Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
SSM Qual Res Health ; 2: 100110, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1946630

ABSTRACT

From the adoption of mask-wearing in public settings to the omnipresence of hand-sanitising, the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has brought unprecedented cultural attention to infection prevention and control (IPC) in everyday life. At the same time, the pandemic threat has enlivened and unsettled hospital IPC processes, fracturing confidence, demanding new forms of evidence, and ultimately involving a rapid reassembling of what constitutes safe care. Here, drawing on semi-structured interviews with 63 frontline healthcare workers from two states in Australia, interviewed between September 2020 and March 2021, we illuminate some of the affective dimensions of IPC at a time of rapid change and evolving uncertainty. We track how a collective sense of risk and safety is relationally produced, redefining attitudes and practices around infective risk, and transforming accepted paradigms of care and self-protection. Drawing on Puig de la Bellacasa's formulation, we propose the notion of IPC as a multidimensional matter of care. Highlighting the complex negotiation of space and time in relation to infection control and care illustrates a series of paradoxes, the understanding of which helps illuminate not only how IPC works, in practice, but also what it means to those working on the frontline of the pandemic.

2.
Heart Lung Circ ; 31(7): 924-933, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1773346

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus is likely to remain endemic globally despite widespread vaccination. There is increasing concern for myocardial involvement and ensuing cardiac complications due to COVID-19, however, the available evidence suggests these risks are low. Pandemic publishing has resulted in rapid manuscript availability though pre-print servers. Subsequent article retractions, a lack of standardised definitions, over-reliance on isolated troponin elevation and the heterogeneity of studied patient groups (i.e. severe vs. symptomatic vs all infections) resulted in early concern for high rates of myocarditis in patients with and recovering from COVID-19. The estimated incidence of myocarditis in COVID-19 infection is 11 cases per 100,000 infections compared with an estimated 2.7 cases per 100,000 persons following mRNA vaccination. For substantiated cases, the clinical course of myocarditis related to COVID-19 or mRNA vaccination appears mild and self-limiting, with reports of severe/fulminant myocarditis being rare. There is limited data available on the management of myocarditis in these settings. Clinical guidance for appropriate use of cardiac investigations and monitoring in COVID-19 is needed for effective risk stratification and efficient use of cardiac resources in Australia. An amalgamation of national and international position statements and guidelines is helpful for guiding clinical practice. This paper reviews the current available evidence and guidelines and provides a summary of the risks and potential use of cardiac investigations and monitoring for patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Heart Diseases , Myocarditis , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Myocarditis/epidemiology , Myocarditis/etiology , RNA, Messenger , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination
3.
Infect Dis Health ; 27(2): 71-80, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1531344

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has challenged health systems globally. A key controversy has been how to protect healthcare workers (HCWs) using personal protective equipment (PPE). METHODS: Interviews were performed with 63 HCWs across two states in Australia to explore their experiences of PPE during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Thematic analysis was performed. RESULTS: Four themes were identified with respect to HCWs' experience of pandemic PPE: 1. Risk, fear and uncertainty: HCWs experienced considerable fear and heightened personal and professional risk, reporting anxiety about the adequacy of PPE and the resultant risk to themselves and their families. 2. Evidence and the ambiguities of evolving guidelines: forms of evidence, its interpretation, and the perception of rapidly changing guidelines heightened distress amongst HCWs. 3. Trust and care: Access to PPE signified organisational support and care, and restrictions on PPE use were considered a breach of trust. 4. Non-compliant practice in the context of social upheaval: despite communication of evidence-based guidelines, an environment of mistrust, personal risk, and organisational uncertainty resulted in variable compliance. CONCLUSION: PPE preferences and usage offer a material signifier of the broader, evolving pandemic context, reflecting HCWs' fear, mistrust, sense of inequity and social solidarity (or breakdown). PPE therefore represents the affective (emotional) demands of professional care, as well as a technical challenge of infection prevention and control. If rationing of PPE is necessary, policymakers need to take account of how HCWs will perceive restrictions or conflicting recommendations and build trust through effective communication (including of uncertainty).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Personal Protective Equipment , Australia , COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Health Place ; 72: 102693, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1458860

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to highlight both global interconnectedness and schisms across place, context and peoples. While countries such as Australia have securitised their borders in response to the global spread of disease, flows of information and collective affect continue to permeate these boundaries. Drawing on interviews with Australian healthcare workers, we examine how their experiences of the pandemic are shaped by affect and evidence 'traveling' across time and space. Our analysis points to the limitations of global health crisis responses that focus solely on material risk and spatial separation. Institutional responses must, we suggest, also consider the affective and discursive dimensions of health-related risk environments.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Australia/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care , Health Personnel , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
5.
Infect Dis Health ; 25(3): 210-215, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-324594

ABSTRACT

Since December 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has infected over four million people worldwide. There are multiple reports of prolonged viral shedding in people infected with SARS-CoV-2 but the presence of viral RNA on a test does not necessarily correlate with infectivity. The duration of quarantine required after clinical recovery to definitively prevent transmission is therefore uncertain. In addition, asymptomatic and presymptomatic transmission may occur, and infectivity may be highest early after onset of symptoms, meaning that contact tracing, isolation of exposed individuals and social distancing are essential public health measures to prevent further spread. This review aimed to summarise the evidence around viral shedding vs infectivity of SARS-CoV-2.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , Coronavirus Infections/etiology , Pneumonia, Viral/etiology , Virus Shedding , Asymptomatic Infections , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Humans , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Public Health , SARS-CoV-2 , Viral Load
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL