Psychological morbidity and return to work after injury: multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of work for physical, psychological, and financial wellbeing are well documented. Return to work (RTW) after unintentional injury is often delayed, and psychological morbidity may contribute to this delay. The impact of psychological morbidity on RTW after a wide range of unintentional injuries in the UK has not been adequately quantified. AIM: To quantify the role of psychological factors, including anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic distress, on RTW following unintentional injuries. DESIGN AND SETTING: A longitudinal multicentre prospective study was undertaken in Nottingham, Bristol, Leicester, and Guildford, UK. METHOD: Participants (n = 273) were 16-69-year-olds admitted to hospital following unintentional injury, who were in paid employment prior to injury. They were surveyed at baseline, then at 1, 2, 4, and 12 months following injury; demographic data were collected along with injury characteristics, psychological morbidity, and RTW status. Associations between demographic, injury and psychological factors, and RTW between 2 and 12 months after injury were quantified using random effects logistic regression. RESULTS: The odds of RTW between 2 and 12 months after injury reduced as depression scores early in the recovery period (1 month after injury) increased (odds ratio [OR] 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.79 to 0.95) and as length of hospital stay increased (OR 0.91, 95% CI] = 0.86 to 0.96). For those experiencing threatening life events following injury (OR 0.27, 95% CI = 0.10 to 0.72) and with higher scores on the Crisis Support Scale (OR 0.93, 95% CI] = 0.88 to 0.99), the odds of RTW between 2 and 12 months after injury were lower. Multiple imputation analysis found similar results, but those relating to crisis support did not remain statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Primary care professionals can identify patients at risk of delayed RTW who may benefit from management of psychological morbidity and support to RTW.

Improving recovery-Learning from patients' experiences after injury: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore experiences of patients after injury and identify implications for clinical care and support within the hospital setting and primary care. DESIGN: Semi-structured telephone administered qualitative interviews with purposive sampling and thematic qualitative analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Patients who have experienced an unintentional injury and attended hospital. SETTING: Bristol, Surrey and Swansea. RESULTS: Key issues that emerged were: most patients reported mixed experiences of hospital care but some described the delivery of care as depersonalising; the need for clinicians to provide adequate, timely and realistic information to patients about their injury and treatment to inform their expectations of recovery; the impact of pain at the time of the injury and for an extended period afterwards; the experience of injury on patients' emotional state with possible implications for longer term mental health issues; the pivotal role of physiotherapy care in providing practical and individualised strategies for recovery; and the importance of social support for recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Trauma patients' recovery needs to be supported by information protocols. The social circumstances of patients need to be considered at the point of discharge and during recovery. There is a need to identify people who may be experiencing mental health issues for timely referral to assessment services and appropriate care. Signposting to support groups may also be helpful for those with life changing injuries. Improved pain management would help alleviate discomfort and stress. Physiotherapy has a key role to play in supporting patients in recovery.

The advocacy for pedestrian safety study: cluster randomised trial evaluating a political advocacy approach to reduce pedestrian injuries in deprived communities.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether advocacy targeted at local politicians leads to action to reduce the risk of pedestrian injury in deprived areas. DESIGN: Cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 239 electoral wards in 57 local authorities in England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: 617 elected local politicians. INTERVENTIONS: Intervention group politicians were provided with tailored information packs, including maps of casualty sites, numbers injured and a synopsis of effective interventions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: 25-30 months post intervention, primary outcomes included: electoral ward level: percentage of road traffic calmed; proportion with new interventions; school level: percentage with 20 mph zones, Safe Routes to School, pedestrian training or road safety education; politician level: percentage lobbying for safety measures. Secondary outcomes included politicians' interest and involvement in injury prevention, and facilitators and barriers to implementation. RESULTS: PRIMARY OUTCOMES DID NOT SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFER: % difference in traffic calming (0.07, 95%CI: -0.07 to 0.20); proportion of schools with 20 mph zones (RR 1.47, 95%CI: 0.93 to 2.32), Safe Routes to School (RR 1.34, 95%CI: 0.83 to 2.17), pedestrian training (RR 1.23, 95%CI: 0.95 to 1.61) or other safety education (RR 1.16, 95%CI: 0.97 to 1.39). Intervention group politicians reported greater interest in child injury prevention (RR 1.09, 95%CI 1.03 to 1.16), belief in potential to help prevent injuries (RR 1.36, 95%CI 1.16 to 1.61), particularly pedestrian safety (RR 1.55, 95%CI 1.19 to 2.03). 63% of intervention politicians reported supporting new pedestrian safety schemes. The majority found the advocacy information surprising, interesting, effectively presented, and could identify suitable local interventions. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the feasibility of an innovative approach to translational public health by targeting local politicians in a randomised controlled trial. The intervention package was positively viewed and raised interest but changes in interventions were not statistically significance. Longer term supported advocacy may be needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN91381117.

Engaging the Somali community in the road safety agenda: a process evaluation from the London borough of Hounslow.

In the UK the most disadvantaged in society are more likely than those more affluent to be injured or killed in a road traffic collision and therefore it is a major cause of health inequality. There is a strong link between ethnicity, deprivation and injury. Whilst national road traffic injury data does not collect ethnic origin the London accident and analysis group does in terms of broad categories such as 'white', 'black' and 'Asian'. Analysis of this data revealed the over-representation of child pedestrian casualties from a 'black' ethnic origin. This information led road safety practitioners in one London borough to map child pedestrian casualties against census data which identified the Somali community as being particularly at risk of being involved in a road traffic collision. Working with the community they sought to discuss and address road safety issues and introduced practical evidence based approaches such as child pedestrian training. The process evaluation of the project used a qualitative approach and showed that engaging with community partners and working across organisational boundaries was a useful strategy to gain an understanding of the Somali community. A bottom approach provided the community with a sense of control and involvement which appears to add value in terms of reducing the sense of powerlessness that marginalised communities often feel. In terms of evaluation, small projects like these, lend themselves to a qualitative process evaluation though it has to be accepted that the strength of this evidence may be regarded as weak. Where possible routine injury data needs to take into account ethnicity which is a known risk factor for road casualty involvement which needs to be continually monitored.

The UK burden of injury study - a protocol. [National Research Register number: M0044160889].

BACKGROUND: Globally and nationally large numbers of people are injured each year, yet there is little information on the impact of these injuries on people's lives, on society and on health and social care services. Measurement of the burden of injuries is needed at a global, national and regional level to be able to inform injured people of the likely duration of impairment; to guide policy makers in investing in preventative measures; to facilitate the evaluation and cost effectiveness of interventions and to contribute to international efforts to more accurately assess the global burden of injuries. METHODS/DESIGN: A prospective, longitudinal multi-centre study of 1333 injured individuals, atttending Emergency Departments or admitted to hospital in four UK areas: Swansea, Surrey, Bristol and Nottingham. Specified quotas of patients with defined injuries covering the whole spectrum will be recruited. Participants (or a proxy) will complete a baseline questionnaire regarding their injury and pre-injury quality of life. Follow up occurs at 1, 4, and 12 months post injury or until return to normal function within 12 months, with measures of health service utilisation, impairment, disability, and health related quality of life. National estimates of the burden of injuries will be calculated by extrapolation from the sample population to national and regional computerised hospital in-patient, emergency department and mortality data. DISCUSSION: This study will provide more detailed data on the national burden of injuries than has previously been available in any country and will contribute to international collaborative efforts to more accurately assess the global burden of injuries. The results will be used to advise policy makers on prioritisation of preventive measures, support the evaluation of interventions, and provide guidance on the likely impact and degree of impairment and disability following specific injuries.