ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In March 2020 we faced a huge spread of the epidemic of SARS-CoV2 in northern Italy; the Emergency Departments (ED) and the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) were overwhelmed by patients requiring care. The hospitals were forced to reorganize their services, and the ED was the focal point of this challenge. As Emergency Department in a metropolitan area of the region most affected, we saw an increasing number of patients with COVID-19, and we made some structural and staff implementations according to the evolution of the epidemic. METHODS: We analysed in a narrative way the weaknesses and the point of strength of our response to COVID-19 first outbreak, focusing point by point on main challenges and minor details involved in our ED response to the pandemics. RESULTS: The main stems for our response to the pandemic were: use of clear and shared contingency plans, as long as preparedness to implement them; stockage of as much as useful material can be stocked; training of the personnel to be prepared for a fast response, trying to maintain divided pathway for COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients, well-done isolation is a key factor; preparedness to de-escalate as soon as needed. CONCLUSIONS: We evaluated our experience and analysed the weakness and strength of our first response to share it with the rest of the scientific community and colleagues worldwide, hoping to facilitate others who will face the same challenge or similar challenges in the future. Shared experience is the best way to learn and to avoid making the same mistakes.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Hospitals, University/organization & administration , Urban Health Services/organization & administration , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Italy/epidemiologyABSTRACT
Objective: to evaluate the quality of life of healthcare professionals tested for covid-19 in a polyclinic in the state of Rio de Janeiro. Method: cross-sectional study with 476 health professionals who underwent covid-19 testing from March to July 2020. A World Health Organization sociodemographic and quality of life questionnaire was applied. Scores for each domain were transformed into a 0-100 scale;higher means suggested better perceived quality of life. Results: the most compromised domain was the environment (related to home environment, financial resources, leisure, environment) and the physical domain was the least compromised (related to pain, discomfort, energy, mobility, activity). Conclusion: it is emphasized that post covid-19 healthcare professionals need a thorough look at their quality of life, since they are more prone to negative outcomes by acting in the pandemic, with impact mainly on leisure, pain, discomfort, among others. © 2021, Universidade Federal do Parana 1. All rights reserved.