Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes ; 5(6): 1089-1099, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1527800

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on psychosocial and behavioral responses of the non-health care workforce and to evaluate transmission prevention behavior implementation in the workplace. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: We deployed the baseline questionnaire of a prospective online survey from November 20, 2020, through February 8, 2021 to US-based employees. The survey included questions on psychosocial and behavioral responses in addition to transmission prevention behaviors (e.g., mask wearing). Select questions asked employees to report perceptions and behaviors before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data were analyzed descriptively and stratified by work from home (WFH) percentage. RESULTS: In total, 3607 employees from 8 companies completed the survey. Most participants (70.0%) averaged 90% or more of their time WFH during the pandemic. Employees reported increases in stress (54.0%), anxiety (57.4%), fatigue (51.6%), feeling unsafe (50.4%), lack of companionship (60.5%), and feeling isolated from others (69.3%) from before to during the pandemic. Productivity was perceived to decrease for 42.9% of employees and non-work-related screen time and alcohol consumption to increase for 50.7% and 25.1% of employees, respectively, from before to during the pandemic. Adverse changes were worse among those with lower WFH percentages. Most employees reported wearing a mask (98.2%), washing hands regularly (95.7%), and physically distancing (93.6%) in the workplace. CONCLUSION: These results suggest worsened psychosocial and behavioral outcomes from before to during the COVID-19 pandemic and higher transmission prevention behavior implementation among non-health care employees. These observations provide novel insight into how the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted non-health care employees.

2.
Am J Emerg Med ; 53: 285.e1-285.e5, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1432719

ABSTRACT

STUDY OBJECTIVES: COVID-19 brought unique challenges; however, it remains unclear what effect the pandemic had on violence in healthcare. The objective of this study was to identify the impact of the pandemic on workplace violence at an academic emergency department (ED). METHODS: This mixed-methods study involved a prospective descriptive survey study and electronic medical record review. Within our hospital referral region (HRR), the first COVID-19 case was documented on 3/11/2020 and cases peaked in mid-November 2020. We compared the monthly HRR COVID-19 case rate per 100,000 people to the rate of violent incidents per 1000 ED visits. Multidisciplinary ED staff were surveyed both pre/early-pandemic (April 2020) and mid/late-pandemic (December 2020) regarding workplace violence experienced over the prior 6-months. The study was deemed exempt by the Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board. RESULTS: There was a positive association between the monthly HRR COVID-19 case rate and rate of violent ED incidents (r = 0.24). Violent incidents increased overall during the pandemic (2.53 incidents per 1000 visits) compared to the 3 months prior (1.13 incidents per 1000 visits, p < .001), as well as compared to the previous year (1.24 incidents per 1000 patient visits, p < .001). Survey respondents indicated a higher incidence of assault during the pandemic, compared to before (p = .019). DISCUSSION: Incidents of workplace violence at our ED increased during the pandemic and there was a positive association of these incidents with the COVID-19 case rate. Our findings indicate health systems should prioritize employee safety during future pandemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Workplace Violence/statistics & numerical data , Academic Medical Centers/organization & administration , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Adult , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Chi-Square Distribution , Crime Victims/rehabilitation , Data Mining/statistics & numerical data , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Female , Health Personnel/psychology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Surveys and Questionnaires , Workplace Violence/trends
3.
West J Emerg Med ; 21(5): 1080-1083, 2020 Aug 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-792594

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Barrier enclosures have been developed to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission to healthcare providers during intubation, but little is known about their impact on procedure performance. We sought to determine whether a barrier enclosure delays time to successful intubation by experienced airway operators. METHODS: We conducted a crossover simulation study at a tertiary academic hospital. Participants watched a four-minute video, practiced one simulated intubation with a barrier enclosure, and then completed one intubation with and one without the barrier enclosure (randomized to determine order). The primary outcome measure was time from placement of the video laryngoscope at the lips to first delivered ventilation. Secondary outcomes were periprocedural complications and participant responses to a post-study survey. RESULTS: Proceduralists (n = 50) from emergency medicine and anesthesiology had median intubation times of 23.6 seconds with practice barrier enclosure, 20.5 seconds with barrier enclosure, and 16.7 seconds with no barrier. Intubation with barrier enclosure averaged 4.5 seconds longer (95% confidence interval, 2.7-6.4, p < .001) than without, but was less than the predetermined clinical significance threshold of 10 seconds. Three complications occurred, all during the practice intubation. Barrier enclosure made intubation more challenging according to 48%, but 90% indicated they would consider using it in clinical practice. CONCLUSION: Experienced airway operators performed intubation using a barrier enclosure with minimal increased time to procedure completion in this uncomplicated airway model. Given potential to reduce droplet spread, use of a barrier enclosure may be an acceptable adjunct to endotracheal intubation for those familiar with its use.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Clinical Competence/statistics & numerical data , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Intubation, Intratracheal/instrumentation , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Adult , Anesthesiology , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Cross-Over Studies , Emergency Medicine , Female , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal/methods , Laryngoscopes , Male , Manikins , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , SARS-CoV-2 , Time Factors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL