BackgroundThe social determinants of health have been widely recognised yet there remains a lack of clarity regarding what constitute the macro-economic determinants of health and what can be done to address them. An umbrella review of systematic reviews was conducted to identify the evidence for the health and health inequalities impact of population level macroeconomic factors, strategies, policies and interventions.MethodsNine databases were searched for systematic reviews meeting the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) criteria using a novel conceptual framework. Studies were assessed for quality using a standardised instrument and a narrative overview of the findings is presented.ResultsThe review found a large (n = 62) but low quality systematic review-level evidence base. The results indicated that action to promote employment and improve working conditions can help improve health and reduce gender-based health inequalities. Evidence suggests that market regulation of tobacco, alcohol and food is likely to be effective at improving health and reducing inequalities in health including strong taxation, or restriction of advertising and availability. Privatisation of utilities and alcohol sectors, income inequality, and economic crises are likely to increase health inequalities. Left of centre governments and welfare state generosity may have a positive health impact, but evidence on specific welfare interventions is mixed. Trade and trade policies were found to have a mixed effect. There were no systematic reviews of the health impact of monetary policy or of large economic institutions such as central banks and regulatory organisations.ConclusionsThe results of this study provide a simple yet comprehensive framework to support policy-makers and practitioners in addressing the macroeconomic determinants of health. Further research is needed in low and middle income countries and further reviews are needed to summarise evidence in key gaps identified by this review.Trial registrationProtocol for umbrella review prospectively registered with PROSPERO CRD42017068357.

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.

Background and objectives Patients with decompensated cirrhosis rarely receive palliative and supportive care interventions, which are routine in other life-limiting diseases. We aimed to design and evaluate a prognostic screening tool to routinely identify inpatients with decompensated cirrhosis at high risk of dying over the coming year, alongside the development of a supportive care intervention. Design Clinical notes from consecutive patients admitted as an emergency to University Hospitals Bristol with a diagnosis of cirrhosis over two distinct 90-day periods were scrutinised retrospectively for the presence or absence of five evidence-based factors associated with poor prognosis. These were analysed against their ability to predict mortality at 1 year. 'PlanDo-Study-Act' (PDSA) methodology was used to incorporate poor-prognosis screening into the routine assessment of patients admitted with cirrhosis, and develop a supportive care intervention. Results 73 admissions were scrutinised (79.5% male, 63% alcohol-related liver disease, median age 54). The presence of three or more poorprognosis criteria at admission predicted 1-year mortality with sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value of 72.2%, 83.8% and 81.3%, respectively, and was used as a trigger for implementing the supportive care intervention. Following modification from six PDSA cycles, prognostic screening was integrated into the assessment of all patients admitted with

No abstract