Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
BMJ Open ; 12(8): e063279, 2022 08 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1973849

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the working environment, how we think of it and how it stands to develop into the future. Knowledge about how people have continued to work on-site and adjusted to working from home during the COVID-19 lockdown will be vital for planning work arrangements in the post-pandemic period. Our primary objective was to investigate experiences of working from home or having colleagues working from home during a late stage of the COVID-19 lockdown among researchers and healthcare providers in a hospital research setting. Second, we aimed to investigate researchers' productivity through changes in various proxy measures during lockdown as compared with pre-lockdown. DESIGN: Mixed-method participatory Group Concept Mapping (GCM). SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: GCM, based on a mixed-method participatory approach, was applied involving researchers' and healthcare providers' online sorting and rating experiences working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic. At a face-to-face meeting, participants achieved consensus on the number and labelling of domains-the basis for developing a conceptual model. RESULTS: Through the GCM approach, 47 participants generated 125 unique statements of experiences related to working from home, which were organised into seven clusters. Using these clusters, we developed a conceptual model that illustrated the pros and cons of working from home. CONCLUSION: The future work setting, the role of the office and the overall work environment need to respond to workers' increased wish for flexible work arrangements and co-decision.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Personnel , Research Personnel , Communicable Disease Control , Denmark , Hospitals , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
2.
Pilot Feasibility Stud ; 7(1): 122, 2021 Jun 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1266512

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The ABLE intervention was developed to enhance the ability to perform activities of daily living (ADL) tasks among persons living with chronic conditions. ABLE is a generic, home-based, individualised, 8-week occupational therapy intervention program, developed to be delivered in Danish municipalities. In a previous study, the feasibility of ABLE was evaluated in terms of content and delivery. In this pilot study, the remaining feasibility aspects of a randomised controlled trial including (i) trial procedures (recruitment and retention), (ii) randomisation, (iii) adherence to program, (iv) feasibility of additional outcome measurements, and (iv) access to information on usual occupational therapy were evaluated. METHODS: The study was conducted in a Danish municipality, using a two-armed parallel randomised controlled design, planning a recruitment strategy including 20 persons living with one/more chronic conditions and experiencing problems performing ADL. The following progression criteria were used to determine if a future full-scale randomised controlled trial was feasible: (i) recruitment (50% met the eligibility criteria) and retention (80%), (ii) randomisation (80% accepted randomisation, procedure was executed as planned), (iii) adherence to program (100% followed the treatment protocol), (iv) outcome measurements (80% of the participants delivered relevantly and fully answered questionnaires), and (v) usual occupational therapy (extraction of needed information was successful). RESULTS: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the study was truncated resulting in limited but sufficient data to answer most of the study questions. (i) Eighteen of 37 eligible persons (48.6%) were recruited; of those treated (n = 6), all remained (100%); (ii) 18 accepted randomisation (100%), and procedure was effective; (iii) ABLE was delivered with adherence (100%); (iv) 92.3-100% of the participants gave relevant and complete answers in two of three questionnaires; and (v) needed information on usual occupational therapy was extractable in seven of nine aspects. CONCLUSIONS: Proceeding to full-scale trial is recommendable; however, a few adjustments on outcome measurements, inclusion criteria and extraction of information on usual occupational therapy are needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04295837 ) on December 5th, 2019. Retrospectively registered.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL