Adaptation, Validity, and Reliability of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq.

AIM: The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) is widely used for detecting and screening depression in Iraq. However, no psychometric assessment has been performed on any Iraqi version. This study aims at studying the reliability and validity of the Iraqi Kurdish version of the PHQ-9 as tool for identifying depression. METHODS: A cross-sectional study design was used; data were collected from 872 participants (49.3% female and 51.7% male) at Primary Health Care Centers (PHCCs) in the host community as well as from Internal Displaced Persons (IDPs) and refugee camps. Sociodemographic information was obtained; PHQ-9 for the diagnosis and screening of depression and Self Reporting Questionnaire 20 items (SRQ-20) for the screening of common mental illnesses were administered. Validity and reliability analyses were performed. RESULTS: In total, 19% of the participants had a PHQ-9 total score equal to or higher than the clinical cut-off of 10 for diagnosing depressive disorder. The internal consistency of the PHQ-9 was good (Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.89). Good concurrent validity for PHQ-9 compared with SRQ-20 (71%, p < 0.001) was found. CONCLUSIONS: The PHQ-9 demonstrates good psychometric properties and proves to be a good tool for detecting and screening depression.

Working conditions and stressors data during Covid-19 and mental well-being in Iranian healthcare workers.

The current Covid-19 pandemic has affected the physical and mental stressors of hospital-based healthcare workers, but the extent of such effects are required to be quantified. This survey looked at data on nurses' perception across teaching hospitals to assess the impacts of Covid-19 on working conditions, exposure to stressors, and mental health symptoms. We implemented a population survey with a cross-sectional design in teaching hospitals affiliated with Medical Sciences Universities in Iran from April to November 2021. Participants were about 1200 health care workers, including hospital nursing staff, assistants, and technicians. Final data were assembled from 831 hospital nurses across surgery, dialysis, intensive care, emergency care, cardiac care, internal medicine, gynecology, and pediatric wards. Self-reported data were collected directly from survey participants. We collected information on variables including gender, marital status, employment status, occupational health training, evaluation of work environment stressors, fear of Covid-19, and occupational burnout constructs, specifically reflecting emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment. Focus groups of faculties evaluated and edited items to test the content wording and to define the content that are valid measures of the variables. The questionnaires were assessed for their reliability. Manual data entries were double-checked for errors. Data were recorded and categorized consistently to ensure the replicability of the data in the future. Statistical descriptive and analytical analyses were performed on the data. Data reported on the frequencies and mean values of responses and the variations of mental health in terms of worktime schedules. Chi- square, ANOVA, and correlation analyses determined relations between variables. The compiled data shed light on the exposure and response to physical and psychosocial factors and mental health symptoms among nurses during the pandemic. The data files detailed in this article can be further reused to inform workplace determinants of health in hospital settings. The obtained scores and existing dataset on mental health outcomes can help future studies to consider resilience strategies that should be provided among nurses.

Outbreaks in Health Care Settings.

Outbreaks and pseudo-outbreaks in health care settings are complex and should be evaluated systematically using epidemiologic and molecular tools. Outbreaks result from failures of infection prevention practices, inadequate staffing, and undertrained or overcommitted health care personnel. Contaminated hands, equipment, supplies, water, ventilation systems, and environment may also contribute. Neonatal intensive care, endoscopy, oncology, and transplant units are areas at particular risk. Procedures, such as bronchoscopy and endoscopy, are sources of infection when cleaning and disinfection processes are inadequate. New types of equipment can be introduced and lead to contamination or equipment and medications can be contaminated at the manufacturing source.

Perspectives on COVID-19 testing policies and practices: a qualitative study with scientific advisors and NHS health care workers in England.

BACKGROUND: As COVID-19 death rates have risen and health-care systems have experienced increased demand, national testing strategies have come under scrutiny. Utilising qualitative interview data from a larger COVID-19 study, this paper provides insights into influences on and the enactment of national COVID-19 testing strategies for health care workers (HCWs) in English NHS settings during wave one of the COVID-19 pandemic (March-August 2020). Through the findings we aim to inform learning about COVID-19 testing policies and practices; and to inform future pandemic diagnostic preparedness. METHODS: A remote qualitative, semi-structured longitudinal interview method was employed with a purposive snowball sample of senior scientific advisors to the UK Government on COVID-19, and HCWs employed in NHS primary and secondary health care settings in England. Twenty-four interviews from 13 participants were selected from the larger project dataset using a key term search, as not all of the transcripts contained references to testing. Framework analysis was informed by the non-adoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, and sustainability of patient-facing health and care technologies implementation framework (NASSS) and by normalisation process theory (NPT). RESULTS: Our account highlights tensions between the communication and implementation of national testing developments; scientific advisor and HCW perceptions about infectiousness; and uncertainties about the responsibility for testing and its implications at the local level. CONCLUSIONS: Consideration must be given to the implications of mass NHS staff testing, including the accuracy of information communicated to HCWs; how HCWs interpret, manage, and act on testing guidance; and the influence these have on health care organisations and services.

Singapore COVID-19 Pandemic Response as a Successful Model Framework for Low-Resource Health Care Settings in Africa?

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus continues to spread and evolve across the planet. The crosscutting impacts of the virus, individual country responses to the virus, and the state of preparedness of local public health systems greatly vary across the world. The ostensibly late arrival of the virus in Africa has allowed learning, innovation, and adaptation of methods that have been successful in the early-hit countries. This article analyzes how Singapore has responded to the COVID-19 pandemic and proposes that adaptations of the Singapore pandemic response model would bode well for Africa's response to the COVID-19 pandemic in ways that also take into account regional differences in health care infrastructures, socioeconomic resilience, poverty, and the vast population diversity in the African continent. As the pandemic evolves, the lessons learned in Asia, in particular, and the emerging new experiences in African countries should inform, ideally in real time, how best to steer the world populations into safety, including those in low-resource health care settings. Finally, we note that the current COVID-19 pandemic is also a test for our collective ability to scale and surge public health in response to future and likely equally challenging zoonosis infections that jump from animals to humans, not to mention climate change-related planetary health calamities in the 21st century. Hence, what we learn effectively from the current COVID-19 pandemic shall have broad, enduring, and intergenerational relevance for the future of planetary heath and society.