Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
BMC Public Health ; 20(1): 1816, 2020 Nov 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-949119

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has become a pandemic. The knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) of the public play a major role in the prevention and control of infectious diseases. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the KAP of the Chinese public and to assess potential influencing factors related to practices. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted in China in February 2020 via a self-designed questionnaire comprising 33 questions assessing KAP. RESULTS: For the 2136 respondents from 30 provinces or municipalities in China, the accurate response rate for the knowledge section ranged from 72.7 to 99.5%, and the average was 91.2%. Regarding attitude section, the percentage of positive attitudes ("strongly agree" and "agree") ranged from 94.7 to 99.7%, and the average value was 98.0%. The good practices ("always" and "often") results ranged from 76.1 to 99.5%, and the average value was 96.8%. The independent samples t-test revealed that gender and ethnic differences had no effect on knowledge, attitude or behaviour (P > 0.05). However, knowledge was associated with age (t = 4.842, p < 0.001), marital status (t = - 5.323, p < 0.001), education level (t = 8.441, p < 0.001), occupation (t = - 10.858, p < 0.001), and place of residence (t = 7.929, p < 0.001). Similarly, attitude was associated with marital status (t = - 2.383, p = 0.017), education level (t = 2.106, p = 0.035), occupation (t = - 4.834, p < 0.001), and place of residence (t = 4.242, p < 0.001). The multiple linear regression analysis results showed that the factors influencing practices were knowledge (t = - 3.281, p = 0.001), attitude (t = 18.756, p < 0.001), occupation (t = - 3.860, p < 0.001), education level (t = 3.136, p = 0.002), and place of residence (t = 3.257, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The Chinese public exhibited a good level of knowledge of COVID-19, a positive attitude, and high adherence to good practices. COVID-19-related knowledge, attitudes and practices were affected by age, marital status, education level, occupation, and place of residence to varying degrees. In addition, practices were affected by knowledge and attitudes towards COVID-19.

2.
Ann Transl Med ; 8(12): 747, 2020 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-640177

ABSTRACT

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) virus has a high incidence rate and strong infectivity. The diagnosis and evaluation of familial outbreaks requires a collective consideration of epidemiological history, molecular detection methods, chest computed tomography (CT), and clinical symptoms. Methods: A group of family patients with COVID-19 diagnosed in Guizhou, China, in February 2020, was retrospectively analyzed. As of March 1, all patients in the group have been discharged from hospital. This study tracked all patients in the group. We report the epidemiology, radiological characteristics, treatment, and clinical outcomes of these patients. Results: We collected a group of 8 clustered cases (3 men and 5 women) from a family with confirmed COVID-19 infection. In the first admission diagnosis, according to the degree of clinical symptoms, the 8 patients were defined as mild type (4/8) or moderate type (4/8). They were also divided according to the CT findings into early period (1/8), progressive period (3/8), and negative on CT scan (4/8); for the first 4 patients, the corresponding CT image scores were 1, 4, 5, and 5 respectively. In this group of COVID-19 patients, half of the patients showed occult clinical manifestations and negative CT performance. We defined these patients as COVID-19-infected patients, or asymptomatic carriers. Conclusions: The family cluster analysis indicated that COVID-19-infected patients (asymptomatic carriers) and symptomatic COVID-19 patients are distinct but coexistent. This may indicate that the infectivity and virulence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) has decreased. In order to block the transmission pathway of this virus before it spreads, we need to identify the presence of asymptomatic carriers as early as possible.

3.
Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle) ; 9(7): 357-364, 2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-627115

ABSTRACT

Objective: To investigate the prevalence, characteristics, and preventive status of skin injuries caused by personal protective equipment (PPE) in medical staff. Approach: A cross-sectional survey was conducted online for understanding skin injuries among medical staff fighting COVID-19 in February 8-22, 2020. Participants voluntarily answered and submitted the questionnaire with cell phone. The questionnaire items included demographic data, grade of PPE and daily wearing time, skin injury types, anatomical sites, and preventive measures. Univariable analyses and logistic regression analyses were used to explore the risk factors associated with skin injuries. Results: A total of 4,308 respondents were collected from 161 hospitals and 4,306 respondents were valid. The overall prevalence of skin injuries was 42.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 41.30-44.30) with three types of device-related pressure injuries, moist-associated skin damage, and skin tear. Co-skin injuries and multiple location injuries were 27.4% and 76.8%, respectively. The logistic regression analysis indicated that sweating (95% CI for odds ratio [OR] 87.52-163.11), daily wearing time (95% CI for OR 1.61-3.21), male (95% CI for OR 1.11-2.13), and grade 3 PPE (95% CI for OR 1.08-2.01) were associated with skin injuries. Only 17.7% of respondents took prevention and 45.0% of skin injuries were treated. Innovation: This is the first cross-sectional survey to understand skin injuries in medical staff caused by PPE, which is expected to be a benchmark. Conclusion: The skin injuries among medical staff are serious, with insufficient prevention and treatment. A comprehensive program should be taken in the future.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Medical Staff , Occupational Injuries , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment , Pneumonia, Viral , Skin/injuries , Adult , Betacoronavirus , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Odds Ratio , Personal Protective Equipment/adverse effects , Prevalence , Respiratory Protective Devices
4.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 99(26): e20844, 2020 Jun 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-616557

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has emerged as a rapidly spreading communicable disease affecting individuals worldwide. Patients with diabetes are more vulnerable to the disease, and the mortality is higher than in those without diabetes. We reported a severe COVID-19 patient with diabetes and shared our experience with blood glucose management. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 64-year-old female diabetes patient was admitted to the intensive care unit due to productive coughing for 8 days without any obvious cause. The results of blood gas analysis indicated that the partial pressure of oxygen was 84 mm Hg with oxygen 8 L/min, and the oxygenation index was less than 200 mm Hg. In addition, postprandial blood glucose levels were abnormal (29.9 mmol/L). DIAGNOSES: The patient was diagnosed with COVID-19 (severe type) and type 2 diabetes. INTERVENTIONS: Comprehensive interventions including establishing a multidisciplinary team, closely monitoring her blood glucose level, an individualized diabetes diet, early activities, psychological care, etc, were performed to control blood glucose while actively treating COVID-19 infection. OUTCOMES: After the comprehensive measures, the patient's blood glucose level gradually became stable, and the patient was discharged after 20 days of hospitalization. LESSONS: This case indicated that the comprehensive measures performed by a multidisciplinary team achieved good treatment effects on a COVID-19 patient with diabetes. Targeted treatment and nursing methods should be performed based on patients' actual situations in clinical practice.


Subject(s)
Blood Glucose/drug effects , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Diabetes Complications/virology , Hypoglycemic Agents/administration & dosage , Insulin/administration & dosage , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Infections/psychology , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Diabetes Complications/blood , Diabetes Complications/psychology , Diabetes Complications/therapy , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/psychology , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy
6.
Int J Nurs Stud ; : 103635, 2020 May 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-276127

ABSTRACT

This article has been withdrawn at the request of the editor. The Publisher apologizes for any inconvenience this may cause. The full Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal can be found at https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal.

7.
Int Wound J ; 17(5): 1300-1309, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-245059

ABSTRACT

Since December 2019, the medical staff fighting against COVID-19 frequently reported the device-related pressure injury (DRPI) caused by personal protective equipment (PPE). We conducted a cross-sectional survey online to investigate the prevalence and characteristics of DRPI among medical staff. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were employed to explore the risk factors associated with DRPI. A total of 4308 participants were collected and 4306 participants were valid from 161 hospitals in China. The overall prevalence of DRPI caused by PPE among medical staff was 30.03% (95% CI 28.69%-31.41%). The prevalence of male was more than that of female (42.25%, 95% CI 37.99-46.51% vs 26.36%, 95% CI 26.93-29.80%, P < .001).The categories were mainly stages 1 and 2, and the common anatomical locations were nose bridge, cheeks, ears, and forehead. Logistic regression analysis revealed that the risk factors were sweating (OR = 43.99, 95% CI 34.46-56.17), male (OR = 1.50, 95% CI 1.12-1.99), level 3 PPE (OR = 1.44, 95% CI 1.14-1.83), and longer wearing time (OR = 1.28, 95% CI 0.97-1.68). The prevalence of DRPI was high among medical staff wearing PPE against COVID-19, and the risk factors were sweating, male, wearing level 3 PPE, and longer wearing time. Comprehensive preventive interventions should be taken.

8.
Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle) ; 9(7): 357-364, 2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-101974

ABSTRACT

Objective: To investigate the prevalence, characteristics, and preventive status of skin injuries caused by personal protective equipment (PPE) in medical staff. Approach: A cross-sectional survey was conducted online for understanding skin injuries among medical staff fighting COVID-19 in February 8-22, 2020. Participants voluntarily answered and submitted the questionnaire with cell phone. The questionnaire items included demographic data, grade of PPE and daily wearing time, skin injury types, anatomical sites, and preventive measures. Univariable analyses and logistic regression analyses were used to explore the risk factors associated with skin injuries. Results: A total of 4,308 respondents were collected from 161 hospitals and 4,306 respondents were valid. The overall prevalence of skin injuries was 42.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 41.30-44.30) with three types of device-related pressure injuries, moist-associated skin damage, and skin tear. Co-skin injuries and multiple location injuries were 27.4% and 76.8%, respectively. The logistic regression analysis indicated that sweating (95% CI for odds ratio [OR] 87.52-163.11), daily wearing time (95% CI for OR 1.61-3.21), male (95% CI for OR 1.11-2.13), and grade 3 PPE (95% CI for OR 1.08-2.01) were associated with skin injuries. Only 17.7% of respondents took prevention and 45.0% of skin injuries were treated. Innovation: This is the first cross-sectional survey to understand skin injuries in medical staff caused by PPE, which is expected to be a benchmark. Conclusion: The skin injuries among medical staff are serious, with insufficient prevention and treatment. A comprehensive program should be taken in the future.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Medical Staff , Occupational Injuries , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment , Pneumonia, Viral , Skin/injuries , Adult , Betacoronavirus , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Odds Ratio , Personal Protective Equipment/adverse effects , Prevalence , Respiratory Protective Devices
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL