ABSTRACT
Background: Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) exposed health personnel worldwide to high stress levels, which increases the phenomenon of burnout. Aim: To evaluate burnout, its risk, and protective factors in our health team, which has been exposed for months to greater work stress and changes in their usual tasks due to the pandemic. Material and Methods: An online survey including the Maslach Burnout Inventory Human Services Survey (MBI-HSS) and sociodemographic questions, was carried out among health care personnel who continued working during the pandemic. Results: A total of 209 surveys were obtained. Seventy six percent of respondents presented some degree of burnout in the time of the pandemic. Only one protective factor was observed: living with one or more children at home (Odds ratio (OR) 0.21, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.05 - 0.87; p = 0.03). Having night shifts (OR 2.72, 95% CI 1.02 - 7.28; p = 0.04), having more than six years in the workplace (OR 3.58, 95% CI 1.18 - 10.8; p = 0.023) and maintaining a regular or poor diet during the pandemic (OR 4.52, 95% CI 1.51-13.48; p < 0.01) were identified as risk factors. Conclusions: A high incidence of burnout was observed in the surveyed population. Living with one or more children in the home stands out as a protective factor and working night shifts, having more than 6 years in the workplace, and maintaining a poor diet as risk factors.
ABSTRACT
Background: Benzodiazepines are used for perioperative conscious sedation. However, its use may be associated with paradoxical reactions. The known risk factors for these reactions are age, alcohol and drug abuse and psychiatric disorders. Aim: To assess the incidence and impact of risk factors of paradoxical reactions to midazolam. Material and Methods: Cross sectional study of 218 patients aged 50 ± 16 years (51% women) scheduled for elective surgical procedures under regional anesthesia and midazolam sedation. The paradoxical reactions were classified according to their severity in three categories. Results: The incidence of paradoxical reactions to midazolam was 8.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 5.0-12.7). All were mild and only 28% of the affected patients required pharmacological treatment, none of them flumazenil. A multivariable logistic regression model showed that the variables independently associated with a paradoxical reaction to midazolam were the use of psychoactive medications (Odds Ratio (OR) = 3.4 [1.1-11], p = 0.04, and the dose of midazolam (OR 1.35 [1.03-1.78], p = 0.03. Conclusions: The incidence of paradoxical reactions to midazolam was 8,3% and all were mild. Their risk factors are the use of psychoactive medications and the use of higher doses of midazolam.