Multimorbidity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in a nationally representative population sample: implications of count versus cluster method for defining multimorbidity on HRQoL

Background: No universally accepted definition of multimorbidity (MM) exists, and implications of different definitions have not been explored. This study examined the performance of the count and cluster definitions of multimorbidity on the sociodemographic profile and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in a general population. Methods: Data were derived from the nationally representative 2007 Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing (n = 8841). The HRQoL scores were measured using the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL-4D) instrument. The simple count (2+ & 3+ conditions) and hierarchical cluster methods were used to define/identify clusters of multimorbidity. Linear regression was used to assess the associations between HRQoL and multimorbidity as defined by the different methods. Results: The assessment of multimorbidity, which was defined using the count method, resulting in the prevalence of 26% (MM2+) and 10.1% (MM3+). Statistically significant clusters identified through hierarchical cluster analysis included heart or circulatory conditions (CVD)/arthritis (cluster-1, 9%) and major depressive disorder (MDD)/anxiety (cluster-2, 4%). A sensitivity analysis suggested that the stability of the clusters resulted from hierarchical clustering. The sociodemographic profiles were similar between MM2+, MM3+ and cluster-1, but were different from cluster-2. HRQoL was negatively associated with MM2+ (β: −0.18, SE: −0.01, p < 0.001), MM3+ (β: −0.23, SE: −0.02, p < 0.001), cluster-1 (β: −0.10, SE: 0.01, p < 0.001) and cluster-2 (β: −0.36, SE: 0.01, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Our findings confirm the existence of an inverse relationship between multimorbidity and HRQoL in the Australian population and indicate that the hierarchical clustering approach is validated when the outcome of interest is HRQoL from this head-to-head comparison. Moreover, a simple count fails to identify if there are specific conditions of interest that are driving poorer HRQoL. Researchers should exercise caution when selecting a definition of multimorbidity because it may significantly influence the study outcomes

Trends, variations, and prediction of staff sickness absence rates among NHS ambulance services in England: a time series study

Objectives: Our aim was to measure ambulance sickness absence rates over time, comparing ambulance services and investigate the predictability of rates for future forecasting. Setting: All English ambulance services, UK. Design: We used a time series design analysing published monthly National Health Service staff sickness rates by gender, age, job role and region, comparing the 10 regional ambulance services in England between 2009 and 2018. Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) and Seasonal ARIMA (SARIMA) models were developed using Stata V.14.2 and trends displayed graphically. Participants: Individual participant data were not available. The total number of full-time equivalent (FTE) days lost due to sickness absence (including non-working days) and total number of days available for work for each staff group and level were available. In line with The Data Protection Act, if the organisation had less than 330 FTE days available during the study period it was censored for analysis. Results: A total of 1117 months of sickness absence rate data for all English ambulance services were included in the analysis. We found considerable variation in annual sickness absence rates between ambulance services and over the 10-year duration of the study in England. Across all the ambulance services the median days available were 1 336 888 with IQR of 548 796 and 73 346 median days lost due to sickness absence, with IQR of 30 551 days. Among clinical staff sickness absence varied seasonally with peaks in winter and falls over summer. The winter increases in sickness absence were largely predictable using seasonally adjusted (SARIMA) time series models. Conclusion: Sickness rates for clinical staff were found to vary considerably over time and by ambulance trust. Statistical models had sufficient predictive capability to help forecast sickness absence, enabling services to plan human resources more effectively at times of increased demand

The experiences and perceptions of wellbeing provision among English ambulance services staff: a multi-method qualitative study

Background: NHS ambulance service staff are at risk of poor physical and mental wellbeing because of the likelihood of encountering stressful and traumatic incidents. While reducing sickness absence and improving wellbeing support to ambulance staff is a key NHS priority, few studies have empirically documented a national picture to inform policy and service re-design. The study aimed to understand how ambulance service trusts in England deal with staff health and wellbeing, as well as how the staff perceive and use wellbeing services. Methods: To achieve our aim, we undertook semi-structured telephone interviews with health and wellbeing leads and patient-facing ambulance staff, as well as undertaking documentary analysis of ambulance trust policies on wellbeing. The study was conducted both before and during the UK first COVID-19 pandemic wave. The University of Lincoln ethics committee and the Health Research Authority (HRA) granted ethical approval. Overall, we analysed 57 staff wellbeing policy documents across all Trusts. Additionally, we interviewed a Health and Wellbeing Lead in eight Trusts as well as 25 ambulance and control room staff across three Trusts. Results: The study highlighted clear variations between organisational and individual actions to support wellbeing across Trust policies. Wellbeing leads acknowledged real ‘tensions’ between individual and organisational responsibility for wellbeing. Behaviour changes around diet and exercise were perceived to have a positive effect on the overall mental health of their workforce. Wellbeing leads generally agreed that mental health was given primacy over other wellbeing initiatives. Variable experiences of health and wellbeing support were partly contingent on the levels of management support, impacted by organisational culture and service delivery challenges for staff. Conclusion: Ambulance service work can impact upon physical and mental health, which necessitates effective support for staff mental health and wellbeing. Increasing the knowledge of line managers around the availability of services could improve engagement

Protecting the Mental Health of Small-to-Medium Enterprise Owners: A Randomized Control Trial Evaluating a Self-Administered Versus Telephone Supported Intervention

OBJECTIVE: Small-medium enterprises (SMEs) are under-represented in occupational health research. Owner/managers face mental ill-health risks/exacerbating factors including financial stress and long working hours. This study assessed the effectiveness of a workplace mental health and wellbeing intervention specifically for SME owner/managers. METHODS: Two hundred ninety seven owner/managers of SMEs were recruited and invited to complete a baseline survey assessing their mental health and wellbeing and were then randomly allocated to one of three intervention groups: (1) self-administered, (2) self-administered plus telephone, or (3) an active control condition. After a four-month intervention period they were followed up with a second survey. RESULTS: Intention to treat analyses showed a significant decrease in psychological distress for both the active control and the telephone facilitated intervention groups, with the telephone group demonstrating a greater ratio of change. CONCLUSION: The provision of telephone support for self-administered interventions in this context appears warranted

The ideal healthcare: priorities of people with chronic conditions and their carers

Background It is well established that health consumer opinions should be considered in the design, delivery, and evaluation of health services. However, the opinions of people with chronic conditions and their carers and what they actually consider as ideal healthcare is limited. The aim of this study is to investigate the healthcare priorities of consumers with chronic conditions and their carers, if there are differences between these two groups, and if priorities differ depending on geographical location. Methods The nominal group technique was used as a method to identify what is currently important to, or valued by, participants. This method was also particularly suited to learning about healthcare problems and generating important solutions, thereby helping to bridge the gap between research and policy. Recruitment was carried out via purposive sampling, with the assistance of community pharmacies, general practices, various health agencies, government and non-government organisations. A total of 11 nominal groups were conducted; five groups consisted predominantly of consumers (n = 33 participants), two groups consisted predominantly of carers (n = 12 participants) and four were mixed groups, i.e. consumers, carers, and both (n = 26 participants). Results The findings suggested that to create a model of ideal healthcare for people with chronic conditions and their carers, appropriate and timely healthcare access was of paramount importance. Continuity and coordinated care, patient-centred care and affordability were equally the second most important healthcare priorities for all groups. When compared with other groups, access was discussed more frequently among participants residing in the rural area of Mount Isa. Compared to consumers, carers also discussed priorities that were more reminiscent with their caring roles, such as increased access and continuity and coordinated care. Conclusions Access to healthcare is the most important priority for people with chronic conditions and their carers. In the event of inappropriate access for certain groups, all other efforts to increase the quality of healthcare delivery, e.g. patient-centred care, may be pointless. However, health professionals alone may be limited in their ability to address the concerns related to healthcare access; structural changes by health policy makers may be needed