One in four workers suffers work-related stress in times of recession, resulting in sharp spikes in employee absence, according to research published today.

The number of staff taking time off due to job stress leaps 25% during economic downturns, while total time due to work-related stress increases by more than a third during a slump.

The study of tens of thousands of civil servants in Northern Ireland by researchers at the University of Nottingham and the University of Ulster should act as a “stark warning” to employers, according to the Society of Occupational Medicine. It said that the results showed firms that they should use occupational health services or risk long-term damage to productivity.

The study, published in the scientific journal Occupational Medicine, compared the findings of two surveys. The first was conducted in 2005 prior to the onset of the recession and the second in 2009 while the economy was severely hit. Scientists assessed how exposed respondents were to the pressures of work by looking at areas such as the demands of the job, control over work and the support they felt they had from managers. They also measured workers perceptions of how stressed they were at work and how much time they had taken off because of work-related stress.

Jonathan Houdmont, the study’s lead author, said the “stark differences” in the responses given at these two time points “clearly” show that national economic crises can have “substantial” implications for workers’ health and organisational performance.

“The findings suggest that those organisations which seek to reduce work-related stress during austere economic times are likely to experience lower staff absence and greater productivity,” Houdmont said.

The study is available here.

Source: HIMAG 21/02/12

Patients may have to pay for treatment that is currently provided at no charge by the NHS if the Government’s proposed reforms to the health service are implemented, an academic has claimed.

Allyson Pollock, professor of public health at Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, said the Health and Social Care Bill had "a hidden purpose" which would see the privatisation of health services.

Writing in The Lancet, Professor Pollock said the aim of the Bill is to introduce "a mixed financing system and to abolish the model of tax-financed universal healthcare on which the NHS is based".

The passage of the Bill has proved "highly controversial and unusually prolonged" due to "extraordinary" concern voiced by opposition politicians, the public and the medical profession, she said. Should the Bill proceed without further amendments, the Secretary of State for Health will no longer have a duty to provide a universal healthcare system free at the point of use, she said.

A Department of Health spokesman dismissed Prof Pollock's arguments as "simply nonsense", the Daily Telegraph reports.

She said: "The Bill reaffirms that healthcare will always be there for everyone who needs it, funded from general taxation, and based on need not ability to pay."

The paper can be accessed here.

Source: HIMAG 16/02/2012

Consumer Prices Index (CPI) inflation in the UK fell to 3.6% last month, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS), while RPI inflation – including mortgage interest payments – fell to 3.9% from 4.8%.

The ONS said inflation fell sharply as the impact of last year's VAT rise was no longer included in the figures. VAT rose from 17.5% to 20% in January 2011.

Ian Kernohan, economist at Royal London Asset Management, said: "The sharp fall in the rate of UK CPI inflation in January is not a huge surprise, given that last year's rise in VAT has now dropped out of the annual comparison.

"The Bank of England will take some comfort from the fact that their inflation story appears to be panning out as expected, at least in the short term."

Source: Cover Magazine 14/02/12

The NHS has to spend billions each year due to a "systemic" failure to tackle mental health problems in people with long-term conditions such as diabetes, heart disease problems early.

Research published today by the King’s Fund and the Centre for Mental Health suggests that too often a mental health condition goes undetected where there is a co-existing long-term physical health condition.

Researchers found that by exacerbating physical illnesses, co-existing mental health problems substantially increase the costs related to care for long-term conditions. Overall, £1 in every £8 spent on long-term conditions is linked to poor mental health, equating to £8-13bn of NHS spending each year.

Co-existing mental health problems can lead to increased hospitalisation rates and increased outpatient service use, the researchers said. They can also lead to less effective self-management as people with poor mental health who have heart disease or other long-term conditions are less likely to look after their physical health, take medication as intended and attend medical appointments.

The study also shows that depression increases mortality rates after a heart attack by 3.5 times.

Researchers said there is a growing volume of research evidence which suggests that more integrated approaches, with closer working between professionals responsible for patients’ mental and physical health, can improve outcomes while also reducing costs.

The study, Long-term conditions and mental health: the cost of co-morbidities, is available here.

Source: HIMAG 09/02/12

Eight in ten employees work when they are sick, according to a report published this week, which argues that technology is not being used to monitor trends and engage with staff effectively.

The report claims that an approach to absence management that does not embrace technology in fact heightens employer and employee risk.

Research behind the report highlights the rise of the “Wickie” – or the “Working Sickie” – which means that 80% of people work when unwell, largely down to the prevailing economic conditions and concerns about job security.

This is in spite of the fact that a similar number – 80% – of employers believe that presenteeism is a bad thing. It is also in spite of the fact that over half of workers still confess to “pulling a sickie” when they are not ill.

The report, Sick Notes, by Ellipse, the group risk insurer, and Professor Cary Cooper, CBE, a world authority on workplace issues, warns that British businesses can “ill afford” unproductive and/or overstretched workforces. It states that better use of technology can help employers to address such issues.

Five steps towards better absence management are recommended by the report. Employers should: ensure they have a clear and simple procedure; use technology to monitor trends; maintain proactive contact with the employee; consider external expertise; and foster a culture of employee engagement and consider flexible working.

Ellipse chief executive John Ritchie said that the research shows that while workplace practices have evolved “significantly”, absence management has “failed to keep up”.

He said: “This lack of progress frustrates me. With advances in technology benefiting so many areas of work, isn’t it high time organisations embraced it to benefit staff welfare?”

Source: HIMAG 01/02/12

More proof that individuals continue to choose to purchase pet insurance than protection products is revealed in research published this week.

A survey carried out for Ageas Protect shows that less than one in ten (9%) people have a critical illness (CI) policy in place – equivalent to 4.5 million adults – while 12% have taken out a pet insurance policy, equating to 5.9 million adults. The Opinium survey of over 2,000 adults suggests that one fifth of parents stated they would have to rely on savings if they were to fall seriously ill.

Earlier this month Friends Life published research which suggests that while 14% of people would automatically take out pet insurance, just 10% would take out CI cover. Research carried out for Scottish Widows last year, meanwhile, showed that across the UK just 7% of people have income protection insurance, compared to 15% who have taken out pet insurance.

A study carried out last year by unbiased.co.uk, the professional advice website, suggests that more than one in four (27%) UK adults hope to leave enough money for their family or pets to live comfortably after they are gone. However, an estimated 29.5 million UK adults do not have a will in place.

Source: HIMAG 02/02/12

Britain’s largest medical royal college has called for the Health and Social Care Bill to be scrapped, branding it "damaging, unnecessary and expensive".

The Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) said that despite the tabling of amendments to the controversial bill in the House of Lords this week, it believes the planned reforms would "cause irreparable damage to patient care and jeopardise the NHS".

RCGP chair Dr Clare Gerada said that after earlier efforts to persuade Health Secretary Andrew Lansley to introduce further changes to the bill had failed, the RCGP had been "left with no alternative" but to write to the Prime Minister to call for its complete withdrawal.

She said: "We have taken every opportunity to negotiate changes for the good of our patients and for the continued stability of the NHS, yet while the Government has claimed that it has made widespread concessions, our view is that the amendments have created greater confusion. We remain unconvinced that the Bill will improve the care and services we provide to our patients."

The 20 colleges that make up the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges have been divided over how they should express their opposition to the Bill. The Royal College of Radiologists has said it has "grave concerns" about the bill, while the Royal College of Psychiatrists has called it "fundamentally flawed".

The British Medical Association (BMA) welcomed today’s announcement by the RCGP.

Dr Hamish Meldrum, chairman of BMA Council, said: "The RCGP statement seeking withdrawal of the Health and Social Care Bill surely scotches, once and for all, the Government's claims that there is professional support for this deeply flawed, damaging and unnecessary legislation.”

Health Minister Simon Burns told the BBC that he was “baffled” by the RCGP’s stated position as it conflicted with views that he heard from GPs “up and down the country”.

Source: HIMAG 03/02/12

Cabinet ministers are to discuss tough new curbs designed to slash the number of whiplash injury claims.

Transport Secretary Justine Greening is proposing to ban claims involving very low speeds, introduce rigorous medical checks and target “ambulance-chasing lawyers” who are making millions of pounds.

It is hoped that the proposals will help to curb escalating car insurance premiums which come about as a result of increased whiplash claims.

Greening will meet Health Secretary Andrew Lansley, Justice Secretary Ken Clarke, Home Secretary Theresa May and Business Secretary Vince Cable to discuss the situation.

Prime Minister David Cameron will later convene a wider review on the issue.

Britain has much higher rates of whiplash claims than anywhere else in Europe, driving higher insurance premiums. In January the Transport Select Committee called for a higher threshold before payouts for whiplash are made.

Writing in the Mail on Sunday, Greening said: "There is no getting away from it: the cost of car insurance is bearing increasingly little relationship to the real world where motorists act more responsibly than ever and accidents really do happen less often.

"With this in mind, it would be reasonable to expect premiums to come down or at least hold steady. But the cost of cover continues on a relentless climb. Sadly, Britain is now the whiplash capital of Europe, with more than 1,500 claims a day.

"From texting and cold-calling drivers involved in accidents, to running high profile advertising campaigns, lawyers are encouraging people to claim for whiplash injuries sustained in the most minor of incidents – which barely damage the car's paintwork, never mind its driver.

"As Transport Secretary I believe it is time to confront these issues and I'm determined to take a serious look at what can be done. Premiums are not simply the price of an insurance policy, they are a contract of mutual responsibility and insurers must live up to their side of the bargain. It is time for them to get a grip and put their houses in order."

Nick Starling, director of general insurance at the Association of British Insurers, said honest motorists have rightly “had enough” of paying for “ambulance-chasing lawyers, claims management companies and fraudsters who milk the compensation merry-go-round through higher premiums”.

Source: HIMAG 06/02/12

Nice released its draft guidance saying that abiraterone's cost of at least £63,200 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) was too much for the organisation to recommend for NHS use.

However, this has been greeted with anger by cancer groups who said the drug had been in high demand from the government's specialist cancer drugs fund and there were almost no effective alternatives available.

The body has rejected several other cancer drugs over recent months, predominantly on the grounds of cost.

While it is not a rigid formula, Nice typically does not recommend treatments that cost more than £20,000 to £30,000 per QALY, with the largest being £50,000 for Sunitinib.

Abiraterone is designed to be used in combination with prednisone or prednisolone for the treatment of castration-resistant metastatic prostate cancer that has progressed on or after chemotherapy.

Sir Andrew Dillon, chief executive of NICE, acknowledged that Abiraterone could potentially extend life by more than three months compared with placebo tests and that noted one of its key benefits was that it can be taken orally at home.

And he expressed disappointment at not to be able to recommend it for use on the NHS.

 “However, it is an expensive drug and the independent advisory committee that made this decision did not feel the drug provided enough benefit to patients to justify the price the NHS is being asked to pay, even with the discount that the manufacturer has offered," he said.

The announcement prompted an angry reaction from Cancer Research UK which has urged for a solution to be found over the impasse.

It was particularly concerned by the provisional ruling as Nice had found it was "clinically effective".

Professor Peter Johnson, chief clinician at Cancer Research UK, said: “This decision makes no sense.

“Since it became available in the UK, abiraterone has been one of the most requested treatments from the Cancer Drugs Fund because patients and doctors value the extra months of life it can give if prostate cancer has come back after chemotherapy.

“We need to find a way for it to be routinely available through the NHS.

“At the moment it is too expensive and NICE must find a better way to ensure drugs that are already working for patients get approved,” he added.

The charity noted there were very few other treatment options for men with advanced prostate cancer and that the only one available on the NHS that has been shown to prolong survival has more severe side effects and is effective in fewer men.

It warned that if Nice could not agree a better discount scheme, abiraterone will only be available through the Cancer Drugs Fund in England.

The Fund is only available until 2014 and does not apply to Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

Source: Cover Magazine 02/02/12

A four-year study of 60,000 workers in six countries showed that the UK's stress level has risen by 10% since 2008, making it the highest out of the countries surveyed.

According to the Kenexa High Performance Institute, the UK's stress level (35%) is higher than Brazil (34%), Germany (33%), the United States (32%) and double that of China and India (both 17%).

The Stress: What's the Impact for Organisations? study – outlines the prevalence of stress, its physical and psychological consequences, who is at risk and what leaders and HR practitioners can do to reduce stress levels.

It identified the main causes of employee stress as work-life conflict, poor leadership and management behaviour, lack of job security, lack of team cohesiveness, lack of cooperation and dissatisfaction with the level of pay.

Perhaps crucially, it noted the effects of the economic downturn were still being felt.

In organisations where staff had been made redundant, the average employee stress level was nearly 40%, compared to just 25% for organisations which hadn't made layoffs in the same period.

Workers in the healthcare sector have the highest level of stress but those in the public sector, financial services and retail have seen the largest increases in stress since 2008.

Employees in high-tech manufacturing report the least stress.

In terms of job role, frontline service and production workers have the most stress; upper and middle managers have the least.

Men and women experience roughly equal levels of stress, though employees aged 55-64 report the highest levels of stress.

Dr. Rena Rasch, research manager at the Kenexa High Performance Institute, explained there had been a marked increase in workplace stress in every country, industry and job type, to the extent that it is now higher than at any time in the last four years.

"High stress levels increase absenteeism and decrease productivity," she said.

"For individuals, stress causes sleep deprivation, headaches, high blood pressure and greater susceptibility to illness, which lowers well-being and increases the chance of burn out.

"HR practitioners and leaders need to understand the root causes of stress, and who is most at risk, so they can target the right stress-reducing initiatives at the right people," she added.

Dr Rasch suggested that focus groups and interviews could find out what support employees wanted while leaders also needed to be honest with and sympathetic to their employees.

Source: Cover Magazine 30/01/12