Battling against the great disruption to surgical care in a pandemic: experiences of 11 South and Southeast Asian countries.

OBJECTIVES: The majority of the cancelled elective surgeries caused by the COVID-19 pandemic globally were estimated to occur in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where surgical services had long been in short supply even before the pandemic. Therefore, minimising disruption to existing surgical care in LMICs is of crucial importance during a pandemic. This study aimed to explore contributory factors to the continuity of surgical care in LMICs in the face of a pandemic. DESIGN: Semistructured interviews were conducted over zoom with surgical leaders of 25 tertiary hospitals from 11 LMICs in South and Southeast Asia in September to October 2020. Key themes were subsequently identified from the interview transcripts using the Braun and Clarke's method of thematic analysis. RESULTS: The COVID-19 pandemic affected all surgical services of participating institutions to varying degrees. Overall, elective surgeries suffered the gravest disruption, followed by outpatient surgical care, and finally emergency surgeries. Keeping healthcare workers safe and striving for continuity of essential surgical care emerged as notable response strategies observed across all participating institutions. CONCLUSION: This study suggested that four factors are important for the resilience of surgical care against COVID-19: adequate COVID-19 testing capacity and effective institutional infection control measures, designated COVID-19 treatment facilities, whole-system approach to balancing pandemic response and meeting essential surgical needs, and active community engagement. These findings can inform healthcare institutions in other countries, especially LMICs, in their effort to tread a fine line between preserving healthcare capacity for pandemic response and protecting surgical services against pandemic disruption.

The Psychological Well-Being of Southeast Asian Frontline Healthcare Workers during COVID-19: A Multi-Country Study.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined the prevalence of anxiety, depression, and job burnout among frontline healthcare workers (HCWs) across six Southeast Asian countries (Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam) during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2021. We also investigated the associated risk and protective factors. METHODS: Frontline HCWs (N = 1381) from the participating countries participated between 4 January and 14 June 2021. The participants completed self-reported surveys on anxiety (GAD-7), depression (PHQ-8), and job burnout (PWLS). Multivariate logistic regressions were performed with anxiety, depression, and job burnout as outcomes and sociodemographic and job characteristics and HCW perceptions as predictors. RESULTS: The average proportion of HCWs reporting moderate anxiety, moderately severe depression, and job burnout across all countries were 10%, 4%, and 20%, respectively. Working longer hours than usual (Odds ratio [OR] = 1.82; 3.51), perceived high job risk (1.98; 2.22), and inadequate personal protective equipment (1.89; 2.11) were associated with increased odds of anxiety and job burnout while working night shifts was associated with increased risk of depression (3.23). Perceived good teamwork was associated with lower odds of anxiety (0.46), depression (0.43), and job burnout (0.39). CONCLUSION: Job burnout remains a foremost issue among HCWs. Potential opportunities to improve HCW wellness are discussed.

The Psychological Well-Being of Southeast Asian Frontline Healthcare Workers during COVID-19: A Multi-Country Study

Objectives: This study examined the prevalence of anxiety, depression, and job burnout among frontline healthcare workers (HCWs) across six Southeast Asian countries (Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam) during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2021. We also investigated the associated risk and protective factors. Methods: Frontline HCWs (N = 1381) from the participating countries participated between 4 January and 14 June 2021. The participants completed self-reported surveys on anxiety (GAD-7), depression (PHQ-8), and job burnout (PWLS). Multivariate logistic regressions were performed with anxiety, depression, and job burnout as outcomes and sociodemographic and job characteristics and HCW perceptions as predictors. Results: The average proportion of HCWs reporting moderate anxiety, moderately severe depression, and job burnout across all countries were 10%, 4%, and 20%, respectively. Working longer hours than usual (Odds ratio [OR] = 1.82;3.51), perceived high job risk (1.98;2.22), and inadequate personal protective equipment (1.89;2.11) were associated with increased odds of anxiety and job burnout while working night shifts was associated with increased risk of depression (3.23). Perceived good teamwork was associated with lower odds of anxiety (0.46), depression (0.43), and job burnout (0.39). Conclusion: Job burnout remains a foremost issue among HCWs. Potential opportunities to improve HCW wellness are discussed.

Analysis of Speaker Introduction Formality by Gender at the American College of Gastroenterology 2020 Annual Scientific Meeting.

BACKGROUND: Gender-based differences in the use of professional titles during speaker introductions have been described in other medical specialties. AIMS: Our primary aim was to assess gender-based differences in the formality of speaker introductions at the American College of Gastroenterology 2020 Virtual Annual Scientific Meeting. Our secondary aim was to assess gender-based differences in the formality of speaker self-introductions. METHODS: Reviewed presentations from the American College of Gastroenterology Annual Meeting for gender-based differences in professional title use during speaker introductions and self-introductions. RESULTS: Speakers included 29 women (37.2%) and 49 men (62.8%). We found no significant gender differences in the use of professional titles by introducers (t(67) = - 0.775, p = 0.441) or in self-introductions (36.4% of women vs. 41.9% of men, t(63) = 0.422, p = 0.674). CONCLUSION: The lack of gender differences in professional title use may represent a novel advantage of virtual meeting formats or suggest increased attention to gender bias in introductions.