Background: Oral anticoagulants are prescribed for stroke prophylaxis in patients with atrial fibrillation, which is the most common heart arrhythmia worldwide. The vitamin K antagonist (VKA) warfarin is a long-established anticoagulant. However, newer direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been recently introduced as an alternative. Given the prevalence of atrial fibrillation, anticoagulant choice has substantial clinical and financial implications for healthcare systems. In this study, we explore trends and geographic variation in anticoagulant prescribing in English primary care. Because national guidelines in England do not specify a first-line anticoagulant, we investigate the association between local policies and prescribing data. Methods: Primary care prescribing data of anticoagulants for all NHS practices from 2014 to 2019 in England was obtained from the ePACT2 database. Public formularies were accessed online to obtain local anticoagulation prescribing policies for 89.5% of clinical commissioning groups (CCGs). These were categorized according to their recommendations: no local policies, warfarin as first-line, or identification of a preferred DOAC (but not a preferred anticoagulant). Local policies were cross-tabulated with pooled prescribing data to measure the strength of association with Cramér's V. Results: Nationally, prescribing of DOACs increased from 9% of all anticoagulants in 2014 to 74% in 2019, while that of warfarin declined accordingly. Still, there was significant local variation. Across geographical regions, DOACs ranged from 53 to 99% of all anticoagulants. Most CCGs (73%) did not specify a first-line choice, and 16% recommended warfarin first line. Only 11% designated a preferred DOAC. Policies with a preferred DOAC indeed correlated with increased prescribing of that DOAC (Cramér's V = 0.25, 0.27, 0.38 for rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban respectively). However, local policies showed a negligible relationship with the classes of anticoagulants prescribed-DOAC or VKA (Cramér's V = 0.01). Conclusions: Nationally, the use of DOACs to treat atrial fibrillation has increased rapidly. Despite this, significant geographical variation in uptake remains. This study provides insights on how local policies relate to this variation. Our findings suggest that, in the absence of a nationally recommended first-line anticoagulant, local prescribing policies may aid in deciding between individual DOACs, but not in adjudicating between DOACs and vitamin K antagonists (i.e. warfarin) as general classes.

ObjectivesThis paper reports findings exploring work cultures, contexts and conditions associated with psychological distress in foundation and junior doctors.DesignQualitative study using in-depth interviews with 21 junior doctor participants. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, anonymised and imported into NVivo V.11 to facilitate data management. Data were analysed using a thematic analysis employing the constant comparative method.SettingNHS in England.ParticipantsA purposive sample of 16 female and five male junior doctor junior doctor participants who self-identified as having stress, distress, anxiety, depression and suicidal thoughts, or having attempted to kill themselves.ResultsAnalysis reported four key themes: (1) workload and working conditions; (2) toxic work cultures—including abuse and bullying, sexism and racism, culture of blaming and shaming; (3) lack of support; (4) stigma and a perceived need to appear invulnerable.ConclusionThis study highlights the need for future solutions and interventions targeted at improving work cultures and conditions. There needs to be greater recognition of the components and cumulative effects of potentially toxic workplaces and stressors intrinsic to the work of junior doctors, such as the stress of managing high workloads and lack of access to clinical and emotional support. A cultural shift is needed within medicine to more supportive and compassionate leadership and work environments, and a zero-tolerance approach to bullying, harassment and discrimination.

ObjectivesThis paper reports findings exploring junior doctors’ experiences of working during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK.DesignQualitative study using in-depth interviews with 15 junior doctors. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, anonymised and imported into NVivo V.12 to facilitate data management. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.SettingNational Health Service (NHS) England.ParticipantsA purposive sample of 12 female and 3 male junior doctors who indicated severe depression and/or anxiety on the DASS-21 questionnaire or high suicidality on Paykel’s measure were recruited. These doctors self-identified as having lived experience of distress due to their working conditions.ResultsWe report three major themes. First, the challenges of working during the COVID-19 pandemic, which were both personal and organisational. Personal challenges were characterised by helplessness and included the trauma of seeing many patients dying, fears about safety and being powerless to switch off. Work-related challenges revolved around change and uncertainty and included increasing workloads, decreasing staff numbers and negative impacts on relationships with colleagues and patients. The second theme was strategies for coping with the impact of COVID-19 on work, which were also both personal and organisational. Personal coping strategies, which appeared limited in their usefulness, were problem and emotion focused. Several participants appeared to have moved from coping towards learnt helplessness. Some organisations reacted to COVID-19 collaboratively and flexibly. Third, participants reported a positive impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on working practices, which included simplified new ways of working—such as consistent teams and longer rotations—as well as increased camaraderie and support.ConclusionsThe trauma that junior doctors experienced while working during COVID-19 led to powerlessness and a reduction in the benefit of individual coping strategies. This may have resulted in feelings of resignation. We recommend that, postpandemic, junior doctors are assigned to consistent teams and offered ongoing support.

No abstract

ObjectivesThis paper reports findings identifying foundation and junior doctors’ experiences of occupational and psychological protective factors in the workplace and sources of effective support.DesignInterpretative, inductive, qualitative study involving in-depth interviews with 21 junior doctor participants. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, anonymised and imported into NVivo V.11 to facilitate data management. Data were analysed using a thematic analysis employing the constant comparative method.SettingNational Health Service in the UK.ParticipantsParticipants were recruited from junior doctors through social media (eg, the British Medical Association (BMA) junior doctors’ Facebook group, Twitter and the mental health research charity websites). A purposive sample of 16 females and 5 males, ethnically diverse, from a range of specialities, across the UK. Junior doctor participants self-identified as having stress, distress, anxiety, depression and suicidal thoughts or having attempted to kill themselves.ResultsAnalysis identified three main themes, with corresponding subthemes relating to protective work factors and facilitators of support: (1) support from work colleagues – help with managing workloads and emotional support; (2) supportive leadership strategies, including feeling valued and accepted, trust and communication, supportive learning environments, challenging stigma and normalising vulnerability; and (3) access to professional support – counselling, cognitive–behavioural therapy and medication through general practitioners, specialist support services for doctors and private therapy.ConclusionsFindings show that supportive leadership, effective management practices, peer support and access to appropriate professional support can help mitigate the negative impact of working conditions and cultures experienced by junior doctors. Feeling connected, supported and valued by colleagues and consultants acts as an important buffer against emotional distress despite working under challenging working conditions.