Prognostic Factors and Models for Predicting Work Absence in Adults with Musculoskeletal Conditions Consulting a Healthcare Practitioner: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: It is difficult to predict which employees, in particular those with musculoskeletal pain, will return to work quickly without additional vocational advice and support, which employees will require this support and what levels of support are most appropriate. Consequently, there is no way of ensuring the right individuals are directed towards the right services to support their occupational health needs. The aim of this review will be to identify prognostic factors for duration of work absence in those already absent and examine the utility of prognostic models for work absence. METHODS: Eight databases were search using a combination of subject headings and key words focusing on work absence, musculoskeletal pain and prognosis. Two authors independently assessed the eligibility of studies, extracted data from all eligible studies and assessed risk of bias using the QUIPS or PROBAST tools, an adapted GRADE was used to assess the strength of the evidence. To make sense of the data prognostic variables were grouped according to categories from the Disability Prevention Framework and the SWiM framework was utilised to synthesise findings. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies were included in the review, including 13 prognostic models and a total of 110 individual prognostic factors. Overall, the evidence for all prognostic factors was weak, although there was some evidence that older age and better recovery expectations were protective of future absence and that previous absence was likely to predict future absences. There was weak evidence for any of the prognostic models in determining future sickness absence. CONCLUSION: Analysis was difficult due to the wide range of measures of both prognostic factors and outcome and the differing timescales for follow-up. Future research should ensure that consistent measures are employed and where possible these should be in-line with those suggested by Ravinskaya et al. (2023).

Musculoskeletal pain affects the age of retirement and the risk of work cessation among older people.

OBJECTIVES: Many people with chronic pain cannot work, while working despite chronic pain is linked to absenteeism and presenteeism and a host of other deleterious effects. This disproportionately affects older adults, who are closer to retirement, while the exact relationship between pain and work cessation as well as retirement among older adults is not known. We explore longitudinally the relationship between chronic pain and the risk of ceasing work and entering retirement. METHODS: Data from 1156 individuals 50 years or older living in England taking part in the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing were used in this study. Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were used to examine the nature of the relationship between musculoskeletal pain and work cessation as well as retirement longitudinally over the course of fourteen years. RESULTS: Suffering from frequent musculoskeletal pain was associated with an increased risk of ceasing work and retiring at an earlier age, as did work dissatisfaction, higher perceived social status, female gender, and not receiving the recognition they felt they deserved in their job. Severity of depressive symptoms, psychosocial job demands, decision authority, and social support did not influence the age at which participants reported work cessation or retirement. CONCLUSIONS: Frequent musculoskeletal pain may increase the risk of earlier work exit and earlier retirement. Further research should establish the mechanisms and decision making involved in leaving the workforce in people with frequent musculoskeletal pain.

An Appraisal of the Evidence behind the Use of the CHRODIS Plus Initiative for Chronic Pain: A Scoping Review.

Background: Chronic conditions, especially pain conditions, have a very significant impact on quality of life and on workplaces. Workplace interventions for chronic conditions are heterogenous, multidimensional, and sometimes poorly evidenced. The Joint Action for Chronic Disease Plus (CHRODIS Plus), including The CHRODIS Plus Workbox on Employment and Chronic Conditions (CPWEC), aimed to combat this, prevent chronic disease and multimorbidity, and influence policy in Europe. However, the supporting evidence behind CHRODIS Plus has not been formally assessed. Methods: A scoping review was carried out; Embase, MEDLINE, and CINAHL were searched for literature related to CHRODIS Plus and pain. Title and abstract and full-text screening were carried out in duplicate and independently. Additionally, CHRODIS Plus authors were approached for unpublished data. Secondly, the search was broadened to CHRODIS Plus and pain-causing conditions. Grey literature was also searched. Appropriateness appraisal was derived from the Trial Forge Guidance. Systematic reviews, on which CPWEC was based, were appraised using the A Measurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 tool. Results: The initial search yielded two results, of which zero were suitable to be included in the scoping review. The second, broader search revealed 14 results; however, none were deemed suitable for inclusion. AMSTAR 2 scores revealed that the three systematic reviews influencing CPWEC were of varying quality (from critically low to moderate). Conclusions: CPWEC is based on heterogenous reviews of varying quality. However, comparable tools are designed using alternative forms of evidence. Further research evaluating the post-implementation efficacy of the tool is needed.

Do current methods of measuring the impact of chronic pain on work reflect the experience of working-age adults? An integrated mixed-methods systematic narrative review.

ABSTRACT: Chronic pain affects individuals' work participation. The impact of chronic pain on work has historically been measured through sickness absence, though it is now appreciated that the impacts on work are far wider. This mixed-methods review aimed to identify the full range of impacts of pain on work in addition to impacts that are currently measured quantitatively to inform the development of a new questionnaire assessing the wider impacts of chronic pain on work. MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, and CINAHL were searched for studies that included quantitative measures of the impact of chronic pain on work and for qualitative studies where individuals described impacts of their chronic pain on work. Quantitative measures, and text from qualitative studies, were analysed thematically. A thematic framework was developed for establishing the types of impacts measured or described in the literature. Forty-four quantitative and 16 qualitative papers were identified. The literature described impacts within 5 areas: changes at work and to working status; aspects of the workplace and work relationships; pain and related symptoms at work; psychological factors; and factors and impacts outside the work environment related to work. Quantitative measures mainly assessed impacts related to the quantity and quality of work (29 of 42 measures). Seventeen aspects were only discussed within the qualitative literature. This study identifies a discrepancy between the impacts that have been the focus of quantitative measures and the range that individuals working with chronic pain experience and highlights the need for a new measure assessing a wider range of issues.

Understanding the impacts of chronic pain on autistic adolescents and effective pain management: a reflexive thematic analysis adolescent-maternal dyadic study.

OBJECTIVE: Sensory elements are core features in chronic pain and autism, yet knowledge of the pain experience in autistic adolescents is limited. Little is known regarding how autistic adolescents experience chronic pain, manage their pain and perceive psychological treatment for their chronic pain. METHODS: Ten autistic adolescents (6 female, 3 male, and 1 self-identified as agender) with chronic pain and their mothers (n = 10) participated in semistructured interviews concerning their perceptions of living with chronic pain. Participants were recruited from U.K. pain management services. According to preference, interviews were conducted individually (n = 10) or dyadically (n = 10 participants across 5 dyads). Data were analyzed using inductive reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Two themes were generated. Theme 1, "overstimulated and striving for control" described how adolescents' experience of heightened sensitivity enhanced adolescents' levels of anxiety and subsequent pain, illustrating a reciprocal relationship between anxiety, pain, and sensory elements. Theme 2, "not everyone fits the mold" captured how autistic adolescents positioned themselves as distinct from others due to the unique nature of being autistic and living with pain. This sense of difference negatively impacted adolescents' ability to engage with and benefit from the standard treatment for chronic pain. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that autistic adolescents living with pain experience pain and face barriers to effective pain treatment. Our results identify the need for educational resources to facilitate clinicians to better understand the experience of autistic adolescents living with pain. In turn, such understanding may improve treatment and outcomes in this population.

'Making every contact count' with patients with musculoskeletal conditions: a qualitative exploration of acceptability to physiotherapists.

AIM: To qualitatively explore physiotherapists' experiences and acceptability of implementing 'Making Every Contact Count Healthy Conversation Skills' (MECC HCS) in routine practice with patients with musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions. METHODS: This article reports the second phase of a mixed method, sequential explanatory study. Physiotherapists trained in and delivering MECC HCS in their practice were invited to take part in semi-structured interviews. We hoped to develop a rich, in-depth understanding of their use and perceptions of the brief intervention and to contextualise findings from the first phase of the study. Qualitative data were analysed using Reflexive Thematic Analysis. RESULTS: Physiotherapists valued MECC HCS as being integral to their practice, promoting a person-centred approach to supporting behaviour change and enhancing self-management in patients with MSK conditions and pain. It was believed that this brief intervention could reduce workload pressure for physiotherapists and have significant wider benefits for health services. Time limitations associated with appointments did, however, pose as a challenge to MECC HCS delivery, and it was felt that more organisational-level support was needed to sustain it. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support our quantitative data, collected in the first phase of this study. MECC HCS is a highly acceptable brief intervention that can be delivered in physiotherapy care to support behaviour change in patients with MSK conditions. Future roll-out may be optimised within organisations by providing regular refresher training and adopting a MECC champion.

The Web-Based Pain-at-Work Toolkit With Telephone Support for Employees With Chronic or Persistent Pain: Protocol for a Cluster Randomized Feasibility Trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic or persistent pain affects one's ability to work or be productive at work, generating high societal and economic burden. However, the provision of work-related advice and support for people with chronic pain is variable or lacking. The Pain-at-Work (PAW) Toolkit was cocreated with people who live with pain, health care professionals, and employers. It aims to increase knowledge about employee rights and how to access support for managing a painful chronic condition in the workplace and provides advice on lifestyle behaviors that facilitate the management of chronic pain. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to establish the feasibility of conducting a definitive cluster randomized controlled trial comparing access to the PAW Toolkit and telephone support calls from an occupational therapist (PAW) with treatment as usual (ie, standard support from their employer). Our primary outcomes are establishing parameters of feasibility, acceptability, usability, and safety of this digital workplace health intervention. We will assess the candidate primary and secondary outcomes' feasibility and test research processes for a definitive trial. METHODS: This is an open-label, parallel 2-arm pragmatic feasibility cluster randomized controlled trial with exploratory health economics analysis and a nested qualitative interview study. We aim to recruit 120 participants from at least 8 workplace clusters (any type, >10 employees) in England. The recruitment of workplaces occurs via personal approach, and the recruitment of individual participants is web based. Eligible participants are vocationally active adults aged ≥18 years with internet access and self-reporting chronic pain interfering with their ability to undertake or enjoy productive work. A restricted 1:1 cluster-level randomization is used to allocate employment settings to PAW or treatment as usual; participants are unblinded to group allocation. Following site- and individual-level consent, participants complete a web-based baseline survey (time 0), including measures of work capacity, health and well-being, and health care resource use. Follow-up is performed at 3 months (time 1) and 6 months (time 2). Feasibility outcomes relate to recruitment; intervention fidelity (eg, delivery, reach, uptake, and engagement); retention; and follow-up. Qualitative evaluation (time 2) is mapped to the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behavior model and will explore intervention acceptability to employees and employers, along with individual and contextual factors influencing the delivery and uptake of the intervention. RESULTS: Ethics approval was obtained in March 2023. Trial recruitment began in June 2023. CONCLUSIONS: The PAW Toolkit is the first evidence-based digital health intervention aimed at supporting the self-management of chronic or persistent pain at work. This study will inform the design of a definitive trial, including sample size estimation, approaches to cluster site identification, primary and secondary outcomes' selection, and the final health economic model. Findings will inform approaches for the future delivery of this digital health intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05838677; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05838677. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/51474.

Patient and professional perspectives about using in vitro fertilisation add-ons in the UK and Australia: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: In vitro fertilisation (IVF) add-ons are additional procedures offered alongside an IVF cycle with the aim of improving live birth rates. They are controversial because of the paucity of evidence to support their efficacy and safety, alongside the additional financial cost they often pose to patients. Despite this, they are popular. However, there is limited qualitative research regarding their use. The aims of the VALUE Study were to understand the decision-making process surrounding using or recommending add-ons; report sources of information for add-ons; and explore concerns for safety and effectiveness when considering their use. DESIGN: 'VALUE' is a qualitative semistructured interview study using inductive thematic analysis of anonymised transcriptions. SETTING: Participants were recruited from a broad geographical spread across the UK and Australia from public and private clinical settings. PARTICIPANTS: Patients (n=25) and health professionals (embryologists (n=25) and clinicians (n=24)) were interviewed. A purposive sampling strategy was undertaken. The sampling framework included people having state-subsidised and private cycles, professionals working in public and private sectors, geographical location and professionals of all grades. RESULTS: Patients often made decisions about add-ons based on hope, minimising considerations of safety, efficacy or cost, whereas professionals sought the best outcomes for their patients and wanted to avoid them wasting their money. The driving forces behind add-on use differed: for patients, a professional opinion was the most influential reason, whereas for professionals, it was seen as patient driven. For both groups, applying the available evidence to individual circumstances was very challenging, especially in the sphere of IVF medicine, where the stakes are high. CONCLUSIONS: There is scope to build on the quality of the discourse between patients and professionals. Patients describe valuing their autonomy with add-ons, but for professionals, undertaking informed consent will be critical, no matter where they sit on the spectrum regarding add-ons. TRIAL REGISTRATION: osf.io/vnyb9.

"It all depends on why it's red": qualitative interviews exploring patient and professional views of a traffic light system for IVF add-ons.

Background IVF add-ons are techniques, medicines or procedures used in addition to standard IVF with the aim of improving the chance of success. The United Kingdom's IVF regulator, ( the Human Fertilisation Embryology Authority (HFEA) developed a traffic light system to categorise add-ons as either green, amber, or red, based on results of randomised controlled trials. Method Qualitative interviews were undertaken to explore understanding and views of the HFEA traffic light system among IVF clinicians, embryologists and IVF patients across Australia and the United Kingdom. Results A total of 73 interviews were conducted. Overall, participants were supportive of the intention of the traffic light system, however many limitations were raised. It was widely recognized that a simple traffic light system necessarily omits information which may be important to understanding the evidence base. In particular, the red category was used in scenarios that patients viewed as having different implications for their decision-making, including 'no evidence' and 'evidence of harm'. Patients were surprised at the absence of any green add-ons and questioned the value of a traffic light system in this context. Many participants considered the website a helpful starting point, but desired more detail, including the contributing studies, results specific to patient demographics (e.g., <35 years and >35 years), and inclusion of more options (e.g. acupuncture). Overall, participants believed the website to be reliable and trustworthy, particularly due to the Government affiliation, and despite some concerns regarding transparency and an overly cautious regulator. Conclusion Participants identified many limitations with the current application of the traffic light system. These could be considered in any future updates to the HFEA website and for others developing similar decision support tools.

'I can feel myself coming out of the rut': a brief intervention for supporting behaviour change is acceptable to patients with chronic musculoskeletal conditions.

AIM: To a) understand the perceptions and experiences of patients with musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions in relation to their physiotherapy care and their acceptability of 'Making Every Contact Count Healthy Conversation Skills' (MECC HCS) as a brief intervention within this care and, b) explore the mechanisms through which MECC HCS might facilitate behaviour change and enhance self-management in patients with MSK conditions. METHODS: This study adopted an exploratory qualitative design, in which individual, semi-structured interviews with participants were conducted. Eight participants were interviewed. Five had been engaging with physiotherapists trained in and delivering MECC HCS within their routine physiotherapy appointments and three had been engaging with physiotherapists who had not received this training and were instead delivering usual care. MECC HCS is a person-centred approach to behaviour change that aims to empower individuals to take control of their health behaviours by building self-efficacy. The MECC HCS training programme helps healthcare professionals to develop skills in i) using 'open discovery' questions to explore context and allow patients to identify barriers and generate solutions; ii) listening more than giving information/ making suggestions; iii) reflecting on practice and iv) supporting Specific, Measurable, Action-oriented, Realistic, Timed, Evaluated, Reviewed (SMARTER) goal setting. RESULTS: Those who had engaged with MECC HCS trained physiotherapists found their physiotherapy care highly acceptable and felt that their physiotherapist listened to them, tried to understand their context and world, and helped them plan for change. These individuals experienced increases in self-efficacy and motivation for self-managing their MSK conditions. A need for continued support following physiotherapy treatment was, however, emphasised for long-term self-management. CONCLUSIONS: MECC HCS is highly acceptable to patients with MSK conditions and pain and may successfully facilitate health-promoting behaviour change and enhance self-management. Providing opportunities to join support groups following physiotherapy treatment may promote long-term self-management and provide social and emotional benefits for individuals. The positive findings of this small qualitative study warrant further investigation on the differences in experiences and outcomes between patients engaging with MECC HCS physiotherapists and those receiving treatment as usual during routine physiotherapy care.

Trainee doctors' perceptions of the surgeon stereotype and its impact on professional identification: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The demography of the medical profession is changing as more women join the workforce. Traditional assumptions about the personal qualities required to be a successful surgeon may change as more women join the specialty. While exploring the attitudes and beliefs of doctors in their second 'Foundation' year of post-graduate training (FY2) about their choice of specialty, evidence emerged about how the stereotype of the surgeon influences professional identification and beliefs about person-specialty fit. METHODS: Qualitative telephone interviews with 24 FY2 doctors, 17 women and 7 men, in South-West England. RESULTS: Many participants reported exposure to stereotypes about the personal qualities desirable in a surgeon. Senior doctors and other trainees were the primary source of these stereotypical views. Experience on surgical placements could either reinforce stereotypes or challenge them, the latter particularly where senior surgeons provided positive role models. As more women enter the surgical specialties, they are increasingly challenging the traditional stereotype and sub-culture. CONCLUSION: Gendered stereotypes about surgical roles persist, and for some this can hinder professional identification with the role. Positive role models and mentoring can encourage and support women who are interested a surgical career to identify with the role, but there is a need for a broader debate encompassing job redesign and surgical identities.

How useful is the Making Every Contact Count Healthy Conversation Skills approach for supporting people with musculoskeletal conditions?

Aim: To explore the current use and perceptions of the Wessex model of Making Every Contact Count (MECC), incorporating Healthy Conversation Skills (HCS), focussing specifically on physiotherapists supporting people living with musculoskeletal conditions. Methods: A mixed method, sequential explanatory design was employed. This article reports the first phase of the study, in which an online questionnaire was administered, consisting of items relating to perceived acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, sustainability, and uptake of MECC HCS. Barriers and facilitators to MECC HCS delivery were additionally explored and mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework. Results: Seventy-one professionals responded, including 15 physiotherapists supporting people with MSK conditions. Across professional groups, MECC HCS was found to be highly acceptable, appropriate, and feasible. A significant interaction between perceived sustainability of MECC HCS and the location in which professionals worked was observed. Physiotherapists reported using their MECC HCS at least daily; however, there were discrepancies between the number of their patients they believed could benefit from behaviour change intervention, and the number to whom they reported actually delivering MECC HCS. Perceived barriers and facilitators to MECC HCS implementation mapped mostly to 'Environmental Context and Resources' on the Theoretical Domains Framework. Conclusions: The Wessex model of MECC is a promising brief or very brief intervention for physiotherapists supporting individuals with musculoskeletal conditions. Barriers associated with the sustainability of the intervention within organisations must be addressed in order to enhance future implementation. Further rollout of this intervention may be beneficial for meeting the goals of the NHS and Public Health England in prevention of chronic MSK conditions and promotion of musculoskeletal health.

Beliefs About Worry and Pain Amongst Adolescents With and Without Chronic Pain.

OBJECTIVE: To explore beliefs about worries, beliefs about pain, and worries about pain held by adolescents with and without chronic pain. METHODS: Adolescents with and without chronic pain aged 14-19 completed an online survey with free text questions about pain and worry. We collected demographics and used the Penn State Worry Questionnaire and Pain Catastrophizing Scale for Children to contextualize the qualitative data, which was analyzed with reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Eighty-one participants completed the survey, 36 with chronic pain and 45 without (mean age: 16.73). Compared to adolescents without chronic pain, adolescents living with chronic pain reported significantly higher general worry and pain catastrophizing. Thematic analysis generated two themes, "Worry changes perceptions of selfhood" and "Pain changes perceptions of selfhood." Each theme comprised two sub-themes showing how current and future identity trajectories were distorted by worry and pain. The theme "Pain changes perceptions of selfhood" also included a third sub-theme: "Pain impedes future working choices." Worry content as well as process was problematic in all adolescents. Adolescents experiencing chronic pain had specific, additional worries that pain reduces future career progression. These worries appeared highly salient and challenging. CONCLUSIONS: Adolescents may need greater support in recognizing worry as part of normative development. Adolescents in pain may benefit from specific support identifying and reducing how pain-related worries interact with their futures and careers, and from school-based and vocational interventions to reduce the realistic risks they face negotiating modern labor markets.

The COVID-19 Clinician Cohort (CoCCo) Study: Empirically Grounded Recommendations for Forward-Facing Psychological Care of Frontline Doctors.

This study aimed to develop empirically grounded recommendations and a coherent model of psychological care derived from the experiences and psychological care needs of COVID-19 frontline doctors, using semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis. Participants were UK frontline doctors specialising in Emergency Medicine, Anaesthetics, or Intensive Care (n = 31) purposively sampled for maximum variation on gender, specialty, ethnicity, and trauma-related distress; most worked in ICU during the pandemic (71%). Four themes were derived: (1) 'coping strategies', participants used many, including exercise, mindfulness, and "wait until it gets really bad"; (2) 'sources of support', participants valued embedded psychological support, digital services, and informal conversations with colleagues or family, though there was little opportunity; (3) 'organisational influences on wellbeing', participants reported a love-hate relationship for concepts like 'wellbeing', seen as important but insulting when basic workplace needs were unmet; (4) 'improving engagement with support', analysis suggests we must reduce physical and psychological barriers to access and encourage leaders to model psychologically supportive behaviours. Doctors' frontline COVID-19 working experiences shine a 'spotlight' on pre-existing problems such as lack of physical resources and access to psychological care. Empirically grounded recommendations and a model of incremental psychological care are presented for use in clinical services.

VALUE study: a protocol for a qualitative semi-structured interview study of IVF add-ons use by patients, clinicians and embryologists in the UK and Australia.

INTRODUCTION: For couples undergoing assisted reproduction, a plethora of adjuncts are available; these are known as 'add-ons'. Most add-ons are not supported by good quality randomised trial evidence of efficacy, with some proven to be ineffective. However, estimates suggest that over 70% of fertility clinics provide at least one add-on, often at extra cost to the patient. This study has three aims. First, to undertake a survey of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) clinics in the UK to ascertain which add-ons are being offered and at what cost. Second, to undertake qualitative semi-structured interviews of patients, clinicians and embryologists, to explore their opinions and beliefs surrounding add-ons. Third, to review the interpretation of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority traffic light system, to better understand the information required by IVF patients, clinicians and embryologists when making decisions about add-ons. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: All UK IVF clinics will be contacted by email and invited to complete an online survey. The survey will ask them which add-ons they offer, at what cost per cycle and how information is shared with patients. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted in the UK and Australia with three groups of participants: (i) fertility patients; (ii) clinicians and (iii) embryologists. Participants for the interviews will be recruited via social media channels, website adverts, email and snowball sampling. Up to 20 participants will be recruited for each group in each country. Following an online consent process, interviews will be conducted via video-conferencing software, transcribed verbatim and data subjected to inductive thematic analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by the Universities of Sheffield, Bath Spa and Melbourne. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated to regulatory bodies in the UK and Australia. A lay summary of findings will be shared via Fertility Network, UK.

Co-Creating and Evaluating an App-Based Well-Being Intervention: The HOW (Healthier Outcomes at Work) Social Work Project.

Stress and mental health at work are the leading causes of long-term sickness absence in the UK, with chronically poor working conditions impacting employee physiological and psychological health. Social workers play a significant part in the fabric of UK society, but have one of the most stressful occupations in the country. The aim of this project was to work with UK social workers to co-develop, implement, and evaluate a series of smartphone-based mental health initiatives. A Participatory Action Research (PAR) approach, consisting of semi-structured interviews and focus group and steering group discussions, was utilized to design the mental health and well-being interventions. Study efficacy was evaluated via a pre- and post-intervention survey and post-intervention semi-structured interviews. Interventions developed were psycho-educational, improved top-down and bottom-up communication, and provided access to a Vocational Rehabilitation Assistant for those struggling and at risk of sickness absence. Six months following dissemination, surveys demonstrated significant improvements in communication, and mean score improvements in four other working conditions. This project, therefore, demonstrates that co-developed initiatives can be positively impactful, despite post-intervention data collection being impacted by COVID-19. Future studies should build upon these findings and broaden the PAR approach nationally while taking a robust approach to evaluation.

What influences young doctors in their decision-making about general practice as a possible career? A qualitative study.

Background: Recruitment to General Practitioner (GP) training programmes in the United Kingdom is poor. Colleagues' negative comments about general practice could contribute to this.Aim: To investigate what influences Foundation Year 2 (FY2) doctors in their decisions to choose general practice as a career, and how colleagues' comments about GPs might affect those decisions.Design and Setting: A qualitative study in Southwest England.Method: Thematic analysis of interviews with FY2 doctors.Results: Twenty-four doctors participated. They thought that GPs worked hard and had very varied clinical work. The effect on their career choice depended on their personalities. GP placement experiences significantly influenced their career intentions. The loneliness of working in general practice was a key concern. FY2 doctors thought colleagues' criticisms of GPs did not reflect reality and were outdated. 'Banter' had little effect on career choices.Conclusion: Person-specialty fit and FY2 doctors' experiences of GP work have a significant effect on career choices. Loneliness in their GP work placements is a particular problem that should be addressed. While colleagues' derogatory comments about GPs may affect medical students' views on their career choices, they appear to have little effect on the career decision-making of qualified doctors.Abbreviations: CMT: Core Medical Training; FY2: Foundation Year 2; GP: general practitioner; NHS: National Health Service; UK: United Kingdom.