The media and white coats
Are you interested in hearing some “insider” information? As you may know, The Lancet comes out in print, and goes on-line, every Friday. I work very closely with our press officer, Tony Kirby, to decide which articles we should choose for press release every week. We send out the press releases every Wednesday which are embargoed until the Friday. So Friday is usually the day when Lancet articles get the most media coverage.
Every Friday, it never fails to amaze me which articles the newspapers and other media choose to cover. This week is no exception. We published a Lancet editorial about white coats, saying that there is no evidence to support the UK Government’s decision to ban them as part of its strategy to control hospital-acquired infection. It has been picked up everywhere. ITV News contacted us to see if someone would speak about it and lots of other requests are coming in.
Yet we also press released a very important study which shows how an Individual Placement and Support Scheme helps establish people with mental illness in competitive employment which has not been picked up at all so far.
Of course, what gets covered depends on what else is happening in the world, and we did make the title of the press release about the white coats the rather catchy, “Politicians must stop pandering to populism about cleanliness and listen to evidence,” but even still. With all that is happening in the world, are we really that bothered about white coats? What do you think? O and in case you have still not registered with the Lancet.com, I have copied the editorial below. Bye for now Rhona
Lancet Editorial: The traditional white coat: goodbye, or au revoir?
Last week, UK Health Secretary Alan Johnson outlined new measures to prevent hospital-acquired infection, including hand washing and a “bare below the elbows” dress code for clinical staff in hospitals, to start in January, 2008. The new policy means short sleeves. The policy bans the traditional long-sleeved white coat. Also banned are wristwatches, presumably leaving doctors to gaze expectantly for a convenient wall-clock when timing an event or taking a pulse.
Cuffs on long sleeves can become contaminated with microorganisms, but do cuffs transmit infection? The Health Secretary’s working group stated that “there is no conclusive evidence that uniforms (or other work clothes) pose a significant hazard in terms of spreading infection”. So, on what basis did the Health Secretary make his recommendations? The working group resorted to “informed common sense”-a level of evidence just above guesswork.
What will be the effect of these new, possibly ineffectual, guidelines about short sleeves? Johnson’s guess is that they will help to ensure better washing of hands and wrists. The reforms do signal that the National Health Service is taking hospital-acquired infection seriously, especially because the public perceives that uniforms present an infection risk, according to the working group.
Johnson’s boss has also grasped the wrong end of the evidence stick. This week, UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown called for ward-by-ward cleaning in hospitals to stop the spread of infection. But disinfection of high-touch surfaces is what is needed, more so than removing visible dirt. The public understandably wants clean wards and crisp uniforms, but politicians must stop pandering to populism about hospital cleanliness and listen to the evidence. Brown also plans to double the number of hospital matrons, to check on ward cleaning, and accost doctors wearing long sleeves. They would be better employed making sure doctors, nurses, and visitors wash their hands properly, the proven way to stop hospital-acquired infections. The Lancet
Bookmark on delicious | Digg