Project description:BackgroundThe occurrence of strikes in the health sector has been an increasing concern around the world, given their negative impact on the provision of services and care to patients. The Mozambican doctors' strike in 2013 2013 is considered by many to be the largest of a kind in the country's history, and marked the changes which are still a matter of debate. The aim of this study is to understand the causes, strategies and perceived impact of this strike from the perspective of the main actors involved, taking a look back at everything that happened, including the backstage and tense moments during the negotiations. These details have been little covered in similar studies and are important for a better understanding and management of this type of movement.MethodsThis is a qualitative study with a phenomelogical approach that consisted of semi-structured interviews with the main players involved in the strike movement, and analysis of documents produced around this movement. Non-probabilistic snowball sampling was used to select participants until data saturation was reached. The interviews were transcribed and imported into Nvivo version 12, and the data was analysed using content analysis to identify themes related to the research questions.ResultsThe doctors were demanding better salaries, career prospects and working conditions. Failure to fulfil agreements, threats from the government and a lack of communication are believed to have precipitated the strike. Faced with staff shortages, the government restricted services, prioritised urgent cases, and patients saw services slowed down, their care delayed, a lack of medicines in health units and a loss of confidence in the healthcare system. Although the strike contributed to the approval of the Doctors' Statute, it led to the interruption of postgraduate studies, transfers and suspensions of professionals.ConclusionThe strike was motivated by aspects associated with salaries and working conditions. Some of the approaches adopted further distanced the parties and delayed consensus. The strike had negative consequences for everyone, especially patients. This study provides important lessons for improving strike prevention and management strategies in the health sector.
Project description:ObjectivesTo identify differences in average basic pay between groups of National Health Service (NHS) doctors cross-classified by ethnicity and gender. Analyse the extent to which characteristics (grade, specialty, age, hours, etc.) can explain these differences.DesignRetrospective observational study using repeated cross-section design.SettingHospital and Community Health Service (HCHS) in England.ParticipantsAll HCHS doctors in England employed by the NHS between 2016 and 2020 appearing in the Digital Electronic Staff Record dataset (average N=99 953 per year).Main outcome measuresHours-adjusted full-time equivalent pay gaps; given as raw data and further adjusted for demographic, job, and workplace characteristics (such as grade, specialty, age, whether British nationality, region) using multivariable regression and statistical decomposition techniques.ResultsPay gaps relative to white men vary with the ethnicity-gender combination. Indian men slightly out-earn white men and Bangladeshi women have a 40% pay gap. In most cases, pay gaps can largely be explained by characteristics that can be measured, especially grade, with the extent varying by specific ethnicity-gender group. However, a portion of pay gaps cannot be explained by characteristics that can be measured.ConclusionsThis study presents new evidence on ethnicity-gender pay gaps among NHS doctors in England using high quality administrative and payroll data. The findings indicate all ethnicity-gender groups earn less than white men on average, except for Indian men. In some cases, these differences cannot be explained giving rise to discussions about the role of discrimination.
Project description:BackgroundRising health spending is associated with high out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE), catastrophic health spending (CHS), increasing poverty, and impoverishment. Though studies have examined poverty and impoverishment effect of health spending in India, there is limited research on the regional patterns of health spending by type of health centers. This paper tests the hypothesis that the poor people from the poorer states of India pay significantly more for hospitalization in public health centers than those in the richer states of India.MethodsData from the Social Consumption of Health Survey (71st round, 2014), carried out by the National Sample Survey (NSS) is used in the analyses. Descriptive statistics, log-linear regression model and tobit model were used to examine the determinants and variations in health spending.ResultsInter-state variations in the utilization of public health services and the OOPE on hospitalization are high in India. States with high levels of poverty make higher use of the public health centers and yet incur high OOPE. In 2014, the mean OOPE per episode of hospitalization in public health centers in India was ₹5688 and ₹4264 for the economically poor households. It was lowest in the economically developed state of Tamil Nadu and highest in the economically poorer state of Bihar. The OOPE per episode of hospitalization in public health centers among the poor in the poorer states was at least twice that in Tamil Nadu. Among the poor using public health centers, the share of direct cost account 24% in Tamil Nadu compared to over 80% in Bihar, Odisha and other poorer states. Adjusting for socio-economic correlates, the cost of hospitalization per episode (CHPE) among the poor using public health centers was 51% lower than for the non-poor using private health centers in India.ConclusionThe poor people in the poorer states in India pay significantly more to avail hospitalization in public health centers than those in the developed states. Provision of free medicines, surgery and free diagnostic tests in public health centers may reduce the high OOPE and medical poverty in India.
Project description:The gender pay gap has been observed for decades, and still exists. Due to a life course perspective, gender differences in income are analyzed over a period of 24 years. Therefore, this study aims to investigate income trajectories and the differences regarding men and women. Moreover, the study examines how human capital determinants, occupational positions and factors that accumulate disadvantages over time contribute to the explanation of the GPG in Germany. Therefore, this study aims to contribute to a better understanding of the GPG over the life course. The data are based on the German cohort study lidA (living at work), which links survey data individually with employment register data. Based on social security data, the income of men and women over time are analyzed using a multilevel analysis. The results show that the GPG exists in Germany over the life course: men have a higher daily average income per year than women. In addition, the income developments of men rise more sharply than those of women over time. Moreover, even after controlling for factors potentially explaining the GPG like education, work experience, occupational status or unemployment episodes the GPG persists. Concluding, further research is required that covers additional factors like individual behavior or information about the labor market structure for a better understanding of the GPG.
Project description:Purpose:Communication skills education is still relatively new in some non-Western countries. Further, most evaluation research on communication skills education examines only short-term results. In our communication skills program in Qatar, we aimed to: 1) assess the impact of the communication skills course on participant skills application; 2) assess the length of time since course completion associated with participant skills application; and 3) assess participant gender or clinical position associated with participant skills application. Methods:Seven hundred and thirty-eight physicians completed a seven-module communication skills course. Participants reflected on what they learned in the course and how the course had impacted their behavior through a nine-item online survey that included a four-item Communication Workshop Impact Scale (CWIS), three open questions, and two demographic questions. To assess the effect of time since workshop on outcomes, we stratified the respondents into five groups based on how long ago they had completed the course. Results:Three hundred and thirty-two physicians completed the survey. Participants reported agreement with the items on the CWIS: X=4.45 (range 1-5; SD=0.70). When asked which skill(s) they had been able to implement in their clinical practice, 235 gave a specific response, either a specific communication skill (eg, ask open questions), a higher-order category of skills (eg, questioning skills), or the name of one of the seven modules of the course. Only 28 participants listed the name of a skill or module name that they had not been able to implement. There was no evidence of difference in CWIS score based on time since course completion. There was no gender difference; however, residents had significantly lower CWIS scores than fellows (4.70 vs. 4.29, p<0.05). Conclusion:Participants reported agreement with response items about the impact of the course on their skills application. Participant gender did not play a significant role, but residents had lower scores than did fellows. Furthermore, most physicians (92%) were able to name something specific that they had learned from the course and were currently implementing in their practice. Positive outcomes of the course did not seem to diminish over time. Future research should identify whether observable communication behavior matches the self-reported behavior.
Project description:The Fridays for Future strikes involve students striking for increased action on climate change, and this movement has spread to 185 countries and received widespread media attention. This exploratory study investigates motives for participating or not in the climate strikes and future participation among students in Switzerland. In a sample of N = 638 university students, we found that trust in climate scientists, low trust in governments, response efficacy, protest enjoyment and the perceived success of the strikes predicted participation. Contrary to statements in the public media but consistent with the literature, students who participated in the climate strikes reported consuming less meat, flying less and taking more steps to compensate the CO2 emissions from flights compared to students who did not participate. We discuss how the insights from this study help reveal the determinants of youth collective action on climate change.