Archives

Fairness demands transparency

Doctors often speak publicly about injustice, torture, and attacks on healthcare in conflict zones and humanitarian crises. Because doctors’ voices carry significant public trust, their speech is also subject to professional regulation and employer oversight.

In recent years, complaints about doctors’ public comments on international conflicts have increased. Yet complaint volume alone is a poor guide to misconduct. Where repeated complaints trigger escalating scrutiny even when no professional or legal standard has been breached, the regulatory process itself becomes the penalty for doctors.

Doctors’ freedom of speech much be protected from punitive scrunity, a British Medical Journal (BMJ) opinion article written by Rubin Minhas, Nick Maynard, Iain Chalmers, and VISION Director Gene Feder, examines how complaint-driven escalation risks creating “punitive scrutiny”—a situation where investigation and oversight impose a heavy burden of process even in the absence of wrongdoing.

The authors argue that the solution is not weaker regulation but greater transparency. Regulators and employers should publish aggregate indicators on complaint patterns and escalation decisions to demonstrate that scrutiny is driven by evidence rather than complaint pressure.

Ensuring that lawful professional speech is protected from punitive scrutiny is essential both for doctors who speak about humanitarian harms and for maintaining public confidence in professional regulation.

To download the opinion piece: Doctors’ freedom of speech must be protected from punitive scrutiny | The BMJ

Illustration / photograph from Adobe Stock subscription

Impact of consecutive COVID-19 lockdowns on GP referrals of women experiencing domestic abuse in England and Wales

To curb COVID-19, three periods of severe physical distancing measures (‘lockdowns’) were imposed by the Government throughout 2020 and 2021 in England and Wales: between 23 March and 1 June 2020 (68 days), 5 November 2020 and 2 December 2020 (27 days) and between 6 January and 8 March 2021 (61 days). These lockdowns resulted in societal changes, including full or part-time school and workplace closures, and reduced community mixing.

The pandemic also necessitated a change in clinical consultations in primary care, with a shift from predominantly face-to-face to mostly remote consultations (telephone, digital and video), complicating the provision of care and support, including safeguarding. The lockdowns made it harder for people to disclose domestic violence and abuse (DVA) to health professionals, as online consultations can form barriers to support.

Long and enforced lockdowns can make it harder to disclose DVA and can have a detrimental impact on DVA victim-survivors and their families. Previous studies suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic and its lockdowns have led to an increase in DVA incidence. Refuge, the organisation running the 24-hour national DVA helpline in England, reported that calls surged by 60% during 2020 compared with the previous year. There is, however, scarce evidence on the impact of consecutive lockdowns over a period of almost 2 years on referrals from primary care to DVA support services in England.

The research team, led by Dr Jasmina Panovska-Griffiths and others including VISION researchers Professor Gene Feder and Dr Estela Capelas Barbosa, evaluated the impact of the three successive national lockdowns on the referrals from general practice (GP) to the Identification and Referral to Improve Safety DVA services. Their study, Interrupted time series and non-linear regression analyses to evaluate the impact of the three consecutive COVID-19 national lockdowns on the general practice referrals of women experiencing domestic violence and abuse in England and Wales, is the first to evaluate the continual impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the three consecutive national lockdowns in 2020 and 2021 on DVA referrals. The researchers also explored the relationship between stringency of lockdowns and number of DVA referrals.

Anonymised data on daily referrals, interrupted-time series and non-linear regression quantified the impact of the three national lockdowns over 2020 and 2021 comparing analogous periods in the 2 years before and after, reporting incidence rate ratios, 95% Confidence Intervals and p values. Time spent at home and workplace visits over the lockdown periods were quantified as proxies for the stringency of the different lockdowns.

The first national lockdown in early 2020 led to a reduced number of referrals to DVA services. Over the second and the third lockdown, there was a possible increase in the number of referrals. The first national lockdown was more stringent (58% decline in workplace visits; 22% increase in time spent at home) than the second (34% decline in workplace visits; 14% increase in time spent at home) or the third (18% decline in workplace visits; 18% increase in time spent at home).

Increased freedom of movement alongside easier access to GP services during the two latter, less stringent, lockdowns compared with the first, stringent, lockdown could have contributed to the different trends in referrals. The research team determined that ensuring access to primary care and adequate and continuing provision of specialist support for people experiencing DVA is important during national emergencies. Further research, coproduced with DVA survivors and DVA agencies, is necessary to establish and evaluate the most appropriate support during both potential future national lockdowns and other systemic closures (eg, school holidays).

Recommendation

More stringent systemic closures will lead to a reduced number of referrals to a specialist DVA programme, while more relaxed system closures may result in increased referrals. This highlights the importance of ensuring adequate access to support, such as primary care, where people can safely disclose DVA and be referred to service providers during system closures, regardless of the stringency.

For further information: Please contact Jasmina at jasmina.panovska-griffiths@queens.ox.ac.uk

To cite: Panovska-Griffiths J, Szilassy E, Downes L, Dixon S, Dowrick A, Griffiths C, Feder G, Capelas Barbosa E. Interrupted time series and non-linear regression analyses to evaluate the impact of the three consecutive COVID-19 national lockdowns on the general practice referrals of women experiencing domestic violence and abuse in England and Wales. BMJ Public Health. 2025;3:e002408. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjph-2024-002408

Photograph from Adobe Photo Stock subscription

How general practice can respond to violence against women and girls

Violence against women and girls (VAWG) is a global violation of human rights that damages health and wellbeing across the life course and across generations. Except in its most obvious manifestations as acute injury or distress, VAWG has been largely hidden from the awareness of health services.

At a UK national policy level, this started to change with mandatory reporting policies on female genital mutilation, the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) safeguarding standards and toolkit, and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) domestic abuse guidelines. However, evidence-based guidance is not yet systematically implemented in clinical education and practice.

National and local VAWG prevention policies are siloed, despite the overlap of different types of VAWG, often affecting the same families, and often part of intersectional vulnerability, amplifying other sources of inequality: class, deprivation, ethnicity, gender identity, disability, and poor mental health.

VISION Director and Professor of primary care at the University of Bristol, Gene Feder, and his Bristol colleagues, argue that the role of general practice needs to be based on the evidence for effective interventions. Despite the relatively recent recognition that violence prevention and mitigation is part of health care, that evidence has grown rapidly over the past two decades. It is strongest for the training of primary care teams linked to a referral pathway to the specialist domestic abuse sector in the UK as well as post-disclosure specialist support for survivors.

Experience of domestic violence and abuse is difficult to disclose and may endanger the patient if the abuser learns of disclosure. Disclosure may be even less likely with the increase of remote and digital access to general practice. Therefore, training for all clinicians should include how to ask about abuse, including in online or telephone consultations, how to appropriately and safely respond to disclosure, and to safely document in the medical record.

Although associated with inequality, VAWG is present in all communities. Prevention and mitigation needs to be across all sectors, with investment in interventions with individuals, families, communities, and tackling structural drivers of violence. General practice must be part of this societal response.

Key messages

There is overlap between different types of violence often affecting the same children, families, and households.
Intersections of deprivation, disability, poor mental health, and racism amplifies the effect of violence and trauma, also reducing access to general practice support.
Violence against women and girls (VAWG) requires a team-based general practice response underpinned by trauma-informed training and referral pathways to specialist services, often in the voluntary sector.
Effective responses to VAWG needs to be rooted in trauma-informed care, facilitated by relational continuity and enabled by face-to-face consultations.
Clinician experience of violence and abuse needs to be addressed in training and support.

To download: Violence against women and girls: how can general practice respond?

To cite: Violence against women and girls: how can general practice respond? Gene Feder, Helen Cramer, Lucy Potter, Jessica Roy and Eszter Szilassy. British Journal of General Practice 2025; 75 (756): 297-299. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2025.0244

For further information, please contact Gene at gene.feder@bristol.ac.uk

Photograph licensed under Adobe Stock subscription

Better utilisation of healthcare data to measure violence

Despite violence being recognised as a harm to health, it is not consistently or adequately captured in healthcare data systems. Administrative health records could be a valuable source for researching violence and understanding the needs of victims, but such datasets are currently underutilised for this purpose.

VISION researcher Dr Anastasia Fadeeva, with input from Dr Estela Capelas Barbosa, Professor Sally McManus and Public Health Wales’ Dr Alex Walker, examined violence indicators in emergency care, primary care, and linked healthcare datasets in the paper Using Primary Care and Emergency Department datasets for Researching Violence Victimisation in the UK.

Anastasia worked with Hospital Episode Statistics Accident and Emergency (HES A&E) and the Emergency Care Data Set (ECDS) while on secondment at the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), with helpful review provided by researchers in the department.

Among the datasets reviewed in the study, the South Wales Violence Surveillance dataset (police and emergency department data linked by Public Health Wales) had the most detail about violent acts and their contexts, while the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) provided the more extensive range of socioeconomic factors about patients and extensive linkage with other datasets. Currently, detailed safeguarding information is routinely removed from the ECDS extracts provided to researchers, limiting its utility for violence research. In the HES A&E, only physical violence was consistently recorded.

Addressing these limitations and increasing awareness of the potential utility of health administrative datasets to violence-related research has the potential to provide insight into the health service needs of victims.

For further information please see: Social Sciences | Free Full-Text | Using Primary Care and Emergency Department Datasets for Researching Violence Victimisation in the UK: A Methodological Review of Four Sources (mdpi.com)

Or contact Dr Anastasia Fadeeva at anastasa.fadeeva@city.ac.uk

Photo from licensed Adobe Stock library

A health perspective to the war in Israel and Palestine

Gene Feder, VISION Director and Professor of Primary Care at the University of Bristol, has written an opinion piece with colleagues commenting on events in Israel and Gaza from a public health and primary care perspective. Responding to the war in Israel and Palestine was published in December in the online edition of the British Journal of General Practice.

Gene and his colleagues are GPs working to further the development of family medicine in the occupied Palestinian territory, specifically in the West Bank, but with links to family medicine in Gaza through the United Nations Relief and Works Agency and through Medical Aid for Palestinians. They also have friends and family in Israel and Palestine.

They have three responses to the current crisis as informed by their work as GPs and connection to Palestinian primary care:

A plea for the protection of health care and health professionals amid the war
A plea for the preservation of public health amid war
A recognition that in the aftermath of October 7th and the invasion of Gaza, the widespread direct and vicarious trauma in Israeli and Palestinian populations will result in permanent physical and emotional damage: the former in the shape of orthopaedic, neurological, and gynaecological (as a result of rape) harm, the latter in the form of widespread anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder which will also cascade down the generations.

Given VISION’s commitment to developing evidence on violence prevention, we will be organising roundtable meetings bringing together researchers focusing on post-conflict violence reduction. This is an opportunity for dialogue, perhaps leading to new perspectives and research including systematic assessment of sustainable post-conflict interventions as well as further joint activities.

For further information on the opinion piece, please see: Responding to the war in Israel and Palestine

Photograph by Emad El Byed on Unsplash

Cost effectiveness of primary care training & support programme for secondary prevention of DVA

Recent research evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the Identification and Referral to Improve Safety plus (IRIS+) intervention compared with usual care using feasibility data derived from seven UK general practice sites.

IRIS+ is a training and support programme for clinicians working in primary care to aid in their identification of those experiencing or perpetrating domestic violence / abuse (DVA).

VISION Deputy Director, Dr Estela Capelas Barbosa and Director, Professor Gene Feder, worked with their University of Bristol colleagues to conduct a cost–utility analysis, a form of economic evaluation comparing cost with patient-centred outcome measures, as a means to measure the benefit obtained from the treatment or intervention.

The specific cost-utility analysis they conducted assessed the potential cost-effectiveness of IRIS+ which assists primary care staff in identifying, documenting and referring not only women, but also men and children who may have experienced DVA as victims, perpetrators or both.

The analysis showed that in practices that adopted the IRIS+ intervention, a savings of £92 per patient occurred. The incremental net monetary benefit was positive (£145) and the IRIS+ intervention was cost-effective in 55% of simulations (when the model is repeated with different assumptions).

The research team therefore concluded that the IRIS+ intervention could be cost-effective in the UK from a societal perspective though there are large uncertainties. To resolve these the team will conduct a large trial with further economic analysis.

For further information please see: Primary care system-level training and support programme for the secondary prevention of domestic violence and abuse: a cost-effectiveness feasibility model | BMJ Open

Or contact Dr Estela Capelas Barbosa at e.capelasbarbosa@bristol.ac.uk

Photo by Marcelo Leal on Unsplash

COVID-19 adaptations to a training and support programme to improve primary care response to domestic abuse

Dr Estela Capelas Barbosa, VISION Deputy Director has recently published, COVID-19 adaptations to a training and support programme to improve primary care response to domestic abuse: a mixed methods rapid study in the BMC Primary Care journal, with Lucy Downes, IRIS Network Director.

Increased incidence and/or reporting of domestic abuse (DA) occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result of the lockdowns across the UK, services providing support to victims had to adapt and consider adding methods of remote outreach to their programmes.

Identification and Referral to Improve Safety (IRIS) is a programme to improve the response to domestic abuse in general practice, providing training for general practice teams and support for patients affected by DA. The COVID-19 pandemic required those running the programme to adapt to online training and remote support.

Estela and Lucy employed a mixed methods rapid approach to this research in order to gather evidence around the relevance, desirability and acceptability of IRIS operating remotely. Quantitative IRIS referral data were triangulated with data from surveys and interviews. They found that the adaptation to online training and support of IRIS was acceptable and desirable.

This study contributes to practice by asserting the desirability and acceptability of training clinicians to be able to identify, ask about DA and refer to the IRIS programme during telephone/online consultations. The findings from this study may be of interest to (public) health commissioners when making commissioning decisions to improve the general practice response to domestic abuse.

For further information please see: COVID-19 adaptations to a training and support programme to improve primary care response to domestic abuse: a mixed methods rapid study | BMC Primary Care (springer.com)

Or contact Dr Estela Capelas Barbosa at e.capelasbarbosa@bristol.ac.uk

Photo by Chris Yang on Unsplash

Making change happen in primary care: the story of IRIS

VISION Director and Professor of Primary Care at the University of Bristol Medical School, Gene Feder, was a keynote speaker at the webinar: Making change happen in primary care – The IRIS story, on 28 November 2023.

With his co-presenter, Medina Johnson, CEO of IRIS, they shared the story of the concept and ambition that led to the beginning of the social enterprise established in 2017 to promote and improve the healthcare response to domestic violence and abuse (DVA).

DVA is a violation of human rights that damages the health of women and families. The health care sector, including primary care, has been slow to respond to the needs of patients affected by DVA, not least because of uncertainty about the effectiveness of training clinicians in identification and engagement with survivors of abuse.

To address that uncertainty, Gene and Medina conducted a cluster-randomised trial in Hackney and Bristol, finding that both identification and referral to specialist DVA services substantially increased in the intervention practices.

In the webinar they mapped the (not always smooth) trajectory from trial results to a nationally available programme commissioned by Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) and local authorities in over 50 areas to date, including getting into guidelines/policy, further implementation research, negotiating with commissioners, and setting up a social enterprise (IRISi) to drive the scaling up of the intervention.

For further information please watch the webinar video below.

For any questions or comments, please contact IRISi at info@irisi.org

Training GPs remotely during COVID-19: Lessons learned

There may have been a rise in domestic abuse during the COVID-19 pandemic. At the same time general practice adopted remote working, which extended to training and education being delivered online.

IRIS (Identification and Referral to Improve Safety) is an example of an evidence-based UK healthcare training support and referral programme, focusing on DVA, which transitioned to remote delivery during the pandemic.

To understand the adaptations and impact of remote DVA training in IRIS-trained general practices a group of researchers – including VISION members Estela Barbosa and Gene Feder – explored the perspectives of those delivering and receiving training.

It was found that remote DVA training in UK general practice widened access to learners. However, it may have reduced learner engagement compared with face-to-face training. DVA training is integral to the partnership between general practice and specialist DVA services, and reduced engagement risks weakening this partnership.

The researchers recommend a hybrid DVA training model for general practice, including remote information delivery alongside a structured face-to-face element. This has broader relevance for other specialist services providing training and education in primary care.

For further information please see: Adapting domestic abuse training to remote delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic: perspectives from general practice and support services | British Journal of General Practice (bjgp.org)

Or contact Estela Barbosa Capelas at estela.barbosa@city.ac.uk

Remote GP contact limits domestic violence care

General Practice has a central role in identifying and supporting those affected by DVA. Pandemic associated changes in UK primary care included remote initial contacts with primary care and predominantly remote consulting.

This paper explores general practice’s adaptation to DVA care during the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that the disruption caused by pandemic restrictions revealed how team dynamics and interactions before, during and after clinical consultations contribute to identifying and supporting patients experiencing DVA. Remote assessment complicates access to and delivery of DVA care.

This has implications for all primary and secondary care settings, within the NHS and internationally, which are vital to consider in both practice and policy.

For further information please see: General practice wide adaptations to support patients affected by DVA during the COVID-19 pandemic: a rapid qualitative study | BMC Primary Care | Full Text (biomedcentral.com)

Photo by National Cancer Institute on Unsplash