The use of locum doctors in the NHS - results of a national survey of NHS Trusts in England.

BACKGROUND: Locum working in healthcare organisations has benefits for individual doctors and organisations but there are concerns about the impact of locum working on continuity of care, patient safety, team function and cost. We conducted a national survey of NHS Trusts in England to explore locum work, and better understand why and where locum doctors were needed; how locum doctors were engaged, supported, perceived and managed; and any changes being made in the way locums are used. METHODS: An online survey was sent to 191 NHS Trusts and 98 were returned (51%) including 66 (67%) acute hospitals, 26 (27%) mental health and six (6%) community health providers. Data was analysed using frequency tables, t-tests and correlations. Free-text responses were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Most NHS Trusts use locums frequently and for varying lengths of time. Trusts prefer to use locums from internal locum banks but frequently rely on locum agencies. The benefits of using locums included maintaining workforce capacity and flexibility. Importantly, care provided by locums was generally viewed as the same or somewhat worse when compared to care provided by permanent doctors. The main disadvantages of using locum agencies included cost, lack of familiarity and impact on organisational development. Some respondents felt that locums could be unreliable and less likely to be invested in quality improvement. NHS Trusts were broadly unfamiliar with the national guidance from NHS England for supporting locums and there was a focus on processes like compliance checks and induction, with less focus on providing feedback and support for appraisal. CONCLUSIONS: Locum doctors provide a necessary service within NHS Trusts to maintain workforce capacity and provide patient care. There are potential issues related to the way that locums are perceived, utilised, and supported which might impact the quality of the care that they provide. Future research should consider the arrangements for locum working and the performance of locums and permanent doctors, investigating the organisation of locums in order to achieve safe and high-quality care for patients.

The place of charity in a public health service: Inequality and persistence in charitable support for NHS trusts in england.

The British National Health Service (NHS) relies for the great bulk of its funding on direct taxation, but the contribution of charitable sources of income to the NHS is not well-understood. The few studies of charitable giving to the NHS to date have concentrated on aggregate levels of income and expenditure. However, to date there has been limited collective understanding about the extent to which different kinds of NHS Trusts benefit from charitable funding and about the persistence of inequalities between trusts in their access to these resources. This paper presents novel analyses of the distribution of NHS Trusts in terms of the proportion of their income that comes from charitable sources. We build a unique linked longitudinal dataset which follows through time the population of NHS Trusts, and the population of associated NHS charities, in England since 2000. The analysis illustrates intermediate levels of charitable support for acute hospital trusts compared with the much lower levels of charitable support for ambulance, community and mental health Trusts and, conversely, much higher levels of charitable support for Trusts providing specialist care. These results represent rare quantitative evidence relevant to theoretical discussions about the uneven nature of the voluntary sector's response to healthcare need. They provide important evidence for a key feature (and arguably weakness) of voluntary initiative, namely philanthropic particularism - the tendency for charitable support to focus on a restricted range of causes. We also show that this 'philanthropic particularism' - reflected in the very sizeable differences in charitable income between different sectors of NHS trusts - is becoming more marked over time, while spatial disparities, notably between elite institutions in London and other locations, are also substantial. The paper reflects on the implications of these inequalities for policy and planning within a public health care system.

A cross-sectional study of all clinicians' conflict of interest disclosures to NHS hospital employers in England 2015-2016.

OBJECTIVE: We set out to document how NHS trusts in the UK record and share disclosures of conflict of interest by their employees. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of responses to a Freedom of Information Act request for Gifts and Hospitality Registers. SETTING: NHS Trusts (secondary/tertiary care organisations) in England. PARTICIPANTS: 236 Trusts were contacted, of which 217 responded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We assessed all disclosures for completeness and openness, scoring them for achieving each of five measures of transparency. RESULTS: 185 Trusts (78%) provided a register. 71 Trusts did not respond within the 28 day time limit required by the FoIA. Most COI registers were incomplete by design, and did not contain the information necessary to assess conflicts of interest. 126/185 (68%) did not record the names of recipients. 47/185 (25%) did not record the cash value of the gift or hospitality. Only 31/185 registers (16%) contained the names of recipients, the names of donors, and the cash amounts received. 18/185 (10%) contained none of: recipient name, donor name, and cash amount. Only 15 Trusts had their disclosure register publicly available online (6%). We generated a transparency index assessing whether each Trust met the following criteria: responded on time; provided a register; had a register with fields identifying donor, recipient, and cash amount; provided a register in a format that allowed further analysis; and had their register publicly available online. Mean attainment was 1.9/5; no NHS trust met all five criteria. CONCLUSION: Overall, recording of employees' conflicts of interest by NHS trusts is poor. None of the NHS Trusts in England met all transparency criteria. 19 did not respond to our FoIA requests, 51 did not provide a Gifts and Hospitality Register and only 31 of the registers provided contained enough information to assess employees' conflicts of interest. Despite obligations on healthcare professionals to disclose conflicts of interest, and on organisations to record these, the current system for logging and tracking such disclosures is not functioning adequately. We propose a simple national template for reporting conflicts of interest, modelled on the US 'Sunshine Act'.

Perspectives of clinical microbiologists on antimicrobial stewardship programmes within NHS trusts in England.

BACKGROUND: The Antimicrobial Self-Assessment Toolkit for NHS Trusts (ASAT) was developed in England by a National Pharmacist Reference Group of an Advisory Non-Departmental Public Body on Antimicrobial Resistance and Healthcare Associated Infections (ARHAI), in conjunction with the Department of Health. It is intended to identify and evaluate interventions for the promotion and implementation hospital-based antimicrobial stewardship programmes (ASPs). ASAT v16 was produced by iterative validity testing with end-users utilising a sequential exploratory strategy. It was highlighted that there was a need for the inclusion of the domain which targeted the role of clinical microbiologists due to their substantial roles in hospital-based ASP development and implementation. METHODS: This study aimed to investigate the content validity of ASAT v16 and a proposed draft domain for clinical microbiologists and hence produce ASAT v17. From June to September 2011, semi-structured interviews were conducted with ten consultant clinical microbiologists from secondary and tertiary care National Health Service (NHS) Trusts within England. Interviews were conducted until no novel themes were identified i.e., data saturation was achieved. Each interview was digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim and then analysed using a thematic framework that facilitated the identification of emergent themes and sub-themes. RESULTS: Nine emergent themes were identified which included common enablers and challenges associated with the implementation of effective and sustainable hospital-based ASPs. Key themes included formal governmental mandates, IT infrastructure and also prescribers' knowledge base of antimicrobial chemotherapy and infectious diseases. Most respondents agreed with the content of ASATv16 and the proposed draft section however they suggested that minor modifications were required to improve question sensitivity and hence reduce measurement error. CONCLUSIONS: Although, the ASAT been through multiple iterations and content validity testing, further modifications were required to produce the next iteration, ASAT v17. Question merging and other minor modifications were conducted as indicated by study findings. This study reinforces the need for stakeholder engagement during the development and implementation of tools that evaluate hospital-based implementation strategies.

NHS Trusts' clinical research activity and overall CQC performance - Is there a correlation?

OBJECTIVE: Since the late 2000's, the creation of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) has transformed clinical research activity in the United Kingdom. This study sought to establish if there is a link between clinical research activity and overall NHS Trust performance. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: Data for NHS Trust performance were obtained from public databases, namely the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 2013 risk rating for overall performance, and 2012-13 NIHR records for clinical research activity. RESULTS: Applying Spearman's rank analysis, none of the Trust categories showed a correlation with CQC risk rating: small hospitals, r = -0.062 (P = 0.76; n = 27); medium, r = -0.224 (P = 0.13; n = 47); large, r = -0.008 (P = 0.96; n = 57); academic, r = -0.18 (P = 0.41; n = 24). Similar results were observed when CQC risk rating was compared with the number of different clinical research studies conducted per Trust. CONCLUSION: The degree of NIHR National Portfolio clinical research activity is not significantly related to CQC risk rating, used as an indicator of overall NHS Trust performance. Other studies have previously shown that increased research activity correlates with improved mortality rates, one component of CQC risk rating scores. Alternative tools may have to be explored to evaluate the impact of clinical research on NHS Trusts and its patients.