Missed nursing care in the critical care unit, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A comparative cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: Todescribe and evaluate reported missed nursing care in the critical care context during different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in Sweden. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY: A comparative cross-sectional design was used, comparing missed nursing care in three samples: before the COVID-19 pandemic in 2019, during the second wave of the pandemic in spring 2020, and during the third wave of the pandemic in fall 2021. SETTING: The study was conducted at critical care units at a university hospital, Sweden. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The MISSCARE Survey-Swedish version was used to collect data along with two study-specific questions concerning perception of patient safety and quality of care. RESULTS: Significantly more overtime hours and number of days absent due to illness were reported during the pandemic. The nurse/patient ratio was above the recommended level at all data collection time points. Most missed nursing care was reported in items concerning basic care. The most reported reasons for missed nursing care in all samples concerned inadequate staffing, urgent situations, and a rise in patient volume. Most nurses in all samples perceived the level of patient safety and quality of care as good, and the majority had no intention to leave their current position. CONCLUSION: The pandemic had a great impact on the critical care workforce but few elements of missed nursing care were affected. To measure and use missed nursing care as a quality indicator could be valuable for nursing managers, to inform them and improve their ability to meet changes in patient needs with different workforce approaches in critical care settings.

Do-Not-Attempt-Cardiopulmonary-Resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions in patients admitted through the emergency department in a Swedish University Hospital - An observational study of outcome, patient characteristics and changes in DNACPR decisions.

AIMS: The aims were to examine patient and hospital characteristics associated with Do-Not-Attempt-Cardiopulmonary-Resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions for adult admissions through the emergency department (ED), for patients with DNACPR decisions to examine patient and hospital characteristics associated with hospital mortality, and to explore changes in CPR status. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of adult patients admitted through the ED at Karolinska University Hospital 1 January to 31 October 2015. RESULTS: The cohort included 25,646 ED admissions, frequency of DNACPR decisions was 11% during hospitalisation. Patients with DNACPR decisions were older, with an overall higher burden of chronic comorbidities, unstable triage scoring, hospital mortality and one-year mortality compared to those without. For patients with DNACPR decisions, 63% survived to discharge and one-year mortality was 77%. Age and comorbidities for patients with DNACPR decisions were similar regardless of hospital mortality, those who died showed signs of more severe acute illness on ED arrival. Change in CPR status during hospitalisation was 5% and upon subsequent admission 14%. For patients discharged with DNACPR decisions, reversal of DNACPR status upon subsequent admission was 32%, with uncertainty as to whether this reversal was active or a consequence of a lack of consideration. CONCLUSION: For a mixed population of adults admitted through the ED, frequency of DNACPR decisions was 11%. Two-thirds of patients with DNACPR decisions were discharged, but one-year mortality was high. For patients discharged with DNACPR decisions, reversal of DNACPR status was substantial and this should merit further attention.

A first remotely-delivered guided brief intervention to reduce intrusive memories of psychological trauma for healthcare staff working during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic: Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Addressing the mental health needs of healthcare staff exposed to psychologically traumatic events at work during the COVID-19 pandemic is a pressing global priority. We need to swiftly develop interventions to target the psychological consequences (e.g., persistent intrusive memories of trauma). Interventions for healthcare staff must be brief, flexible, fitted around the reality and demands of working life under the pandemic, and repeatable during ongoing/further trauma exposure. Intervention delivery during the pandemic should be remote to mitigate risk of infection; e.g., here using a blend of digitalized self-administered materials (e.g., video instructions) and guided (remote) support from a researcher. This parallel groups, two-arm, randomised controlled trial (RCT) with healthcare staff working during the COVID-19 pandemic is the first evaluation of whether a digitalized form of a brief cognitive task intervention, which is remotely-delivered (guided), reduces intrusive memories. Healthcare staff who experience intrusive memories of work-related traumatic event(s) during the COVID-19 pandemic (≥2 in the week before inclusion) will be randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either the cognitive task intervention or an active (attention placebo) control, and followed up at 1-week, 1-month, 3-months, and 6-months post-intervention. The primary outcome will be the number of intrusive memories reported during Week 5; secondary and other outcomes include the number of intrusive memories reported during Week 1, and other intrusive symptoms. Findings will inform further development and dissemination of a brief cognitive task intervention to target intrusive memories.

Patient safety, quality of care and missed nursing care at a cardiology department during the COVID-19 outbreak.

AIM: To evaluate missed nursing care and patient safety during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic at in-patient cardiology wards. DESIGN: A cross-sectional design with a comparative approach. METHOD: Registered nurses and nurse assistants at a cardiology department were invited to answer the MISSCARE Survey-Swedish version, and questions on patient safety and quality of care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The data were compared with a reference sample. RESULTS: A total of 43 registered nurses and nurse assistants in the COVID-19 sample and 59 in the reference sample participated. The COVID-19 sample reported significantly more overtime hours and more absence from work due to illness in comparison with the reference sample. The patient safety and quality of care were perceived significantly worse, 76.7% (N = 33) versus 94.7% (N = 54), and 85.7% (N = 36) versus 98.3% (N = 58, respectively. The COVID-19 sample reported more missed nursing care in wound care and in basic nursing.

Missed nursing care during the COVID-19 pandemic: A comparative observational study.

AIM: To evaluate frequencies, types of and reasons for missed nursing care during the COVID-19 pandemic at inpatient wards in a highly specialized university hospital. BACKGROUND: Registered nurse/patient ratio and nursing competence are known to affect patient outcomes. The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic entailed novel ways for staffing to meet the expected increased acute care demand, which potentially could impact on quality of care. METHODS: A comparative cross-sectional study was conducted, using the MISSCARE Survey. A sample of nursing staff during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (n = 130) was compared with a reference sample (n = 157). RESULTS: Few differences between samples concerning elements of missed care and no significant differences concerning reasons for missed care were found. Most participants perceived the quality of care and the patient safety to be good. CONCLUSION: The results may be explained by three factors: maintained registered nurse/patient ratio, patients' dependency levels and that nursing managers could maintain the staffing needs with a sufficient skill mix. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Nursing managers impact on the occurrence of MNC; to provide a sufficient registered nurse/patient ratio and skill mix when staffing. They play an important role in anticipatory planning and during infectious disease outbreaks.

A simple cognitive task intervention to prevent intrusive memories after trauma in patients in the Emergency Department: A randomized controlled trial terminated due to COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: This randomised controlled trial (RCT) aimed to investigate the effects of a simple cognitive task intervention on intrusive memories ("flashbacks") and associated symptoms following a traumatic event. Patients presenting to a Swedish emergency department (ED) soon after a traumatic event were randomly allocated (1:1) to the simple cognitive task intervention (memory cue + mental rotation instructions + computer game "Tetris" for at least 20 min) or control (podcast, similar time). We planned follow-ups at one-week, 1-month, and where possible, 3- and 6-months post-trauma. Anticipated enrolment was N = 148. RESULTS: The RCT was terminated prematurely after recruiting N = 16 participants. The COVID-19 pandemic prevented recruitment/testing in the ED because: (i) the study required face-to-face contact between participants, psychology researchers, ED staff, and patients, incurring risk of virus transmission; (ii) the host ED site received COVID-19 patients; and (iii) reduced flow of patients otherwise presenting to the ED in non-pandemic conditions (e.g. after trauma). We report on delivery of study procedures, recruitment, treatment adherence, outcome completion (primary outcome: number of intrusive memories during week 5), attrition, and limitations. The information presented and limitations may enable our group and others to learn from this terminated study. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04185155 (04-12-2019).

Digitalizing a Brief Intervention to Reduce Intrusive Memories of Psychological Trauma for Health Care Staff Working During COVID-19: Exploratory Pilot Study With Nurses.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the worldwide need for simple remotely delivered (digital) scalable interventions that can also be used preventatively to protect the mental health of health care staff exposed to psychologically traumatic events during their COVID-19-related work. We have developed a brief behavioral intervention that aims to reduce the number of intrusive memories of traumatic events but has only been delivered face-to-face so far. After digitalizing the intervention materials, the intervention was delivered digitally to target users (health care staff) for the first time. The adaption for staff's working context in a hospital setting used a co-design approach. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this mixed method exploratory pilot study with health care staff who experienced working in the pandemic were to pilot the intervention that we have digitalized (for remote delivery and with remote support) and adapted for this target population (health care staff working clinically during a pandemic) to explore its ability to reduce the number of intrusive memories of traumatic events and improve related symptoms (eg, posttraumatic stress) and participant's perception of their functioning, and to explore the feasibility and acceptability of both the digitalized intervention and digitalized data collection. METHODS: We worked closely with target users with lived experience of working clinically during the COVID-19 pandemic in a hospital context (registered nurses who experienced intrusive memories from traumatic events at work; N=3). We used a mixed method design and exploratory quantitative and qualitative analysis. RESULTS: After completing the digitalized intervention once with remote researcher support (approximately 25 minutes) and a brief follow-up check-in, participants learned to use the intervention independently. All 3 participants reported zero intrusive memories during week 5 (primary outcome: 100% digital data capture). Prior to study inclusion, two or more intrusions in the week were reported preintervention (assessed retrospectively). There was a general pattern of symptom reduction and improvement in perceived functioning (eg, concentration) at follow-up. The digitalized intervention and data collection were perceived as feasible and rated as acceptable (eg, all 3 participants would recommend it to a colleague). Participants were positive toward the digital intervention as a useful tool that could readily be incorporated into work life and repeated in the face of ongoing or repeated trauma exposure. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention when delivered remotely and adapted for this population during the pandemic was well received by participants. Since it could be tailored around work and daily life and used preventatively, the intervention may hold promise for health care staff pending future evaluations of efficacy. Limitations include the small sample size, lack of daily intrusion frequency data in the week before the intervention, and lack of a control condition. Following this co-design process in adapting and improving intervention delivery and evaluation, the next step is to investigate the efficacy of the digitalized intervention in a randomized controlled trial.