Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
2.
Am J Otolaryngol ; 41(6): 102694, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-731702

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Head and neck surgeons are among the highest risk for COVID-19 exposure, which also brings great risk to their mental wellbeing. In this study, we aim to evaluate mental health symptoms among head and neck surgeons in Brazil surrounding the time it was declared the epicenter of the virus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional, survey-based study evaluating burnout, anxiety, distress, and depression among head and neck surgeons in Brazil, assessed through the single-item Mini-Z burnout assessment, 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale, 22-item Impact of Event Scale-Revised, and 2-item Patient Health Questionnaire, respectively. RESULTS: 163 physicians completed the survey (74.2% males). Anxiety, distress, burnout, and depression symptoms were reported in 74 (45.5%), 43 (26.3%), 24 (14.7%), and 26 (16.0%) physicians, respectively. On multivariable analysis, female physicians were more likely to report a positive screening for burnout compared to males (OR 2.88, CI [1.07-7.74]). Physicians 45 years or older were less likely to experience anxiety symptoms than those younger than 45 years (OR 0.40, CI [0.20-0.81]). Physicians with no self-reported prior psychiatric conditions were less likely to have symptoms of distress compared to those with such history (OR 0.11, CI [0.33-0.38]). CONCLUSION: Head and neck surgeons in Brazil reported symptoms of burnout, anxiety, distress and depression during our study period within the COVID-19 pandemic. Institutions should monitor these symptoms throughout the pandemic. Further study is required to assess the long-term implications for physician wellness.


Subject(s)
Anxiety/epidemiology , Burnout, Professional/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Depression/epidemiology , Occupational Stress/epidemiology , Otolaryngologists/psychology , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Surgeons/psychology , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Betacoronavirus , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19 , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Sex Factors , Stress, Psychological/epidemiology , Surveys and Questionnaires
3.
OTO Open ; 4(3): 2473974X20948835, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-729457

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Nonphysician health care workers are involved in high-risk patient care during the COVID-19 pandemic, placing them at high risk of mental health burden. The mental health impact of COVID-19 in this crucial population has not been studied thus far. Thus, the objective of this study is to assess the psychosocial well-being of these providers. STUDY DESIGN: National cross-sectional online survey (no control group). SETTING: Academic otolaryngology programs in the United States. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We distributed a survey to nonphysician health care workers in otolaryngology departments across the United States. The survey incorporated a variety of validated mental health assessment tools to measure participant burnout (Mini-Z assessment), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7), distress (Impact of Event Scale), and depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-2). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine predictive factors associated with these mental health outcomes. RESULTS: We received 347 survey responses: 248 (71.5%) nurses, 63 (18.2%) administrative staff, and 36 (10.4%) advanced practice providers. A total of 104 (30.0%) respondents reported symptoms of burnout; 241 (69.5%), symptoms of anxiety; 292 (84.1%), symptoms of at least mild distress; and 79 (22.8%), symptoms of depression. Upon further analysis, development of these symptoms was associated with factors such as occupation, practice setting, and case load. CONCLUSION: Frontline otolaryngology health care providers exhibit high rates of mental health complications, particularly anxiety and distress, in the wake of COVID-19. Adequate support systems must be put into place to address these issues.

4.
Med Educ Online ; 25(1): 1798088, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-675938

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic and resulting cancellation of medical student clinical rotations pose unique challenges to students' educations, the impact of which has not yet been explored. DESIGN: This cross-sectional survey study collected responses from 13 April 2020 until 30 April 2020. Students at US allopathic medical schools completed the survey online. RESULTS: 1,668 responses were analyzed. A total of 337 (20.2%) respondents thought the pandemic would affect their choice of specialty, with differences across class years: 15.2% (53) of first-years (MS1s), 26.4% (92) of second-years (MS2s), 23.7% (162) of third-years (MS3s), and 9.7% (22) of fourth-years (MS4s) (p < 0.0001). Among all classes, the most common reason chosen was inability to explore specialties of interest (244, 72.4%), and the second was inability to bolster their residency application (162, 48.1%). Out of the MS3s who chose the latter, the majority were concerned about recommendation letters (68, 81.0%) and away rotations (62, 73.8%). As high as 17.4% (119) of MS3s said they were more likely to take an extra year during medical school as a result of the pandemic. Region of the US, number of local COVID cases, and number of local COVID deaths had no effect on whether respondents thought the pandemic would affect their specialty choice. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found that about one-fifth of surveyed medical students currently believe that the COVID-19 pandemic will affect their choice of specialty, with many of these citing concerns that they cannot explore specialties or obtain recommendation letters. With prolonged suspension of clinical rotations, targeted efforts by medical schools to address these concerns through enhanced virtual curriculum development and advising strategies will become increasingly important. Further study is needed to explore whether these cross-sectional student perspectives will manifest as changes in upcoming National Residency Matching Program data.


Subject(s)
Career Choice , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Internship and Residency/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Students, Medical/statistics & numerical data , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Students, Medical/psychology , United States
6.
Head Neck ; 42(7): 1621-1628, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-595767

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: No reports describe falsepositive reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for novel coronavirus in preoperative screening. METHODS: Preoperative patients had one or two nasopharyngeal swabs, depending on low or high risk of viral transmission. Positive tests were repeated. RESULTS: Forty-three of 52 patients required two or more preoperative tests. Four (9.3%) had discrepant results (positive/negative). One of these left the coronavirus disease (COVID) unit against medical advice despite an orbital abscess, with unknown true disease status. The remaining 3 of 42 (7.1%) had negative repeat RT-PCR. Although ultimately considered falsepositives, one was sent to a COVID unit postoperatively and two had urgent surgery delayed. Assuming negative repeat RT-PCR, clear chest imaging, and lack of subsequent symptoms represent the "gold standard," RT-PCR specificity was 0.97. CONCLUSIONS: If false positives are suspected, we recommend computed tomography (CT) of the chest and repeat RT-PCR. Validated serum immunoglobulin testing may ultimately prove useful.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/genetics , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , False Positive Reactions , Otorhinolaryngologic Surgical Procedures , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Emergencies , Female , Florida/epidemiology , Humans , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Male , Middle Aged , Nasopharynx/virology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Preoperative Care , RNA, Viral , SARS-CoV-2 , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Young Adult
7.
Head Neck ; 42(7): 1597-1609, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-526661

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Otolaryngologists are among the highest risk for COVID-19 exposure. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional, survey-based, national study evaluating academic otolaryngologists. Burnout, anxiety, distress, and depression were assessed by the single-item Mini-Z Burnout Assessment, 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale, 15-item Impact of Event Scale, and 2-item Patient Health Questionnaire, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 349 physicians completed the survey. Of them, 165 (47.3%) were residents and 212 (60.7%) were males. Anxiety, distress, burnout, and depression were reported in 167 (47.9%), 210 (60.2%), 76 (21.8%), and 37 (10.6%) physicians, respectively. Attendings had decreased burnout relative to residents (odds ratio [OR] 0.28, confidence interval [CI] [0.11-0.68]; P = .005). Females had increased burnout (OR 1.93, CI [1.12.-3.32]; P = .018), anxiety (OR 2.53, CI [1.59-4.02]; P < .005), and distress (OR 2.68, CI [1.64-4.37]; P < .005). Physicians in states with greater than 20 000 positive cases had increased distress (OR 2.01, CI [1.22-3.31]; P = .006). CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the prevalence of burnout, anxiety, and distress is high among academic otolaryngologists.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Internship and Residency , Medical Staff, Hospital/psychology , Otolaryngologists/psychology , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Adult , Anxiety/epidemiology , Betacoronavirus , Burnout, Professional/epidemiology , COVID-19 , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Medical Staff, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Otolaryngologists/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Sex Factors , Stress, Psychological/epidemiology , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States/epidemiology
8.
Head Neck ; 42(6): 1131-1136, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-66373

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND METHODS: There is an added level of complexity in the management of head and neck cancer patients with underlying immunosuppressive disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic. Head and neck oncologists are tasked with balancing the dual risks of cancer progression in the setting of impaired tumor immunity and increased susceptibility to life-threatening complications from exposure to viral infection for patients and providers. Through two cases of immunocompromised patients with newly diagnosed head and neck malignancies, we aim to provide guidance to clinicians struggling with how to best counsel and manage this unique subset of patients under these difficult circumstances. RESULTS: After careful consideration of the options, we took different approaches in the care of these two patients. CONCLUSIONS: Ultimately, there is no uniform set of rules to apply to this heterogeneous group of immunocompromised patients. We provide some general principles to help guide patient management during the current pandemic.


Subject(s)
Conservative Treatment/methods , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Head and Neck Neoplasms/therapy , Immunocompromised Host , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Time-to-Treatment/organization & administration , Adult , COVID-19 , Clinical Decision-Making , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Disease Management , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Head and Neck Neoplasms/pathology , Humans , Interdisciplinary Communication , Laryngeal Neoplasms/pathology , Laryngeal Neoplasms/surgery , Male , Middle Aged , Mouth Neoplasms/pathology , Mouth Neoplasms/surgery , Patient Safety , Risk Assessment , Sampling Studies , Time Factors , United States , Vocal Cords/pathology , Vocal Cords/surgery
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL