Are We Ever Going Back? Exploring the Views of Health Professionals on Postpandemic Continuing Professional Development Modalities.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly altered the ways in which health care professionals engage with continuing professional development (CPD), but the extent to which these changes are permanent remains unknown at present. This mixed-methods research aims to capture the perspectives of health professionals on their preferences for CPD formats, including the conditions that inform preferences for in-person and online CPD events and the optimum length and type of online and in-person events. METHODS: A survey was used to gain a high-level perspective on health professionals' engagement with CPD, areas of interest, and capabilities and preferences in relation to online formats. A total of 340 health care professionals across 21 countries responded to the survey. Follow-up semistructured interviews were conducted with 16 respondents to gain deeper insights into their perspectives. RESULTS: Key themes include CPD activity before and during COVID, social and networking aspects, access versus engagement, cost, and time and timing. DISCUSSION: Recommendations regarding the design of both in-person and online events are included. Beyond merely moving in-person events online, innovative design approaches should be adopted to capitalize on the affordances of digital technologies and enhance engagement.

Modelling the impacts of COVID-19 on nurse workload and quality of care using process simulation.

Higher acuity levels in COVID-19 patients and increased infection prevention and control routines have increased the work demands on nurses. To understand and quantify these changes, discrete event simulation (DES) was used to quantify the effects of varying the number of COVID-19 patient assignments on nurse workload and quality of care. Model testing was based on the usual nurse-patient ratio of 1:5 while varying the number of COVID-19 positive patients from 0 to 5. The model was validated by comparing outcomes to a step counter field study test with eight nurses. The DES model showed that nurse workload increased, and the quality of care deteriorated as nurses were assigned more COVID-19 positive patients. With five COVID-19 positive patients, the most demanding condition, the simulant-nurse donned and doffed personal protective equipment (PPE) 106 times a shift, totaling 6.1 hours. Direct care time was reduced to 3.4 hours (-64% change from baseline pre-pandemic case). In addition, nurses walked 10.5km (+46% increase from base pre-pandemic conditions) per shift while 75 care tasks (+242%), on average, were in the task queue. This contributed to 143 missed care tasks (+353% increase from base pre-pandemic conditions), equivalent to 9.6 hours (+311%) of missed care time and care task waiting time increased to 1.2 hours (+70%), in comparison to baseline (pre-pandemic) conditions. This process simulation approach may be used as potential decision support tools in the design and management of hospitals in-patient care settings, including pandemic planning scenarios.