Jennifer Scott

Dr. Jennifer Scott

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

30Years (1997-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 November 2009 in British Journal of General Practice
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
FFFiona Fox
Fiona Fox
MHMichael Harris
Michael Harris
GTGordon Taylor
Gordon Taylor
KRKaren Rodham
Karen Rodham
JSJane Sutton
Jane Sutton
JSJennifer Scott
Jennifer Scott
Background Current evidence about the experiences of doctors who are unwell is limited to poor quality data. Aim To investigate GPs9 experiences of significant illness, and how this affects their own subsequent practice. Design of study Qualitative study using interpretative phenomenological analysis to conduct and analyse semi-structured interviews with GPs who have experienced significant illness. Setting Two primary care trusts in the West of England. Method A total of 17 GPs were recruited to take part in semi-structured interviews which were conducted and analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis Results Four main categories emerged from the data. The category, ‘Who cares when doctors are ill?’ embodies the tension between perceptions of medicine as a ‘caring profession’ and as a ‘system’. ‘Being a doctor–patient’ covers the role ambiguity experienced by doctors who experience significant illness. The category ‘Treating doctor–patients’ reveals the fragility of negotiating shared medical care. ‘Impact on practice’ highlights ways in which personal illness can inform GPs9 understanding of being a patient and their own consultation style. Conclusion Challenging the culture of immunity to illness among GPs may require interventions at both individual and organisational levels. Training and development of doctors should include opportunities to consider personal health issues as well as how to cope with role ambiguity when being a patient and when treating doctor–patients. Guidelines about being and treating doctor–patients need to be developed, and GPs need easy access to an occupational health service.

26 October 2009 in Family Practice
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RHRachel J Hobson
Rachel J Hobson
JSJennifer Scott
Jennifer Scott
JSJane Sutton
Jane Sutton
Background. Little is known about patients’ opinions upon the development of non-medical prescribing (NMP). Objective. To explore the opinions of patients on the development of NMP. Methods. In-depth interviews using qualitative methodology (Interpretative Phenomological Analysis). Eighteen interviews were undertaken in Bristol (Sites 1 and 3), Swindon (Site 2) and Brighton (Site 4). [Site 1 = primary care, GP prescriber (n = 5), Site 2 = secondary care, consultant prescriber (n = 5), Site 3 = primary care (n = 5) and Site 4 = secondary care (n = 3) (both pharmacist supplementary prescribers.] Participants (n = 18) were randomly sampled from patients under the care of the participating prescriber. Participants were aged between 42 and 81 years of age (n = 11 male and n = 7 female). Interviews took place between January and August 2006. Results. Participants expressed concerns about clinical governance, privacy and whether sufficient space were available to provide the service in community pharmacies. Participants acknowledged the expert drug knowledge of pharmacists and their accessibility. These factors enhanced acceptability of this role for pharmacists. Nurses were highly regarded, accepted and preferred as prescribers with few concerns. Conclusions. The results indicate support for pharmacists and nurses as prescribers, which aid successful implementation. Further research may be needed to evaluate the level of understanding that the public has of NMP and their views of the service once NMP is more widely established. Stakeholders should be mindful that the public may be hesitant regarding the professionalism, quality and clinical governance standards of clinics in community pharmacies in particular.

1 February 2019 in Social Science & Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
LMLaura Medina-Perucha
Laura Medina-Perucha
JSJennifer Scott
Jennifer Scott
SCSarah Chapman
Sarah Chapman
JBJulie Barnett
Julie Barnett
CDCharlotte Dack
Charlotte Dack
HFHannah Family
Hannah Family
Women on opioid substitution treatment (WOST) are at high risk for sexually transmitted infections and blood-borne viruses (HIV, Hepatitis B and C). This heightened risk is rooted in social and health inequities. Experiencing stigma is considered to have an important role in maintaining these inequities and is a barrier to promoting sexual health. The aims of this study were to examine (1) the experiences of stigma of WOST, and (2) how experiencing stigma may influence WOST' sexual health. Twenty semi-structured interviews with WOST were conducted between October 2016 and April 2017 in South West England (UK). Data were analysed using Framework Analysis. Women's narratives highlighted the intersection of stigma associated with distinct elements of women's identities: (1) female gender, (2) drug use, (3) transactional sex, (4) homelessness, and (5) sexual health status. Intersectionality theory and social identity theory are used to explain sexual health risks and disengagement from (sexual) health services among WOST. Intersectional stigma was related to a lack of female and male condom use and a lack of access to (sexual) health services. The approach taken goes beyond individualistic approaches of health promotion and provides suggestions to improve future research, policy and practice. It identifies stigma as a crucial element to address when promoting sexual health among WOST. Importantly, this study focuses on tackling social and health inequities and in doing so advocates for human and women's rights.

14 July 2020 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TWTalen Wright
Talen Wright
VHVivian Hope
Vivian Hope
DCDaniel Ciccarone
Daniel Ciccarone
DLDan Lewer
Dan Lewer
JSJennifer Scott
Jennifer Scott
MHMagdalena Harris
Magdalena Harris
Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI) are a common but preventable cause of morbidity and mortality among people who inject drugs (PWID). They can be severe, and hospitalisations of PWID with SSTI are rising. The most common SSTI presentations are abscesses and cellulitis. We used data from Care & Prevent, a cross-sectional community survey of PWID in London. We reported the lifetime prevalence of SSTI, severity of infections, key risk factors, and associated sequelae. Pictorial questions were used to assess SSTI severity. We recruited 455 PWID. SSTI lifetime prevalence was high: 64% reported an abscess and/or cellulitis. Over one-third (37%) reported a severe infection, 137 (47%) reported hospitalisation. SSTIrisk factors were: aged 35+ years, injecting once or more times a day, subcutaneous or intra-muscular injections, and making four or more attempts to achieve an injection. Those who reported having other health conditions were at higher odds of having an abscess or cellulitis, with risk tending to increase with number of reported conditions. Half (46%) employed self-care for their worst SSTI, and 43% waited for ten or more days before seeking medical care or not seeking medical care at all. Abscess and cellulitis are very common among PWID in London. We corroborate findings indicating SSTIs are associated with risks, e.g. venous access problems, as well as other co-morbid conditions: septicaemia, endocarditis, DVT, and kidney disease. These co-morbidities may impact SSTIs severity and outcomes. Delayed healthcare seeking potentially exacerbates infection severity, which in turn increases poorer health outcomes and complications.

15 April 2005 in Harm Reduction Journal
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JMJohn Maliphant
John Maliphant
JSJennifer Scott
Jennifer Scott
Background: Use of the femoral vein for intravenous access by injecting drug users (IDUs) (commonly called 'groin injecting') is a practice that is often observed but on which little is written in the literature. The purpose of this study was to describe self-reported data from a sample of groin injectors on the natural history and rationale regarding their groin injecting, to inform future research and the development of appropriate harm reduction strategies. Methods: A convenience sample of groin injectors willing to participate in a semi-structured interview were recruited through the Bristol Drugs Project Harm Reduction Service. The interviews were conducted over the period of one week. Data on transition to groin injecting, rationale for use and incidence of problems were collected. Results: Forty seven IDUs currently injecting in their femoral vein ('groin') were interviewed, 66% (n = 31) male and 34% (n = 16) female. Their mean age was 31 yrs (range 17 to 50 yrs; SD = 7.7). The mean length of time since first injecting episode was 9.6 yrs (range 6 mths to 30 yrs; SD = 7.0). The mean length of time since use of the groin began was 2.6 years (range 1 mth to 15 yrs; SD = 3.3). The mean length of time between first injection and first use of the groin was 7.0 yrs (SD = 7.0). One person had used no other area for venous access prior to using the groin, nine people had used one, nine people had used two, 10 people had used three, five people had used four and 13 people had used more than four areas. The main reason given for starting to inject in the groin was that 'no other sites were left'. However further discussion identified this meant no other convenient sites were accessible. Practises such as the rotation of injecting sites, as advocated in many harm reduction leaflets, were reported to be difficult and unreliable. The risk of missing the vein and subsequently losing the 'hit' was considered high. Use of the non-dominant hand to administer injections was problematic and deterred rotation between arms. The groin site was reported to be convenient, provide quick access, with little mess and less pain than smaller more awkward veins. The formation of sinuses over time facilitated continued use of the groin. Approximately two thirds of participants had experienced difficulty gaining IV access at their groin. Common problem included scar tissue occlusion, swelling and pain. Some reported infections and past history of deep vein thrombosis. Conclusion: Use of the groin was perceived to be convenient by the study group. Problems following safer injecting advice were identified, including dexterity difficulties leading to fear of losing the 'hit'. Health problems at the groin site did not deter use. These results suggest further qualitative work is needed to explore the difficulties in following safer injecting advice in more detail and inform the development of more appropriate advice. Further quantitative work is necessary to establish the prevalence of groin injecting amongst IDUs and the incidence of associated problems. There is a need for a longitudinal study to examine the relationship between injecting technique and loss of patency of veins. If protective factors could be identified, evidence-based safer injecting advice could be established to preserve peripheral veins and reduce use of the groin site, which is high risk and associated with serious adverse consequences.

20 October 2009 in Qualitative Health Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
FFFiona E. Fox
Fiona E. Fox
KRKaren J. Rodham
Karen J. Rodham
MHMichael F. Harris
Michael F. Harris
GTGordon J. Taylor
Gordon J. Taylor
JSJane Sutton
Jane Sutton
BRBrian Robinson
Brian Robinson
Work-related pressures and susceptibility to health problems mean that many general practitioners (GPs) will, at some stage, experience the role of patient. However qualitative evidence about their experiences of illness and patienthood is sparse. Our study offers an interpretative perspective on GPs’ experiences of illness and the influence that this has had on their practice. Seventeen GPs who had experienced significant illness took part in semistructured interviews. Data were analyzed using interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA). The findings highlight the relationship between empathy and empowerment and explore the role of self-disclosure of GP status by GPs in consultations. We make suggestions as to how empathy in doctor—patient relationships can be developed through consideration of power and status as well as through interaction with patients from similar backgrounds. Future research should focus on more specific ways to integrate these ideas into medical training.