The impact of Covid-19 on research into work and health

BACKGROUND

The global coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic created a profound disruption to the delivery of planned scientific research with unknown immediate and potentially longer-term impacts.

AIMS

We explored researchers' experiences of the impact of the pandemic on the continued development and delivery of research into work and health, and on research infrastructure in this field.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study.

RESULTS

Thirty-three questionnaires were completed, representing a response rate of 15%. Sixty-one per cent of respondents were female, the majority (78%) had over 11 years of research experience and 76% worked mainly in academia. Most respondents (88%) were able to progress with research during the pandemic. A small proportion (4%) had studies paused or suspended due to the pandemic, while a larger proportion (19%) had research staff redeployed to assist with other studies or furloughed. Respondents described a range of emerging practical and logistical issues for research into work and health during the pandemic. Some benefited from increased opportunities to collaborate on new multidisciplinary studies, opportunities to engage participants in work and health research, and more flexible and inclusive work practices. Others experienced challenges that had an adverse impact, such as hampering research delivery (e.g. barriers to participant screening and intervention delivery), poor (home) working environments, reduced team cohesion and isolation. A range of future priorities for research was highlighted.

CONCLUSIONS

We describe lessons learned and opportunities that can be used to support or further research activities in the field of work and health research in the future.

[ZApprO versus ZÄPrO: results of a first comparative study]

BACKGROUND

More than 60 years after the enactment of the first Licensing Regulations for Dentists (ZÄPrO), a new Licensing Regulations for Dentists, the ZApprO, was implemented in 2020. The aims of this study were to evaluate and compare the "Course in Technical Propaedeutics" (TPK) with the course "Dental Propaedeutics with a Focus on Dental Technology" (ZPDT), which are based on different legal foundations.

METHODS

The following parameters were compared after completion of the courses: (1) theoretical and practical knowledge, (2) regular department-internal learner evaluation, and (3) special evaluation of learning conditions by the learners and (4) by the instructors. The theoretical and practical exams and the questionnaires were analyzed in terms of their test-statistical characteristics (difficulty, discrimination index, internal consistency). Group comparisons between TPK and ZPDT were conducted using t‑tests for independent groups.

RESULTS

Significant differences were only detected in the students' evaluation of their learning conditions, with theoretical and practical knowledge transfer being rated lower in the TPK than in the ZPDT.

DISCUSSION

The comparable results of the knowledge assessments and the regular learner evaluation, triangulated with the comprehensive learner and instructor evaluation, allowed a broad assessment of both courses. The significant differences identified provide opportunities for optimization of the newly implemented ZPDT course.

Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires

BACKGROUND

Self-administered questionnaires are widely used to collect data in epidemiological research, but non-response reduces the effective sample size and can introduce bias. Finding ways to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires would improve the quality of epidemiological research.

OBJECTIVES

To identify effective strategies to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 14 electronic databases up to December 2021 and manually searched the reference lists of relevant trials and reviews. We contacted the authors of all trials or reviews to ask about unpublished trials; where necessary, we also contacted authors to confirm the methods of allocation used and to clarify results presented.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials of methods to increase response to postal or electronic questionnaires. We assessed the eligibility of each trial using pre-defined criteria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data on the trial participants, the intervention, the number randomised to intervention and comparison groups and allocation concealment. For each strategy, we estimated pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) in a random-effects model. We assessed evidence for selection bias using Egger's weighted regression method and Begg's rank correlation test and funnel plot. We assessed heterogeneity amongst trial odds ratios using a Chi2 test and quantified the degree of inconsistency between trial results using the I2 statistic.

MAIN RESULTS

Postal We found 670 eligible trials that evaluated over 100 different strategies of increasing response to postal questionnaires. We found substantial heterogeneity amongst trial results in half of the strategies. The odds of response almost doubled when: using monetary incentives (odds ratio (OR) 1.86; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.73 to 1.99; heterogeneity I2 = 85%); using a telephone reminder (OR 1.96; 95% CI 1.03 to 3.74); and when clinical outcome questions were placed last (OR 2.05; 95% CI 1.00 to 4.24). The odds of response increased by about half when: using a shorter questionnaire (OR 1.58; 95% CI 1.40 to 1.78); contacting participants before sending questionnaires (OR 1.36; 95% CI 1.23 to 1.51; I2 = 87%); incentives were given with questionnaires (i.e. unconditional) rather than when given only after participants had returned their questionnaire (i.e. conditional on response) (OR 1.53; 95% CI 1.35 to 1.74); using personalised SMS reminders (OR 1.53; 95% CI 0.97 to 2.42); using a special (recorded) delivery service (OR 1.68; 95% CI 1.36 to 2.08; I2 = 87%); using electronic reminders (OR 1.60; 95% CI 1.10 to 2.33); using intensive follow-up (OR 1.69; 95% CI 0.93 to 3.06); using a more interesting/salient questionnaire (OR 1.73; 95% CI 1.12 to 2.66); and when mentioning an obligation to respond (OR 1.61; 95% CI 1.16 to 2.22). The odds of response also increased with: non-monetary incentives (OR 1.16; 95% CI 1.11 to 1.21; I2 = 80%); a larger monetary incentive (OR 1.24; 95% CI 1.15 to 1.33); a larger non-monetary incentive (OR 1.15; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.33); when a pen was included (OR 1.44; 95% CI 1.38 to 1.50); using personalised materials (OR 1.15; 95% CI 1.09 to 1.21; I2 = 57%); using a single-sided rather than a double-sided questionnaire (OR 1.13; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.25); using stamped return envelopes rather than franked return envelopes (OR 1.23; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.33; I2 = 69%), assuring confidentiality (OR 1.33; 95% CI 1.24 to 1.42); using first-class outward mailing (OR 1.11; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.21); and when questionnaires originated from a university (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.54). The odds of response were reduced when the questionnaire included questions of a sensitive nature (OR 0.94; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.00). Electronic We found 88 eligible trials that evaluated over 30 different ways of increasing response to electronic questionnaires. We found substantial heterogeneity amongst trial results in half of the strategies. The odds of response tripled when: using a brief letter rather than a detailed letter (OR 3.26; 95% CI 1.79 to 5.94); and when a picture was included in an email (OR 3.05; 95% CI 1.84 to 5.06; I2 = 19%). The odds of response almost doubled when: using monetary incentives (OR 1.88; 95% CI 1.31 to 2.71; I2 = 79%); and using a more interesting topic (OR 1.85; 95% CI 1.52 to 2.26). The odds of response increased by half when: using non-monetary incentives (OR 1.60; 95% CI 1.25 to 2.05); using shorter e-questionnaires (OR 1.51; 95% CI 1.06 to 2.16; I2 = 94%); and using a more interesting e-questionnaire (OR 1.85; 95% CI 1.52 to 2.26). The odds of response increased by a third when: offering survey results as an incentive (OR 1.36; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.59); using a white background (OR 1.31; 95% CI 1.10 to 1.56); and when stressing the benefits to society of response (OR 1.38; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.78; I2 = 41%). The odds of response also increased with: personalised e-questionnaires (OR 1.24; 95% CI 1.17 to 1.32; I2 = 41%); using a simple header (OR 1.23; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.48); giving a deadline (OR 1.18; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.34); and by giving a longer time estimate for completion (OR 1.25; 95% CI 0.96 to 1.64). The odds of response were reduced when: "Survey" was mentioned in the e-mail subject (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.67 to 0.97); when the email or the e-questionnaire was from a male investigator, or it included a male signature (OR 0.55; 95% CI 0.38 to 0.80); and by using university sponsorship (OR 0.84; 95%CI 0.69 to 1.01). The odds of response using a postal questionnaire were over twice those using an e-questionnaire (OR 2.33; 95% CI 2.25 to 2.42; I2 = 98%). Response also increased when: providing a choice of response mode (electronic or postal) rather than electronic only (OR 1.76 95% CI 1.67 to 1.85; I2 = 97%); and when administering the e-questionnaire by computer rather than by smartphone (OR 1.62 95% CI 1.36 to 1.94).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Researchers using postal and electronic questionnaires can increase response using the strategies shown to be effective in this Cochrane review.

Expanding the strategic and clinical leadership role of accredited specialists

BACKGROUND

We sought to explore the value and benefits of accredited specialists employed in the National Health Service (NHS), and proposed strategies for expanding their role.

AIMS

To explore the core characteristics of accredited specialists and to examine how their skills could be further utilized to enhance occupational health (OH) services.

METHODS

Mixed methods comprising a survey and qualitative work.

RESULTS

OH survey was completed by 65 of 128 (51%) respondents. Nine accredited specialists and 16 stakeholders contributed qualitative data. Most OH departments were located in acute NHS trusts and additionally provided externally contracted services. We found a large variation in OH staffing and OH services delivered. The COVID pandemic created unprecedented challenges and required expansion in services to meet demand. The majority of respondents described greater recognition and appreciation by others of accredited specialists and OH teams for their specialist contribution during the pandemic. From the qualitative data, we identified two overarching themes. 'Professional credibility has currency' (Theme 1) and 'A visionary future' (Theme 2). A series of sub-themes are described.

CONCLUSIONS

Accredited specialists employed in the NHS possess a core set of attributes and capabilities, and are skilful at delivering strong, influential and impactful clinical and strategic leadership across the NHS hierarchy and landscape. The COVID pandemic provided valuable opportunities for them to showcase their specialist clinical and leadership skills. The current wider reorientation of NHS clinical services offers bold new ways to expand their role beyond traditional clinical boundaries.

Attitudes and practices of ophthalmology doctors in London (UK) on the importance of discussing work as a clinical outcome with patients during consultations: A cross sectional survey

Background

Limited research suggests that non-occupational health doctors rarely discuss occupation with their patients. There is a gap in research regarding the attitudes and practices of doctors towards discussing patient occupation and return to work. The aim of this work was to explore the attitudes of ophthalmology doctors towards work as a clinical outcome and assess the need for occupational health training among participants (doctors).

Methods

A cross-sectional survey among doctors working in ophthalmology in two London teaching hospitals. The survey focused on the attitudes of doctors towards ‘work’ as a clinical outcome, their practices of asking patients about occupation, their perceived level of competency in this area of clinical practice and the level of training doctors had received in this field. Descriptive data analysis was undertaken and results presented as frequencies and proportions.

Results

The response rate was 30/72 (42%). Approximately a quarter (8/30;27%) of doctors ‘always’ discussed return to work during care planning whilst the majority (25/30;87%) of doctors agreed or strongly agreed that this should always be the case. Over half of the doctors had received no formal OH training on how to discuss or assess the impact of health on work and only 17/30 (57%) considered themselves competent in discussing these work outcomes with patients. Over half agreed that additional training would be useful, with the majority believing that it would be most useful at all stages of medical training.

Conclusion

We found the majority of ophthalmology doctors regard ‘return to work’ as an important clinical outcome yet most do not routinely discuss work outcomes with patients to inform care planning. Majority of doctors lack training in how to discuss issues relating to work and would benefit from additional OH training.

Mixed-mode versus paper surveys for patient-reported outcomes after critical illness: A randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to determine the response rate to a mixed-mode survey using email compared with that to a paper survey in survivors of critical illness.

DESIGN

This is a prospective randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

The study was conducted at a single-centre quaternary intensive care unit (ICU) in Adelaide, Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

Study participants were patients admitted to the ICU for ≥48 h and discharged from the hospital.

INTERVENTIONS

The participants were randomised to receive a survey by paper (via mail) or via online (via email, or if a non-email user, via a letter with a website address). Patients who did not respond to the initial survey received a reminder paper survey after 14 days. The survey included quality of life (EuroQol-5D-5L), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), and post-traumatic symptom (Impact of Event Scale-Revised) assessment.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Survey response rate, extent of survey completion, clinical outcomes at different time points after discharge, and survey cost analysis were the main outcome measures. Outcomes were stratified based on follow-up time after ICU discharge (3, 6, and 12 months).

RESULTS

A total of 239 patients were randomised. The response rate was similar between the groups (mixed-mode: 78% [92/118 patients] vs. paper: 80% [97/121 patients], p = 0.751) and did not differ between time points of follow-up. Incomplete surveys were more prevalent in the paper group (10% vs 18%). The median EuroQol-5D-5L index value was 0.83 [0.71-0.92]. Depressive symptoms were reported by 25% of patients (46/187), anxiety symptoms were reported by 27% (50/187), and probable post-traumatic stress disorder was reported by 14% (25/184). Patient outcomes did not differ between the groups or time points of follow-up. The cost per reply was AU$ 16.60 (mixed-mode) vs AU$ 19.78 (paper).

CONCLUSION

The response rate of a mixed-mode survey is similar to that of a paper survey and may provide modest cost savings.

Strategies to improve retention in randomised trials

BACKGROUND

Poor retention of participants in randomised trials can lead to missing outcome data which can introduce bias and reduce study power, affecting the generalisability, validity and reliability of results. Many strategies are used to improve retention but few have been formally evaluated.

OBJECTIVES

To quantify the effect of strategies to improve retention of participants in randomised trials and to investigate if the effect varied by trial setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Scopus, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection (SCI-expanded, SSCI, CPSI-S, CPCI-SSH and ESCI) either directly with a specified search strategy or indirectly through the ORRCA database. We also searched the SWAT repository to identify ongoing or recently completed retention trials. We did our most recent searches in January 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included eligible randomised or quasi-randomised trials of evaluations of strategies to increase retention that were embedded in 'host' randomised trials from all disease areas and healthcare settings. We excluded studies aiming to increase treatment compliance.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data on: the retention strategy being evaluated; location of study; host trial setting; method of randomisation; numbers and proportions in each intervention and comparator group. We used a risk difference (RD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) to estimate the effectiveness of the strategies to improve retention. We assessed heterogeneity between trials. We applied GRADE to determine the certainty of the evidence within each comparison.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 70 eligible papers that reported data from 81 retention trials. We included 69 studies with more than 100,000 participants in the final meta-analyses, of which 67 studies evaluated interventions aimed at trial participants and two evaluated interventions aimed at trial staff involved in retention. All studies were in health care and most aimed to improve postal questionnaire response. Interventions were categorised into broad comparison groups: Data collection; Participants; Sites and site staff; Central study management; and Study design. These intervention groups consisted of 52 comparisons, none of which were supported by high-certainty evidence as determined by GRADE assessment. There were four comparisons presenting moderate-certainty evidence, three supporting retention (self-sampling kits, monetary reward together with reminder or prenotification and giving a pen at recruitment) and one reducing retention (inclusion of a diary with usual follow-up compared to usual follow-up alone). Of the remaining studies, 20 presented GRADE low-certainty evidence and 28 presented very low-certainty evidence. Our findings do provide a priority list for future replication studies, especially with regard to comparisons that currently rely on a single study.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Most of the interventions we identified aimed to improve retention in the form of postal questionnaire response. There were few evaluations of ways to improve participants returning to trial sites for trial follow-up. None of the comparisons are supported by high-certainty evidence. Comparisons in the review where the evidence certainty could be improved with the addition of well-done studies should be the focus for future evaluations.

A case management occupational health model to facilitate earlier return to work of NHS staff with common mental health disorders: a feasibility study

BACKGROUND

The NHS is the biggest employer in the UK. Depression and anxiety are common reasons for sickness absence among staff. Evidence suggests that an intervention based on a case management model using a biopsychosocial approach could be cost-effective and lead to earlier return to work for staff with common mental health disorders.

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of conducting a trial of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an early occupational health referral and case management intervention to facilitate the return to work of NHS staff on sick leave with any common mental health disorder (e.g. depression or anxiety).

DESIGN

A multicentre mixed-methods feasibility study with embedded process evaluation and economic analyses. The study comprised an updated systematic review, survey of care as usual, and development of an intervention in consultation with key stakeholders. Although this was not a randomised controlled trial, the study design comprised two arms where participants received either the intervention or care as usual.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were NHS staff on sick leave for 7 or more consecutive days but less than 90 consecutive days, with a common mental health disorder.

INTERVENTION

The intervention involved early referral to occupational health combined with standardised work-focused case management.

CONTROL/COMPARATOR

Participants in the control arm received care as usual.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

The primary outcome was the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention, study processes (including methods of recruiting participants) and data collection tools to measure return to work, episodes of sickness absence, workability (a worker's functional ability to perform their job), occupational functioning, symptomatology and cost-effectiveness proposed for use in a main trial.

RESULTS

Forty articles and two guidelines were included in an updated systematic review. A total of 49 of the 126 (39%) occupational health providers who were approached participated in a national survey of care as usual. Selected multidisciplinary stakeholders contributed to the development of the work-focused case management intervention (including a training workshop). Six NHS trusts (occupational health departments) agreed to take part in the study, although one trust withdrew prior to participant recruitment, citing staff shortages. At mixed intervention sites, participants were sequentially allocated to each arm, where possible. Approximately 1938 (3.9%) NHS staff from the participating sites were on sick leave with a common mental health disorder during the study period. Forty-two sick-listed NHS staff were screened for eligibility on receipt of occupational health management referrals. Twenty-four (57%) participants were consented: 11 (46%) received the case management intervention and 13 (54%) received care as usual. Follow-up data were collected from 11 out of 24 (46%) participants at 3 months and 10 out of 24 (42%) participants at 6 months. The case management intervention and case manager training were found to be acceptable and inexpensive to deliver. Possible contamination issues are likely in a future trial if participants are individually randomised at mixed intervention sites.

HARMS

No adverse events were reported.

LIMITATIONS

The method of identification and recruitment of eligible sick-listed staff was ineffective in practice because uptake of referral to occupational health was low, but a new targeted method has been devised.

CONCLUSION

All study questions were addressed. Difficulties raising organisational awareness of the study coupled with a lack of change in occupational health referral practices by line managers affected the identification and recruitment of participants. Strategies to overcome these barriers in a main trial were identified. The case management intervention was fit for purpose and acceptable to deliver in the NHS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN14621901.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 12. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

A behaviour change package to prevent hand dermatitis in nurses working in health care: the SCIN cluster RCT

BACKGROUND

Although strategies have been developed to minimise the risk of occupational hand dermatitis in nurses, their clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness remain unclear.

OBJECTIVES

The Skin Care Intervention in Nurses trial tested the hypothesis that a behaviour change package intervention, coupled with provision of hand moisturisers, could reduce the point prevalence of hand dermatitis when compared with standard care among nurses working in the NHS. The secondary aim was to assess the impact of the intervention on participants' beliefs and behaviour regarding hand care, and the cost-effectiveness of the intervention in comparison with normal care.

DESIGN

Cluster randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Thirty-five NHS hospital trusts/health boards/universities.

PARTICIPANTS

First-year student nurses with a history of atopic tendency, and full-time intensive care unit nurses.

INTERVENTION

Sites were randomly allocated to be 'intervention plus' or 'intervention light'. Participants at 'intervention plus' sites received access to a bespoke online behaviour change package intervention, coupled with personal supplies of moisturising cream (student nurses) and optimal availability of moisturising cream (intensive care unit nurses). Nurses at 'intervention light' sites received usual care, including a dermatitis prevention leaflet.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The difference between intervention plus and intervention light sites in the change of point prevalence of visible hand dermatitis was measured from images taken at baseline and at follow-up.

RANDOMISATION

Fourteen sites were randomised to the intervention plus arm, and 21 sites were randomised to the intervention light arm.

BLINDING

The participants, trial statistician, methodologist and the dermatologists interpreting the hand photographs were blinded to intervention assignment.

NUMBERS ANALYSED

An intention-to-treat analysis was conducted on data from 845 student nurses and 1111 intensive care unit nurses.

RESULTS

The intention-to-treat analysis showed no evidence that the risk of developing dermatitis was greater in the intervention light group than in the intervention plus group (student nurses: odds ratio 1.25, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 2.69; intensive care unit nurses: odds ratio 1.41, 95% confidence interval 0.81 to 2.44). Both groups had high levels of baseline beliefs about the benefits of using hand moisturisers before, during and after work. The frequency of use of hand moisturisers before, during and after shifts was significantly higher in the intensive care unit nurses in the intervention plus arm at follow-up than in the comparator group nurses. For student nurses, the intervention plus group mean costs were £2 lower than those for the comparator and 0.00002 more quality-adjusted life-years were gained. For intensive care unit nurses, costs were £4 higher and 0.0016 fewer quality-adjusted life-years were gained.

HARMS

No adverse events were reported.

LIMITATIONS

Only 44.5% of participants in the intervention plus arm accessed the behaviour change package.

CONCLUSION

The intervention did not result in a statistically significant decrease in the prevalence of hand dermatitis in the intervention plus group.

FUTURE WORK

Participants had a high level of baseline beliefs about the importance of using hand moisturisers before, during and after work. Future research should focus on how workplace culture can be changed in order for that knowledge to be actioned.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN53303171.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 58. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.