The aim of this study was to describe rates of exposure to bullying and sexual harassment in junior doctors in first- or second-year prevocational medical training (PGY1 or PGY2 respectively) positions in New South Wales (NSW) and the Australian Capital Territory (ACT), and to explore the types of actions taken in response. A cross-sectional survey of junior doctors in PGY1 or PGY2 positions was undertaken in 2015 and 2016 (n=374 and 440 respectively). Thematic analysis was undertaken on free-text responses to describe the reporting process and outcomes in more depth. The estimated response rate was 17-20%. Results from both surveys followed almost identical trends. Most respondents in 2015 and 2016 reported being bullied (n=203 (54.3%) and 253 (57.5%) respectively), 16-19% reported sexual harassment (n=58 and 82 respectively) and 29% of females reported sexual harassment. Qualitative analysis elucidated reasons for not taking action in response to bullying and harassment, including workplace normalisation of these behaviours, fear of reprisal and lack of knowledge or confidence in the reporting process. For respondents who did take action, most reported ineffective or personally harmful outcomes when reporting to senior colleagues, including being dismissed or blamed, and an intention not to trust the process in the future. The findings suggest that interventions targeted at the level of junior doctors to improve the culture of bullying and harassment in medicine are unlikely to be helpful. Different approaches that address the problem in a more systemic way are needed, as is further research about the effectiveness of such interventions. Bullying and sexual harassment are common workplace experiences in the medical profession. Over half the junior doctors in the present study experienced bullying and nearly one-fifth experienced sexual harassment. Junior doctors are reluctant to speak out, not only for fear of reprisal, but also because they do not believe it is worth doing so. The data confirm a systemic problem of bullying in NSW. Primarily focusing on interventions with junior doctors (e.g. resilience training) is unlikely to solve the problem. Different and multipronged approaches (e.g. raising awareness in senior colleagues and training bystanders to intervene) should be tried and studied.

2019) Disability patterns over the first year after a diagnosis of epilespy. Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery, 179,[60][61][62][63][64][65] Objective: To determine the patterns and predictors of disability over the first 12 months after a diagnosis of epilepsy. Patients and methods: The Sydney Epilepsy Incidence Study to Measure Illness Consequences (SEISMIC) was a prospective, multicenter, community-based study of people with newly diagnosed epilepsy in Sydney, Australia. Disability was assessed using the World Health Organization's, Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 12-item version, at baseline (i.e. within 28 days of diagnosis) and 12 months post-diagnosis. Demographic, socioeconomic, clinical and epilepsy-related data, obtained through structured interviews, were entered into multivariable linear regression and shift analysis to determine predictors of greater disability. Results: Of 259 adults (≥18 years), 190 (73%) had complete WHODAS at baseline (mean ± SD scores 4 ± 6) and follow-up (4 ± 8). After adjustment for age, sex and co-morbidity, greater overall disability at 12 months was associated with lower education (P = 0.05), economic hardship (P = 0.004), multiple antiepileptic medications (P = 0.02) and greater disability (P < 0.001) at the time of diagnosis; these variables explained 38.3% of the variance. Among the 12 WHODAS items, "being emotionally affected by health problems" was the most frequent disability problem identified at both time points (all P < 0.0001). The proportion of participants without problems in that domain improved over 12 months (from 24% to 50%, P < 0.0001), whereas the other 11 items remained relatively stable. Independent baseline predictors of a worse emotional outcome at 12 months were severe/extreme emotional distress (odds ratio [OR] 4.52, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.67-12.24), economic hardship (OR 2.30, 95% CI 1.24-4.25) and perceived stigma (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.03-3.93). Conclusion: Most people report problems with emotional health after a diagnosis of epilepsy but many recover over the next 12 months. Services addressing the social and psychological impact of diagnosis may be needed to improve outcome.