Activism in the time of COVID-19

In many countries, COVID-19 has amplified the health, economic and social inequities that motivate group-based collective action. We draw upon the SIRDE/IDEAS model of social change to explore how the pandemic might have affected complex reactions to social injustices. We argue that the virus elicits widespread negative emotions which are spread contagiously through social media due to increased social isolation caused by shelter-in-place directives. When an incident occurs which highlights systemic injustices, the prevailing negative emotional climate intensifies anger at these injustices as well as other emotions, which motivates participation in protest actions despite the obvious risk. We discuss how the pandemic might shape both normative and non-normative protests, including radical violent and destructive collective actions. We also discuss how separatism is being encouraged in some countries due to a lack of effective national leadership and speculate that this is partially the result of different patterns of social identification. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Nurses' strategies for overcoming barriers to fundamental nursing care in patients with COVID-19 caused by infection with the SARS-COV-2 virus: Results from the 'COVID-NURSE' survey.

AIMS: To identify strategies used by registered nurses and non-registered nursing care staff in overcoming barriers when providing fundamental nursing care for non-invasively ventilated inpatients with COVID-19. DESIGN: Online survey with open-ended questions to collect qualitative data. METHODS: In August 2020, we asked UK-based nursing staff to describe any strategies they employed to overcome barriers to delivering care in 15 fundamental nursing care categories when providing care to non-invasively ventilated patients with COVID-19. We analysed data using Framework Analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1062 nurses consented to participate in our survey. We derived four themes. 1) Communication behaviours included adapting verbal and non-verbal communication with patients, using information technology to enable patients' significant others to communicate with staff and patients, and establishing clear information-sharing methods with other staff. 2) Organizing care required clustering interventions, carefully managing supplies, encouraging patient self-care and using 'runners' and interdisciplinary input. 3) Addressing patients' well-being and values required spending time with patients, acting in loco familiae, providing access to psychological and spiritual support, obtaining information about patients' wishes early on and providing privacy and comforting/meaningful items. 4) Management and leadership behaviours included training, timely provision of pandemic information, psychological support, team huddles and facilitating regular breaks. CONCLUSIONS: Our respondents identified multiple strategies in four main areas of clinical practice. Management and leadership are crucial to both fundamental care delivery and the well-being of nurses during pandemics. Grouping strategies into these areas of action may assist nurses and leaders to prepare for pandemic nursing. IMPACT: As these strategies are unlikely to be exclusive to the COVID-19 pandemic, their global dissemination may improve patient experience and help nurses deliver fundamental care when planning pandemic nursing. However, their effectiveness is unknown. Therefore, we are currently evaluating these strategies in a cluster randomized controlled trial.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on faecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening programmes in Australia, Canada, and the Netherlands: a comparative modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer screening programmes worldwide have been disrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to estimate the impact of hypothetical disruptions to organised faecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening programmes on short-term and long-term colorectal cancer incidence and mortality in three countries using microsimulation modelling. METHODS: In this modelling study, we used four country-specific colorectal cancer microsimulation models-Policy1-Bowel (Australia), OncoSim (Canada), and ASCCA and MISCAN-Colon (the Netherlands)-to estimate the potential impact of COVID-19-related disruptions to screening on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality in Australia, Canada, and the Netherlands annually for the period 2020-24 and cumulatively for the period 2020-50. Modelled scenarios varied by duration of disruption (3, 6, and 12 months), decreases in screening participation after the period of disruption (0%, 25%, or 50% reduction), and catch-up screening strategies (within 6 months after the disruption period or all screening delayed by 6 months). FINDINGS: Without catch-up screening, our analysis predicted that colorectal cancer deaths among individuals aged 50 years and older, a 3-month disruption would result in 414-902 additional new colorectal cancer diagnoses (relative increase 0·1-0·2%) and 324-440 additional deaths (relative increase 0·2-0·3%) in the Netherlands, 1672 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·3%) and 979 additional deaths (relative increase 0·5%) in Australia, and 1671 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·2%) and 799 additional deaths (relative increase 0·3%) in Canada between 2020 and 2050, compared with undisrupted screening. A 6-month disruption would result in 803-1803 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·2-0·4%) and 678-881 additional deaths (relative increase 0·4-0·6%) in the Netherlands, 3552 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·6%) and 1961 additional deaths (relative increase 1·0%) in Australia, and 2844 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·3%) and 1319 additional deaths (relative increase 0·4%) in Canada between 2020 and 2050, compared with undisrupted screening. A 12-month disruption would result in 1619-3615 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·4-0·9%) and 1360-1762 additional deaths (relative increase 0·8-1·2%) in the Netherlands, 7140 additional diagnoses (relative increase 1·2%) and 3968 additional deaths (relative increase 2·0%) in Australia, and 5212 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·6%) and 2366 additional deaths (relative increase 0·8%) in Canada between 2020 and 2050, compared with undisrupted screening. Providing immediate catch-up screening could minimise the impact of the disruption, restricting the relative increase in colorectal cancer incidence and deaths between 2020 and 2050 to less than 0·1% in all countries. A post-disruption decrease in participation could increase colorectal cancer incidence by 0·2-0·9% and deaths by 0·6-1·6% between 2020 and 2050, compared with undisrupted screening. INTERPRETATION: Although the projected effect of short-term disruption to colorectal cancer screening is modest, such disruption will have a marked impact on colorectal cancer incidence and deaths between 2020 and 2050 attributable to missed screening. Thus, it is crucial that, if disrupted, screening programmes ensure participation rates return to previously observed rates and provide catch-up screening wherever possible, since this could mitigate the impact on colorectal cancer deaths. FUNDING: Cancer Council New South Wales, Health Canada, and Dutch National Institute for Public Health and Environment.

Design and quantitative evaluation of 'Aerosol Bio-Containment Device (ABCD)' for reducing aerosol exposure during infectious aerosol-generating events.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic renewed interest in infectious aerosols and reducing risk of airborne respiratory pathogen transmission, prompting development of devices to protect healthcare workers during airway procedures. However, there are no standard methods for assessing the efficacy of particle containment with these protective devices. We designed and built an aerosol bio-containment device (ABCD) to contain and remove aerosol via an external suction system and tested the aerosol containment of the device in an environmental chamber using a novel, quantitative assessment method. The ABCD exhibited a strong ability to control aerosol exposure in experimental and computational fluid dynamic (CFD) simulated scenarios with appropriate suction use and maintenance of device seals. Using a log-risk-reduction framework, we assessed device containment efficacy and showed that, when combined with other protective equipment, the ABCD can significantly reduce airborne clinical exposure. We propose this type of quantitative analysis serves as a basis for rating efficacy of aerosol protective enclosures.

Lymphatic coagulation and neutrophil extracellular traps in lung-draining lymph nodes of COVID-19 decedents.

Clinical manifestations of severe COVID-19 include coagulopathies that are exacerbated by the formation of neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs). Here, we report that pulmonary lymphatic vessels, which traffic neutrophils and other immune cells to the lung-draining lymph node (LDLN), can also be blocked by fibrin clots in severe COVID-19. Immunostained tissue sections from COVID-19 decedents revealed widespread lymphatic clotting not only in the lung, but notably in the LDLN, where the extent of clotting correlated with the presence of abnormal, regressed, or missing germinal centers. it strongly correlated with the presence of intralymphatic NETs. In mice, TNFα induced intralymphatic fibrin clots, and this could be inhibited by DNAse 1, which degrades NETs. In vitro, TNF induced lymphatic endothelial cell upregulation of ICAM-1 and CXCL8 among other neutrophil-recruiting factors as well as thrombomodulin downregulation. Furthermore, in decedents, lymphatic clotting in LDLNs. In a separate cohort of hospitalized patients, serum levels of MPO-DNA (a NET marker) inversely correlated with antiviral antibody titers, but D-dimer levels, indicative of blood thrombosis, did not correlate with either. In fact, patients with high MPO-DNA but low D-dimer levels generated poor anti-viral antibody titers. This study introduces lymphatic coagulation in lungs and LDLNs as a clinical manifestation of severe COVID-19 and suggests the involvement of NETosis of lymphatic-trafficking neutrophils. It further suggests that lymphatic clotting may correlate with impaired formation or maintenance of germinal centers necessary for robust antiviral antibody responses, although further studies are needed to determine whether and how lymphatic coagulation impacts adaptive immune responses.

Fundamental nursing care in patients with the SARS-CoV-2 virus: results from the 'COVID-NURSE' mixed methods survey into nurses' experiences of missed care and barriers to care.

BACKGROUND: Patient experience of nursing care is associated with safety, care quality, treatment outcomes, costs and service use. Effective nursing care includes meeting patients' fundamental physical, relational and psychosocial needs, which may be compromised by the challenges of SARS-CoV-2. No evidence-based nursing guidelines exist for patients with SARS-CoV-2. We report work to develop such a guideline. Our aim was to identify views and experiences of nursing staff on necessary nursing care for inpatients with SARS-CoV-2 (not invasively ventilated) that is omitted or delayed (missed care) and any barriers to this care. METHODS: We conducted an online mixed methods survey structured according to the Fundamentals of Care Framework. We recruited a convenience sample of UK-based nursing staff who had nursed inpatients with SARS-CoV-2 not invasively ventilated. We asked respondents to rate how well they were able to meet the needs of SARS-CoV-2 patients, compared to non-SARS-CoV-2 patients, in 15 care categories; select from a list of barriers to care; and describe examples of missed care and barriers to care. We analysed quantitative data descriptively and qualitative data using Framework Analysis, integrating data in side-by-side comparison tables. RESULTS: Of 1062 respondents, the majority rated mobility, talking and listening, non-verbal communication, communicating with significant others, and emotional wellbeing as worse for patients with SARS-CoV-2. Eight barriers were ranked within the top five in at least one of the three care areas. These were (in rank order): wearing Personal Protective Equipment, the severity of patients' conditions, inability to take items in and out of isolation rooms without donning and doffing Personal Protective Equipment, lack of time to spend with patients, lack of presence from specialised services e.g. physiotherapists, lack of knowledge about SARS-CoV-2, insufficient stock, and reluctance to spend time with patients for fear of catching SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSIONS: Our respondents identified nursing care areas likely to be missed for patients with SARS-CoV-2, and barriers to delivering care. We are currently evaluating a guideline of nursing strategies to address these barriers, which are unlikely to be exclusive to this pandemic or the environments represented by our respondents. Our results should, therefore, be incorporated into global pandemic planning.

Impact of COVID-19 and other infectious conditions requiring isolation on the provision of and adaptations to fundamental nursing care in hospital in terms of overall patient experience, care quality, functional ability, and treatment outcomes: systematic review.

AIM: This systematic review identifies, appraises and synthesizes the evidence on the provision of fundamental nursing care to hospitalized patients with a highly infectious virus and the effectiveness of adaptations to overcome barriers to care. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: In July 2020, we searched Medline, PsycINFO (OvidSP), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), BNI (ProQuest), WHO COVID-19 Database (https://search.bvsalud.org/) MedRxiv (https://www.medrxiv.org/), bioRxiv (https://www.biorxiv.org/) and also Google Scholar, TRIP database and NICE Evidence, forwards citation searching and reference checking of included papers, from 2016 onwards. REVIEW METHODS: We included quantitative and qualitative research reporting (i) the views, perceptions and experiences of patients who have received fundamental nursing care whilst in hospital with COVID-19, MERS, SARS, H1N1 or EVD or (ii) the views, perceptions and experiences of professional nurses and non-professionally registered care workers who have provided that care. We included review articles, commentaries, protocols and guidance documents. One reviewer performed data extraction and quality appraisal and was checked by another person. RESULTS: Of 3086 references, we included 64 articles; 19 empirical research and 45 review articles, commentaries, protocols and guidance documents spanning five pandemics. Four main themes (and 11 sub-themes) were identified. Barriers to delivering fundamental care were wearing personal protective equipment, adequate staffing, infection control procedures and emotional challenges of care. These barriers were addressed by multiple adaptations to communication, organization of care, staff support and leadership. CONCLUSION: To prepare for continuation of the COVID-19 pandemic and future pandemics, evaluative studies of adaptations to fundamental healthcare delivery must be prioritized to enable evidence-based care to be provided in future. IMPACT: Our review identifies the barriers nurses experience in providing fundamental care during a pandemic, highlights potential adaptations that address barriers and ensure positive healthcare experiences and draws attention to the need for evaluative research on fundamental care practices during pandemics.

COVID-NURSE: evaluation of a fundamental nursing care protocol compared with care as usual on experience of care for noninvasively ventilated patients in hospital with the SARS-CoV-2 virus-protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Patient experience of nursing care is correlated with safety, clinical effectiveness, care quality, treatment outcomes and service use. Effective nursing care includes actions to develop nurse-patient relationships and deliver physical and psychosocial care to patients. The high risk of transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus compromises nursing care. No evidence-based nursing guidelines exist for patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, leading to potential variations in patient experience, outcomes, quality and costs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: we aim to recruit 840 in-patient participants treated for infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus from 14 UK hospitals, to a cluster randomised controlled trial, with embedded process and economic evaluations, of care as usual and a fundamental nursing care protocol addressing specific areas of physical, relational and psychosocial nursing care where potential variation may occur, compared with care as usual. Our coprimary outcomes are patient-reported experience (Quality from the Patients' Perspective; Relational Aspects of Care Questionnaire); secondary outcomes include care quality (pressure injuries, falls, medication errors); functional ability (Barthell Index); treatment outcomes (WHO Clinical Progression Scale); depression Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2), anxiety General Anxiety Disorder-2 (GAD-2), health utility (EQ5D) and nurse-reported outcomes (Measure of Moral Distress for Health Care Professionals). For our primary analysis, we will use a standard generalised linear mixed-effect model adjusting for ethnicity of the patient sample and research intensity at cluster level. We will also undertake a planned subgroup analysis to compare the impact of patient-level ethnicity on our primary and secondary outcomes and will undertake process and economic evaluations. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Research governance and ethical approvals are from the UK National Health Service Health Research Authority Research Ethics Service. Dissemination will be open access through peer-reviewed scientific journals, study website, press and online media, including free online training materials on the Open University's FutureLearn web platform. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN13177364; Pre-results.

A series of COVID-19 autopsies with clinical and pathologic comparisons to both seasonal and pandemic influenza.

Autopsies of patients who have died from COVID-19 have been crucial in delineating patterns of injury associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Despite their utility, comprehensive autopsy studies are somewhat lacking relative to the global burden of disease, and very few comprehensive studies contextualize the findings to other fatal viral infections. We developed a novel autopsy protocol in order to perform postmortem examinations on victims of COVID-19 and herein describe detailed clinical information, gross findings, and histologic features observed in the first 16 complete COVID-19 autopsies. We also critically evaluated the role of ancillary studies used to establish a diagnosis of COVID-19 at autopsy, including immunohistochemistry (IHC), in situ hybridization (ISH), and electron microscopy (EM). IHC and ISH targeting SARS-CoV-2 were comparable in terms of the location and number of infected cells in lung tissue; however, nonspecific staining of bacteria was seen occasionally with IHC. EM was unrevealing in blindly sampled tissues. We then compared the clinical and histologic features present in this series to six archival cases of fatal seasonal influenza and six archival cases of pandemic influenza from the fourth wave of the 'Spanish Flu' in the winter of 1920. In addition to routine histology, the inflammatory infiltrates in the lungs of COVID-19 and seasonal influenza victims were compared using quantitative IHC. Our results demonstrate that the clinical and histologic features of COVID-19 are similar to those seen in fatal cases of influenza, and the two diseases tend to overlap histologically. There was no significant difference in the composition of the inflammatory infiltrate in COVID-19 and influenza at sites of acute lung injury at the time of autopsy. Our study underscores the relatively nonspecific clinical features and pathologic changes shared between severe cases of COVID-19 and influenza, while also providing important caveats to ancillary methods of viral detection.

The Calm Before the Storm: Using In Situ Simulation to Evaluate for Preparedness of an Alternative Care Hospital During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has been identified as an acute respiratory illness leading to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. As the disease spread, demands on health care systems increased, specifically the need to expand hospital capacity. Alternative care hospitals (ACHs) have been used to mitigate these issues; however, establishing an ACH has many challenges. The goal of this session was to perform systems testing, using a simulation-based evaluation to identify areas in need of improvement. METHODS: Four simulation cases were designed to depict common and high acuity situations encountered in the ACH, using a high technology simulator and standardized patient. A multidisciplinary observer group was given debriefing forms listing the objectives, critical actions, and specific areas to focus their attention. These forms were compiled for data collection. RESULTS: Logistical, operational, and patient safety issues were identified during the simulation and compiled into a simulation event report. Proposed solutions and protocol changes were made in response to the identified issues. CONCLUSION: Simulation was successfully used for systems testing, supporting efforts to maximize patient care and provider safety in a rapidly developed ACH. The simulation event report identified operational deficiencies and safety concerns directly resulting in equipment modifications and protocol changes.

Optimising remote consultations for older people during COVID‐19

The COVID‐19 pandemic has provided an opportunity to rethink the way the majority of patient consultations are conducted, with a move from face‐to‐face visits to remote consultations. This article, which is applicable to all primary care clinicians undertaking medication review, outlines the main principles of optimising remote consultations, with a focus on older people living with frailty during COVID‐19.

Can survivors of COVID-19 later experience guilt? Research nurses describe how some patients report anxiety and feelings of guilt after discharge from hospital

The article mentions the psychological impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on survivors, that included feelings of anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or survivor guilt, as of September 2020.

From Concerts to COVID: Transforming the RI Convention Center into an Alternate Hospital Site in under a Month

Field hospitals have long been used to extend health care capabilities in times of crisis. In response to the pandemic and an anticipated surge in patients, Rhode Island Gov. Gina Raimondo announced a plan to create three field hospitals, or "alternate hospital sites" (AHS), totaling 1,000 beds, in order to expand the state's hospital capacity. Following China's Fangcang shelter hospital model, the Lifespan AHS (LAHS) planning group attempted to identify existing public venues that could support rapid conversion to a site for large numbers of patients at a reasonable cost. After discussions with many stakeholders - pharmacy, laboratory, healthcare providers, security, emergency medical services, and infection control - design and equipment recommendations were given to the architects during daily teleconferencing and site visits. Specific patient criteria for the LAHS were established, staffing was prioritized, and clinical protocols were designed to facilitate care. Simulations using 4 different scenarios were practiced in order to assure proper patient care and flow, pharmacy utilization, and staffing.