Burnout on the frontline: the impact of COVID-19 on emergency department staff wellbeing.

BACKGROUND: Burnout is a syndrome resulting from chronic workplace stress that has not been successfully managed. Healthcare professionals are particularly susceptible to this occupational phenomenon. There is limited literature currently published addressing burnout in the context of the Irish frontline workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVES: Our study aims to determine the rate and degree of burnout present in the emergency department (ED) staff at St. James hospital Dublin (SJH) and at Cork University Hospital (CUH), in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was performed on a convenience sample of medical staff and healthcare staff in the ED at Cork University Hospital and St. James Hospital Dublin, two major University Hospital EDs. Burnout was measured using the Oldenburg burnout inventory (OLBI) a standardised 16-question instrument. Participants also provided demographic data and answered several questions relating to the pandemic. PARTICIPANTS: Ninety-nine participants across two departments responded (a response rate of 30%). All ED cohorts were represented. RESULTS: Burnout was identified in almost three quarters of respondents (74%). The mean burnout scores were 2.42 (OLBI cut-off 2.18). There was mean disengagement level of 2.25 and a mean exhaustion level of 2.59. There was no statistically significant variance between staff, by demographics (i.e. occupation, years working in the ED, age, or gender). There was no significant difference in burnout rates or scores between St. James Hospital, Dublin, and Cork University Hospital, though the former tended to have a higher rate of burnout at 81% vs the 67% burnout observed in CUH. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic may be contributing to the long-established problem of health care burnout. The trajectory of this disease is still unclear. Consistent, progressive measures to address staff well-being, and support frontline workers, are imperative going forward.

CT coronary angiography and COVID-19: inpatient use in acute chest pain service.

OBJECTIVES: CT coronary angiography (CTCA) is a well-validated clinical tool in the evaluation of chest pain. In our institution, CTCA availability was increased in January 2020, and subsequently, expanded further to replace all exercise testing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our objective was to assess the impact of increased utilisation of CTCA on length of stay in patients presenting with chest pain in the prepandemic era and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Study design was retrospective. Patients referred for cardiology review between October 2019 and May 2020 with chest pain and/or dyspnoea were broken into three cohorts: a baseline cohort, a cohort with increased CTCA availability and a cohort with increased CTCA availability, but after the national lockdown due to COVID-19. Coronary angiography and revascularisation, length of stay and 30-day adverse outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: 513 patients (35.3% female) presented over cohorts 1 (n=179), 2 (n=182), and 3 (n=153). CTCA use increased from 7.8% overall in cohort 1% to 20.4% in cohort 3. Overall length of stay for the patients undergoing CTCA decreased from a median of 4.2 days in cohort 1 to 2.5 days in cohort 3, with no increase in 30 days adverse outcomes. Invasive coronary angiogram rates were 45.8%, 39% and 34.2% across the cohorts. 29.6% underwent revascularisation in cohort 1, 15.9% in cohort 2 and to 16.4% in cohort 3. CONCLUSIONS: Increased CTCA availability was associated with a significantly reduced length of stay both pre-COVID-19 and post-COVID-19 lockdown, without any increase in 30-day adverse outcomes.