Ira Madan

Shame! Self-stigmatisation as an obstacle to sick doctors returning to work: a qualitative study

Objective To explore the views of sick doctors on the obstacles preventing them returning to work. Design Qualitative study. Setting Single participating centre recruiting doctors from all over the UK. Participants Doctors who had been away from work for at least 6 months with physical or mental health problems, drug or alcohol problems, General Medical Council involvement or any combination of these, were eligible. Eligible doctors were recruited in conjunction with the Royal Medical Benevolent Fund, the General Medical Council and the Practitioner Health Programme. These organisations approached 77 doctors; 19 participated. Each doctor completed an in-depth semistructured interview. We used a constant comparison method to identify and agree on the coding of the data and the identification of a number of central themes. Results The doctors described that being away from work left them isolated and sad. Many experienced negative reactions from their family and some deliberately concealed their problems. Doctors described a lack of support from colleagues and feared a negative response when returning to work. Self-stigmatisation was central to the participants’ accounts; several described themselves as failures and appeared to have internalised the negative views of others. Conclusions Self-stigmatising views, which possibly emerge from the belief that ‘doctors are invincible’, represent a major obstacle to doctors returning to work. From medical school onwards cultural change is necessary to allow doctors to recognise their vulnerabilities so they can more easily generate strategies to manage if they become unwell.

Three-Year Change in the Wellbeing of Orphaned and Separated Children in Institutional and Family-Based Care Settings in Five Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Background With more than 2 million children living in group homes, or “institutions”, worldwide, the extent to which institution-based caregiving negatively affects development and wellbeing is a central question for international policymakers. Methods A two-stage random sampling methodology identified community representative samples of 1,357 institution-dwelling orphaned and separated children (OSC) and 1,480 family-dwelling OSC aged 6–12 from 5 low and middle income countries. Data were collected from children and their primary caregivers. Survey-analytic techniques and linear mixed effects models describe child wellbeing collected at baseline and at 36 months, including physical and emotional health, growth, cognitive development and memory, and the variation in outcomes between children, care settings, and study sites. Findings At 36-month follow-up, institution-dwelling OSC had statistically significantly higher height-for-age Z-scores and better caregiver-reported physical health; family-dwelling OSC had fewer caregiver-reported emotional difficulties. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups on other measures. At both baseline and follow-up, the magnitude of the differences between the institution- and family-dwelling groups was small. Relatively little variation in outcomes was attributable to differences between sites (11–27% of total variation) or care settings within sites (8–14%), with most variation attributable to differences between children within settings (60–75%). The percent of variation in outcomes attributable to the care setting type, institution- versus family-based care, ranged from 0–4% at baseline, 0–3% at 36-month follow-up, and 0–4% for changes between baseline and 36 months. Interpretation These findings contradict the hypothesis that group home placement universally adversely affects child wellbeing. Without substantial improvements in and support for family settings, the removal of institutions, broadly defined, would not significantly improve child wellbeing and could worsen outcomes of children who are moved from a setting where they are doing relatively well to a more deprived setting.

‘You feel you've been bad, not ill’: Sick doctors’ experiences of interactions with the General Medical Council

Objective To explore the views of sick doctors on their experiences with the General Medical Council (GMC) and their perception of the impact of GMC involvement on return to work. Design Qualitative study. Setting UK. Participants Doctors who had been away from work for at least 6 months with physical or mental health problems, drug or alcohol problems, GMC involvement or any combination of these, were eligible for inclusion into the study. Eligible doctors were recruited in conjunction with the Royal Medical Benevolent Fund, the GMC and the Practitioner Health Programme. These organisations approached 77 doctors; 19 participated. Each doctor completed an in-depth semistructured interview. We used a constant comparison method to identify and agree on the coding of data and the identification of central themes. Results 18 of the 19 participants had a mental health, addiction or substance misuse problem. 14 of the 19 had interacted with the GMC. 4 main themes were identified: perceptions of the GMC as a whole; perceptions of GMC processes; perceived health impacts and suggested improvements. Participants described the GMC processes they experienced as necessary, and some elements as supportive. However, many described contact with the GMC as daunting, confusing and anxiety provoking. Some were unclear about the role of the GMC and felt that GMC communication was unhelpful, particularly the language used in correspondence. Improvements suggested by participants included having separate pathways for doctors with purely health issues, less use of legalistic language, and a more personal approach with for example individualised undertakings or conditions. Conclusions While participants recognised the need for a regulator, the processes employed by the GMC and the communication style used were often distressing, confusing and perceived to have impacted negatively on their mental health and ability to return to work.

Out of hours management of occupational exposures to blood and body fluids in healthcare staff

Aims: To assess and compare the out of hours and in hours management of occupational blood and body fluid exposures in a London teaching hospital. Methods: The occupational health and accident and emergency records of individuals presenting with occupational body fluid exposures over a six month period at a London teaching hospital were analysed retrospectively. Main outcome measures were the completeness of records, and the appropriate management of body fluid exposures using the Department of Health guidelines as the gold standard. Results: A total of 177 body fluid exposures were reported; 109 (61.58%) were initially assessed in the occupational health department, and 68 (38.42%) in the accident and emergency department. Of those originally assessed in the accident and emergency department, only 21 (30.88%) attended the occupational health department for follow up. Occupational health staff were more consistent in assessing and managing exposures, and in a higher proportion of cases gave more appropriate advice on post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) against hepatitis B and HIV. Of the 11 individuals prescribed HIV PEP (all by accident and emergency staff), only three subsequently attended occupational health for follow up. In all three cases therapy was discontinued, as the source was HIV negative or the exposure low risk. Conclusions: Out of hours management of occupational body fluid exposures, particularly the prescribing of HIV PEP, was inconsistent with in hours practice. This may also be the case in other large inner city hospitals offering a similar service.

Work and mental health in the UK.

A case of could do better

From sick notes to fit notes

Doctors need better support in dealing with work related medical problems

Occupational management of type I latex allergy

BACKGROUND Although the incidence of type 1 latex allergy has decreased in recent years with the introduction of powder-free low-protein (PFLP) latex gloves, type 1 latex allergy is still commonly found among workers who use natural rubber latex (NRL) gloves at work. AIMS To elucidate the optimal management of workers with type 1 latex allergy whose work necessitates the use of NRL gloves in the workplace. METHODS A sensitive electronic search of relevant bibliographic databases was performed with related search terms for articles from 1 January 1990 to 1 September 2010. Relevant abstracts were reviewed, and studies that furnished data on the management of type 1 latex allergy in the workplace were extracted. Articles for inclusion in the review were appraised using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network methodology. RESULTS A total of 7041 abstracts were retrieved; 12 articles met the inclusion criteria for the review. We found moderately strong and consistent evidence that avoidance of NRL in the workplace reduces both symptoms and markers of sensitization in latex-allergic individuals. There is limited evidence that latex-allergic workers can continue to use PFLP gloves with no worsening of symptoms, provided that their co-workers also use PFLP latex or non-latex gloves. CONCLUSIONS Individuals with type 1 latex allergy whose work necessitates them wearing latex gloves may continue in their job provided that adjustments are made to ensure that they are not exposed to powdered latex gloves.

The applicability of grading systems for guidelines

RATIONALE This study focused on factors that most concern specialist societies when choosing an evidence grading system, such as methodological strengths and weaknesses, applicability and ease of use. The grading systems chosen were the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) and the National Service Framework for long-term neurological conditions critical appraisal tool (NSF-LTC). METHODOLOGY Twelve assessors, representing typical members of society-based guideline development groups, graded papers and a recommendation using a key question as a guide. Key questions and recommendations were extracted from existing clinical guidelines representing a variety of research fields. Assessors were given 3 months to grade the papers using the grading systems and to complete a semi-structured qualitative questionnaire. The results were independently assessed for emerging themes. RESULTS Assessors felt all three systems had strengths and weaknesses depending on the type of evidence being graded. GRADE was seen as the most complex but rigorous system, while SIGN and NSF were seen as easier and more flexible to use, but less methodologically rigorous. In grading the evidence, 10% of assessors used GRADE incorrectly, 33% used SIGN incorrectly and 75% used NSF-LTC incorrectly. In grading the recommendations, 60% used GRADE incorrectly, 50% used SIGN incorrectly and 50% used NSF-LTC incorrectly. IMPLICATIONS It is recommended that specialist societies consider the type of evidence they will be evaluating and the research experience of the appraisers before selecting a grading system. Additionally, appraisers should have training in appraising and grading evidence using the system to be employed.

Delivery of cognitive behavioural therapy to workers: a systematic review

BACKGROUND Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is a key intervention, enabling workers on sick leave with common mental health problems to return to work. It can be delivered by a variety of methods including face-to-face therapy and the Internet. It is not known which is the optimal method of delivery. AIMS To establish the optimum method of delivering CBT to workers with common mental health problems. METHODS We undertook a systematic search of the OvidMEDLINE and EMBASE biomedical databases from the start of electronic records to 31 July 2013 for randomized trials comparing one method of delivering CBT with another for treatment of mild-to-moderate depression, anxiety and adjustment disorders. We included publications that assessed at least one of four outcomes: clinical or cost-effectiveness, accessibility and acceptability. A scoping search found no studies in the workplace. We therefore focussed on interventions in the 18-65 year age group. RESULTS We found six studies comparing methods of delivery of CBT for anxiety disorders but found no trials which compared methods of delivery for mild-to-moderate depression. All delivery methods led to an improvement in anxiety symptoms. Internet-delivered CBT with some input from a therapist was found to be as clinically effective as face-to-face CBT and more cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS Internet CBT should be made available in workplaces for workers with anxiety disorders as part of a stepped care plan.

Which patients are seen by an occupational psychiatry service

BACKGROUND Common mental disorders are the leading cause of sickness absence but are frequently misdiagnosed and undertreated. It is against this background that a specialist occupational psychiatry clinic was established at a London teaching hospital. AIMS To explore the nature of patients and complaints seen in the clinic and investigate whether this form of service provision reached patients who may have otherwise been missed in the gap between primary and secondary care. METHODS We reviewed the case notes of 51 consecutive new clinic assessments using a data extraction form, gathering information on socio-demographic and occupational details; the nature, duration and severity of symptoms [as assessed by Health of the Nation Outcome Scale (HoNOS)]; diagnosis; prior treatment and the outcome of the clinic appointment. RESULTS Only half of those seen in the new clinic were currently on sick leave. The most common diagnosis was depression with most having symptoms lasting longer than 9 months. Sixty-five per cent had a medium or high HoNOS rating. Although 75% had received treatment from their general practitioner, the majority remained functionally impaired, and only 31% had been seen in secondary care. CONCLUSIONS Specialist occupational psychiatry clinics do not replicate the work already being done by standard mental health services. Patients referred to a new specialist clinic within an occupational health department had chronic, debilitating psychiatric illnesses, which in many cases had failed to respond adequately to primary care treatment and were at risk of falling into the gap between primary and secondary services.