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.

Constructing therapeutic support and negotiating competing agendas: A discourse analysis of vocational advice provided to individuals who are absent from work due to ill-health.

Work participation is known to benefit people's overall health and wellbeing, but accessing vocational support during periods of sickness absence to facilitate return-to-work can be challenging for many people. In this study, we explored how vocational advice was delivered by trained vocational support workers (VSWs) to people who had been signed-off from work by their General Practitioner (GP), as part of a feasibility study testing a vocational advice intervention. We investigated the discursive and interactional strategies employed by VSWs and people absent from work, to pursue their joint and respective goals. Theme-oriented discourse analysis was carried out on eight VSW consultations. These consultations were shown to be complex interactions, during which VSWs utilised a range of strategies to provide therapeutic support in discussions about work. These included; signalling empathy with the person's perspective; positively evaluating their personal qualities and prior actions; reflecting individuals' views back to them to show they had been heard and understood; fostering a collaborative approach to action-planning; and attempting to reassure individuals about their return-to-work concerns. Some individuals were reluctant to engage in return-to-work planning, resulting in back-and-forth interactional negotiations between theirs and the VSW's individual goals and agendas. This led to VSWs putting in considerable interactional 'work' to subtly shift the discussion towards return-to-work planning. The discursive strategies we have identified have implications for training health professionals to facilitate work-orientated conversations with their patients, and will also inform training provided to VSWs ahead of a randomised controlled trial.

Risk factors for the progression to multimorbidity among UK urban working-age adults. A community cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: The progression of long-term conditions (LTCs) from zero-to-one (initiation), and from one-to-many (progression)are common trajectories that impact a person's quality of life including their ability to work. This study aimed to explore the demographic, socioeconomic, psychosocial, and health-related determinants of LTC initiation and progression, with a focus on work participation. METHODS: Data from 622 working-age adults who had completed two waves (baseline and follow-up) of the South-East London Community Health survey were analysed. Chi square tests and multinomial logistic regression were used to describe the associations between self-reported demographic, socioeconomic, psychosocial, and health-related variables, and the progression of LTCs. RESULTS: Small social networks, an increased number of stressful life events, low self-rated health, functional impairment, and increased somatic symptom severity were all associated with both the progression from zero-to-one LTC and from one LTC to multimorbidity (two or more LTCs). Renting accommodation (RRR 1.73 [95% CI 1.03-2.90]), smoking (RRR 1.91 [95% CI 1.16-3.14]) and being overweight (RRR 1.88 [95% CL 1.12-3.16]) were unique risk factors of developing initial LTCs, whereas low income (RRR 2.53 [95% CI 1.11-5.80]), working part-time (RRR 2.82 ([95% CL 1.12-7.10]), being unemployed (RRR 4.83 [95% CI 1.69-13.84]), and making an early work exit (RRR 16.86 [95% CI 3.99-71.30]) all increased the risk of progressing from one LTC to multimorbidity compared to being employed full-time. At follow-up, depression was the most prevalent LTC in the unemployed group whereas musculoskeletal conditions were the most prevalent in those working. CONCLUSIONS: The journey to multimorbidity is complex, with both common and unique risk factors. Non-full-time employment was associated with an increased risk of progression to multimorbidity. Future research should explore the risk and benefit pathways between employment and progression of LTCs. Interventions to prevent progression of LTCs should include mitigation of modifiable risk factors such as social isolation.

Anomalies in the review process and interpretation of the evidence in the NICE guideline for chronic fatigue syndrome and myalgic encephalomyelitis.

Chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) is a disabling long-term condition of unknown cause. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) published a guideline in 2021 that highlighted the seriousness of the condition, but also recommended that graded exercise therapy (GET) should not be used and cognitive-behavioural therapy should only be used to manage symptoms and reduce distress, not to aid recovery. This U-turn in recommendations from the previous 2007 guideline is controversial.We suggest that the controversy stems from anomalies in both processing and interpretation of the evidence by the NICE committee. The committee: (1) created a new definition of CFS/ME, which 'downgraded' the certainty of trial evidence; (2) omitted data from standard trial end points used to assess efficacy; (3) discounted trial data when assessing treatment harm in favour of lower quality surveys and qualitative studies; (4) minimised the importance of fatigue as an outcome; (5) did not use accepted practices to synthesise trial evidence adequately using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations trial evidence); (6) interpreted GET as mandating fixed increments of change when trials defined it as collaborative, negotiated and symptom dependent; (7) deviated from NICE recommendations of rehabilitation for related conditions, such as chronic primary pain and (8) recommended an energy management approach in the absence of supportive research evidence.We conclude that the dissonance between this and the previous guideline was the result of deviating from usual scientific standards of the NICE process. The consequences of this are that patients may be denied helpful treatments and therefore risk persistent ill health and disability.

Suicidal thoughts and behaviour among healthcare workers in England during the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal study.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, concern has been raised about suicide risk among healthcare workers (HCWs). We investigated the incidence risk and prevalence of suicidal thoughts and behaviour (STB), and their relationship with occupational risk factors, among National Health Service HCWs in England between April 2020 and August 2021. METHODS: In this longitudinal study, we analysed online survey data completed by 22,501 HCWs from 17 NHS Trusts at baseline (Time 1) and six months (Time 2). The primary outcome measures were suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and non-suicidal self-injury. We used logistic regression to investigate the relationship between these outcomes and demographic characteristics and occupational factors. Results were stratified by occupational role (clinical/non-clinical). RESULTS: Time 1 and Time 2 surveys were completed by 12,514 and 7,160 HCWs, respectively. At baseline, 10.8% (95% CI = 10.1%, 11.6%) of participants reported having experienced suicidal thoughts in the previous two months, whilst 2.1% (95% CI = 1.8%, 2.5%) of participants reported having attempted suicide over the same period. Among HCWs who had not experienced suicidal thoughts at baseline (and who completed the Time 2 survey), 11.3% (95%CI = 10.4%, 12.3%) reported such thoughts six months later. Six months after baseline, 3.9% (95% CI = 3.4%, 4.4%) of HCWs reported attempting suicide for the first time. Exposure to potentially morally injurious events, lack of confidence about raising safety concerns and these concerns being addressed, feeling unsupported by managers, and providing a reduced standard of care were all associated with increased suicidal ideation among HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic. At six months, among clinicians, a lack of confidence about safety concerns being addressed, independently predicted suicidal ideation. CONCLUSION: Suicidal thoughts and behaviour among healthcare workers could be reduced by improving managerial support and enhancing the ability of staff to raise safety concerns.

Moral injury and psychological wellbeing in UK healthcare staff.

BACKGROUND: Potentially morally injurious events (PMIEs) can negatively impact mental health. The COVID-19 pandemic may have placed healthcare staff at risk of moral injury. AIM: To examine the impact of PMIE on healthcare staff wellbeing. METHODS: Twelve thousand nine hundred and sixty-five healthcare staff (clinical and non-clinical) were recruited from 18 NHS-England trusts into a survey of PMIE exposure and wellbeing. RESULTS: PMIEs were significantly associated with adverse mental health symptoms across healthcare staff. Specific work factors were significantly associated with experiences of moral injury, including being redeployed, lack of PPE, and having a colleague die of COVID-19. Nurses who reported symptoms of mental disorders were more likely to report all forms of PMIEs than those without symptoms (AOR 2.7; 95% CI 2.2, 3.3). Doctors who reported symptoms were only more likely to report betrayal events, such as breach of trust by colleagues (AOR 2.7, 95% CI 1.5, 4.9). CONCLUSION: A considerable proportion of NHS healthcare staff in both clinical and non-clinical roles report exposure to PMIEs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Prospective research is needed to identify the direction of causation between moral injury and mental disorder as well as continuing to monitor the longer term outcomes of exposure to PMIEs.

Linking electronic mental healthcare and benefits records in South London: design, procedure and descriptive outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the process and outcomes of a data linkage between electronic secondary mental healthcare records from the South London and Maudsley (SLaM) NHS Foundation Trust with benefits records from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). We also describe the mental health and benefit profile of patients who were successfully linked. DESIGN: A deterministic linkage of routine records from health and welfare government service providers within a secure environment. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged≥18 years who were referred to or accessed treatment at SLaM services between January 2007 and June 2019, including those who were treated as part of Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) services between January 2008 and June 2019 (n=448 404). Benefits data from the DWP from January 2005 to June 2020. OUTCOME MEASURES: The linkage rate and associated sociodemographic, diagnostic and treatment factors. Recorded primary psychiatric diagnosis based on International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 codes and type of benefit receipt. RESULTS: A linkage rate of 92.3% was achieved. Women, younger patients and those from ethnic minority groups were less likely to be successfully linked. Patients who had subsequently died, had a recorded primary psychiatric diagnosis, had also engaged with IAPT and had a higher number of historical postcodes available were more likely to be linked. Overall, 83% of patients received benefits at some point between 2005 and 2020. Benefit receipt across the psychiatric diagnosis spectrum was high, over 80% across most ICD-10 codes. CONCLUSIONS: This data linkage is the first of its kind in the UK demonstrating the use of routinely collected mental health and benefits data. Benefit receipt was high among patients accessing SLaM services and varied by psychiatric diagnosis. Future areas of research are discussed, including exploring the effectiveness of interventions for helping people into work and the impact of benefit reforms.

Which outcomes should always be measured in intervention studies for improving work participation for people with a health problem? An international multistakeholder Delphi study to develop a core outcome set for Work participation (COS for Work).

OBJECTIVE: Synthesising evidence of the effects of interventions to improve work participation among people with health problems is currently difficult due to heterogeneity in outcome measurements. A core outcome set for work participation is needed. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Following the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials methodology, we used a five-step approach to reach international multistakeholder consensus on a core outcome set for work participation. Five subgroups of stakeholders took part in two rounds of discussions and completed two Delphi voting rounds on 26 outcomes. A consensus of ≥80% determined core outcomes and 50%-80% consensus was required for candidate outcomes. RESULTS: Fifty-eight stakeholders took part in the Delphi rounds. Core outcomes were: 'any type of employment including self-employment', 'proportion of workers that return to work after being absent because of illness' and 'time to return to work'. Ten candidate outcomes were proposed, among others: 'sustainable employment', 'work productivity' and 'workers' perception of return to work'. CONCLUSION: As a minimum, all studies evaluating the impact of interventions on work participation should include one employment outcome and two return to work outcomes if workers are on sick leave prior to the intervention.

'You get looked at like you're failing': A reflexive thematic analysis of experiences of mental health and wellbeing support for NHS staff.

Staff in the National Health Service (NHS) are under considerable strain, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic; whilst NHS Trusts provide a variety of health and wellbeing support services, there has been little research investigating staff perceptions of these services. We interviewed 48 healthcare workers from 18 NHS Trusts in England about their experiences of workplace health and wellbeing support during the pandemic. Reflexive thematic analysis identified that perceived stigma around help-seeking, and staffing shortages due to wider socio-political contexts such as austerity, were barriers to using support services. Visible, caring leadership at all levels (CEO to line managers), peer support, easily accessible services, and clear communication about support offers were enablers. Our evidence suggests Trusts should have active strategies to improve help-seeking, such as manager training and peer support facilitated by building in time for this during working hours, but this will require long-term strategic planning to address workforce shortages.

Multicentre, England-wide randomised controlled trial of the 'Foundations' smartphone application in improving mental health and well-being in a healthcare worker population.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (HCWs) have faced considerable pressures during the COVID-19 pandemic. For some, this has resulted in mental health distress and disorder. Although interventions have sought to support HCWs, few have been evaluated. AIMS: We aimed to determine the effectiveness of the 'Foundations' application (app) on general (non-psychotic) psychiatric morbidity. METHOD: We conducted a multicentre randomised controlled trial of HCWs at 16 NHS trusts (trial registration number: EudraCT: 2021-001279-18). Participants were randomly assigned to the app or wait-list control group. Measures were assessed at baseline, after 4 and 8 weeks. The primary outcome was general psychiatric morbidity (using the General Health Questionnaire). Secondary outcomes included: well-being; presenteeism; anxiety; depression and insomnia. The primary analysis used mixed-effects multivariable regression, presented as adjusted mean differences (aMD). RESULTS: Between 22 March and 3 June 2021, 1002 participants were randomised (500:502), and 894 (89.2%) followed-up. The sample was predominately women (754/894, 84.3%), with a mean age of 44⋅3 years (interquartile range (IQR) 34-53). Participants randomised to the app had a reduction in psychiatric morbidity symptoms (aMD = -1.39, 95% CI -2.05 to -0.74), improvement in well-being (aMD = 0⋅54, 95% CI 0⋅20 to 0⋅89) and reduction in insomnia (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0⋅36, 95% CI 0⋅21 to 0⋅60). No other significant findings were found, or adverse events reported. CONCLUSIONS: The app had an effect in reducing psychiatric morbidity symptoms in a sample of HCWs. Given it is scalable with no adverse effects, the app may be used as part of an organisation's tiered staff support package. Further evidence is needed on long-term effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

Prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder and common mental disorders in health-care workers in England during the COVID-19 pandemic: a two-phase cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of health-care workers have relied on self-reported screening measures to estimate the point prevalence of common mental disorders. Screening measures, which are designed to be sensitive, have low positive predictive value and often overestimate prevalence. We aimed to estimate prevalence of common mental disorders and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among health-care workers in England using diagnostic interviews. METHODS: We did a two-phase, cross-sectional study comprising diagnostic interviews within a larger multisite longitudinal cohort of health-care workers (National Health Service [NHS] CHECK; n=23 462) during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the first phase, health-care workers across 18 NHS England Trusts were recruited. Baseline assessments were done using online surveys between April 24, 2020, and Jan 15, 2021. In the second phase, we selected a proportion of participants who had responded to the surveys and conducted diagnostic interviews to establish the prevalence of mental disorders. The recruitment period for the diagnostic interviews was between March 1, 2021 and Aug 27, 2021. Participants were screened with the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) and assessed with the Clinical Interview Schedule-Revised (CIS-R) for common mental disorders or were screened with the 6-item Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist (PCL-6) and assessed with the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5) for PTSD. FINDINGS: The screening sample contained 23 462 participants: 2079 participants were excluded due to missing values on the GHQ-12 and 11 147 participants due to missing values on the PCL-6. 243 individuals participated in diagnostic interviews for common mental disorders (CIS-R; mean age 42 years [range 21-70]; 185 [76%] women and 58 [24%] men) and 94 individuals participated in diagnostic interviews for PTSD (CAPS-5; mean age 44 years [23-62]; 79 [84%] women and 15 [16%] men). 202 (83%) of 243 individuals in the common mental disorders sample and 83 (88%) of 94 individuals in the PTSD sample were White. GHQ-12 screening caseness for common mental disorders was 52·8% (95% CI 51·7-53·8). Using CIS-R diagnostic interviews, the estimated population prevalence of generalised anxiety disorder was 14·3% (10·4-19·2), population prevalence of depression was 13·7% (10·1-18·3), and combined population prevalence of generalised anxiety disorder and depression was 21·5% (16·9-26·8). PCL-6 screening caseness for PTSD was 25·4% (24·3-26·5). Using CAPS-5 diagnostic interviews, the estimated population prevalence of PTSD was 7·9% (4·0-15·1). INTERPRETATION: The prevalence estimates of common mental disorders and PTSD in health-care workers were considerably lower when assessed using diagnostic interviews compared with screening tools. 21·5% of health-care workers met the threshold for diagnosable mental disorders, and thus might benefit from clinical intervention. FUNDING: UK Medical Research Council; UCL/Wellcome; Rosetrees Trust; NHS England and Improvement; Economic and Social Research Council; National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at the Maudsley and King's College London (KCL); NIHR Protection Research Unit in Emergency Preparedness and Response at KCL.

A general framework for selecting work participation outcomes in intervention studies among persons with health problems: a concept paper.

BACKGROUND: Work participation is important for health and can be considered as engagement in a major area of life which is of significance for most people, but it can also be thought of as fulfilling or discharging a role. Currently, academic research lacks a comprehensive classification of work participation outcomes. The International Classification of Functioning is the foremost model in defining work functioning and its counterpart work disability, but it does not provide a critical (core) set of outcomes. Standardizing the definitions and nomenclature used in the research of work participation would ensure that the outcomes of studies are comparable, and practitioners and guideline developers can better decide what works best. As work participation is a broad umbrella term including outcome categories which need unambiguous differentiation, a framework needs to be developed first. AIM: To propose a framework which can be used to develop a generic core outcome set for work participation. METHODS: First, we performed a systematic literature search on the concept of (work) participation, views on how to measure it, and on existing classifications for outcome measurements. Next, we derived criteria for the framework and proposed a framework based on the criteria. Last, we applied the framework to six case studies as a proof of concept. RESULTS: Our literature search provided 2106 hits and we selected 59 studies for full-text analysis. Based on the literature and the developed criteria we propose four overarching outcome categories: (1) initiating employment, (2) having employment, (3) increasing or maintaining productivity at work, and (4) return to employment. These categories appeared feasible in our proof-of-concept assessment with six different case studies. CONCLUSION: We propose to use the framework for work participation outcomes to develop a core outcome set for intervention studies to improve work participation.

Long-term health conditions in UK working-age adults: a cross-sectional analysis of associations with demographic, socioeconomic, psychosocial and health-related factors in an inner-city population.

OBJECTIVES: To study the overall disease prevalence, and associations between demographic, socioeconomic, psychosocial, and health-related factors, and self-reporting one or more long-term health conditions (LTCs) in a working-age inner-city population. DESIGN: Cross-sectional household-based survey with a follow-up timepoint. SETTING: South-East London Community Health survey data. PARTICIPANTS: 893 adults aged 16-64 years living in Lambeth and Southwark, London. OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence estimates of individual and multiple LTCs. Multinomial logistic regression was used to analyse the association of demographic, socioeconomic, psychosocial and health-related indicators with having one and multiple LTCs at two timepoints. RESULTS: More than one third of participants reported at least one LTC, with the most prevalent being musculoskeletal conditions and asthma. The prevalence of one LTC at both timepoints was 20.6% and 21.4%, and of multimorbidity was 14.0% and 16.4%. At both timepoints, the 35-44 age group showed the largest increase in prevalence of one LTC compared with the preceding age group (16-34). After adjusting for age and gender, small social networks and a larger number of stressful life events were associated with increased risk of having both one and multiple LTCs. The risk of multimorbidity was greater than for initial LTCs for small social networks (3.8 (95% CI: 1.8 to 7.8) compared with 2.0 (95% CI: 1.0 to 3.9)), and three to five stressful life events (3.0 (95% CI: 1.7 to 5.3) compared with 1.5 (95% CI 1.0 to 2.2)). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the prevalence of multimorbidity increased more than the prevalence of one LTC between the two timepoints, indicating a progression of the overall disease prevalence over time. The 35-44 age group showed the greatest increase in the number of initial LTCs which support health-promotion interventions targeting younger age groups. Focusing on increasing social support networks and treating the psychological impact of stressful life events may also be of benefit.

A pilot trial investigating the feasibility of a future randomised controlled trial of Individualised Placement and Support for people unemployed with chronic pain recruiting in primary care.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the feasibility of recruiting patients unemployed for more than 3 months with chronic pain using a range of methods in primary care in order to conduct a pilot trial of Individual Placement and Support (IPS) to improve quality of life outcomes for people with chronic pain. METHODS: This research was informed by people with chronic pain. We assessed the feasibility of identification and recruitment of unemployed patients; the training and support needs of employment support workers to integrate with pain services; acceptability of randomisation, retention through follow-up and appropriate outcome measures for a definitive trial. Participants randomised to IPS received integrated support from an employment support worker and a pain occupational therapist to prepare for, and take up, a work placement. Those randomised to Treatment as Usual (TAU) received a bespoke workbook, delivered at an appointment with a research nurse not trained in vocational rehabilitation. RESULTS: Using a range of approaches, recruitment through primary care was difficult and resource-intensive (1028 approached to recruit 37 eligible participants). Supplementing recruitment through pain services, another 13 people were recruited (total n = 50). Randomisation to both arms was acceptable: 22 were allocated to IPS and 28 to TAU. Recruited participants were generally not 'work ready', particularly if recruited through pain services. CONCLUSION: A definitive randomised controlled trial is not currently feasible for recruiting through primary care in the UK. Although a trial recruiting through pain services might be possible, participants could be unrepresentative in levels of disability and associated health complexities. Retention of participants over 12 months proved challenging, and methods for reducing attrition are required. The intervention has been manualised.

Attitudes and practices of ophthalmology doctors in London (UK) on the importance of discussing work as a clinical outcome with patients during consultations: A cross sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Limited research suggests that non-occupational health doctors rarely discuss occupation with their patients. There is a gap in research regarding the attitudes and practices of doctors towards discussing patient occupation and return to work. The aim of this work was to explore the attitudes of ophthalmology doctors towards work as a clinical outcome and assess the need for occupational health training among participants (doctors). METHODS: A cross-sectional survey among doctors working in ophthalmology in two London teaching hospitals. The survey focused on the attitudes of doctors towards 'work' as a clinical outcome, their practices of asking patients about occupation, their perceived level of competency in this area of clinical practice and the level of training doctors had received in this field. Descriptive data analysis was undertaken and results presented as frequencies and proportions. RESULTS: The response rate was 30/72 (42%). Approximately a quarter (8/30;27%) of doctors 'always' discussed return to work during care planning whilst the majority (25/30;87%) of doctors agreed or strongly agreed that this should always be the case. Over half of the doctors had received no formal OH training on how to discuss or assess the impact of health on work and only 17/30 (57%) considered themselves competent in discussing these work outcomes with patients. Over half agreed that additional training would be useful, with the majority believing that it would be most useful at all stages of medical training. CONCLUSION: We found the majority of ophthalmology doctors regard 'return to work' as an important clinical outcome yet most do not routinely discuss work outcomes with patients to inform care planning. Majority of doctors lack training in how to discuss issues relating to work and would benefit from additional OH training.

Preferred Methods of Measuring Work Participation: An International Survey Among Trialists and Cochrane Systematic Reviewers.

Purpose Heterogeneity in work participation (WP) outcomes measurements hampers large scale evidence synthesis in systematic reviews of trials. In this survey we explore authors' reasons for choosing specific WP outcomes and their measurement methods, including employment status, absence from work, at-work productivity loss, and employability. Methods We contacted authors of 260 trials and 69 systematic reviews and asked closed and open-ended questions about previously used WP outcomes and measurement methods as well as their opinion on the best way to measure WP. Results In total, 91 authors from a wide range of professional backgrounds completed the survey. The majority of authors (86%) chose WP outcomes based on their use in previous similar studies. In most studies (88%), patients had not been involved in the process of selecting the WP outcome. Authors judged feasibility to be an important factor for choosing a measurement instrument (67%). Additionally, valid measurement tools should be available, easy to administer and not too time consuming. Although authors preferred registry data for long term follow-up, the availability and validity of registries was seen as a barrier. Most of the reviewers (72%) struggled to pool data because of variation in follow-up times and cut off points and varying definitions of work outcomes. Almost all (92%) respondents support the use of a Core Outcome Set for Work. Conclusions There is strong support from authors of trials and systematic reviews to develop a core outcome set on work participation outcomes for the evaluation of interventions.

Development of decision aid on health help-seeking for medical students.

BACKGROUND: Rates of mental health problems are increasing among medical students, who have added pressures compared with non-medical students. Medical student populations exhibit low rates of help-seeking and often struggle with disclosing health conditions due to the barriers experienced and concerns over negative repercussions. AIMS: This study aimed to create and test the feasibility and potential efficacy of an online decision aid (DA) tool that provides medical students with resources for disclosing and help-seeking for their health concerns. METHODS: The research used mixed methods, comprising two rounds of testing, the first used the Think-Aloud method to identify modifications needed, and both of which measured feasibility and assessed decision making outcomes pre and post use of the DA utilizing O'Connor's Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) (2010) and Stage of Decision Making (SDM) (2003) measures. RESULTS: Results showed good feasibility of the DA. The mean DCS total score decreased from 32 to 16.75, (Wilcoxon signed-rank tests Z = -3.06, P < 0.05). There was no significant change in the SDM. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that the DA may reduce decisional conflict, improving their certainty and confidence in decision making, but had no immediate impact on their SDM, consistent with some other DAs. Further longitudinal research would be beneficial.

Driving, work, wound care and rehabilitation after carpal tunnel release: Consensus recommendations from a UK Delphi study.

Introduction: There is variability in the information available for patients after carpal tunnel release (CTR). We aimed to establish (i) what advice should be provided regarding return to driving after CTR; (ii) how work activities should be categorised and defined in relation to CTR, and when patients should be recommended to return to these activities; (iii) what wound care and rehabilitation advice should be provided after CTR. Methods: We developed consensus recommendations from an expert panel of hand surgeons, primary care surgeons and hand therapists using an electronic Delphi process. Participants were recruited from clinical organisations using pre-defined criteria. Delphi questionnaires included open text and tick-box responses. Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement and summary feedback was provided after each round. Results: There were 33 panellists (21 surgeons and 12 hand therapists), of which 27 (82%) completed all rounds. Expected return to driving was agreed as 5-14 days. Expected timescales were also agreed for return to seven selected occupational activities. Post-operative advice focused on using and moving the hand, rather than specific rehabilitation. While consensus was reached for most items, there were important areas of disagreement, including divergent views on driving with sutures in situ and the need to inform car insurers. Conclusion: Recommendations from this study expand on existing advice by including functional descriptors for occupational activities and guidance timescales generated through a formal consensus process. Areas where consensus was not reached warrant further exploration to assess whether different practices impact clinical and functional outcomes for patients.

Extensive variability of work participation outcomes measured in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate how work participation outcomes in randomized controlled trials are measured internationally and across disciplines. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We identified trials that reported on work participation in Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and Cochrane Central published between 2014 and 2019. Screening, selection, and data extraction were done by two authors independently. We grouped outcomes into four categories ("employment status", "absence from work", "at-work productivity loss," and "employability") and created subcategories according to how the outcome was measured. RESULTS: From 10,022 database hits we selected 269 trials reporting on 435 work participation outcomes. Authors used inconsistent outcome terminology to describe the measured constructs. Grouped in four main categories we identified 70 outcomes that reported on "employment status", 196 on "absence from work" and return-to-work, 132 on "at-work productivity loss," and 37 on "employability" outcomes. Variability in measurement methods existed across all categories. Employment status and absenteeism measures consisted mostly of clinimetrically unvalidated tools. "At-work productivity loss" and "employability" were measured by at least 41 different questionnaires. CONCLUSION: Extensive variability exists among trials in the measurement of outcomes, measurement methods and measurement instruments that focus on work participation. This study is a first step towards the development of a Core Outcome Set for work participation.

Multimorbidity and fit note receipt in working-age adults with long-term health conditions.

BACKGROUND: Research on sickness absence has typically focussed on single diagnoses, despite increasing recognition that long-term health conditions are highly multimorbid and clusters comprising coexisting mental and physical conditions are associated with poorer clinical and functional outcomes. The digitisation of sickness certification in the UK offers an opportunity to address sickness absence in a large primary care population. METHODS: Lambeth Datanet is a primary care database which collects individual-level data on general practitioner consultations, prescriptions, Quality and Outcomes Framework diagnostic data, sickness certification (fit note receipt) and demographic information (including age, gender, self-identified ethnicity, and truncated postcode). We analysed 326 415 people's records covering a 40-month period from January 2014 to April 2017. RESULTS: We found significant variation in multimorbidity by demographic variables, most notably by self-defined ethnicity. Multimorbid health conditions were associated with increased fit note receipt. Comorbid depression had the largest impact on first fit note receipt, more than any other comorbid diagnoses. Highest rates of first fit note receipt after adjustment for demographics were for comorbid epilepsy and rheumatoid arthritis (HR 4.69; 95% CI 1.73-12.68), followed by epilepsy and depression (HR 4.19; 95% CI 3.60-4.87), chronic pain and depression (HR 4.14; 95% CI 3.69-4.65), cardiac condition and depression (HR 4.08; 95% CI 3.36-4.95). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show striking variation in multimorbid conditions by gender, deprivation and ethnicity, and highlight the importance of multimorbidity, in particular comorbid depression, as a leading cause of disability among working-age adults.