Healthcare workers use of psychological support resources during COVID-19; a mixed methods approach utilising Pillar Integration Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to examine healthcare workers (HCWs) utilisation of formal and informal psychological support resources in the workplace during the first and third waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ireland. METHODS: A convergent mixed methods approach was undertaken. Four hundred and thirty HCWs in the Mid West and South of Ireland responded to an online survey in terms of their use of psychological support resources during Wave 1 (April/May 2020) of COVID-19. Thirty-nine HCWs undertook in depth interviews at Wave 3 (January/February 2021), and a further quantitative survey was distributed and completed by 278 HCWs at this time. Quantitative data arising at Wave 1 and Wave 3, were synthesised with Qualitative data collected at Wave 3. A Pillar Integration Process (PIP) was utilised in the analysis of the quantitative and qualitative data. RESULTS: Five pillars were identified from the integration of results. These were: a) the primacy of peer support, b) the importance of psychologically informed management, c) a need to develop the organisational well-being ethos, d) support for all HCWs, and e) HCWs ideas for developing the well-being path. These pillars encapsulated a strong emphasis on collegial support, an emphasis on the need to support managers, a questioning of the current supports provided within the healthcare organisations and critical reflections on what HCWs viewed as most helpful for their future support needs. CONCLUSIONS: HCWs who utilised supportive resources indicated 'in house' supports, primarily collegial resources, were the most frequently used and perceived as most helpful. While formal psychological supports were important, the mechanism by which such psychological support is made available, through utilising peer support structures and moving towards psychologically informed supervisors and workplaces is likely to be more sustainable and perceived more positively by HCWs.

An investigation of psychological responses to COVID-19 in Irish healthcare workers: longitudinal quantitative and nested qualitative study.

COVID-19 is an unprecedent occurrence in modern times and individuals who work within healthcare settings, face a broad array of challenges in responding to this worldwide event. Key information on the psychosocial responses of such healthcare workers (HCWs) in the context of COVID-19 is limited and in particular there is a need for studies that utilise longitudinal methods, an overarching theoretical model, and use of a cohort of participants within a defined geographical area across acute and community settings. The work packages making up the current research project use quantitative and qualitative methods to examine the psychological sequelae for HCWs in the context of COVID-19 in geographically adjacent healthcare areas (South and Mid-West of Ireland) across four time points (induction, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year follow-up). The quantitative arm of the project (WP 1) utilises the Common-Sense Model of Self-Regulation (CSM-SR) and examines a number of key psychological factors pertinent to this model including perceptions about COVID-19 and infection more generally, coping, formal and informal support and a number of impact variables including mood, sleep quality, and perceptions of stigma. The qualitative study (WP 2) will address HCWs experiences of working during the pandemic, ascertain any additional areas of psychological functioning, environmental and workplace factors and resources that may be utilised by HCWs and that are not assessed by the quantitative study protocol, focusing particularly on those staff groups typically underrepresented in previous studies.

Seroprevalence study of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in healthcare workers following the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in a tertiary-level hospital in the south of Ireland.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG antibodies, using the Abbott antinucleocapsid IgG chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA) assay, in five prespecified healthcare worker (HCW) subgroups following the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. SETTING: An 800-bed tertiary-level teaching hospital in the south of Ireland. PARTICIPANTS: Serum was collected for anti-SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid IgG using the Abbott ARCHITECT SARS-CoV-2 IgG CMIA qualitative assay, as per the manufacturer's specifications.The groups were as follows: (1) HCWs who had real-time PCR (RT-PCR) confirmed COVID-19 infection (>1-month postpositive RT-PCR); (2) HCWs identified as close contacts of persons with COVID-19 infection and who subsequently developed symptoms (virus not detected by RT-PCR on oropharyngeal/nasopharyngeal swab); (3) HCWs identified as close contacts of COVID-19 cases and who remained asymptomatic (not screened by RT-PCR); (4) HCWs not included in the aforementioned groups working in areas determined as high-risk clinical areas; and (5) HCWs not included in the aforementioned groups working in areas determined as low-risk clinical areas. RESULTS: Six of 404 (1.49%) HCWs not previously diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection (groups 2-5) were seropositive for SARS-CoV-2 at the time of recruitment into the study.Out of the 99 participants in group 1, 72 had detectable IgG to SARS-CoV-2 on laboratory testing (73%). Antibody positivity correlated with shorter length of time between RT-PCR positivity and antibody testing.Quantification cycle value on RT-PCR was not found to be correlated with antibody positivity. CONCLUSIONS: Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in HCWs who had not previously tested RT-PCR positive for COVID-19 was low compared with similar studies.

Managing clinical trials during COVID-19: experience from a clinical research facility.

There is a dearth of literature on best practices for managing clinical trials, and little is understood on the role of the clinical trial manager. The COVID-19 pandemic has brought this into focus, and the continuance of clinical trials worldwide has been catapulted into a state of uncertainty as countries enter lockdown to manage the spread of the virus. Participant retention is an ongoing issue in clinical trials, and the concern is that in the current pandemic environment, attrition will be an issue which could potentially jeopardise trial completion. The current situation has necessitated timely problem solving by the trial manager to ensure trials remain open, and most importantly, that participant safety, paramount in clinical trials, is monitored. The purpose of our study is to highlight key issues arising in the management of clinical trials during a pandemic from first-hand experience in a clinical research facility managing both academic and commercial clinical trials. We offer some practical guidance on solution implementation.