Shining a light on an additional clinical burden: work-related digital communication survey study – COVID-19 impact on NHS staff wellbeing

Work-related communication volume within the United Kingdom’s National Health Service (NHS) has had little systematic research previously. The impact of communication volume on work-life balance of healthcare staff in the NHS is also not known and has not been an area of focus or governance. COVID-19 led to a shift to non-physical work, with greater reliance on digital communication for clinical decision making. We sought to elucidate the relationship between communication, work-life balance, and COVID-19. An online survey was conducted to assess the platforms used to communicate professionally, the volume of and time spent on work-related communications, how this has changed from before to during COVID-19, and the effect on work-life balance. A total of 3047 healthcare staff provided consent and evaluable data. Emails were reported as the most frequently used communication tool, and the majority of staff asked, reported increased work-related communications due to COVID-19. Staff estimated receiving 14 emails on an average day before COVID-19. During the pandemic, staff estimated getting approximately 17 emails on an average day and 29 emails on a busy day. Work communications reportedly took up increased amounts of family and home time during COVID-19. A large proportion (36%) of staff were unable to switch off from work-related communications already before COVID-19, worsening (57%) during the pandemic. Work-related digital communication is a vital component of working in the NHS. We provide the first detailed data on the types, volume, and impact of such communication on NHS staff during the COVID-19 pandemic, compared to pre-pandemic levels. We found that 82% of staff support the need for NHS guidance on work-related communications to help manage overload, protect emotional wellbeing, and increase resilience. Further work is urgently needed in this area to tackle the negative impact of communication technologies (technostress) on work-life balance to reduce staff stress, burnout, and turnover or early retirement of some staff

Recognizing and Moving on from a Failed Paradigm: The Case of Agricultural Landscapes in Anglo-Saxon England c. AD 400–800

A central preoccupation for archaeologists is how and why material culture changes. One of the most intractable examples of this problem can be found between AD 400 and 800 in the enigmatic transformation of sub-Roman into Anglo-Saxon England. That example lies at the heart of this review, explored through the case of the agricultural economy. Although the ideas critically examined below relate specifically to early medieval England, they represent themes of universal interest: the role of migration in the transformation of material culture, politics, and economy in a post-imperial world, the significance of ‘‘core’’ and ‘‘periphery’’ in evolving polities, ethnogenesis as a strategy in kingdom building, property rights as a lens for investigating cultural change, and the relationship between hierarchical political structures and collective forms of governance. The first part of my argument proposes a structured response to paradigmatic stalemate by identifying and testing each underlying assumption, premise, and interpretative framework. The recognition of any fallacies, false premises, and flawed arguments might assist with an overall evaluation of the continuing utility of a discourse—whether it has life in it yet, or should be set aside. In either case, the recognition of its structure should enable arguments to be developed that do not lead into a disciplinary cul-de-sac, prevented by the orthodoxy from exploring new avenues for research. In the second part of the review, I deliberately adopt a starting point outside the limits of the current discourse. Freed from the confines of the conventional consensus, I experiment with an alternative ‘‘bottom-up’’ approach to change in early medieval England that contrasts with conventional ‘‘top-down’’ arguments. I focus in particular on how rights over agricultural property—especially collective rights—and the forms of governance implied by them may assist in illuminating the roles of tradition and transformation in effecting cultural change.This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10814-015-9088-