ABSTRACT
Background@#As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is ongoing, heavy workload of healthcare workers (HCWs) is a concern. This study investigated the workload of HCWs responding to the COVID-19 outbreak in South Korea. @*Methods@#A nationwide cross-sectional survey was conducted from September 16 to October 15, 2020, involving 16 healthcare facilities (4 public medical centers, 12 tertiary-care hospitals) that provide treatment for COVID-19 patients. @*Results@#Public medical centers provided the majority (69.4%) of total hospital beds for COVID-19 patients (n = 611), on the other hand, tertiary care hospitals provided the majority (78.9%) of critical care beds (n = 57). The number of beds per doctor (median [IQR]) in public medical centers was higher than in tertiary care hospitals (20.2 [13.0, 29.4] versus 3.0 [1.3, 6.6], P = 0.006). Infectious Diseases physicians are mostly (80%) involved among attending physicians. The number of nurses per patient (median [interquartile range, IQR]) in tertiarycare hospitals was higher than in public medical centers (4.6 [3.4–5] vs. 1.1 [0.8–2.1], P =0.089). The median number of nurses per patient for COVID-19 patients was higher than the highest national standard in South Korea (3.8 vs. 2 for critical care). All participating healthcare facilities were also operating screening centers, for which a median of 2 doctors, 5 nurses, and 2 administrating staff were necessary. @*Conclusion@#As the severity of COVID-19 patients increases, the number of HCWs required increases. Because the workload of HCWs responding to the COVID-19 outbreak is much greater than other situations, a workforce management plan regarding this perspective is required to prevent burnout of HCWs.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: This study aimed to examine levels of stress and professionalism of nurses who provided nursing care during the 2015 Middle East respiratory syndrome outbreak based on their experience, to investigate the nurses' intention to respond to possible future outbreaks in relation to their experience during the outbreak, and to determine the relationship between the outbreak experience and nursing intention considering stress and professionalism. METHODS: A self-administered questionnairewas designed based on modifications of related questionnaires, and used to assess levels of stress, professionalism, and nursing intention according to participants' experiences during the outbreak. Multiple regression analysiswas used to examine the relationship between the outbreak nursing experience and nursing intention considering stress and nursing professionalism. RESULTS: The overall stress, professionalism, and nursing intention scores for the firsthand experience group were 33.72, 103.00, and 16.92, respectively, whereas those of the secondhand experience group were 32.25, 98.99, and 15.60, respectively. There were significant differences in professionalism and nursing intention scores between the groups (p = .001 and p < .001, respectively). The regression analysis revealed that the regression estimate between stress and nursing intention was B(SE) = −0.08(0.02), beta = −0.21, p < .001 and the regression estimate between professionalism in nursing and nursing intention was B(SE) = 0.05(0.01), beta = 0.23, p < .001. CONCLUSIONS: Prior outbreak nursing experience was importantly associated with intention to provide care for patients with a newly emerging infectious disease in the future considering stress and professionalism. Gathering information about nurses' experience of epidemics and regular assessment of job stress and professionalism are required.