Search

Background: Healthcare workers (HCWs) in the United Kingdom (UK) have faced many challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, some of these arising out of their social positions. Existing literature explicating these challenges (e.g., lack of appropriate PPE, redeployment, understaffing) have highlighted inequities in how these have been experienced by HCWs based on ethnicity, gender or, job role. In this paper, we move a step ahead and examine how the intersection of these social positions have impacted HCWs' experiences of challenges during the pandemic. Methods: We collected qualitative data, using interviews and focus groups, from 164 HCWs from different ethnicities, gender, job roles, migration statuses, and regions in the United Kingdom (UK) between December 2020 and July 2021. Interviews and focus groups were conducted online or by telephone, and recorded with participants' permission. Recordings were transcribed and a hybrid thematic analytical approach integrating inductive data-driven codes with deductive ones informed by an intersectional framework was adopted to analyse the transcripts. Results: Thematic analysis of transcripts identified disempowerment, disadvantage and, discrimination as the three main themes around which HCWs' experiences of challenges were centred, based on their intersecting identities (e.g., ethnicity gender, and/or migration status). Our analysis also acknowledges that disadvantages faced by HCWs were linked to systemic and structural factors at the micro, meso and macro ecosystemic levels. This merging of analysis which is grounded in intersectionality and considers the ecosystemic levels has been termed as 'intrasectionalism'. Discussion: Our research demonstrates how an intrasectional lens can help better understand how different forms of mutually reinforcing inequities exist at all levels within the healthcare workforce and how these impact HCWs from certain backgrounds who face greater disadvantage, discrimination and disempowerment, particularly during times of crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We conducted a service evaluation of the medical support worker (MSW) role at Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust following the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The aim was to explore the roles of MSWs, their contributions to the NHS, factors influencing their career choices, and the goals of the MSW position, to inform quality improvement in relation to their integration into the Trust. The perspectives of MSWs, their supervisors and recruiters were analysed through nine semi-structured interviews and two focus group discussions involving 18 participants. Results were categorised into micro-, meso-, and macro-levels of the health system. At the micro-level, MSWs were recognised as a diverse group of highly qualified international medical graduates (IMGs) who had a crucial role during the pandemic. At the meso-level, participants emphasised the importance of a comprehensive induction by the hospital, to clarify responsibilities and familiarise MSWs with the health system. At the macro-level, the role facilitated MSW integration within the NHS, with the aim of practising as doctors. The importance of comprehensive hospital induction, with role clarity for both MSWs and their teams, supportive supervision and assistance with applying for registration with the General Medical Council, were highlighted as key quality improvement areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To explore how psychological well‐being is maintained by healthcare professionals (HCPs) employed in a cancer setting during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Design: A qualitative design using diaries and interviews to collect data was used to gain insights into how HCPs managed their well‐being during the pandemic. Methods: Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) was used to analyse diaries and interviews completed by 66 HCPs during the second pandemic lockdown period (December 2020–April 2021). A total of 102 HCPs were recruited, drawn from five groups: nursing staff, radiographers, medical staff, allied health professionals (AHPs) (non‐radiographers) and support staff. Results: The majority of participants adjusted to the challenges of the pandemic using positive coping strategies, although difficult days required the mobilization of additional resources. Emotion management was regulated through peer relationships, professional roles and the workplace, sustained through communities of practice involving knowledge exchange, shared goals and social interactions. Maintaining high‐quality patient care was a source of job satisfaction, providing a route through which positive emotions could be channelled; however, it was juxtaposed with threats to well‐being from busy workloads and variable organizational responsiveness. Work routines provided a platform for well‐being, underpinned by the sharing of problems and solutions within peer networks. Conclusion: This study has highlighted the dynamic nature of well‐being amongst HCPs during the pandemic. Well‐being interventions should build on the preferred coping strategies of HCPs, focusing on the way individuals coalesce in groups to learn from and support one another. Impact: HCPs may experience different psychological responses when exposed to a pandemic situation. This study identifies the strategies used by HCPs to maintain positive psychological well‐being within professional roles, whilst adjusting to emerging well‐being threats. Key components of HCP's well‐being are addressed, which are relevant to clinical practice and the broader healthcare workforce. Patient or Public Contribution: Research team members included public representatives who contributed to the development, methods, data collection and analysis of the study. They supported the development of the Research Assistant by providing mock interview skills training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Care home staff working during the COVID‐19 pandemic experienced higher levels of stress and increased workloads. People from diverse ethnic backgrounds were disproportionately affected by the COVID‐19 pandemic. This study explored the identity experiences of care home staff from diverse ethnic backgrounds in the context of working during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Methods: Fourteen semistructured interviews were conducted between May 2021 and April 2022 with ethnic minority care home staff in England, who worked during the pandemic. Participants were recruited using convenience and theoretical sampling. Interviews were conducted via telephone or online platforms. A social constructivist grounded theory methodology was utilised in analysing the data. Findings: Participants described five key processes which facilitated or hindered the impact that their experiences had on their identity: dealing with uncertainty and transitioning into a COVID‐19 world; difficult emotions; experiences of discrimination and racism; the response from the care home and societal systems; and the personal vs collective responsibility. When participants' physical and psychological needs went unmet by support structures within the care home and/or society, they experienced a sense of injustice, lack of control and being unvalued or discriminated against by others. Conclusions: This study highlights the importance of recognising the unique needs of staff from diverse ethnic backgrounds working in care homes and adapting working practices to improve impact on identity, job satisfaction and staff retention. Patient and Public Involvement: One care home worker was involved in developing the topic guide and helping to interpret the findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To ascertain the views of public health experts on adverse trends in life expectancy across England and Wales over the past decade, causal factors, possible solutions, and their opinions about how the prepandemic situation influenced the UK's COVID-19 response. Semistructured, in-depth interviews. Nineteen public health experts were identified by purposeful sampling and invited to take part via e-mail. Sixty-three percent responded and participated (n = 12), six females and six males. Interviews took place via Microsoft Teams between November 2021 and January 2022. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using thematic content analysis. There was no consensus on the significance of the stalling and, at some ages, reversal of previous improvements in life expectancy between 2010 and 2020. Explanations offered included data misinterpretation, widening health inequalities, and disinvestment in public services, as well as some disease-specific causes. Those accepting that the decline was concerning linked it to social factors and suggested solutions based on increased investment and implementing existing evidence on how to reduce health inequalities. These interviewees also pointed to the same factors playing a role in the UK's poor COVID-19 response, highlighting the need to understand and address these underlying issues as part of pandemic preparedness. There was no consensus among a group of influential public health experts in the UK on the scale, nature, and explanations of recent trends in life expectancy. A majority called for implementation of existing evidence on reducing inequalities, especially in the wake of COVID-19. However, without agreement on what the problem is, action is likely to remain elusive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The phrase 'in it together' has been used liberally since the outbreak of COVID‐19, but the extent that frontline workers felt 'in it together' is not well understood. Here, we consider the factors that built (or eroded) solidarity while working through the pandemic, and how frontline workers navigated their lives through periods of disconnection. Semi‐structured interviews with 21 frontline workers, across all sectors, were conducted in the United Kingdom and Ireland. The qualitative data were analysed systematically using reflexive thematic analysis. The three themes identified in the data were: (1) Solidarity as central to frontline experiences; (2) Leadership as absent, shallow and divisive: highlighting 'us‐them' distinctions and (3) The rise of 'us' and 'we' among colleagues. Our research offers insights into how frontline workers make sense of their experiences of solidarity and discordance during the first year of the COVID‐19 pandemic, with relevance for government and organizational policy‐makers shaping future conditions for frontline workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We describe how COVID-19-related policy decisions and guidelines impacted healthcare workers (HCWs) during the UK's first COVID-19 pandemic phase. Guidelines in healthcare aim to streamline processes, improve quality and manage risk. However, we argue that during this time the guidelines we studied often fell short of these goals in practice. We analysed 74 remote interviews with 14 UK HCWs over 6 months (February–August 2020). Reframing guidelines through Mol's lens of 'enactment', we reveal embodied, relational and material impacts that some guidelines had for HCWs. Beyond guideline 'adherence', we show that enacting guidelines is an ongoing, complex process of negotiating and balancing multilevel tensions. Overall, guidelines: (1) were inconsistently communicated; (2) did not sufficiently accommodate contextual considerations; and (3) were at times in tension with HCWs' values. Healthcare policymakers should produce more agile, acceptable guidelines that frontline HCWs can enact in ways which make sense and are effective in their contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Frontline workers have shown extraordinary resilience and sustained efforts since the outbreak of COVID-19. The present study used semi-structured interviews with 38 frontline workers in the UK and Ireland to explore the psychological impact of working through COVID-19. The qualitative data were analysed systematically using thematic analysis. Four themes were interpreted: 1)) "I've stopped turning the telly on. I've had to because the news was making me ill": An ecosystem of influence; 2) "Dead, dead, dead": The emotional and psychological toll: 3) "It's shone a light on what we're failing on as well": Injustices, hierarchies and heroes: and 4) "I definitely think COVID happened for a reason to stop us in our tracks and to slow us down": Unexpected positives. This research offers insights into how frontline workers make sense of their experiences during periods of enormous societal and occupational stress. The learnings generated have relevance for government and organisational policy-makers who have opportunities to shape future conditions for frontline workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVID‐19 was first reported in China and later spread across the world causing panic because there is no cure for it. The pandemic has adversely affected frontline health workers and patients, owing to poor preparedness. The study explored the triggers of mental health problems among frontline healthcare workers during the COVID‐19 pandemic. An exploratory qualitative approach was utilised in the study. Forty individual semi‐structured interviews were held with frontline healthcare workers. A thematic approach underpinned by some aspects of interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA) and the Silences Framework (SF) was utilised. The research found that triggers of mental health problems among frontline health workers in private care homes and domiciliary care agencies are fear of infection and infecting others, lack of recognition/disparity between National Health Service (NHS) and social care, lack of guidance, unsafe hospital discharge, death and loss of professionals and residents, unreliable testing and delayed results and shortage of staff. It is important to support frontline workers in private care homes and domiciliary care agencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: During infectious epidemics, healthcare workers are required to deliver traditional care while facing new pressures. Time and resource restrictions, a focus on saving lives and new safety measures can lead to traditional aspects of care delivery being neglected. Aim: Identify barriers to delivering end-of-life care, describe attempts to deliver care during the COVID-19 pandemic, and understand the impact this had on staff. Design: A rapid appraisal was conducted incorporating a rapid review of policies from the United Kingdom, semi-structured telephone interviews with healthcare workers, and a review of mass print media news stories and social media posts describing healthcare worker's experiences of delivering care during the pandemic. Data were coded and analysed using framework analysis. Setting/Participants: From a larger ongoing study, 22 interviews which mentioned death or caring for patients at end-of-life, eight government and National Health Service policies affecting end-of-life care delivery, eight international news media stories and 3440 publicly available social media posts were identified. The social media analysis centred around 274 original tweets with the highest reach, engagement and relevance. Incorporating multiple workstreams provided a broad perspective of end-of-life care during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom. Results: Three themes were developed: (1) restrictions to traditional care, (2) striving for new forms of care and (3) establishing identity and resilience. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic prohibited the delivery of traditional care as practical barriers restricted human connections. Staff prioritised communication and comfort orientated tasks to re-establish compassion at end-of-life and displayed resilience by adjusting their goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: As a response to the acute strain placed on the National Health Service during the first wave of coronavirus disease 2019 in the UK, a number of junior doctors including ENT trainees were redeployed to other clinical specialties. This presented these trainees with novel challenges and opportunities. Methods: A qualitative study was performed to explore these experiences, undertaking semi-structured interviews with ENT trainees between 17th and 30th July. Participants were recruited through purposeful sampling. Interview transcripts underwent thematic analysis using Dedoose software. Results: Seven ENT trainees were interviewed, ranging from specialty trainee years four to eight ('ST4' to 'ST8') in grade. Six core themes were identified: organisation of redeployment, utilisation of skill set, emotional impact of redeployment, redeployed team dynamics, concerns about safety and impact on training. Conclusion: The ENT trainees' experiences of redeployment described highlight some important lessons and considerations for future redeployments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Inpatient care for people with diabetes can and must be improved. The COVID‐19 pandemic has impacted the way care is delivered across the UK. Diabetes UK needed to understand how inpatient care for people with diabetes has been affected and to identify opportunities, areas of concerns and recommendations for the future. Methods: We interviewed 28 healthcare professionals and hospital teams from across the UK to find out about their experiences of delivering inpatient diabetes care during the first peak of the COVID‐19 pandemic. Results: We found that disruption to inpatient diabetes services created positive environments and opportunities for new ways of working, but in the minority, impacted on the quality of care clinicians felt they were able to deliver. Conclusions: It is important that these positive ways of working be maintained and as a result of these experiences we have outlined urgent recommendations for the challenging winter months ahead. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The first cases of Coronavirus (COVID-19) were reported in Wuhan, China in December 2019. Globally millions of people have been diagnosed with the virus whilst thousands have died. As the virus kept spreading health and social care frontline workers (HSCFW) were faced with difficulties when discharging their duties. This paper was set out to explore the challenges faced by different frontline workers in health and social care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The research utilized an explorative qualitative approach. A total of forty (N = 40) in-depth one-to-one semi-structured interviews were undertaken with HSCFW who included support workers (n = 15), nurses (n = 15), and managers (N = 10). Health and social care workers were drawn from domiciliary care and care homes (with and without nursing services). All the interviews were done online. The data were thematically analyzed, and the emergent themes were supported by quotes from the interviews held with participants. Following data analysis the research study found that lack of pandemic preparedness, shortage of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), anxiety and fear amongst professionals, challenges in enforcing social distancing, challenges in fulfilling social shielding responsibility, anxiety and fear amongst residents and service users, delay in testing, evolving PPE guidance and shortage of staff were challenges faced by frontline health and social care workers during COVID-19 pandemic. The results of the current study point to a need for adequate pandemic preparedness within the health and social care sector to protect both frontline workers and the individuals they look after. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The UK government response to COVID-19 has been heavily criticised. We report witnesses' perceptions of what has shaped UK policies and how these policies have been received by healthcare workers. Such studies are usually affected by hindsight. Here we deploy a novel prospective approach to capture real-time information. We are historians, social scientists and biomedical researchers who study how societies cope with infectious disease. In February 2020 we began regular semi-structured calls with prominent members of policy communities, and health care professionals, to elicit their roles in, and reactions to, the pandemic response. We report witnesses' perceptions that personal protective equipment (PPE) stocks were too small, early warnings have not led to sufficiently rapid policy decisions, and a lack of transparency is sapping public trust. Significant successes include research mobilisation. The early experiences and reactions of our witnesses suggest important issues for investigation, notably a perception of delay in decision making. • UK coronavirus response delayed after the alarm was raised. • Politicians abdicated responsibility by their early 'follow the science' rhetoric. • Science advice to policy making needs people who bridge the two worlds. • Centralised responses wasted valuable local public health skills. • Pandemic response needs to move faster than the infectious disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]