ABSTRACT
Outcomes 1. Describe the challenges faced by HPM clinicians navigating mental illness 2. Identify effective strategies for navigating mental illness as an HPM clinician and for supporting colleagues facing mental health challenges 3. Reflect on the opportunities afforded by the experience of mental illness to influence one's practice as a clinician, educator, and colleague Although burnout, wellness, and resilience are well-described topics in the HPM community, mental illness and its impact are underrecognized and remain stigmatized. This forum brings together palliative care physicians who have faced mental illness and reflected carefully on how the experience has affected their practice. During the session, clinicians will share their personal and professional experiences, highlighting challenges, helpful strategies, and opportunities for a pathway forward. There is growing societal awareness of the mental health crisis among healthcare workers, catalyzed in part by the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition to the stigma and poor access to care faced by most people with mental illness, healthcare workers face concerns about transparency in the workplace, job security, and licensing as they seek evaluation and treatment. Palliative care practice is challenging even in times of emotional stability and presents unique work-related mental health threats and opportunities. Clinicians support patients and families struggling with crises and difficult emotions, often at the intersection of life and death. This close proximity to death heightens the awareness of the shared vicissitudes of life, serving as both an opportunity for transformation and a professional hazard. As mental illness is a biopsychosocial process, treatment often requires a multidimensional approach. Individuals, teams, extended support networks, and the field of palliative care can employ physical, emotional, practical, spiritual, and social approaches to management and healing. Additionally, despite the many challenges, positive reflections and unexpected opportunities may arise as clinicians navigate mental health concerns. Vulnerability can foster strength in our shared experiences and empathy in our work. Ultimately, these experiences may help us grow in our roles as clinicians and educators. This session aims to build community, model how clinicians can navigate care, and expand the dialogue about mental illness among palliative care professionals.
ABSTRACT
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic presents a continued public health challenge across the world. Veterinary diagnostic laboratories in the U.S. use real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) for animal testing, and many are certified for testing human samples, so ensuring laboratories have sensitive and specific SARS-CoV-2 testing methods is a critical component of the pandemic response. In 2020, the FDA Veterinary Laboratory Investigation and Response Network (Vet-LIRN) led the first round of an Inter-Laboratory Comparison (ILC) Exercise to help laboratories evaluate their existing real-time RT-PCR methods for detecting SARS-CoV-2. The ILC1 results indicated that all participating laboratories were able to detect the viral RNA spiked in buffer and PrimeStore molecular transport medium (MTM). The current ILC (ILC2) aimed to extend ILC1 by evaluating analytical sensitivity and specificity of the methods used by participating laboratories to detect three SARS-CoV-2 variants (B.1, B.1.1.7 (Alpha) and B.1.351 (Beta)). ILC2 samples were prepared with RNA at levels between 10 to 10,000 copies per 50 μL MTM. Fifty-seven sets of results from 45 laboratories were qualitatively and quantitatively analyzed according to the principles of ISO 16140-2:2016. The results showed that over 95% of analysts detected the SARS-CoV-2 RNA in MTM at 500 copies or higher for all three variants. In addition, 81% and 92% of the analysts achieved a Level of Detection (LOD95 eff. vol. ) below 20 copies in the assays with nucleocapsid markers N1 and N2, respectively. The analytical specificity of the evaluated methods was over 99%. The study allowed participating laboratories to assess their current method performance, identify possible limitations, and recognize method strengths as part of a continuous learning environment to support the critical need for reliable diagnosis of COVID-19 in potentially infected animals and humans.