Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Clin Infect Pract ; : 100142, 2022 Mar 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1944566

ABSTRACT

Objectives: To describe the lived experience of healthcare staff during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic relating to the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) and investigate risks associated with PPE use, error mitigation and acceptability of mindfulness incorporation into PPE practice. Methods: A qualitative human factors' study at two Irish hospitals occurred in late 2020. Data was collected by semi-structured interview and included role description, pre-COVID-19 PPE experience, the impact of COVID-19 on lived experience, risks associated with PPE use, contributory factors to errors, error mitigation strategies and acceptability of incorporating mindfulness into PPE practice. Results: Of 45 participants, 23 of whom were nursing staff (51%), 34 (76%) had previously worn PPE and 25 (56%) used a buddy system. COVID-19 lived experience impacted most on social life/home-work interface (n=36, 80%). Nineteen staff (42%) described mental health impacts. The most cited risk concerned 'knowledge of procedures' (n=18, 40%). Contributory factors to PPE errors included time (n=15, 43%) and staffing pressures (n=10, 29%). Mitigation interventions included training/education (n=12, 40%). The majority (n=35, 78%) supported mindfulness integration into PPE practice. Conclusions: PPE training should address healthcare staff lived experiences and consider incorporation of mindfulness and key organisational factors contributing to safety.

2.
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol ; 58(5): 677-687, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1491008

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of restriction measures implemented to mitigate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on pregnancy duration and outcome. METHODS: A before-and-after study was conducted with cohort sampling in three maternity hospitals in Melbourne, Australia, including women who were pregnant when restriction measures were in place during the COVID-19 pandemic (estimated conception date between 1 November 2019 and 29 February 2020) and women who were pregnant before the restrictions (estimated conception date between 1 November 2018 and 28 February 2019). The primary outcome was delivery before 34 weeks' gestation or stillbirth. The main secondary outcome was a composite of adverse perinatal outcomes. Pregnancy outcomes were compared between women exposed to restriction measures and unexposed controls using the χ-square test and modified Poisson regression models, and duration of pregnancy was compared between the groups using survival analysis. RESULTS: In total, 3150 women who were exposed to restriction measures during pregnancy and 3175 unexposed controls were included. Preterm birth before 34 weeks or stillbirth occurred in 95 (3.0%) exposed pregnancies and in 130 (4.1%) controls (risk ratio (RR), 0.74 (95% CI, 0.57-0.96); P = 0.021). Preterm birth before 34 weeks occurred in 2.4% of women in the exposed group and in 3.4% of women in the control group (RR, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.53-0.95); P = 0.022), without evidence of an increase in the rate of stillbirth in the exposed group (0.7% vs 0.9%; RR, 0.83 (95% CI, 0.48-1.44); P = 0.515). Competing-risks regression analysis showed that the effect of the restriction measures on spontaneous preterm birth was stronger and started earlier (subdistribution hazard ratio (HR), 0.81 (95% CI, 0.64-1.03); P = 0.087) than the effect on medically indicated preterm birth (subdistribution HR, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.70-1.12); P = 0.305). The effect was stronger in women with a previous preterm birth (RR, 0.42 (95% CI, 0.21-0.82); P = 0.008) than in parous women without a previous preterm birth (RR, 0.93 (95% CI, 0.63-1.38); P = 0.714) (P for interaction = 0.044). Composite adverse perinatal outcome was less frequent in the exposed group than in controls (all women: 2.1% vs 2.9%; RR, 0.73 (95% CI, 0.54-0.99); P = 0.042); women with a previous preterm birth: 4.5% vs 8.4%; RR, 0.54 (95% CI, 0.25-1.18); P = 0.116). CONCLUSIONS: Restriction measures implemented to mitigate SARS-CoV-2 transmission during the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with a reduced rate of preterm birth before 34 weeks. This reduction was mainly due to a lower rate of spontaneous prematurity. The effect was more substantial in women with a previous preterm birth and was not associated with an increased stillbirth rate. © 2021 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Infection Control/methods , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pregnancy Outcome/epidemiology , Adult , Australia/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Infant, Low Birth Weight , Infant, Newborn , Physical Distancing , Pregnancy , Premature Birth/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Stillbirth/epidemiology , Young Adult
3.
Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control ; 10(SUPPL 1), 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1448362

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Staff competency and access to PPE training became critical early in the COVID 19 pandemic. This placed demands on infection prevention & control staff when already busy with COVID-19-related tasks. Objectives: To be prepared for the next pandemic, we investigated the role of mindfullness and technology in PPE training. Methods: Human factors research involving three clinical sites (N = 174) consiting of interviews, workshops and participatory codesign sessions. This was extended by interviews with 14 IPC experts from 7 sites in UK and USA. Results: Existing PPE & HH Training: - Addressed the lived experience of using PPE - Variety of training formats e.g. classroom (15%) and in-unit training (85%) - One (1/10) site assessed PPE competency - Four (4/10) sites used a Virtual Learning Environment to track the learner journey - One (1/10) site used a mobile phone based training Performance Shaping Factors: - Training, Fatigue, Distraction, Rushing, Stress, etc. - Changing types of PPE with different quality and fit - Changing PPE guidelines as IPC knowledge evolved Emerging Mobile Learning App Concept & Requirements: - All trainers expressed concerns of low engagement with phonebased training - Online and in-person training must be consistent - Assessment should be carried out on-site, with special-purpose equipment - PPE and Hand Hygiene training should incorporate self-care & mindfulness - Scenario-based training needed to support different clinical roles and needs - Customise training to local guidelines Conclusion: Mindfulness is a protective factor for effective and safe performance. Organisations should consider integrating wellness into IPC training. Technology can support in-person training but it is not a replacement and must be available 24-7. A variety of training access pathways are good but the Learner Journey should be tracked to ensure everyone is trained and skills are maintained over time.

4.
Bjog-an International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology ; 128:99-99, 2021.
Article in English | Web of Science | ID: covidwho-1268875
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL