RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Drexit ("Doctor-Exit") is the exponentially growing trend for junior doctors in the UK to walk away from their jobs in the National Health Service (NHS). Our objective was to identify the reasons why junior doctors in the UK leave their NHS training programs to train overseas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A simultaneous and convergent mixed-methods study was performed to analyze both an online survey and semi-structured interviews from junior doctors who had left the NHS. Social media, online professional media, and networks of junior doctors were used to recruit doctors. All were UK medical school graduates who had left the NHS within the last 15 years (2003-2018). RESULTS: 96.1% (149/155) of respondents reported not being offered an exit interview on leaving the NHS. 94.8% (147/155) of respondents did not regret quitting the NHS. Participants were more satisfied with their pay and work life balance in their overseas posts when compared to training in the NHS (P < 0.05). Burnout was variably defined and was prominent in doctors who left 53.8% (113/210) but was reversed when they practiced medicine overseas in 89.2% (74/83) of cases. Qualitative data identified four key themes which were categorized into push factors, which were lack of interest in retention and bleak outlook; and pull factors, which were financial vs social capital and things are different overseas. CONCLUSION: Listening to the frontline junior doctors' voices lend insights into a better understanding of the push and pull factors that appear to be exacerbating the exodus of junior doctors from the NHS. Our results indicate that exit interviews should be performed routinely. There needs to be a shift to focus on the training of doctors rather than service provision, with efforts to support, appreciate, and value junior doctors. Further exploration is needed to identify what is happening in training programs overseas to improve retention within the NHS. Furthermore, identifying issues perceived by junior doctors in the UK in the context of workforce planning may be applicable to healthcare systems across the globe.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Prostate cancer is a large clinical burden across Europe. It is, in fact, the most common cancer in males, accounting for more than 92,300 deaths annually throughout the continent. Prostate cancer is androgen-sensitive; thus an androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is often used for treatment by reducing androgen to castrate levels. Several ADT agents have achieved benefits with effective palliation, but, unfortunately, severe adverse events are frequent. Contemporary ADT (Luteinising Hormone Releasing Hormone agonist - LHRHa injections) can result in side effects that include osteoporosis and fractures, compromising quality of life and survival. METHODS: In this review we analysed the associated bone toxicity consequent upon contemporary ADT and based on the literature and our own experience we present future perspectives that seek to mitigate this associated toxicity both by development of novel therapies and by better identification and prediction of fracture risk. RESULTS: Preliminary results indicate that parenteral oestrogen can mitigate associated osteoporotic risk and that CT scans could provide a more accurate indicator of overall bone quality and hence fracture risk. CONCLUSIONS: As healthcare costs increase globally, cheap and effective alternatives that achieve ADT, but mitigate or avoid such bone toxicities, will be needed. More so, innovative techniques to improve both the measurement and the extent of this toxicity, by assessing bone health and prediction of fracture risk, are also required.
