Explore the vast range of titles available.

ObjectiveDespite concern regarding high rates of mental illness and suicide amongst the medical profession, the link between working hours and doctors’ mental health remains unclear. This study examines the relationship between average weekly working hours and junior doctors’ (JDs’) mental health in Australia.Design and participantsA randomly selected sample of 42 942 Australian doctors were invited to take part in an anonymous Beyondblue National Mental Health Survey in 2013, of whom 12 252 doctors provided valid data (response rate approximately 27%). The sample of interest comprised 2706 full-time graduate medical trainees in various specialties, at either intern, prevocational or vocational training stage. Consultants and retired doctors were excluded.Outcome measuresMain outcomes of interest were caseness of common mental disorder (CMD) (assessed using a cut-off of 4 as a threshold on total General Health Questionnaire-28 score), presence of suicidal ideation (SI) (assessed with a single item) and average weekly working hours. Logistic regression modelling was used to account for the impact of age, gender, stage of training, location of work, specialty, marital status and whether JDs had trained outside Australia.ResultsJDs reported working an average of 50.1 hours per week (SD=13.4). JDs who worked over 55 hours a week were more than twice as likely to report CMD (adjusted OR=2.05; 95% CI 1.62 to 2.59, p<0.001) and SI (adjusted OR=2.00; 95% CI 1.42 to 2.81, p<0.001) compared to those working 40–44 hours per week.ConclusionsOur results show that around one in four JDs are currently working hours that are associated with a doubling of their risk of common mental health problems and SI. These findings suggest that management of working hours represents an important focus for workplaces to improve the mental health of medical trainees.

Study Objectives: Although important to recovery, sleeping in the hospital is difficult because of disruptions. Understanding how patients, hospital physicians, and nurses perceive sleep disruptions and identifying which disruptions are associated with objective sleep loss can help target improvement initiatives. Methods: Patients and hospital staff completed the Potential Hospital Sleep Disruptions and Noises Questionnaire (PHSDNQ). Cutoff points were defined based on means, and responses were dichotomized. Perceived percent disrupted for each item was calculated, and responses were compared across groups using chi-square tests. Objective sleep time of patients was measured using wrist actigraphy. The association between patient-reported disruptions and objective sleep time was assessed using a multivariable linear regression model controlling for subject random effects. Results: Twenty-eight physicians (78%), 37 nurses (88%), and 166 of their patients completed the PHSDNQ. Patients, physicians, and nurses agreed that pain, vital signs and tests were the top three disrupters to patient sleep. Significant differences among the groups’ perceptions existed for alarms [24% (patients) vs. 46% (physicians) vs. 27% (nurses), p < 0.040], room temperature (15% vs. 0% vs. 5%, p < 0.031) and anxiety (18% vs. 21% vs. 38%, p < 0.031). Using survey and actigraphy data from 645 nights and 379 patients, the presence of pain was the only disruption associated with lower objective sleep duration (minutes) [−38.1 (95% confidence interval −63.2, −12.9) p < 0.003]. Conclusion: Hospital staff and patients agreed that pain, vital signs and tests were top sleep disrupters. However, pain was associated with the greatest objective sleep loss, highlighting the need for proactive screening and management of patient pain to improve sleep in hospitals. Citation: Grossman MN, Anderson SL, Worku A, Marsack W, Desai N, Tuvilleja A, Ramos J, Fancisco MA, Lafond C, Balachandran JS, Mokhlesi B, Farnan JM, Meltzer DO, Arora VM. Awakenings? Patient and hospital staff perceptions of nighttime disruptions and their effect on patient sleep. J Clin Sleep Med . 2017;13(2):301–306.

Background Healthcare professionals in hospitals are exposed to a high level of professional stress, time pressure, workload, and often times poor organizational support. This makes them especially susceptible to burnout. In this pragmatic randomized controlled trial, we test the hypothesis that participation in a 9-week program ( LAGOM ) that was designed in close collaboration with healthcare professionals, incorporating both individual and organizational aspects reduces emotional exhaustion in healthcare professionals (primary outcome). Methods Eighty four nurses and physicians working at the Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin and the Immanuel Hospital Berlin are automatically randomized to the LAGOM program ( n  = 42) or to usual care ( n  = 42) in a one-to-one allocation rate. The primary outcome emotional exhaustion is measured by the Maslach Burnout Inventory—Human Services Survey at baseline, post-intervention, and 1-month follow-up via an online survey. Secondary outcomes include depersonalization, personal accomplishment, subjective stress, mental well-being, self-care, self-efficacy, working conditions, mindfulness, and adverse events. Electrophysiological measures for heart rate variation analysis are captured. The PRECIS-2 tool is used to characterize the degree of pragmatism in our trial. Data analysis and primary intention-to-treat analysis using repeated measures analysis of variance are performed blind to intervention allocation. Per-protocol, subgroup, and secondary outcome analyses are conducted exploratively. An advisory board consisting of various stakeholders accompanies the study process. Discussion If LAGOM proves to be effective in reducing symptoms of burnout, the program could make an important contribution to tackling the problem of the very high burnout rates among healthcare professionals and become an integral part of preventive services offered by hospitals. Trial registration German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00034060. Registered 31 May 2024.

Background Internship and residency are difficult times with novice practitioners facing new challenges and stressors. Junior doctors may experience burnout, a syndrome that encompasses three dimensions: emotional exhaustion, depersonalisation and reduced personal accomplishment. While there is some existing literature on the prevalence of burnout in junior doctors, there are few studies on interventional strategies. Aims This study aimed to examine the prevalence of burnout in a cohort of junior doctors and whether debriefing sessions reduced levels of burnout. Methods A prospective randomised controlled study of a convenience sample of postgraduate year 1 doctors in a single hospital was undertaken during a rotation term in 2011. All participants completed a questionnaire using a validated tool, the Maslach Burnout Inventory, to determine the prevalence of burnout. They were then randomly assigned to a group who were to receive four debriefing sessions over 2 months, or, to the control group, who had no debriefing sessions. Quantitative and qualitative analyses were conducted. Results Thirty-one postgraduate year 1 doctors participated in the study, with 13 being assigned to the group receiving debriefing sessions and 18 assigned to the control group. At baseline, 21/31 (68%) participants displayed evidence of burnout in at least one domain as measured by the Maslach Burnout Inventory. Burnout was significantly higher in women. There was no significant difference in burnout scores with debriefing. The intervention was well received with 11/18 (61%) suggesting they would recommend the strategy to future junior doctors and 16/18 (89%) found that the sessions were a source of emotional and social support. Conclusions Burnout is prevalent among postgraduate year 1 doctors, and they value the emotional and social support from attending debriefing sessions. A larger study is required to determine if debriefing can reduce the incidence of burnout in junior doctors.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of reminder letters informed by social normative theory (a type of ‘nudge theory’) on uptake of seasonal influenza vaccination by front-line hospital staff.DesignIndividually randomised controlled trial.SettingA large acute care hospital in England.ParticipantsFront-line staff employed by the hospital (n=7540) were randomly allocated to one of four reminder types in a factorial design.InterventionsThe standard letter included only general information directing the staff to take up the vaccine. A second letter highlighted a type of social norm based on peer comparisons. A third letter highlighted a type of social norm based on an appeal to authority. A fourth letter included a combination of the social norms.Main outcome measureThe proportion of hospital staff vaccinated on-site.ResultsVaccine coverage was 43% (812/1885) in the standard letter group, 43% (818/1885) in the descriptive norms group, 43% (814/1885) in the injunctive norms group and 43% (812/1885) in the combination group. There were no statistically significant effects of either norm or the interaction. The OR for the descriptive norms factor is 1.01 (0.89–1.15) in the absence of the injunctive norms factor and 1.00 (0.88–1.13) in its presence. The OR for the injunctive norms factor is 1.00 (0.88–1.14) in the absence of the descriptive norms factor and 0.99 (0.87–1.12) in its presence.ConclusionsWe find no evidence that the uptake of the seasonal influenza vaccination is affected by reminders using social norms to motivate uptake.

Background Mental health problems among junior doctors in Malaysia pose a significant concern, as they not only adversely affect their overall well-being but also impact the quality of health services they provide. Therefore, it is important to implement interventions aimed at preserving their mental health. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the Sanubari Optimal Health Program (OHP) intervention in enhancing the mental well-being of junior doctors in Malaysia. Methods The study utilised a quasi-experimental design involving 204 junior doctors who participated in the intervention. The Sanubari OHP Intervention Package was employed alongside self-administered questionnaires for mental health and well-being assessment. To evaluate the effects over time, repeated measures ANOVA was employed to analyse within-group and between-group changes in various endpoints, as measured at different assessment time points. Results The study revealed that self-efficacy and adaptive coping behaviours scores increased over time among the intervention group and decreased among the control group. Yet, depression and anxiety scores decreased significantly over time among the intervention group but not in the control group. No significant differences were observed in well-being and maladaptive coping strategies among the groups. Conclusions This study showed promising results regarding the effectiveness of Sanubari OHP in improving mental well-being among junior doctors.

Background Psychological stress and anxiety have seriously affected the ability of new clinicians to adapt and coordinate their clinical work. Traditional pre-job training is often not very good at assisting new recruits to regulate their emotional problems. Methods This study is a randomized controlled study. A total of 435 newly recruited clinicians participated in the study. 428 clinicians were randomized into a control group ( n  = 214) and an intervention group ( n  = 214). The control group conducted regular pre-job training. Doctors of the intervention group attend a themed course every two weeks on the basis of regular induction training. Their physiological status was evaluated by Perceived Stress Scale (PPS-10), Generalized Anxiety Scale (GAD-7) and Psychological Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-10) 3 months later. Participants in the intervention group received a training satisfaction questionnaire. Results After entering the clinic for 3 months, the PSS-10 and GAD-7 scores of the intervention group were significantly lower than that of the control group. Consistently, the CD-RISC-10 score of new clinicians who received proof-of-concept pre-job training was significantly higher than that of new doctors in the control group. Conclusion New doctors received the proof-of-concept group experienced alleviation in stress and anxiety.

Background This study was conducted to assess the lifestyle behaviours of a national sample of hospital doctors working in Ireland. We also sought to compare the prevalence of these behaviours in doctors to the general Irish population. Methods This was a national cross-sectional study of a randomised sample of hospital doctors working in Irish publicly funded hospitals and residential institutions. The final cohort consisted of 1749 doctors (response rate of 55%). All hospital specialties were represented except radiology. The following data were collected: sociodemographic data (age, sex), work grade (consultant, trainee) average hours worked over a two-week period, specialty and lifestyle behaviours (smoking, alcohol, physical activity). Lifestyle data for the general population was provided by the Healthy Ireland 2015 study. Results Half of participants were men (50.5%). Just over half of the sample were consultants (54.3%), with 45.7% being trainees. 9.3% of doctors surveyed were smokers, 88.4% consumed alcohol and 24.5% were physically inactive. Trainees were more likely to smoke and be physically inactive when compared to consultants. Smoking rates amongst doctors were lower than the general population (9.3% -v- 23%). Doctors were more likely to consume alcohol than the general population (88.4% -v- 71.7%) but less likely to engage in binge drinking on a typical drinking occasion (12.8% -v- 39.5%). Doctors were more compliant than the general population with minimum exercise targets (75.5% -v- 70.5%), but less likely to engage in health enhancing physical activity (19.1% -v- 33%). Conclusions While the prevalence of health behaviours amongst hospital doctors in Ireland compares favourably to the general population, their alcohol consumption and engagement in health enhancing physical activity suggest room for improvement. Continued health promotion and education on the importance of personal health behaviours is essential.

Background Cognitive bias is an important source of diagnostic error yet is a challenging area to understand and teach. Our aim was to determine whether a cognitive forcing tool can reduce the rates of error in clinical decision making. A secondary objective was to understand the process by which this effect might occur. Methods We hypothesised that using a cognitive forcing tool would reduce diagnostic error rates. To test this hypothesis, a novel online case-based approach was used to conduct a single blinded randomized clinical trial conducted from January 2017 to September 2018. In addition, a qualitative series of “think aloud” interviews were conducted with 20 doctors from a UK teaching hospital in 2018. The primary outcome was the diagnostic error rate when solving bias inducing clinical vignettes. A volunteer sample of medical professionals from across the UK, Republic of Ireland and North America. They ranged in seniority from medical student to Attending Physician. Results Seventy six participants were included in the study. The data showed doctors of all grades routinely made errors related to cognitive bias. There was no difference in error rates between groups (mean 2.8 cases correct in intervention vs 3.1 in control group, 95% CI -0.94 – 0.45 P  = 0.49). The qualitative protocol revealed that the cognitive forcing strategy was well received and a produced a subjectively positive impact on doctors’ accuracy and thoughtfulness in clinical cases. Conclusions The quantitative data failed to show an improvement in accuracy despite a positive qualitative experience. There is insufficient evidence to recommend this tool in clinical practice, however the qualitative data suggests such an approach has some merit and face validity to users.

Background There are limited data to inform the choice between parental presence at clinical bedside rounds (PPCBR) and non-PPCBR in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). Methods We performed a single-centre, survey-based, crossed-over randomised trial involving parents of all infants who were admitted to NICU and anticipated to stay >11 days. Parents were randomly assigned using a computer-generated stratified block randomisation protocol to start with PPCBR or non-PPCBR and then crossed over to the other arm after a wash-out period. At the conclusion of each arm, parents completed the ‘NICU Parental Stressor Scale’ (a validated tool) and a satisfaction survey. After completion of the trial, we surveyed all healthcare providers who participated at least in one PPCBR rounding episode. We also offered all participating parents and healthcare providers the opportunity to partake in a focus group discussion regarding PPCBR. Results A total of 72 parents were enrolled in this study, with 63 parents (87%) partially or fully completing the trial. Of the parents who completed the trial, 95% agreed that parents should be allowed to attend clinical bedside rounds. A total of 39 healthcare providers’ surveys were returned and 35 (90%) agreed that parents should be allowed to attend rounds. Nine healthcare providers and 8 parents participated in an interview or focus group, augmenting our understanding of the ways in which PPCBR was beneficial. Conclusions Parents and healthcare providers strongly support PPCBR. NICUs should develop policies allowing PPCBR while mitigating the downsides and concerns of parents and healthcare providers such as decreased education opportunity and confidentiality concerns. Trial registration number Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register number, ACTRN12612000506897.