"It has been the most difficult time in my career": A qualitative exploration of UK obstetric sonographers' experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Substantial changes were made to the provision of pregnancy ultrasound services during the COVID-19 pandemic with the intention of minimising virus transmission and maintaining service continuity. Published literature describing the impact of the pandemic on obstetric sonographers is predominantly quantitative in nature, however statistics cannot fully convey sonographers' voices. This study aimed to gain a deeper understanding of the lived experiences of UK obstetric sonographers performing pregnancy ultrasound scans during the pandemic. METHODS: A UK-wide, online, anonymous cross-sectional survey on Qualtrics XM™ was open to responses between 9th March and 6th May 2021. Whilst this survey contained some quantitative elements, open questions were included to capture additional qualitative detail from respondents about their perceptions and experiences of scanning during the pandemic. Key themes were generated from free text responses using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Written responses were received from 111/138 sonographers participating in the survey. Five themes were generated, depicting the impact of the pandemic on obstetric sonographers: 1) continuity in a crisis; 2) decisions about me, without me; 3) battle scars - the lasting damage of COVID-19; 4) what people think I do vs. what I really do; and 5) the human touch. A cross-cutting theme was sonographers' feelings of disconnection from senior figures and expectant parents which created a sense of abandonment and distrust. CONCLUSION: Survey respondents' self-reported experiences of ineffective leadership and management, and perceived lack of understanding of the complexity of the sonographer role are potential contributory factors in the high levels of moral injury and occupational burnout reported within the workforce during the pandemic.

A behavioral insights approach to recruiting entrepreneurs for an academic study during the COVID-19 pandemic

What should researchers say when recruiting entrepreneurs to participate in their study? Using a sample of entrepreneurs (N = 1,450) who were being asked to participate in an academic research project, we conducted an experiment to determine recruitment message efficacy. Drawing on best practices from the behavioral insights literature, we developed different email message recruitment statements that were randomly assigned across four phases of our experiment. Results indicate that a message grounded in the “descriptive norms” (i.e., social norms) approach resulted in the highest percentage of participants who clicked on the link to participate in our online survey. We discuss the theoretical as well as practical implications of our work. © 2021

Variation in immunosuppressant impact onsevere COVID-19 outcome: Preliminary results fromthe COVID-19 Scottish Registry of AutoimmuneRheumatic Diseases (SCAR-19)

Background/AimsThe novel infectious disease COVID-19 is associated with a widespectrum of clinical severity amongst the general population. Patientswith autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARD) are more likely toexperience serious COVID-19 related events, although risk factorsfor such outcomes have yet to be established. In particular, the riskprofiles of specific ARD therapies are unknown.MethodsA Scottish wide registry was rapidly developed in March 2020. Clinicalcharacteristics and outcomes of infected cases were collated acrossall Scottish health boards, leveraging the Scottish Systemic VasculitisNetwork and Scottish Society for Rheumatology. Eligible patientsincluded any adult ARD patients with a confirmed (clinically or PCR)diagnosis of COVID-19. Simple descriptive statistics were employed toevaluate associations between ARD therapies and a serious COVID-19disease outcome, as defined by a requirement of invasive or noninvasive ventilation, and/or death.ResultsA total of 69 patients (59% female;mean age 65.6, SD15.5) wererecruited to the registry , 92% of which required hospitalisation. Caseswere most commonly diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (n = 32, 46.4%) followed by spondyloarthritis (n = 19, 27.5%) and systemicvasculitis (n = 9, 13.0%). Anti-TNF therapy (n = 8, 11.6%) andmethotrexate (n = 31, 44.9%) were the commonest biologic andconventional disease modifying drug (bDMARD and csDMARD) usedrespectively. N = 20 (29%) received background corticosteroid therapy (15.9% prednisolone >5mg, 13% prednisolone 5mg). A severeoutcome was observed in n = 25(31.9%);n = 11 required assistedventilation and n = 19 died. With the exception of Leflunomide, conventional and biologic DMARDs did not appear to confer ahigher risk for severe outcome (table 1). Of note, anti-TNF therapywas associated with a non-serious outcome (p = 0.04) and prednisolone>5mg with a serious outcome (p = 0.08). ConclusionPreliminary data from this Scotland-wide ARD COVID-19 registryevidences variation in the impact of standard ARD therapies on theseverity of COVID-19 outcome. In general, background csDMARD andbDMARD use does not appear to be a risk factor for severe outcomes.However, anti-TNF therapy may confer a favourable outcome, whileleflunomide and corticosteroids may have the opposite effect.Rheumatologists should be aware of these possible risk factors andcontinue to contribute to registries to help establish whether theseputative signals are clinically relevant.