Search

Abstract Background The Cost of Living Crisis (CoLC), a real term reduction in basic income, risks individuals being unable to afford essentials such as heat, food and clothing. The impact of the CoLC is disproportionate – with different population sub-groups more likely to be negatively affected. The objective of this survey was to evaluate the perceived impact of the CoLC on the life and health of participants across four European countries. Methods A survey housing two questions to investigate the relationship between the CoLC and its perceived impact on life and health was developed. Four European countries (U.K., Sweden, Italy and Germany) took part via the YouGov platform. Logistic regression models were created for each country and question to evaluate which population characteristics were associated with a negative reported impact of the CoLC. Results A total of 8,152 unique individuals responded between 17th March and 30th March 2023. Each country was equally represented. Those aged 36–64 were more likely to report a negative impact of the CoLC on their life and health than younger participants (p

Abstract Background There is significant health inequity in the United Kingdom (U.K.), with different populations facing challenges accessing health services, which can impact health outcomes. At one London National Health Service (NHS) Trust, data showed that patients from deprived areas and minority ethnic groups had a higher likelihood of missing their first outpatient appointment. This study’s objectives were to understand barriers to specific patient populations attending first outpatient appointments, explore systemic factors and assess appointment awareness. Methods Five high-volume specialties identified as having inequitable access based on ethnicity and deprivation were selected as the study setting. Mixed methods were employed to understand barriers to outpatient attendance, including qualitative semi-structured interviews with patients and staff, observations of staff workflows and interrogation of quantitative data on appointment communication. To identify barriers, semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients who missed their appointment and were from a minority ethnic group or deprived area. Staff interviews and observations were carried out to further understand attendance barriers. Patient interview data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis to create a thematic framework and triangulated with staff data. Subthemes were mapped onto a behavioural science framework highlighting behaviours that could be targeted. Quantitative data from patient interviews were analysed to assess appointment awareness and communication. Results Twenty-six patients and 11 staff were interviewed, with four staff observed. Seven themes were identified as barriers – communication factors, communication methods, healthcare system, system errors, transport, appointment, and personal factors. Knowledge about appointments was an important identified behaviour, supported by eight out of 26 patients answering that they were unaware of their missed appointment. Environmental context and resources were other strongly represented behavioural factors, highlighting systemic barriers that prevent attendance. Conclusion This study showed the barriers preventing patients from minority ethnic groups or living in deprived areas from attending their outpatient appointment. These barriers included communication factors, communication methods, healthcare the system, system errors, transport, appointment, and personal factors. Healthcare services should acknowledge this and work with public members from these communities to co-design solutions supporting attendance. Our work provides a basis for future intervention design, informed by behavioural science and community involvement.

Abstract Introduction Barcode medication administration (BCMA) technology helps ensure correct medications are administered by nursing staff through scanning of patient and medication barcodes. In many hospitals scanning rates are low, limiting the potential safety benefits. We aimed to explore the barriers and facilitators to BCMA use in a London hospital. Methods In this mixed methods study we used local quantitative data on BCMA scanning rates to identify clinically similar wards (in terms of patient acuity and workload) with different scanning rates for qualitative exploration. Interviews designed to elicit barriers to using BCMA technology were conducted with nursing staff, supported by observations of medication administration. Qualitative data were analysed inductively and a thematic framework constructed housing key themes, subsequently categorised into barriers and facilitators. To explore patient perspectives of BCMA scanning, a purposive sample of patients were also interviewed. These patient data were analysed deductively according to the thematic framework. Themes were mapped to behavioural science frameworks to further understand the behaviours involved. Results BCMA was operational on 15 wards, with only six having medication scan rates of more than 10% of scannable doses. Of three wards selected for qualitative investigation, the lowest scan rate was 6.7%. Twenty-seven nurses and 15 patients were interviewed. Eleven key themes were identified, encompassing both barriers and facilitators to BCMA use. Barriers included poor trolley ergonomics and perceived time inefficiency. Facilitators included a streamlined process and thorough training. All nurses described BCMA as positive for patient safety. Patients described BCMA as making them “feel safer”. Behavioural science frameworks highlighted the importance of professional role and an individual’s belief in their capability. Conclusion We present a novel exploration of facilitators and barriers to BCMA use from the viewpoint of both patients and nursing staff, highlighting a strong perception that BCMA enhances safety. Barriers were reported on both high and low usage wards, demonstrating the importance of behaviours and motivations. These findings provide a detailed understanding from which to design interventions to support behaviour change and increase BCMA use.

Compliance with hand hygiene is an effective way of reducing the incidence of healthcare acquired infections (HCAI). At one London National Health Service (NHS) Trust, improving hand hygiene compliance (HHC) was a patient safety priority in response to non-compliance and ongoing occurrences of HCAI. The objective of this study was to co-design a behavioural science informed intervention to improve HHC. To obtain a baseline level of HHC and understand associated behaviours, 18 hours of observation were undertaken on three inpatient wards. These focused upon Moment 1 and 5 of the World Health Organisation's moments for hand hygiene. The intervention was co-designed with clinical staff and took the form of "visual primes". Three different stickers designed to create a motivational "nudge" were placed at key points where HHC had been observed to fail. Following implementation, a further 18 hours of observation took place. A Chi-squared statistical analysis compared proportions of HHC pre- and post-intervention. Our intervention led to an 11% increase in HHC across the three study wards for both Moments (X2 (1, N = 1,285) = 13.711, p =

Introduction: Climate change poses a considerable risk of further increasing the world's mental health burden. The ways that, and extent to which, climate change is affecting mental health service users is poorly known. Mental health professionals (MHP)s' views on the nature of climate-related distress and the need for specialist training to support service users is undetermined globally. Methods: A questionnaire survey was disseminated to an opportunity sample of MHPs based in the United Kingdom (UK). It investigated whether MHPs perceived that the number of service users mentioning climate change as affecting their mental health or emotional distress had increased in the five years prior to 2021, and if they believe it will increase further. The survey explored MHPs’ perceptions of the influence of climate change on service users’ mental health needs, if they perceive this to be rational, and if they feel adequately prepared to manage climate change related mental health problems or emotional distress. Results: We surveyed 75 MHPs, including professionals in psychotherapy (38), psychology (19), psychiatry (6). MHPs reported a significant increase in the perceived prevalence of mental health problems or emotional distress related to climate change, believing this increase will continue. MHPs reported a range of impacts on service users due to climate change, typically viewed as a rational response. MHPs felt equipped to manage the consequences of climate change but would benefit from specific training. Conclusions: Our results indicate an increasing incidence of climate-related emotional distress among service users as perceived by MHPs. The expectation among professionals is that this service need is here now but will continue to increase in the future, with potential implications for the provision of training.

Abstract Background Hospital managers are responsible for the delivery of organisational strategy, development of clinical services and maintaining quality standards. There is limited research on hospital managers, in particular how stress manifests and impacts managers and the presence of individual resilience. Managers must work closely with clinical colleagues, however these relationships can be hindered by the perception of stereotyping and differing priorities. This study aimed to explore the working environment of hospital managers, focusing upon the unique stresses faced, psychological safety and the presence of resilience. Methods This study utilised mixed methodology using an embedded approach. Participants were purposively recruited from all levels of hospital management within one National Health Service Trust in London, United Kingdom. An exploration of managers experiences was undertaken using semi-structured qualitative interviews. Psychological safety and individual resilience were additionally assessed using validated surveys. Qualitative data were analysed iteratively using inductive thematic analysis, and triangulated with quantitative data. Kruskal-Wallis statistical analysis was performed to evaluate differences in resilience and psychological safety according to seniority and background experience. Results Twenty-two managers were recruited and interviewed, with 20 returning completed surveys. Key findings from the thematic analysis included the importance of good working relationships with clinical colleagues, the persistence of some stereotyping, and feeling unsupported in times of challenge. Stresses described included the bureaucracy involved when delivering change, conflict with colleagues and target driven expectations. Participants described their own psychological safety as lower than desired, supported by quantitative data; but recognised its importance and strived to create it within their own teams. Sixteen participants had ‘normal’ scores for resilience, with senior managers more likely to have higher scores than those more junior (p=0.011). Conclusion Positive working relationships, high psychological safety and individual resilience are important for organisational safety and individual wellbeing. Our data illustrate unique stressors faced by hospital managers, provide detail on sometimes challenging working relationships, and demonstrate scope to improve both the psychological safety and resilience of those in managerial positions. A map for senior healthcare leaders was constructed, facilitating the identification of modifiable areas within their organisation to promote good working relationships and improve the working environment of hospital managers.

Summary: Background: Shared Decision-Making (SDM) between patients and clinicians is increasingly considered important. Treament Escalation Plans (TEP) are individualised documents outlining life-saving interventions to be considered in the event of clinical deterioration. SDM can inform subjective goals of care in TEP but it remains unclear how much it is considered beneficial by patients and clinicians. We aimed to synthesise the existing knowledge of clinician and older patient (generally aged ≥65 years) perspectives on patient involvement in TEP in the acute setting. Methods: Systematic database search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo and CINAHL databases as well as grey literature from database inception to June 8, 2023, using the Sample (older patients, clinicians, acute setting; studies relating to patients whose main diagnosis was cancer or single organ failure were excluded as these conditions may have specific TEP considerations), Phenomenon of Interest (Treatment Escalation Planning), Design (any including interview, observational, survey), Evaluation (Shared Decision-Making), Research type (qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods) tool. Primary data (published participant quotations, field notes, survey results) and descriptive author comments were extracted and qualitative thematic synthesis was performed to generate analytic themes. Quality assessment was made using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme and Mixed Methods Appraisal Tools. The GRADE-CERQual (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation–Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach was used to assess overall confidence in each thematic finding according to methodology, coherence, adequacy and relevance of the contributing studies. The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO, CRD42022361593. Findings: Following duplicate exclusion there were 1916 studies screened and ultimately 13 studies were included, all from European and North American settings. Clinician-orientated themes were: treatment escalation is a medical decision (high confidence); clinicians want the best for their patients amidst uncertainty (high confidence); involving patients and families in decisions is not always meaningful and can involve conflict (high confidence); treatment escalation planning exists within the clinical environment, organisation and society (moderate confidence). Patient-orientated themes were: patients’ relationships with Treatment Escalation Planning are complex (low confidence); interactions with doctors are important but communication is not always easy (moderate confidence); patients are highly aware of their families when considering TEP (moderate confidence). Interpretation: Based on current evidence, TEP decisions appear dominated by clinicians' perspectives, motivated by achieving the best for patients and challenged by complex decisions, communication and environmental factors; older patients’ perspectives have seldom been explored, but their input on decisions may be modest. Presenting the context and challenge of SDM during professional education may allow reflection and a more nuanced approach. Future research should seek to understand what approach to TEP decision-making patients and clinicians consider to be optimum in the acute setting so that a mutually acceptable standard can be defined in policy. Funding: HCA International and the NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre.

Healthcare teams are expected to deliver high quality and safe clinical care, a goal facilitated by an environment of psychological safety. We hypothesised that an individual's personality would influence psychological safety, perceived stressors in the clinical environment and confer a suitability for different professional roles. Staff members were recruited from the Emergency or Critical Care Departments of one National Health Service Trust. Qualitative interviews explored participants' experiences of personality, incorporating quantitative surveys to evaluate psychological safety and perceived stressors. The 16 Primary Factor Assessment provided a quantitative measure of personality. Participants demonstrated midrange scores for most personality traits, highlighting an ability to adapt to changing environments and requirements. There was a signal that different personality traits predominated between the two professional groups, and that certain traits were significantly associated with higher psychological safety and certain perceived stressors. Personality was described as having a strong influence on teamwork, the working environment and leadership ability. Our analysis highlights that personality can influence team dynamics and the suitability of individuals for certain clinical roles. Understanding the heterogeneity of personalities of team members and their likely responses to challenge may help leaders to support staff in times of challenge and improve team cohesiveness.

Objectives This study aimed to investigate the presence of perceived stressors, psychological safety and teamwork in healthcare professionals. As the timeframe for this study spanned the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, data were captured demonstrating the impact of the pandemic on these factors.Design Qualitative interview study.Setting All staff working within the emergency and critical care departments of one National Health Service Trust in London, UK.Participants Forty-nine participants were recruited using a purposive sampling technique and interviewed when the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic had subsided.Main outcome measures Evaluation of changes in perceived stressors, psychological safety and teamwork in individuals working during the COVID-19 pandemic.Results The thematic analysis relating to a participant’s lived experiences while working during COVID-19 led to the construction of five key themes, including ‘psychological effects’ and ‘changes in team dynamics’. Several psychological effects were described, including the presence of psychological distress and insights into the aetiology of moral injury. There was marked heterogeneity in participants’ response to COVID-19, particularly with respect to changes in team dynamics and the perception of a psychologically safe environment. Descriptions of improved team cohesiveness and camaraderie contrasted with stories of new barriers, notably due to the high workload and the impact of personal protective equipment. Building on these themes, a map of key changes arising due to the pandemic was developed, highlighting potential opportunities to provide targeted support.Conclusions Working on the front line of a pandemic can have significant implications for healthcare workers, putting them at risk of psychological distress and moral injury, as well as affecting team dynamics. There is striking heterogeneity in the manifestation of these challenges. Team leaders can use the themes and qualitative data from this study to help identify areas for management focus and individual and team support.

The workplace environment can have a significant impact on an employee's psychological wellbeing. This has been demonstrated using the Job Demand Control Model, which posits that high job demands and low decision latitude lead to increased job strain.Participants were recruited from three Critical Care Units within one NHS Trust in London. Each participant underwent a qualitative interview exploring attitudes to the workplace environment and its subsequent impact. Data were analysed using a thematic analysis approach.Thirty participants representing the multidisciplinary team and all levels of seniority were recruited according to a purposeful sampling technique. Our analysis demonstrated a measurable incidence of negative psychological consequences resulting from several key areas within the critical care environment, including isolation in single rooms and visibility of senior support. Applying the Job Demand Control model, we were able to identify areas of high job demand and low decision latitude.The critical care environment is highly dynamic and job demands are likely to be unmodifiable. The framework developed in this study highlights areas that can be adapted to improve decision latitude, consequently minimising negative consequences.Leaders wishing to improve the psychological wellbeing of their staff can use our framework to identify areas where individual control can be enhanced. This should lead to increased decision latitude, thereby reducing the psychological strain created by the workplace environment. In addition, a reduction in job strain and improved employee wellbeing may create more commitment to the organisation, improving productivity and enhancing career longevity.

Objectives This study aimed to quantify the presence of psychological safety (defined as an environment ‘safe for interpersonal risk taking’) in critical care staff, exploring the ways in which this manifested.Design Qualitative interview study incorporating a short quantitative survey.Setting Three intensive care units within one National Health Service Trust in London.Participants Thirty participants were recruited from all levels of seniority and roles within the multidisciplinary team. A purposive sampling technique was used, with recruitment ceasing at the point of thematic saturation.Interventions Semistructured interviews explored attitudes towards psychological safety and contained a quantitative assessment measuring the climate of psychological safety present.Results Twenty-eight participants agreed that it was easy to ask for help, with 20 agreeing it is safe to take a risk on the team, demonstrating a strong perception of psychological safety in this group.Our thematic analysis highlighted areas where the context influenced an individual’s psychological safety including personality, culture and leadership. Possible negative consequences of psychological safety included distraction and fatigue for the team leader. We demonstrated that speaking up can be influenced by motivations other than patient safety, such as undermining or self-promotion.Conclusions Our data demonstrate reassuring levels of psychological safety within the participants studied. This allowed us to explore in depth the participant experience of working within a psychologically safe environment. We add to the current literature by uniquely demonstrating there can be negative consequences to a psychologically safe environment in the healthcare setting. We expand on the influence of context on psychological safety by developing a model, allowing leaders to identify which elements of context can be modified in order to promote speaking up. Team leaders can use these data to help foster a culture of openness, innovation and error prevention while minimising the risk of negative implications