ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The pandemic has uncovered a broad lack of understanding of the role of the Medical Director in Canadian Long-Term Care (LTC) Homes. Our objectives were to identify the current demographics and practices of LTC Medical Directors, discover how the pandemic affected their practice habits, and inform the content of the Ontario Long-Term Care Clinicians Medical Director Course, to ensure that Medical Directors have the requisite knowledge of the responsibilities of their role. DESIGN: Email survey. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Medical directors in Ontario long-term care homes. METHODS: Responses to open-ended, close-ended, multiple-choice, and free-text questions. RESULTS: A total of 156 medical directors (approximately 24%) completed the survey. Ninety-four percent were family physicians. Approximately 40% of participants had been a medical director for fewer than 5 years, whereas more than 11% have been in the role for greater than 30 years. More than 60% spend fewer than 2 hours per week in their administrative role, with fewer than 23% completing formal evaluations of the attending clinicians. Greater than 75% are either satisfied or extremely satisfied in their medical director role, citing excellent engagement and collaboration with team members. Feelings of dissatisfaction were associated with pandemic stress, increased hours and responsibility, inadequate remuneration, lack of ability to make decisions and lack of acknowledgement that physicians add value to the interdisciplinary team. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: It is clear that medical directors are in a unique position to impact the care of residents within LTC. It is imperative to engage medical directors as integral members of the LTC health care team. This can be achieved by acknowledging their medical expertise for improving outcomes, providing them with the authority for decision making, compensating them appropriately, and clearly defining the role. By making these changes, we can ensure that there is a higher likelihood to sustain effective medical leadership in LTC.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Physician Executives , Humans , Long-Term Care , Ontario/epidemiology , Physicians, FamilyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Few studies have quantified aerosol concentrations of SARS-CoV-2 in hospitals and long-term care homes, and fewer still have examined samples for viability. This information is needed to clarify transmission risks beyond close contact. METHODS: We deployed particulate air samplers in rooms with COVID-19 positive patients in hospital ward and ICU rooms, rooms in long-term care homes experiencing outbreaks, and a correctional facility experiencing an outbreak. Samplers were placed between 2 and 3 meters from the patient. Aerosol (small liquid particles suspended in air) samples were collected onto gelatin filters by Ultrasonic Personal Air Samplers (UPAS) fitted with <2.5µm (micrometer) and <10 µm size-selective inlets operated for 16 hours (total 1.92m3), and with a Coriolis Biosampler over 10 minutes (total 1.5m3). Samples were assayed for viable SARS-CoV-2 virus and for the viral genome by multiplex PCR using the E and N protein target sequences. We validated the sampling methods by inoculating gelatin filters with viable vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), and with three concentrations of viable SARS-CoV-2, operating personal samplers for 16hrs, and quantifying viable virus recovery by TCID50 assay. RESULTS: In total, 138 samples were collected from 99 rooms. RNA samples were positive in 9.1% (6/66) of samples obtained with the UPAS 2.5µm samplers, 13.5% (7/52) with the UPAS 10µm samplers, and 10.0% (2/20) samples obtained with the Coriolis samplers. Culturable virus was not recovered in any samples. Viral RNA was detected in 15.1% of the rooms sampled. There was no significant difference in viral RNA recovery between the different room locations or samplers. Method development experiments indicated minimal loss of SARS-CoV-2 viability via the personal air sampler operation.