Does a biomedical research centre affect patient care in local hospitals?

Burnout, Moral Distress, and Compassion Fatigue as Correlates of Posttraumatic Stress Symptoms in Clinical and Nonclinical Healthcare Workers

GOAL

Research has highlighted psychological distress resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare workers (HCWs), including the development of posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS). However, the degree to which these conditions have endured beyond the pandemic and the extent to which they affect the entire healthcare team, including both clinical and nonclinical workers, remain unknown. This study aims to identify correlates of PTSS in the entire healthcare workforce with the goal of providing evidence to support the development of trauma-informed leadership strategies.

METHODS

Data were collected from June to July 2022 using a cross-sectional anonymous survey in a large academic medical center setting. A total of 6,466 clinical and nonclinical employees completed the survey (27.3% response rate). Cases with at least one missing variable were omitted, for a total sample size of 4,806, the evaluation of which enabled us to understand individual, organizational, and work-related and nonwork-related stressors associated with PTSS. Data were analyzed using ordinal logistic regression and dominance analyses to identify predictors of PTSS specific to clinical and nonclinical workers.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

While previous studies have shown that HCWs in different job roles experience unique stressors, our data indicate that the top correlates of PTSS among both clinical and nonclinical HCWs are the same: burnout, moral distress, and compassion fatigue. These three factors alone explained 45% and 44.4% of the variance in PTSS in clinical and nonclinical workers, respectively. PTSS was also associated with a lower sense of recognition and feeling mistreated by other employees at work in the clinical workforce. Concerningly, women and sexual minorities in the clinical sample exhibited a higher incidence of PTSS. In nonclinical workers, social isolation or loneliness and lower trust and confidence in senior leadership were associated with PTSS. Nonwork-related factors, such as exhaustion from caregiving responsibilities and financial strain, were also significantly associated with PTSS. Even after controlling for discrimination at and outside of work in both samples, we found that non-White populations were more likely to experience PTSS, highlighting a deeply concerning issue in the healthcare workforce.

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS

The primary objective of this article is to help healthcare leaders understand the correlates of PTSS across the entire healthcare team as organizations recover from the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding which factors are associated with PTSS will help healthcare leaders develop best practices that aim to reduce HCW distress and strategies to circumvent trauma derived from future crises. Our data indicate that leaders must address the correlates of PTSS in the workforce, focusing attention on both those who work on the frontlines and those who work behind the scenes. We urge leaders to adopt a trauma-informed leadership approach to ensure that the entire healthcare workforce is recognized, supported, and cared for as each HCW plays a unique role in the care of patients.

An Investigation of Organizational Correlates of Distress in Non-Clinician Biomedical Researchers in the United States

Purpose

Challenges ushered by the COVID-19 pandemic led to an increased focus on the mental well-being of the healthcare workforce. Despite the important contribution non-clinician biomedical researchers make to the mission of academic medical centers, the well-being of this unique population remains understudied in the United States. The purpose of this study was to examine the individual and organizational correlates of distress among non-clinician biomedical researchers.

Methods

A survey was delivered to employees of a large academic medical center in the southeastern United States, including non-clinician biomedical researchers. Participants were asked to assess their own well-being using the validated Well-Being Index (WBI) tool, resilience, work and nonwork-related stressors and demographic descriptors. Descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses were conducted, and binary logistic regression was used to examine predictors of increased odds of overall distress.

Results

Nearly 44% of surveyed non-clinician biomedical researchers met the threshold for high distress which indicates an increased risk of suicidal ideation, turnover intention, and burnout. The major correlates of distress were at the organizational level, including perceived organizational support (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.70-0.90), heavy workload and long hours (OR 3.25, 95% CI 1.53-6.88), inability or lack of support to take time off (OR 2.80, 95% CI 1.03-7.66) and conflict with supervisor (OR 5.03, 95% CI 1.13-22.1). While lower individual resilience (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.54-0.88) was statistically significantly associated with greater distress, it accounted for less than 10% of the overall variance when controlling for other work-related factors.

Conclusion

These findings suggest that developing organizational interventions that address institutional support for non-clinician biomedical researchers within academic medical centers represents an important opportunity to reduce distress within this population. While emphasizing individual resiliency as an important in the pursuit of well-being, it is also the responsibility of the organization to create and foster an environment in which employees can access their own resilience.

Vulnerability, Moral responsibility, and Moral Obligations: the case of Industrial Action in the Medical and Allied Professions

The article addresses issues at the nexus of physician industrial action, moral agency, and responsibility. There are situations in which we find ourselves best placed to offer aid to those who may be in vulnerable positions, a behavior that is consistent with our everyday moral intuitions. In both our interpersonal relationships and social life, we make frequent judgments about whether to praise or blame someone for their actions when we determine that they should have acted to help a vulnerable person. While the average person is unlikely to confront these kinds of situations often, those in the medical professions, physicians especially, may confront these and similar situations regularly. Therefore, when physicians withhold their services for whatever reason in support of industrial action, it raises issues of moral responsibility to patients who may be in a vulnerable position. Using theories of moral responsibility, vulnerability, and ethics, this paper explores the moral implications of physician industrial action. We explore issues of vulnerability of patients, as well as the moral responsibility and moral agency of doctors to patients. Determining when a person is vulnerable, and when an individual becomes a moral agent, worthy of praise or blame for an act or non-action, is at the core of the framework. Notwithstanding the right of physicians to act in their self-interest, we argue that vulnerability leads to moral obligations, that physicians are moral agents, and the imperatives of their obligations to patients clear, even if limited by certain conditions. We suggest that both doctors and governments have a collective responsibility to prevent harm to patients and present the theoretical and practical implications of the paper.

Pulse oximetry adoption and oxygen orders at paediatric admission over 7 years in Kenya: a multihospital retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To characterise adoption and explore specific clinical and patient factors that might influence pulse oximetry and oxygen use in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) over time; to highlight useful considerations for entities working on programmes to improve access to pulse oximetry and oxygen.

DESIGN

A multihospital retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

All admissions (n=132 737) to paediatric wards of 18 purposely selected public hospitals in Kenya that joined a Clinical Information Network (CIN) between March 2014 and December 2020.

OUTCOMES

Pulse oximetry use and oxygen prescription on admission; we performed growth-curve modelling to investigate the association of patient factors with study outcomes over time while adjusting for hospital factors.

RESULTS

Overall, pulse oximetry was used in 48.8% (64 722/132 737) of all admission cases. Use rose on average with each month of participation in the CIN (OR: 1.11, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.18) but patterns of adoption were highly variable across hospitals suggesting important factors at hospital level influence use of pulse oximetry. Of those with pulse oximetry measurement, 7% (4510/64 722) had hypoxaemia (SpO2 <90%). Across the same period, 8.6% (11 428/132 737) had oxygen prescribed but in 87%, pulse oximetry was either not done or the hypoxaemia threshold (SpO2 <90%) was not met. Lower chest-wall indrawing and other respiratory symptoms were associated with pulse oximetry use at admission and were also associated with oxygen prescription in the absence of pulse oximetry or hypoxaemia.

CONCLUSION

The adoption of pulse oximetry recommended in international guidelines for assessing children with severe illness has been slow and erratic, reflecting system and organisational weaknesses. Most oxygen orders at admission seem driven by clinical and situational factors other than the presence of hypoxaemia. Programmes aiming to implement pulse oximetry and oxygen systems will likely need a long-term vision to promote adoption, guideline development and adherence and continuously examine impact.

Making the move to a learning healthcare system: has the pandemic brought us one step closer?

The notion of a learning healthcare system (LHS) is gaining traction to advance the objectives of high-quality patient-centred care. Within such a system, real-world data analysis, clinical research and health service research are core activities of the health system. To support the transition to an LHS, the Australian Government is implementing the National Clinical Trials Governance Framework, which extends health service accreditation standards to the conduct of clinical trials. This initiative encourages the integration of clinical trials into clinical care and the fostering of a culture of continuous improvement. However, implementing this initiative may prove challenging if health system leaders, clinicians and patients fail to recognise the value of clinical trials as a core health system activity. In this article we describe the enduring value of clinical trials and how the COVID-19 pandemic has enhanced their value by addressing longstanding deficiencies in the way trials are conducted. We also summarise best-practice advice on the embedding of trials into routine health care to enable their integration into health system operations. What is known about this topic? Many healthcare organisations seek to transition to a learning health system. In Australia, National Safety and Quality Health Service Standards, which support the embedding of clinical trials as a core health system activity, have been implemented to catalyse the move. What does this paper add? Because there is little practical advice on how to embed clinical trials into health system operations, this paper summarises best practice. It also provides a rationale for embedding trials as a core health system activity, because the creation of a strong research culture is an important determinant of success. What are the implications for practitioners? The successful transition to an LHS would significantly advance the goals of value-based care.

Incorporating Participant and Clinical Feedback into a Community-Based Participatory Research Study of Colorectal Cancer Among Alaska Native People

Alaska Native (AN) people have among the highest rates of colorectal cancer (CRC) globally. We are developing a community-based participatory research (CBPR) informed program to understand risk and protective factors contributing to these high rates. In 2018, we conducted a pilot study to test feasibility of recruiting participants from the Alaska Native Medical Center CRC Screening Clinic into a prospective epidemiologic study. Post-pilot study completion, we conducted focus groups (n = 2) with participants and key informant interviews (n = 7) with research and clinical staff to understand study experiences. During 106 days of recruitment, 30 participants enrolled in the pilot study. Over half (60%) were female, and most (67%) were aged 40-59 years. Key themes that emerged from the participant focus groups were: the desire to contribute to improving the health of AN people as a key driver of participation; an overall positive experience with the study; the benefit of clinical staff notifying patients about the study; the need to clearly explain the purpose of each biospecimen collected; barriers to participation; and, the importance of returning study results to the community. Key themes from research and clinical staff interviews included: the study not interfering with clinical duties; the importance of relationships between clinical and research staff; the importance of research staff flexibility; and, comments on specific study procedures. As part of the CBPR process, this feedback will be incorporated into study protocols. We are building this pilot work into a larger prospective study that will inform primary prevention programs.

The impact generated by publicly and charity-funded research in the United Kingdom: a systematic literature review

Objective

To identify, synthesise and critically assess the empirical evidence of the impact generated by publicly and charity-funded health research in the United Kingdom.

Methods

We conducted a systematic literature review of the empirical evidence published in English in peer-reviewed journals between 2006 and 2017. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were selected and their findings were analysed using the Payback Framework and categorised into five main dimensions, namely knowledge, benefits to future research and research use, benefits from informing policy and product development, health and health sector benefits, and broader economic benefits. We assessed the studies for risk of selection, reporting and funding bias.

Results

Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria. The majority of the studies (10 out of 13) assessed impact at multiple domains including the main five key themes of the Payback Framework. All of them showed a positive impact of funded research on outcomes. Of those studies, one (8%), six (46%) and six (46%) presented a low, moderate and high risk of bias, respectively.

Conclusions

Empirical evidence on the impact of publicly and charity-funded research is still limited and subject to funding and selection bias. More work is needed to establish the causal effects of funded research on academic outcomes, policy, practice and the broader economy.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12961-019-0425-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The National Institute for Health Research Hyperacute Stroke Research Centres and the ENCHANTED trial: the impact of enhanced research infrastructure on trial metrics and patient outcomes

BACKGROUND

The English National Institute for Health Research Clinical Research Network first established Hyperacute Stroke Research Centres (HSRCs) in 2010 to support multicentre hyperacute (< 9 h) and complex stroke research. We assessed the impact of this investment on research performance and patient outcomes in a post-hoc analysis of country-specific data from a large multicentre clinical trial.

METHODS

Comparisons of baseline, outcome and trial metric data were made for participants recruited to the alteplase-dose arm of the international Enhanced Control of Hypertension and Thrombolysis Stroke study (ENCHANTED) at National Institute for Health Research Clinical Research Network HSRCs and non-HSRCs between June 2012 and October 2015.

RESULTS

Among 774 ENCHANTED United Kingdom participants (41% female; mean age 72 years), 502 (64.9%) were recruited from nine HSRCs and 272 (35.1%) from 24 non-HSRCs. HSRCs had higher monthly recruitment rates (median 1.5, interquartile interval 1.4-2.2 vs. 0.7, 0.5-1.3; p = 0.01) and shorter randomisation-to-treatment times (2.6 vs. 3.1 min; p = 0.01) compared to non-HSRCs. HSRC participants were younger and had milder stroke severity, but clinically important between-group differences in 90-day death or disability outcomes remained after adjustment for minimisation criteria and important baseline variables at randomisation, whether defined by ordinal modified Rankin scale score shift (adjusted OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.62-1.08; p = 0.15), scores 2 to 6 (adjusted OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.50-1.01; p = 0.05), or scores 3 to 6 (adjusted OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.57-1.17; p = 0.27). There was no significant difference in symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage, nor heterogeneity in the comparative treatment effects between low- and standard-dose alteplase by HSRCs or non-HSRCs.

CONCLUSIONS

Infrastructure investment in HSRCs was associated with improved research performance metrics, particularly recruitment and time to treatment with clinically important, though not statistically significant, improvements in patient outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Unique identifier: NCT01422616 .

Facilitating Web-Based Collaboration in Evidence Synthesis (TaskExchange): Development and Analysis

BACKGROUND

The conduct and publication of scientific research are increasingly open and collaborative. There is growing interest in Web-based platforms that can effectively enable global, multidisciplinary scientific teams and foster networks of scientists in areas of shared research interest. Designed to facilitate Web-based collaboration in research evidence synthesis, TaskExchange highlights the potential of these kinds of platforms.

OBJECTIVE

This paper describes the development, growth, and future of TaskExchange, a Web-based platform facilitating collaboration in research evidence synthesis.

METHODS

The original purpose of TaskExchange was to create a platform that connected people who needed help with their Cochrane systematic reviews (rigorous syntheses of health research) with people who had the time and expertise to help. The scope of TaskExchange has now been expanded to include other evidence synthesis tasks, including guideline development. The development of TaskExchange was initially undertaken in 5 agile development phases with substantial user engagement. In each phase, software was iteratively deployed as it was developed and tested, enabling close cycles of development and refinement.

RESULTS

TaskExchange enables users to browse and search tasks and members by keyword or nested filters, post and respond to tasks, sign up to notification emails, and acknowledge the work of TaskExchange members. The pilot platform has been open access since August 2016, has over 2300 members, and has hosted more than 630 tasks, covering a wide range of research synthesis-related tasks. Response rates are consistently over 75%, and user feedback has been positive.

CONCLUSIONS

TaskExchange demonstrates the potential for new technologies to support Web-based collaboration in health research. Development of a relatively simple platform for peer-to-peer exchange has provided opportunities for systematic reviewers to get their reviews completed more quickly and provides an effective pathway for people to join the global health evidence community.

Can delirium research activity impact on routine delirium recognition? A prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To assess if ongoing delirium research activity within an acute admissions unit impacts on prevalent delirium recognition.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Single-site tertiary university teaching hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

125 patients with delirium, as diagnosed by an expert using Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition reference criteria, were recruited to a prospective cohort study investigating use of informant tools to detect unrecognised dementia. This study evaluated recognition of delirium and documentation of delirium by medical staff.

INTERVENTIONS

The main study followed an observational design; the intervention discussed was the implementation of this study itself.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was recognition of delirium by the admitting medical team prior to study diagnosis. Secondary outcomes included recording of or description of delirium in discharge summaries, and factors which may be associated with unrecognised delirium.

RESULTS

Delirium recognition improved between the first half (48%) and second half (71%) of recruitment (p=0.01). There was no difference in recording of delirium or description of delirium in the text of discharge summaries.

CONCLUSION

Delirium research activity can improve recognition of delirium. This has the potential to improve patient outcomes.

'Knowledge for better health' revisited - the increasing significance of health research systems: a review by departing Editors-in-Chief

How can nations organise research investments to obtain the best bundle of knowledge and the maximum level of improved health, spread as equitably as possible? This question was the central focus of a major initiative from WHO led by Prof Tikki Pang, which resulted in a range of developments, including the publication of a conceptual framework for national health research systems - Knowledge for better health - in 2003, and in the founding of the journal Health Research Policy and Systems (HARPS). As Editors-in-Chief of the journal since 2006, we mark our retirement by tracking both the progress of the journal and the development of national health research systems. HARPS has maintained its focus on a range of central themes that are key components of a national health research system in any country. These include building capacity to conduct and use health research, identifying appropriate priorities, securing funds and allocating them accountably, producing scientifically valid research outputs, promoting the use of research in polices and practice in order to improve health, and monitoring and evaluating the health research system. Some of the themes covered in HARPS are now receiving increased attention and, for example, with the assessment of research impact and development of knowledge translation platforms, the journal has covered their progress throughout that expansion of interest. In addition, there is increasing recognition of new imperatives, including the importance of promoting gender equality in health research if benefits are to be maximised. In this Editorial, we outline some of the diverse and developing perspectives considered within each theme, as well as considering how they are held together by the growing desire to build effective health research systems in all countries.From 2003 until mid-June 2017, HARPS published 590 articles on the above and related themes, with authors being located in 76 countries. We present quantitative data tracing the journal's growth and the increasing external recognition of its role. We thank the many colleagues who have kindly contributed to the journal's success, and finish on an exciting note by welcoming the new Editors-in-Chief who will take HARPS forward.

Maximising value from a United Kingdom Biomedical Research Centre: study protocol

BACKGROUND

Biomedical Research Centres (BRCs) are partnerships between healthcare organisations and universities in England. Their mission is to generate novel treatments, technologies, diagnostics and other interventions that increase the country's international competitiveness, to rapidly translate these innovations into benefits for patients, and to improve efficiency and reduce waste in healthcare. As NIHR Oxford BRC (Oxford BRC) enters its third 5-year funding period, we seek to (1) apply the evidence base on how best to support the various partnerships in this large, multi-stakeholder research system and (2) research how these partnerships play out in a new, ambitious programme of translational research.

METHODS

Organisational case study, informed by the principles of action research. A cross-cutting theme, 'Partnerships for Health, Wealth and Innovation' has been established with multiple sub-themes (drug development, device development, business support and commercialisation, research methodology and statistics, health economics, bioethics, patient and public involvement and engagement, knowledge translation, and education and training) to support individual BRC research themes and generate cross-theme learning. The 'Partnerships' theme will support the BRC's goals by facilitating six types of partnership (with patients and citizens, clinical services, industry, across the NIHR infrastructure, across academic disciplines, and with policymakers and payers) through a range of engagement platforms and activities. We will develop a longitudinal progress narrative centred around exemplar case studies, and apply theoretical models from innovation studies (Triple Helix), sociology of science (Mode 2 knowledge production) and business studies (Value Co-creation). Data sources will be the empirical research studies within individual BRC research themes (who will apply separately for NHS ethics approval), plus documentary analysis and interviews and ethnography with research stakeholders. This study has received ethics clearance through the University of Oxford Central University Research Ethics Committee.

DISCUSSION

We anticipate that this work will add significant value to Oxford BRC. We predict accelerated knowledge translation; closer alignment of the innovation process with patient priorities and the principles of responsible, ethical research; reduction in research waste; new knowledge about the governance and activities of multi-stakeholder research partnerships and the contexts in which they operate; and capacity-building that reflects the future needs of a rapidly-evolving health research system.