scholarly journals TP8.2.20 Gongs galore: phaleristic study of the relative risk of a healing art related new-year honour

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katie Mellor ◽  
Arfon GMT Powell ◽  
Osian P James ◽  
David B Robinson ◽  
Richard J Egan ◽  
...  

Abstract Aims To compare proportional representation of healthcare specialty workers, in receipt of New Year honours (NYHs) and examine system bias. Methods Observational study of recipients of NYHs from 2010 to 2019 within the UK honours system including comparative analysis of proportional representation of the UK medical workforce Absolute risk of receiving a NYH, related to medical specialty, gender, and geographical region. Relative Risk (RR) of receiving an NYH for services to healthcare related to specialty. Results 11 207 NYHs were bestowed, with 368 (3.3%) awarded to healthcare professionals: 212 (57.6%) women, 156 (42.4%) men. The RR of a healthcare professional receiving a NYH was 0.76 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.84, p < 0.001) when compared with the remaining UK workforce. Doctors received most NYHs (n = 181), with Public Health, Clinical Oncology, and General Medicine specialties most likely to be rewarded (RR 20.35 (CI 9.61 to 43.08, p < 0.001), 8.43 (CI 2.70 to 26.30, p < 0.001) and 8.22 (CI 6.22 to 10.86, p < 0.001)) respectively; Anaesthetists received fewest NYHs (RR 0.52 (0.13 to 2.10), p = 0.305). Men were more likely to receive NYHs than women (OR 0.44, 95%CI 0.36 to 0.54; p < 0.001). Two hundred and fifty-four NYHs (69.0%) were bestowed on residents of England (60, 16.3% London), 49 (13.3%) Scotland (p = 0.003), 39 (10.6%) Wales (p < 0.001), and 26 (7.1%) Northern-Ireland (p < 0.001). Conclusions Relative risk of receiving a NYH varied over 150-fold by specialty, two-fold by gender, and three-fold by geographical location. Public Health Physicians are perceived to be the pick of the parade.

2021 ◽  
pp. postgradmedj-2020-139368
Author(s):  
Katie Mellor ◽  
Arfon GMT Powell ◽  
Osian P James ◽  
David B Robinson ◽  
Luke Hopkins ◽  
...  

ObjectivesTo compare proportional representation of healthcare specialty workers, in receipt of New Year Honours (NYHs) and examine system bias.DesignObservational study of UK honours system including comparative analysis of proportional representation of the UK medical workforce.ParticipantsRecipients of NYHs from 2010 to 2019.Main outcome measuresAbsolute risk of receiving an NYH, related to medical specialty, gender and geographical region. Relative risk (RR) of receiving an NYH for services to healthcare related to specialty.Results11 207 NYHs were bestowed, with 368 (3.3%) awarded to healthcare professionals: 212 (57.6%) women, 156 (42.4%) men. The RR of a healthcare professional receiving an NYH was 0.76 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.84, p<0.001) when compared with the remaining UK workforce. Doctors received most NYHs (n=181), with public health, clinical oncology and general medicine specialties most likely to be rewarded (RR 20.35 (95% CI 9.61 to 43.08, p<0.001), 8.43 (95% CI 2.70 to 26.30, p<0.001) and 8.22 (95% CI 6.22 to 10.86, p<0.001)), respectively; anaesthetists received fewest NYHs (RR 0.52 (95% CI 0.13 to 2.10), p=0.305). Men were more likely to receive NYHs than women (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.54; p<0.001). Two hundred and fifty-four NYHs (69.0%) were bestowed on residents of England (60, 16.3% London), 49 (13.3%) Scotland (p=0.003), 39 (10.6%) Wales (p<0.001) and 26 (7.1%) Northern-Ireland (p<0.001).ConclusionsRelative risk of receiving an NYH varied over 150-fold by specialty, twofold by gender and threefold by geographical location. Public health physicians are perceived to be the pick of the parade.


BMJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. l6721
Author(s):  
John A Emelifeonwu ◽  
James E Hazelwood ◽  
Oscar Nolan ◽  
Emma Sharland ◽  
Anna O’Donald ◽  
...  

AbstractObjectivesTo compare the proportional representation of healthcare workers in receipt of New Year honours (NYHs) with workers in other industries and to determine whether the NYH system has gender or geographical biases.DesignObservational study of the UK honours system with a comparative analysis of proportional representation of the UK workforce and subgroup analyses of gender and geographical representations.ParticipantsRecipients of NYHs from 2009 to 2018.Main outcome measuresAbsolute risk of receiving an NYH based on industry, gender, or region of the UK. Relative risk of receiving an NYH for services to healthcare compared with other industries.Results10 989 NYHs were bestowed from 2009 to 2018, 47% of which were awarded to women. 832 awards (7.6%) were for services to healthcare. People working in sport and in the arts and media were more likely to receive NYHs than those working in healthcare (relative risks of 22.01 (95% confidence interval 19.91 to 24.34) and 5.84 (5.31 to 6.44), respectively). There was no significant difference between the rate of receiving honours for healthcare and for science and technology (P=0.22). 34% (3741) of awards were issued to people living in London and in the southeast of England, and only 496 of 1447 (34%) higher order awards (knighthoods, damehoods, companions of honour, and commanders of the order of the British empire) were received by women.ConclusionsIn relation to the size of its workforce, a career in healthcare is not as “honourable” as careers in certain other industries. Geographical and gender biases might exist in the honours system.


2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (33) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vasco Ricoca Peixoto ◽  
André Vieira ◽  
Pedro Aguiar ◽  
Paulo Sousa ◽  
Carlos Carvalho ◽  
...  

Background Determinants of hospitalisation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death are still unclear for COVID-19. Few studies have adjusted for confounding for different clinical outcomes including all reported cases within a country. Aim We used routine surveillance data from Portugal to identify risk factors for severe COVID-19 outcomes, and to support risk stratification, public health interventions, and planning of healthcare resources. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study including 20,293 laboratory-confirmed cases of COVID-19 reported between 1 March and 28 April 2020 through the national epidemiological surveillance system. We calculated absolute risk, relative risk (RR) and adjusted relative risk (aRR) to identify demographic and clinical factors associated with hospitalisation, ICU admission and death using Poisson regressions. Results Increasing age (≥ 60 years) was the major determinant for all outcomes. Age ≥ 90 years was the strongest determinant of hospital admission (aRR: 6.1), and 70–79 years for ICU (aRR: 10.4). Comorbidities of cardiovascular, immunodeficiency, kidney and lung disease (aRR: 4.3, 2.8, 2.4, 2.0, respectively) had stronger associations with ICU admission, while for death they were kidney, cardiovascular and chronic neurological disease (aRR: 2.9, 2.6, 2.0). Conclusions Older age was the strongest risk factor for all severe outcomes. These findings from the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic support risk-stratified public health measures that should prioritise protecting older people. Epidemiological scenarios and clinical guidelines should consider this, even though under-ascertainment should also be considered.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. e023470 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elspeth Cumber ◽  
Paul Robert Greig

ObjectivesTo determine the feasibility and ease of using a pre-existing health and safety executive fatigue risk calculator to assess doctors’ rotas.DesignObservational.SettingA large tertiary-referral teaching hospital in the UK.Participants95 anonymised foundation years 1 and 2 rotas in General Medicine, General Surgery and Emergency Medicine covering a 4-month period. All rotas provided by rota coordinators were included and assessed.InterventionsRotas were assessed for two indices: relative risk of fatigue-related errors compared with a ‘2-day, two-night, four-off’ shift pattern and percentage chance of a high score on a standardised sleepiness scale.Primary and secondary outcome measuresFatigue index (percentage chance of a high score on a standardised sleepiness scale) and risk index (relative risk of fatigue-related errors compared with a ‘2-day, two-night, four-off’ shift pattern) of all shifts on all rotas.ResultsNearly half of all shifts demonstrated increased risk of fatigue-related errors and increased probability of high levels of sleepiness. There was significant interspeciality variation in both indices. These results are based on rotas as opposed to ‘work as done’ and are therefore likely to slightly universally underestimate actual fatigue risks.ConclusionsThis preliminary study demonstrates that this tool can be used to compare rotas and guide rota design to minimise risk wherever possible. The calculator guidance clearly states there is no ‘ideal risk’ but that values should be minimised, and a maximum fatigue risk agreed which is deemed acceptable given the nature of work undertaken. This study is intended to demonstrate that fatigue can and should be considered during rota design. We do not suggest that it is used to hold either individuals or organisations to account as there is no evidence for it being used in this way. Further work should assess the practicality of designing medical rotas using this tool to minimise fatigue risk.


Author(s):  
Patrik Bachtiger ◽  
Alex Adamson ◽  
Ji-Jian Chow ◽  
Rupa Sisodia ◽  
Jennifer K Quint ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTObjectivesThe objective of this study was to measure the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on acceptance of flu vaccination in the 2020-21 season, including for those newly eligible for the UK National Health Service (NHS) free vaccination programme, extended this year to include an estimated 32.4 million (48.8%) of the UK population. Knowing intended uptake is essential to inform supply and steer public health messaging to maximise vaccination given the combined threats of both flu and Covid-19 — the unknown impact of which on both attitudes and the need for mass uptake yet again create the threat of ill-informed planning resulting in failure to meet necessary public health demand.MethodsAn online questionnaire posing question items on influenza vaccination was administered to registrants of the Care Information Exchange (CIE), the NHS’s largest patient electronic personal health record. This was part of a longitudinal study initiated during the Covid-19 pandemic lockdown. This analysis was limited to those who, in line with established NHS criteria, were previously or newly eligible but had not routinely received seasonal influenza vaccination in the past. Groups were stratified by response (yes/no) to intending to receive flu vaccination in 2020-21: Group 1.) Previously eligible now responding ‘yes’, 2.) Previously eligible still responding ‘no’, 3.) Newly eligible responding ‘yes’, and 4.) Newly eligible responding ‘no’. Within these groups, response by health worker status and each group’s inclination to vaccinate school age children was also measured. Summary statistics were reported alongside univariate and multivariable regression. Lastly, a network analysis visualised the frequency and co-occurrence of reasons qualifying response for or against influenza vaccination in 2020/21.FindingsAmong 6,641 respondents, 4,040 (61.1%) had previously routinely received the flu vaccination. 1,624 (24.5%) had been either previously eligible but not vaccinated (945, 58.2%) or newly eligible (679, 41.8%). Among the previously eligible participants who had not routinely received influenza vaccination 536 (56.7%) responded they would in 2020-21, increasing the vaccination rate in the entire previously eligible cohort from 79.6% to 91.2%, and 466 (68.6%) in the newly eligible.Multivariable logistic regression resulted in few substantial changes to effect estimates, with the exception of age, for which all estimates showed a stronger association with intention to receive the flu vaccine. In those who became newly eligible to receive the flu vaccine, there was an association between intention to receive the flu vaccine and increased age (OR = 1.07, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.12), IMD quintile, and considering oneself at high risk from Covid-19 (OR = 1.80, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.70).Network analysis showed the most frequent themes for previously eligible unvaccinated and newly eligible participants accepting vaccination in 2020/21 were: ‘precaution for myself’ (41.2% and 46.1%) and ‘Covid-19’ (27.4% and 27.1%), where the former was qualified by the latter in 36% and 29.1% of responses. Among the previously and newly eligible not intending to receive vaccination in 2020/21, misinformed themes of ‘makes me unwell’, ‘gives me flu’ and ‘vaccine doesn’t work’ were present across 37.4% and 21.9% of responses, respectively.Among participants with school age children, of those previously eligible who now intend to be vaccinated themselves, 82.5% also intend to vaccinate their children in 2020/21 compared to 25.8% of those who would not accept the influenza vaccine for themselves. Among the newly eligible respondents this was 82.1% and 43.5%, respectively. 49.9% of the previously unvaccinated healthcare workers would continue to decline the vaccine in 2020/21.InterpretationIn this UK-wide observational study, Covid-19 has increased acceptance of flu vaccination in 2020/21 from 79.6% to 91.2% in those previously eligible, and for the 69% of those newly eligible. This high anticipated vaccination rate (to 26 million (80%) of the UK population) requires appropriate planning, but can be further increased with effective messaging campaigns to address negative misconceptions about flu vaccination, which may also help in preparation for future Covid-19 vaccination. It remains of concern that 50% of healthcare professionals who refused it previously still do not intend to have the flu vaccine.


2019 ◽  
Vol 165 (6) ◽  
pp. 395-399 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Andrew Dermont ◽  
T Elmer

IntroductionThis paper describes the first ever analysis of health data to report influenza vaccine uptake and the effectiveness of the vaccine in preventing general practice presentations for influenza-like illness (ILI) in the UK Armed Forces (UK AF). This was undertaken during the 2017–2018 influenza season.MethodsClinical Read codes for ILI and influenza vaccinations were used to generate reports for the period from September 2017 to April 2018. Using a methodology adapted from Public Health England's (PHE) in hours syndromic surveillance, the ILI rate for the UK AF was calculated. Subsequent analysis explored vaccination uptake in target groups and compared the relative risk (RR) of ILI in vaccinated versus unvaccinated Service Personnel (SP).Results4234 SPs had a record of ILI between September 2017 and April 2018, with a peak rate of 216 cases per 100 000 PAR. The absolute risk reduction for reporting ILI in vaccinated versus unvaccinated SP was 0.4% (p=0.0031), and the RR was statistically significant at 15% (95% CI 5% to 23 %) lower than in the non-vaccinated PAR. The number needed to vaccinate (NNV) to prevent one presentation of ILI was 241 (95% CI 145 to 714). The 8153 vaccinations recorded for the untrained strength equate to approximately 38% of overall training throughput and 65% of all Army SP recorded as being in phase 1 training at some point during this period.ConclusionsThe relative risk reduction (RRR) for vaccinated personnel was modest and lower than reported elsewhere, but closely compares with ILI rates included in a 2018 Cochrane review. The small RRR and large NNV do not support widening the population of UK AF eligible to receive influenza vaccine. Regimental Medical Officers (RMOs) seeking advice on whether to vaccinate other groups of SP should be aware that this approach offers questionable clinical benefit. The ILI surveillance methodology used in this work could be adapted for syndromic surveillance of other infectious diseases.


Author(s):  
Jacob Busch ◽  
Emilie Kirstine Madsen ◽  
Antoinette Mary Fage-Butler ◽  
Marianne Kjær ◽  
Loni Ledderer

Summary Nudging has been discussed in the context of public health, and ethical issues raised by nudging in public health contexts have been highlighted. In this article, we first identify types of nudging approaches and techniques that have been used in screening programmes, and ethical issues that have been associated with nudging: paternalism, limited autonomy and manipulation. We then identify nudging techniques used in a pamphlet developed for the Danish National Screening Program for Colorectal Cancer. These include framing, default nudge, use of hassle bias, authority nudge and priming. The pamphlet and the very offering of a screening programme can in themselves be considered nudges. Whether nudging strategies are ethically problematic depend on whether they are categorized as educative- or non-educative nudges. Educative nudges seek to affect people’s choice making by engaging their reflective capabilities. Non-educative nudges work by circumventing people’s reflective capabilities. Information materials are, on the face of it, meant to engage citizens’ reflective capacities. Recipients are likely to receive information materials with this expectation, and thus not expect to be affected in other ways. Non-educative nudges may therefore be particularly problematic in the context of information on screening, also as participating in screening does not always benefit the individual.


Vaccines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 275
Author(s):  
Gabriella Di Giuseppe ◽  
Concetta Paola Pelullo ◽  
Giorgia Della Polla ◽  
Maria Pavia ◽  
Italo Francesco Angelillo

Understanding whether members of the university population are willing to receive a future vaccination against COVID-19 and identifying barriers may help public health authorities to develop effective strategies and interventions to contain COVID-19. This cross-sectional study explored the willingness to accept a future SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in a university population in Southern Italy. The perceived risk level of developing COVID-19 was 6.5 and it was significantly higher among females, younger subjects, and those who agreed/strongly agreed that COVID-19 is a severe disease. Only 21.4% of respondents were not worried at all regarding the safety of the vaccine. Males, not being married/cohabitant, being a faculty member, those who perceived a lower risk of developing COVID-19, and those who did not need information regarding the vaccination against COVID-19 were significantly more likely to have no concern at all regarding the safety of the vaccine. The vast majority (84.1%) were willing to receive a future vaccine against COVID-19. Almost coherently with predictors of concern on the safety of the vaccine, being male, not being married/cohabitant, being a faculty member, not being concerned at all that COVID-19 vaccination might not be safe, and agreeing that COVID-19 can have serious health consequences were significant predictors of the willingness to receive the vaccine against COVID-19. A considerable proportion of the population had a positive willingness to receive the future COVID-19 vaccine, although some concerns have been expressed regarding the effectiveness and safety and public health activities seem necessary to achieve the rate that can lead to the protection of the community.


2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (9) ◽  
pp. S8-S16
Author(s):  
Eleanor L Stevenson ◽  
Cheng Ching-Yu ◽  
Chang Chia-Hao ◽  
Kevin R McEleny

Male-factor infertility is a common but stigmatised issue, and men often do not receive the emotional support and the information they need. This study sought to understand awareness of male fertility issues compared to female fertility among the UK general male public, and also what were perceived as being the optimum methods for providing support for affected men, emotionally and through information. Men feel that male infertility is not discussed by the public as much as female infertility. Lifestyle issues that affect male fertility are not well understood, and men affected by infertility desire more support, including online, from health professionals and through peer support. Health professionals, including those in public health, could offer evidence-based programmes to reduce stigma and increase public knowledge about infertility, as well as offer emotional support to men with infertility problems.


2021 ◽  
pp. 089198872199681
Author(s):  
Kerry Hanna ◽  
Clarissa Giebel ◽  
Hilary Tetlow ◽  
Kym Ward ◽  
Justine Shenton ◽  
...  

Background: To date, there appears to be no evidence on the longer-term impacts caused by COVID-19 and its related public health restrictions on some of the most vulnerable in our societies. The aim of this research was to explore the change in impact of COVID-19 public health measures on the mental wellbeing of people living with dementia (PLWD) and unpaid carers. Method: Semi-structured, follow-up telephone interviews were conducted with PLWD and unpaid carers between June and July 2020. Participants were asked about their experiences of accessing social support services during the pandemic, and the impact of restrictions on their daily lives. Results: 20 interviews were conducted and thematically analyzed, which produced 3 primary themes concerning emotional responses and impact to mental health and wellbeing during the course of the pandemic: 1) Impact on mental health during lockdown, 2) Changes to mental health following easing of public health, and 3) The long-term effect of public health measures. Conclusions: The findings from this research shed light on the longer-term psychological impacts of the UK Government’s public health measures on PLWD and their carers. The loss of social support services was key in impacting this cohort mentally and emotionally, displaying a need for better psychological support, for both carers and PLWD.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document