High patient satisfaction and increased physical activity following a remote multidisciplinary team multiple myeloma clinic.

PURPOSE: Patients with multiple myeloma suffer from disease-related complications such as bone destruction, toxicities from repeated therapies and age-related co-morbidities. With improved treatment options, patients are living longer and have specific survivorship needs such as low exercise levels that need to be addressed. In this study, we designed, implemented and evaluated a multidisciplinary team (MDT) myeloma clinic that provided participants with tailored exercise and lifestyle advice. METHODS: The Promoting Individualised Self-Management and Survivorship (PrISMS) clinic was set up in two UK myeloma centres. This remote MDT clinic comprised of a doctor, a nurse specialist and a physiotherapist. Patients were required to complete blood tests and a questionnaire about their symptoms and concerns before each consultation. Patient-reported outcome measures were captured using validated questionnaires. Patient feedback was collected using a specially designed survey and structured telephone interviews. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients were enrolled in the pilot clinic with 210 consultations held during the study period. Nine patients had disease progression and were referred safely back to face-to-face clinics. There was a significant improvement in patients' exercise score (p = 0.02) after PrISMS clinic. Patient satisfaction was high, with 83% feeling more confident in self-managing myeloma after PrISMS clinic. CONCLUSION: PrISMS clinic is safe and feasible, with high patient compliant and acceptability. It empowers patients to self-manage their condition and encourages physical activity, which is associated with improved quality of life and fatigue level. Future randomised controlled trials will help to confirm its benefits on patient clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness.

Frontline Health Care Workers' Mental Health and Well-Being During the First Year of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Analysis of Interviews and Social Media Data.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has shed light on fractures in health care systems worldwide and continues to have a significant impact, particularly in relation to the health care workforce. Frontline staff have been exposed to unprecedented strain, and delivering care during the pandemic has affected their safety, mental health, and well-being. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the experiences of health care workers (HCWs) delivering care in the United Kingdom during the COVID-19 pandemic to understand their well-being needs, experiences, and strategies used to maintain well-being (at individual and organizational levels). METHODS: We analyzed 94 telephone interviews with HCWs and 2000 tweets about HCWs' mental health during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: The results were grouped under 6 themes: redeployment, clinical work, and sense of duty; well-being support and HCW's coping strategies; negative mental health effects; organizational support; social network and support; and public and government support. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate the need for open conversations, where staff's well-being needs and the strategies they adopted can be shared and encouraged, rather than implementing top-down psychological interventions alone. At the macro level, the findings also highlighted the impact on HCW's well-being of public and government support as well as the need to ensure protection through personal protective equipment, testing, and vaccines for frontline workers.

Healthcare workers' perceptions and attitudes towards the UK's COVID-19 vaccination programme: a rapid qualitative appraisal.

OBJECTIVES: While there is research relating to perceptions of vaccines among healthcare workers (HCWs), the evidence base in relation to COVID-19 remains limited. The aim of this study was to explore HCWs' perceptions and attitudes towards vaccines and the COVID-19 vaccination programme in the UK, including their expectations and views on promoting vaccination to others. DESIGN: This study was designed as a rapid qualitative appraisal, integrating data from a review of UK policies and guidance on COVID-19 vaccination with data from in-depth semistructured telephone interviews with frontline HCWs in the UK. Data were analysed using framework analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Interviews were carried out with a purposive sample of HCWs from two large London-based hospital Trusts (n=24) and 24 government policies, and guidelines on the vaccination programme were reviewed. RESULTS: The level of uncertainty about the long-term safety of vaccines and efficacy against mutant strains made it difficult for HCWs to balance the benefits against the risks of vaccination. HCWs felt that government decisions on vaccine rollout had not been supported by evidence-based science, and this impacted their level of trust and confidence in the programme. The spread of misinformation online also impacted HCWs' attitudes towards vaccination, particularly among junior level and black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) HCWs. Most HCWs felt encouraged to promote vaccination to their patients, and the majority said they would advocate vaccination or engage in conversations about vaccination with others when relevant. CONCLUSION: In order to improve HCWs' trust and confidence in the UK's COVID-19 vaccination programme, there needs to be clarity about what is known and not known about the vaccines and transparency around the evidence-base supporting government decisions on vaccine rollout. Effort is also needed to dispel the spread of vaccine-related misinformation online and to address specific concerns, particularly among BAME and junior-level HCWs.

UK Healthcare Workers' Experiences of Major System Change in Elective Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Reflections on Rapid Service Adaptation.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted the delivery of elective surgery in the United Kingdom. The majority of planned surgery was cancelled or postponed in March 2020 for the duration of the first wave of the pandemic. We investigated the experiences of staff responsible for delivering rapid changes to surgical services during the first wave of the pandemic in the United Kingdom, with the aim of developing lessons for future major systems change (MSC). METHODS: Using a rapid qualitative study design, we conducted 25 interviews with frontline surgical staff during the first wave of the pandemic. Framework analysis was used to organise and interpret findings. RESULTS: Staff discussed positive and negative experiences of rapid service organisation. Clinician-led decision-making, the flexibility of individual staff and teams, and the opportunity to innovate service design were all seen as positive contributors to success in service adaptation. The negative aspects of rapid change were inconsistent guidance from national government and medical bodies, top-down decisions about when to cancel and restart surgery, the challenges of delivering emergency surgical care safely and the complexity of prioritising surgical cases when services re-started. CONCLUSION: Success in the rapid reorganisation of elective surgical services can be attributed to the flexibility and adaptability of staff. However, there was an absence of involvement of staff in wider system-level pandemic decision-making and competing guidance from national bodies. Involving staff in decisions about the organisation and delivery of MSC is essential for the sustainability of change processes.