Healthcare workers' participation in a healthy-lifestyle-promotion project in western Sweden

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Healthcare professionals play a central role in health promotion and lifestyle information towards patients as well as towards the general population, and it has been shown that own lifestyle habits can influence attitudes and counselling practice towards patients. The purpose of this study was to explore the participation of healthcare workers (HCWs) in a worksite health promotion (WHP) programme. We also aimed to find out whether HCWs with poorer lifestyle-related health engage in health-promotion activities to a larger extent than employees reporting healthier lifestyles.</p> <p>Method</p> <p>A biennial questionnaire survey was used in this study, and it was originally posted to employees in the public healthcare sector in western Sweden, one year before the onset of the WHP programme. The response rate was 61% (n = 3207). In the four-year follow-up, a question regarding participation in a three-year-long WHP programme was included, and those responding to this question were included in the final analysis (n = 1859). The WHP programme used a broad all-inclusive approach, relying on the individual's decision to participate in activities related to four different themes: physical activity, nutrition, sleep, and happiness/enjoyment.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The participation rate was around 21%, the most popular theme being physical activity. Indicators of lifestyle-related health/behaviour for each theme were used, and regression analysis showed that individuals who were sedentary prior to the programme were less likely to participate in the programme's physical activities than the more active individuals. Participation in the other three themes was not significantly predicted by the indicators of the lifestyle-related health, (body mass index, sleep disturbances, or depressive mood).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our results indicate that HCWs are not more prone to participate in WHP programmes compared to what has been reported for other working populations, and despite a supposedly good knowledge of health-related issues, HCWs reporting relatively unfavourable lifestyles are not more motivated to participate. As HCWs are key actors in promoting healthy lifestyles to other groups (such as patients), it is of utmost importance to find strategies to engage this professional group in activities that promote their own health.</p

Health and life insurance as an alternative to malpractice tort law

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Tort law has legitimate social purposes of deterrence, punishment and compensation, but medical tort law does none of these well. Tort law could be counterproductive in medicine, encouraging costly defensive practices that harm some patients, restricting access to care in some settings and discouraging innovation.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Patients might be better served by purchasing combined health and life insurance policies and waiving their right to pursue malpractice claims. The combined policy should encourage the insurer to profit by inexpensively delaying policyholders' deaths. A health and life insurer would attempt to minimize mortal risks to policyholders from any cause, including medical mistakes and could therefore pursue systematic quality improvement efforts. If policyholders trust the insurer to seek, develop and reward genuinely effective care; identify, deter and remediate poor care; and compensate survivors through the no-fault process of paying life insurance benefits, then tort law is largely redundant and the right to sue may be waived. If expensive defensive medicine can be avoided, that savings alone could pay for fairly large life insurance policies.</p> <p>Summary</p> <p>Insurers are maligned largely because of their logical response to incentives that are misaligned with the interests of patients and physicians in the United States. Patient, provider and insurer incentives could be realigned by combining health and life insurance, allowing the insurer to use its considerable information access and analytic power to improve patient care. This arrangement would address the social goals of malpractice torts, so that policyholders could rationally waive their right to sue.</p

Does psychological distress influence reporting of demands and control at work?

Aims: To investigate whether self reporting of psychological demands and control at work is as valid for psychologically distressed subjects as for subjects with psychological wellbeing. Method: Self reported demands and control (according to the model of Karasek) were compared to expert assessments through direct observations of each subject's work conditions concerning time pressure, hindrances, qualification for work tasks, and possibility of having influence. The comparison was made between respondents reporting and not reporting psychological distress as measured by the general health questionnaire with 12 questions (GHQ-12). The sample consisted of 203 men and women in 85 occupations. Result: No systematic differences between self reported and externally assessed working conditions for respondents reporting different levels of psychological distress were found. Conclusion: Over-reporting of work demands or under-reporting of work control is unlikely at the levels of psychological distress studied

Ethical problems in radiology: medical error and disclosure

In radiological practice, as in any medical activity, errors are inevitable despite being foreseeable and preventable. The approach to managing medical error and relations with patients prompt the need for resolving the ethical dilemma arising from conflicting legitimate interests. The solution to this dilemma is particularly complex in an environment in which the tendency to sue physicians for civil liability or incriminate them for criminal liability appears to be particularly high. The disclosure of error is undeniably useful in raising patient awareness, reducing their suffering, improving the quality of care and limiting the consequences of the damage. There does not appear to be any evidence to suggest disclosure modifies the probability of litigation against the physician