A Prospective, Descriptive Study on Awake Self-prone in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients A Multidisciplinary Approach

Purpose/Aims Healthcare workers internationally continue to look for innovative ways to improve patient outcomes and optimize resource utilization during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Proning awake, nonintubated patients has been suggested as a potential intervention in critical care. The aim of this study is to provide a multidisciplinary approach to safely perform awake self-prone positioning in the acute care setting. Design This is a prospective, descriptive study. Method Patients with COVID-19 were screened and enrolled within 48 hours of a positive test. After approval from the primary team, patients were provided education materials by a multidisciplinary team on the self-prone intervention. Visual cues were placed in the room. Patients were requested to maintain a diary of hours of prone positioning. Patients' baseline characteristics, admission vitals, daily oxygen requirements, and level of care were collected. Results Of 203 patients screened, 31 were enrolled. No pressure-related injury or catheter (intravenous or urinary) displacement was identified. Eighty-one percent of patients spent less than 8 hours a day in prone positioning. Among patients enrolled, none required invasive ventilation or died. Conclusions Awake self-proning can be performed safely in patients given a diagnosis of COVID-19 in the acute care setting with a multidisciplinary team.

Elevated risk for obsessive-compulsive symptoms in women pregnant during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a public mental health crisis with many people experiencing new or worsening anxiety. Fear of contagion and the lack of predictability/control in daily life increased the risk for problems such as obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) in the general population. Pregnant women may be particularly vulnerable to such pandemic-related stressors yet the prevalence of OC symptoms in this population during the pandemic remains unknown. We examined the prevalence of OC symptoms in a sample of 4451 pregnant women in the USA, recruited via targeted online methods at the start of the pandemic. Participants completed self-report measures including the Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-Revised and the Pandemic-Related Pregnancy Stress Scale. Clinically significant OC symptoms were present in 7.12% of participants, more than twice as high as rates of peripartum OCD reported prior to the pandemic. Younger maternal age, income loss, and suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection were all associated with higher OC symptoms. Two types of pregnancy-specific stress, pandemic-related and pandemic-unrelated, were both associated with higher levels of OC symptoms. Pandemic-related pregnancy stress predicted OC symptoms even after controlling for non-pandemic-related, pregnancy-specific stress. Elevated rates of OC symptoms were observed in women pregnant during the pandemic, particularly those experiencing elevated pandemic-related pregnancy stress. This type of stress confers a distinct risk for OC symptoms above and beyond pregnancy-specific stress and demographic factors. Healthcare providers should be prepared to see and treat more peripartum women with OC symptoms during this and future public health crises.

The disaster worker resiliency training program: a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: Disaster workers are at elevated risk for mental health problems as a result of trauma exposures during response efforts. One possible way to prevent mental health problems is to build-up coping resources that promote resilience to the effects of disaster work. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a resilience building workshop, the Disaster Worker Resiliency Training Program (DWRT), in disaster workers previously exposed to Hurricane Sandy. METHODS: Disaster workers (N = 167) were randomly assigned to the DWRT workshop (n = 78) or a waitlist (n = 89). Workers completed self-report measures on healthy lifestyle behaviors, perceived stress, depression, and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) symptoms at baseline and 3-month follow-up. They also completed a measure assessing subsequent trauma-exposure between the baseline and 3-month post-intervention. RESULTS: Participants in the workshop condition, as compared to those in a waitlist control, reported significantly greater improvements from pre-intervention (T1) to 3-month follow-up (T2) in healthy lifestyle behaviors (η2 = .03; p = .03), stress management (η2 = .03, p = .04), and spiritual growth (η2 = .03, p = .02). Among participants reporting subsequent trauma exposures between T1 and T2  (n = 101), participants in the waitlist condition, were more likely to report significant increases in perceived stress (η2 = .07, p < .01), PTSD (η2 = .05, p = .03), and depression (η2 = .07, p < .01) symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Participation in the resilience workshop promoted engagement in positive health behaviors and reduced the incidence of mental health symptoms, especially when administered prior to a repeat trauma exposure. Further research is needed to evaluate the long-term health effects of participation in the program.