Work climate in emergency health services during COVID-19 pandemic-An international multicenter study.

Introduction: A good working climate increases the chances of adequate care. The employees of Emergency in Hospitals are particularly exposed to work-related stress. Support from management is very important in order to avoid stressful situations and conflicts that are not conducive to good work organization. The aim of the study was to assess the work climate of Emergency Health Services during COVID-19 Pandemic using the Abridged Version of the Work Climate Scale in Emergency Health Services. Design: A prospective descriptive international study was conducted. Methods: The 24-item Abridged Version of the Work Climate Scale in Emergency Health Services was used for the study. The questionnaire was posted on the internet portal of scientific societies. In the study participated 217 women (74.5%) and 74 men (25.4%). The age of the respondents ranged from 23 to 60 years (SD = 8.62). Among the re-spondents, the largest group were Emergency technicians (85.57%), followed by nurses (9.62%), doctors (2.75%) and Service assistants (2.06%). The study was conducted in 14 countries. Results: The study of the climate at work shows that countries have different priorities at work, but not all of them. By answering the research questions one by one, we can say that the average climate score at work was 33.41 min 27.0 and max 36.0 (SD = 1.52). Conclusion: The working climate depends on many factors such as interpersonal relationships, remuneration or the will to achieve the same selector. In the absence of any of the elements, a proper working climate is not possible.

Work climate in emergency health services during COVID-19 pandemic—An international multicenter study

Introduction A good working climate increases the chances of adequate care. The employees of Emergency in Hospitals are particularly exposed to work-related stress. Support from management is very important in order to avoid stressful situations and conflicts that are not conducive to good work organization. The aim of the study was to assess the work climate of Emergency Health Services during COVID-19 Pandemic using the Abridged Version of the Work Climate Scale in Emergency Health Services. Design A prospective descriptive international study was conducted. Methods The 24-item Abridged Version of the Work Climate Scale in Emergency Health Services was used for the study. The questionnaire was posted on the internet portal of scientific societies. In the study participated 217 women (74.5%) and 74 men (25.4%). The age of the respondents ranged from 23 to 60 years (SD = 8.62). Among the re-spondents, the largest group were Emergency technicians (85.57%), followed by nurses (9.62%), doctors (2.75%) and Service assistants (2.06%). The study was conducted in 14 countries. Results The study of the climate at work shows that countries have different priorities at work, but not all of them. By answering the research questions one by one, we can say that the average climate score at work was 33.41 min 27.0 and max 36.0 (SD = 1.52). Conclusion The working climate depends on many factors such as interpersonal relationships, remuneration or the will to achieve the same selector. In the absence of any of the elements, a proper working climate is not possible.

The Perception of the Patient Safety Climate by Health Professionals during the COVID-19 Pandemic-International Research.

The patient safety climate is a key element of quality in healthcare. It should be a priority in the healthcare systems of all countries in the world. The goal of patient safety programs is to prevent errors and reduce the potential harm to patients when using healthcare services. A safety climate is also necessary to ensure a safe working environment for healthcare professionals. The attitudes of healthcare workers toward patient safety in various aspects of work, organization and functioning of the ward are important elements of the organization's safety culture. The aim of this study was to determine the perception of the patient safety climate by healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The study was conducted in five European countries. The Safety Attitude Questionnaire (SAQ) short version was used for the study. A total of 1061 healthcare workers: physicians, nurses and paramedics, participated in this study. RESULTS: All groups received the highest mean results on the stress recognition subscale (SR): nurses 98.77, paramedics 96.39 and physician 98.28. Nurses and physicians evaluated work conditions (WC) to be the lowest (47.19 and 44.99), while paramedics evaluated perceptions of management (PM) as the worst (46.44). Paramedics achieved statistically significantly lower scores compared to nurses and physicians in job satisfaction (JS), stress recognition (SR) and perception of management (PM) (p < 0.0001). Paramedics compared to nurses and physicians rank better in working conditions (WC) in relation to patient safety (16.21%). Most often, persons of lower seniority scored higher in all subscales (p = 0.001). In Poland, Spain, France, Turkey, and Greece, healthcare workers scored highest in stress recognition (SR). In Poland, Spain, France, and Turkey, they assessed working conditions (WC) as the worst, while in Greece, the perception of management (PM) had the lowest result. CONCLUSION: Participant perceptions about the patient safety climate were not at a particularly satisfactory level, and there is still a need for the development of patient safety culture in healthcare in Europe. Overall, positive working conditions, good management and effective teamwork can contribute to improving employees' attitudes toward patient safety. This study was carried out during the COVID-19 pandemic and should be repeated after its completion, and comparative studies will allow for a more precise determination of the safety climate in the assessment of employees.

Residual clinical damage after COVID-19: A retrospective and prospective observational cohort study.

Data on residual clinical damage after Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) are lacking. The aims of this study were to investigate whether COVID-19 leaves behind residual dysfunction, and identify patients who might benefit from post-discharge monitoring. All patients aged ≥18 years admitted to the Emergency Department (ED) for COVID-19, and evaluated at post-discharge follow-up between 7 April and 7 May, 2020, were enrolled. Primary outcome was need of follow-up, defined as the presence at follow-up of at least one among: respiratory rate (RR) >20 breaths/min, uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) requiring therapeutic change, moderate to very severe dyspnoea, malnutrition, or new-onset cognitive impairment, according to validated scores. Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) served as secondary outcome. 185 patients were included. Median [interquartile range] time from hospital discharge to follow-up was 23 [20-29] days. 109 (58.9%) patients needed follow-up. At follow-up evaluation, 58 (31.3%) patients were dyspnoeic, 41 (22.2%) tachypnoeic, 10 (5.4%) malnourished, 106 (57.3%) at risk for malnutrition. Forty (21.6%) patients had uncontrolled BP requiring therapeutic change, and 47 (25.4%) new-onset cognitive impairment. PTSD was observed in 41 (22.2%) patients. At regression tree analysis, the ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) and body mass index (BMI) at ED presentation, and age emerged as independent predictors of the need of follow-up. Patients with PaO2/FiO2 <324 and BMI ≥33 Kg/m2 had the highest odds to require follow-up. Among hospitalised patients, age ≥63 years, or age <63 plus non-invasive ventilation or diabetes identified those with the highest probability to need follow-up. PTSD was independently predicted by female gender and hospitalisation, the latter being protective (odds ratio, OR, 4.03, 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.76 to 9.47, p 0.0011; OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.92, p 0.033, respectively). COVID-19 leaves behind physical and psychological dysfunctions. Follow-up programmes should be implemented for selected patients.

Post-COVID-19 follow-up clinic: depicting chronicity of a new disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE WORK: The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) outbreak is posing considerable challenges to healthcare systems and societies worldwide. While the knowledge on the acute phase of the disease has rapidly expanded, little is known on the consequences of COVID-19 following clinical remission. We set up a multidisciplinary COVID-19 follow-up outpatient clinic to identify and address the clinical needs of COVID-19 survivors. Here we describe the features of our follow-up programme. METHODS: The multidisciplinary assessment comprises a complete physical examination, respiratory evaluation (peripheral oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, dyspnoea assessment, lung ultrasound and pulmonary function), cardiovascular assessment (electrocardiography, echocardiography), nutritional assessment (anthropometrics, mini Nutritional Assessment screening tool), neurological examination including cognitive tests, and mental health assessment. All data are prospectively collected, and blood is sampled for biobanking. RESULTS: Since 7 April to 5 June, 2020, 453 out of the 1388 COVID-19 survivors managed at our University Hospital have been evaluated at the Outpatient COVID-19 Follow-up Clinic. The characteristics of the follow-up cohort are similar to those of the whole cohort of COVID-19 in terms of demographics, comorbidities, and COVID-19 severity upon ED presentation, indicating that the follow-up cohort is representative of the whole cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous patient monitoring might give an answer to the numerous unsolved questions about what comes next in this pandemic and beyond. This will help physicians and researchers establish strategies to face future pandemics and develop preventative and therapeutic strategies for similar hyperinflammatory conditions.

[Covid-19 in patients on dialysis: infection prevention and control strategies]

Covid-19 is a disease caused by a new coronavirus presenting a variability of flu-like symptoms including fever, cough, myalgia and fatigue;in severe cases, patients develop pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, sepsis and septic shock, that can result in their death. This infection, which was declared a global epidemic by the World Health Organization, is particularly dangerous for dialysis patients, as they are frail and more vulnerable to infections due to the overlap of multiple pathologies. In patients with full-blown symptoms, there is a renal impairment of various degrees in 100% of the subjects observed. However, as Covid-19 is an emerging disease, more work is needed to improve prevention, diagnosis and treatment strategies. It is essential to avoid nosocomial spread;in order to control and reduce the rate of infections it is necessary to strengthen the management of medical and nursing personnel through the early diagnosis, isolation and treatment of patients undergoing dialysis treatment. We cover here a series of recommendations for the treatment of dialysis patients who are negative to the virus, and of those who are suspected or confirmed positive.