Evaluation and Screening of COVID-19, Contact and Risk Conditions in Healthcare Workers in a University Hospital

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the management and risk conditions of healthcare workers (HCWs) having COVID-19 infection before and after the normalization process (NP). Methods: The working group of this study consisted of 1881 HCWs who applied to the Occupational Health and Safety Unit. A form for determining the HCWs' sociodemographic characteristics and the Healthcare Worker COVID-19 Contact Case Follow-up Form were used using the Ministry of Health COVID-19 Guide. Results: This study included 1881 HCWs. The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test was assessed in 1373 (73.0%) of the HCWs, and 172 (12.5%) of the PCR tests were positive HCWs who underwent PCR testing. Before the NP, 13 (2.5%) of the HCWs had PCR positive, and after the NP, 159 (18.4%) of 862 HCWs were PCR positive. While 80 (46.5%) of PCR-positive HCWs were using personal protective equipment (PPE), 478 (39.8%) of PCR-negative HCWs were using PPE (p<0.001). While 5 (38.4%) PCR-positive and 262 (52.6) PCR-negative HCWs were using PPE before NP, 75 (47.1%) PCR-positive and 216 (30.7) PCR-negative HCWs were using PPE after NP (p<0.001 and p<0.001, respectively). Conclusion: The study showed that the frequency of COVID-19 PCR positivity in the HCWs is similar to that given by World Health Organization. ©Copyright 2023 by Anatolian Journal of Family Medicine.

Insomnia and job stressors among healthcare workers who served COVID-19 patients in Bangladesh.

BACKGROUND: The global outbreak of COVID-19 has created unprecedented havoc among health care workers, resulting in significant psychological strains like insomnia. This study aimed to analyze insomnia prevalence and job stressors among Bangladeshi health care workers in COVID-19 units. METHODOLOGY: We conducted this cross-sectional study to assess insomnia severity from January to March 2021 among 454 health care workers working in multiple hospitals in Dhaka city with active COVID-dedicated units. We selected 25 hospitals conveniently. We used a structured questionnaire for face-to-face interviews containing sociodemographic variables and job stressors. The severity of insomnia was measured by the Insomnia Severity Scale (ISS). The scale has seven items to evaluate the rate of insomnia, which was categorized as the absence of Insomnia (0-7); sub-threshold Insomnia (8-14); moderate clinical Insomnia (15-21); and severe clinical Insomnia (22-28). To identify clinical insomnia, a cut-off value of 15 was decided primarily. A cut-off score of 15 was initially proposed for identifying clinical insomnia. We performed a chi-square test and adjusted logistic regression to explore the association of different independent variables with clinically significant insomnia using the software SPSS version 25.0. RESULTS: 61.5% of our study participants were females. 44.9% were doctors, 33.9% were nurses, and 21.1% were other health care workers. Insomnia was more dominant among doctors and nurses (16.2% and 13.6%, respectively) than others (4.2%). We found clinically significant insomnia was associated with several job stressors (p < 0.05). In binary logistic regression, having sick leave (OR = 0.248, 95% CI = 0.116, 0.532) and being entitled to risk allowance (OR = 0.367, 95% CI = 0.124.1.081) showed lower odds of developing Insomnia. Previously diagnosed with COVID-19-positive health care workers had an OR of 2.596 (95% CI = 1.248, 5.399), pointing at negative experiences influencing insomnia. In addition, we observed that any training on risk and hazard increased the chances of suffering from Insomnia (OR = 1.923, 95% CI = 0.934, 3.958). CONCLUSION: It is evident from the findings that the volatile existence and ambiguity of COVID-19 have induced significant adverse psychological effects and subsequently directed our HCWs toward disturbed sleep and insomnia. The study recommends the imperativeness to formulate and implement collaborative interventions to help HCWs cope with this crisis and mitigate the mental stresses they experience during the pandemic.

Uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among healthcare workers and the effect of nudging interventions: A mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: During the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, vaccination of healthcare workers (HCWs) has a critical role because of their high-risk exposure and being a role model. Therefore, we aimed to investigate vaccine hesitancy and the role of mandatory polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing and education for vaccine uptake. METHODS: We conducted an explanatory sequential designed observational mixed-methods study, including quantitative and qualitative sections consecutively in two different pandemic hospitals between 15 September 2021 and 1 April 2022. The characteristics of vaccinated and unvaccinated HCWs were compared. The vaccine hesitancy scales were applied, and the effect of nudging, such as mandatory PCR and education, were evaluated. In-depth interviews were performed to investigate the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among HCWs according to Health Belief Model. RESULTS: In total, 3940 HCWs were included. Vaccine hesitancy was more common among males than females, the ancillary workers than other health professions, and nonmedical departments than other departments. After the mandatory weekly PCR request nudge, 83.33 % (130/156) vaccine-hesitant HCWs were vaccinated, and 8.3 % (13/156) after the small group seminars and mandatory PCR every two days. The rate of COVID-19 vaccination was raised from 95.5 % to 99.67  % (3927/3940). At the end of in-depth interviews (n = 13), the vaccine hesitancy determinants were distrust, fear of uncertainty, immune confidence and spirituality, the media effect, social pressure, and obstinacy. CONCLUSIONS: The nudging interventions such as mandatory PCR testing and small group seminars helped raise the rate of COVID-19 vaccination; the most effective one is mandatory PCR.

Investigating the Current Status of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in Hospital Staff.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 had reported over 676 million cases by March 2023. The main aim of this study is to investigate whether the levels of anti-S and anti-N antibodies could precisely indicate the degree of protection against SARS-CoV-2 and affect the probability or time of contracting COVID-19. In this study, a serosurveillance study was conducted in healthcare workers (HCWs) at a regional hospital in Taiwan to evaluate their antibody levels based on infection and vaccination status. Of 245 HCWs enrolled, all have been vaccinated prior to infection. Of these, 85 participants were infected by SARS-CoV-2, while 160 participants were not infected at the time of blood sample collection. The level of anti-SARS-CoV-2 S antibody was significantly higher in the infected HCWs than in the non-infected participants (p < 0.001). It is worth noting that the mean duration between the administration of the last dose of the vaccine and the occurrence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was 5.61 ± 2.95 months. Our follow-up survey revealed that the non-infected group had significantly higher levels of antibodies compared to the infected group (all p < 0.001). In conclusion, this study suggests that the level of antibodies could serve as a reflection of the protective efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 infection. It has the implication for vaccine decision-making policies in the future.

Adverse Effects Faced by Healthcare Workers While Using Personal Protective Equipment During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Civil Hospital, Ahmedabad.

Background Healthcare workers (HCWs) were compelled to use personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 pandemic to prevent cross-transmission. One of the most significant challenges in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic is the consistent and effective use of PPE to avoid staff exposure and infection. This study aimed to detect and evaluate the adverse effects of PPE and determine the associated risk factors. Methodology This cross-sectional study included 186 randomly selected HCWs at Civil Hospital, Ahmedabad, from May 2022 to July 2022. An anonymous self-administered questionnaire was used for data collection, and data analysis was done using descriptive statistics. Results PPE-related adverse effects were noted among 147 HCWs, with a prevalence of 79.03%. Data analysis showed that factors significantly associated with PPE adverse effects in HCWs were age group 20-40 years (chi-squared (χ2) = 4.119, p = 0.04) and female gender (χ2 = 7.153, p = 0.007). Overall, 30.8% of participants had tested positive while on duty during the pandemic. Similarly, adverse effects were associated with PPE use of more than four hours per day and more than three days per week (χ2 = 5.477, p = 0.02 and χ2 = 6.488, p = 0.01, respectively). The majority of HCWs expressed indentation and pain on the back of the ear (52.7%) and pressure-related injury (39.8%) as adverse effects after wearing masks; skin soaking in sweat (54.83%) due to gloves; profuse sweating due to gown (64.28%); fogging (65.26%) due to googles and face-shield; and discomfort (61.29%). Conclusions The prevalence of adverse effects related to wearing PPE was alarmingly high among HCWs. The major risk factors were age, female sex, and duration of use. Although the majority of healthcare personnel have received vaccinations, the use of PPE has not altered, and severe skin reactions continue to be a global issue with no known solution. To further understand the problem, national data for the impacted healthcare professionals could be helpful. Furthermore, workplace prevention programs are necessary.

Analysis and comparison of SARS-CoV-2 variant antibodies and neutralizing activity for 6 months after a booster mRNA vaccine in a healthcare worker population.

Introduction: In the context of recurrent surges of SARS-CoV-2 infections, a detailed characterization of antibody persistence over a 6-month period following vaccine booster dose is necessary to crafting effective public health policies on repeat vaccination. Methods: To characterize the SARS-CoV-2 antibody profile of a healthcare worker population over a 6-month period following mRNA vaccination and booster dose. 323 healthcare workers at an academic medical center in Orange County, California who had completed primary vaccination and booster dose against SARS-CoV-2 were recruited for the study. A total of 690 blood specimens over a 6-month period were collected via finger-stick blood and analyzed for the presence of antibodies against 9 SARS-CoV-2 antigens using a coronavirus antigen microarray. Results: The primary outcome of this study was the average SARS-CoV-2 antibody level as measured using a novel coronavirus antigen microarray. Additional outcomes measured include levels of antibodies specific to SARS-CoV-2 variants including Delta, Omicron BA.1, and BA.2. We also measured SARS-CoV-2 neutralization capacity for a subset of the population to confirm correlation with antibody levels. Although antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 wane throughout the 6-month period following a booster dose, antibody levels remain higher than pre-boost levels. However, a booster dose of vaccine based on the original Wuhan strain generates approximately 3-fold lower antibody reactivity against Omicron variants BA.1 and BA.2 as compared to the vaccine strain. Despite waning antibody levels, neutralization activity against the vaccine strain is maintained throughout the 6-month period. Discussion: In the context of recurrent surges of SARS-CoV-2 infections, our data indicate that breakthrough infections are likely driven by novel variants with different antibody specificity and not by time since last dose of vaccination, indicating that development of vaccinations specific to these novel variants is necessary to prevent future surges of SARS-CoV-2 infections.

"I Don't Want to Go to Work": A Mixed-Methods Analysis of Healthcare Worker Experiences from the Front- and Side-Lines of COVID-19.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers (HCW) were categorized as "essential" and "non-essential", creating a division where some were "locked-in" a system with little ability to prepare for or control the oncoming crisis. Others were "locked-out" regardless of whether their skills might be useful. The purpose of this study was to systematically gather data over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic from HCW through an interprofessional lens to examine experiences of locked-out HCW. This convergent parallel mixed-methods study captured perspectives representing nearly two dozen professions through a survey, administered via social media, and video blogs. Analysis included logistic regression models of differences in outcome measures by professional category and Rapid Identification of Themes from Audio recordings (RITA) of video blogs. We collected 1299 baseline responses from 15 April 2020 to 16 March 2021. Of those responses, 12.1% reported no signs of burnout, while 21.9% reported four or more signs. Qualitative analysis identified four themes: (1) professional identity, (2) intrinsic stressors, (3) extrinsic factors, and (4) coping strategies. There are some differences in the experiences of locked-in and locked-out HCW. This did not always lead to differing reports of moral distress and burnout, and both groups struggled to cope with the realities of the pandemic.

Impacts of COVID-19 on career choices in health professionals and medical students.

BACKGROUNDS: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in not only significant mortalities in Vietnam but has had an impact on its economy. Previous studies have highlighted how the pandemic has had a marginal impact on Vietnamese healthcare workers working at the frontlines. To date, there have been several other studies examining the impact of COVID-19 on intentions to transition between jobs among healthcare professionals, but this has yet to be explored amongst Vietnamese healthcare workers. METHODS: To achieve the study's objectives an online cross-sectional study was conducted between September to November 2021. Snowball sampling methodology was adopted for the recruitment of participants. The questionnaire that was used for this study comprised of the following sections: (a) socio-demographic information; (b) impact of COVID-19 on work; (c) risk of exposure to COVID-19; (d) career choices/intentions to change job, and (e) motivation at work. RESULTS: There were 5727 completed the entire survey. 17.2% of the respondents have had increased job satisfaction, 26.4% reported increased motivation to work, and 40.9% reported decreased motivation to work. Whilst there were changes in the daily work intensity and the level of work-related stress, more than 60% of respondents we sampled did not intend to switch careers. Demographic variables like gender, whether one was a student or an existing healthcare worker, and income related to work motivation. The community's stigma was a negative factor that declined intrinsic motivation as well as decreased work retention. CONCLUSIONS: Our study is instrumental in identifying the impact of COVID-19 on career choices amongst Vietnamese healthcare workers. The factors identified have clear implications for policymaking.

A New Model for a Sustainable Healthcare Supply Chain Prioritizes Patient Safety: Using the Fuzzy Delphi Method to Identify Healthcare Workers' Perspectives

The pandemic crisis and the resulting global uncertainties have obviously had a severe impact on the healthcare supply chain (HSC), leading scholars, healthcare executives, and policymakers to focus on the sustainability of the HSC. Technologies have emerged and developed rapidly in recent years, especially in the healthcare industry, for coping with the pandemic crisis and supporting the "new normal" for humankind. Within this context, various new technologies have been implemented to maximize the supply chain process, ensure patient and healthcare worker safety, and improve the quality of care. Hence, the integration of a technological dimension with the traditional three pillars of sustainability may aid in attempts to define the potential attributes of these dimensions of sustainability. Therefore, this study aimed to identify the key attributes of a sustainable healthcare supply chain (SHSC), and this paper presents a new, four-dimensional model for SHSCs, consisting of social, environmental, economic, and technological dimensions. A systematic literature review was conducted, resulting in the identification of 35 potential SHSC attributes. The Fuzzy Delphi Method (FDM) was then applied to determine the appropriateness of these potential attributes according to the consensus of 13 experts, including healthcare workers in a variety of medical specialties, who profoundly understand HSC sustainability. The results yielded 22 appropriate attributes, which were then categorized across the four dimensions. Consequently, a new model of an SHSC, which prioritizes patient safety, was constructed and is proposed here. This SHSC model can be applied strategically to the healthcare industry to enhance the safety of both medical personnel and patients in a sustainable manner.

Front-Line vs Second-Line Healthcare Workers: Susceptibility Prediction to COVID-19 Infection in a Tertiary Care Teaching Institute.

Background Since the beginning of the novel coronavirus disease in Wuhan city of China in 2019 and its spreading worldwide and taking the form of a pandemic, many healthcare workers (HCWs) were affected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Though we have used many types of personal protective equipment (PPE) kits while taking care of COVID-19 patients, we have seen COVID-19 susceptibility in different working areas were different. The pattern of infection in different working areas depended on HCWs following COVID-19 appropriate behavior. Therefore, we planned to estimate the susceptibility of front-line HCWs and second-line HCWs to getting COVID-19 infection. Aim To determine the risk of COVID-19 in front-line healthcare workers as compared to second-line healthcare workers. Method and materials We planned a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of COVID-19-positive healthcare workers from our institute within six months. Their nature of duty was analyzed and they were divided into two groups: 1) Front-line HCWs were defined as those who were working or who have worked in screening areas of the outpatient department (OPD) or COVID-19 isolation wards within the prior 14 days and provided direct care to patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19. 2) Second-line HCWs were those who were working in the general OPD or non-COVID-19 areas of our hospital and did not have contact with COVID-19-positive patients. Results A total of 59 HCWs became COVID-19 positive during the study period, 23 as front-line and 36 as second-line HCWs. The mean (SD) duration of work as a front-line worker was 51 and as a second-line worker was 84.4 hours. Fever, cough, body ache, loss of taste, loose stools, palpitation, throat pain, vertigo, vomiting, lung disease, generalized weakness, breathing difficulty, loss of smell, headache, and running nose were present in 21 (35.6%), 15 (25.4%), 9 (15.3%), 10 (16.9%), 3 (5.1%), 5 (8.5%), 5 (8.5%), 1 (1.7%), 4 (6.8%), 2 (3.4%), 11 (18.6%), 4 (6.8%), 9 (15.3%), 6 (10.2%) and 3 (5.1%), respectively. To predict the risk of getting COVID-19 infection in HCWs, binary logistic regression with COVID-19 diagnosis as the output variable was modeled with hours of working in COVID-19 wards as front-line and second-line workers as independent variables. The results showed that there was a 1.18 times increased risk of acquiring the disease for every one-hour excess of working as a front-line worker, whereas, for second-line workers, it was slightly lower, with a 1.11 times increased risk for developing COVID-19 disease with every one hour increase in duty hours. Both these associations were statistically significant (p=0.001 for front-line and 0.006 for second-line HCWs). Conclusion COVID-19 has taught us the importance of COVID-19 appropriate behavior in preventing the spread of respiratory organisms. Our study has shown that both the front-line and second-line HCWs are at increased risk of getting the infection and proper use of a PPE kit or mask can decrease the spread of such respiratory pathogens.

The impact of pandemics on healthcare providers' workloads: A scoping review.

AIMS: To review and synthesize available evidence exploring the impact of pandemics on direct healthcare providers' workloads in the acute care setting. DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA SOURCES: A review of English research articles published up to August 2022 that examined the impact of pandemics on healthcare providers' workloads was undertaken. Studies were identified by searching four electronic databases: Medline (EBSCO), CINAHL (EBSCO), Web of Science and PsychInfo (EBSCO). Fifty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. REVIEW METHODS: The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Scoping Review checklist. RESULTS: Healthcare workers experience an increase in workload pressures during a pandemic. This included patients requiring more care, undertaking non-normal work activities, increase in work content including changes to documentation, increase in demand and skills required, an increase in overtime and hours of work per week and higher patient-to-nurse ratios. The review also highlighted changes to the work environment and worsened work environments, including staffing shortages. CONCLUSION: Focused efforts from health organizations to prioritize supportive conditions, policies focused on improved work environments, staffing adequacy and fair and reasonable workloads will enhance retention of the current workforce and future planning for pandemics. IMPACT: Understanding workload challenges faced by frontline health professionals during the pandemic can improve planning, including policies and procedures, and resource allocation for future pandemic or emergency situations. In addition, extended periods of high workloads can impact staff retention. As many countries return to life after COVID-19, it is important that healthcare organizations examine staff pressures and identify ways to support staff moving forward. This will be vital for the future sustainability of the workforce. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

Workplace violence against healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Workplace violence (WPV) is a prevalent phenomenon, especially in the healthcare setting. WPV against healthcare workers (HCWs) has increased during the COVID-19 epidemic. This meta-analysis determined the prevalence and risk factors of WPV. A database search was conducted across six databases in May 2022, which was updated in October 2022. WPV prevalence among HCWs was the main outcome. Data were stratified by WPV/HCW type, pandemic period (early, mid, late), and medical specialty. WPV risk factors were the secondary outcome. All analyses were conducted through STATA. Newcastle Ottawa Scale evaluated the quality. Sensitivity analysis identified effect estimate changes. A total of 38 studies (63,672 HCWs) were analyzed. The prevalence of WPV of any kind (43%), physical (9%), verbal (48%), and emotional (26%) was high. From mid-pandemic to late-pandemic, WPV (40-47%), physical violence (12-23%), and verbal violence (45-58%) increased. Nurses had more than double the rate of physical violence (13% vs. 5%) than physicians, while WPV and verbal violence were equal. Gender, profession, and COVID-19 timing did not affect WPV, physical, or verbal violence risk. COVID-19 HCWs were more likely to be physically assaulted (logOR = 0.54; 95% CI: 0.10: 0.97). Most healthcare employees suffer verbal violence, followed by emotional, bullying, sexual harassment, and physical assault. Pandemic-related workplace violence increased. Nurses were twice as violent as doctors. COVID-19 healthcare employees had a higher risk of physical and workplace violence.

The impact of COVID-19 vaccination for healthcare workers on the SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers in a tertiary hospital in Jakarta, Indonesia

Background: Healthcare workers (HCWs) get priority access to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination since they are at high risk of infection with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). In Indonesia, an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was utilized to generate an antibody response against SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthcare workers. However, data on the kinetics of antibodies generated by this vaccination remains inconsistent. This study aimed to assess quantitative antibody titers on the 28th and 90th days after the second dose of COVID-19 immunization. Methods: This prospective cohort study involved 189 HCWs. The samples were analyzed by Roche® Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 serology test for quantitative SARS-CoV-2 total antibody. Data were analyzed using STATA version 17 for Windows. Results: Most of the subjects (75.1%) were females, with a male-to-female ratio of 1:3. Most subjects are medic (68.8%), do not have comorbid (75.8%), have not been infected with Covid-19 (73.5%), and not a close contact (55%). Previous COVID-19 infection affects antibody titers significantly (p<0.0001). Moreover, quantitative antibody titers differ significantly between 28-and 90-days following the second dose of Sinovac vaccination (p<0.0001). However, age, gender, profession, comorbidity, and history of close contact did not significantly associate with antibody titers (p=0.150, p=0.105, p=0.367, p=0.063, and p=0.696, respectively). Conclusions: Our study shows that antibody titers on 90-days following the second dose of COVID-19 vaccination are significantly lower than after 28 days. Moreover, antibody titers on survivors are higher than on those who have not been infected. Further multi-institutional study with a larger sample and longer follow-up is necessary to clarify and confirm our findings. © 2023, Sanglah General Hospital. All rights reserved.

Risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence following the first pandemic wave in UK healthcare workers in a large NHS Foundation Trust.

Background: We aimed to measure SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in a cohort of healthcare workers (HCWs) during the first UK wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, explore risk factors associated with infection, and investigate the impact of antibody titres on assay sensitivity. Methods: HCWs at Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust were prospectively enrolled and sampled at two time points. We developed an in-house ELISA for testing participant serum for SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgA reactivity against Spike and Nucleoprotein. Data were analysed using three statistical models: a seroprevalence model, an antibody kinetics model, and a heterogeneous sensitivity model. Results: Our in-house assay had a sensitivity of 99·47% and specificity of 99·56%. We found that 24·4% (n=311/1275) of HCWs were seropositive as of 12th June 2020. Of these, 39·2% (n=122/311) were asymptomatic. The highest adjusted seroprevalence was measured in HCWs on the Acute Medical Unit (41·1%, 95% CrI 30·0-52·9) and in Physiotherapists and Occupational Therapists (39·2%, 95% CrI 24·4-56·5). Older age groups showed overall higher median antibody titres. Further modelling suggests that, for a serological assay with an overall sensitivity of 80%, antibody titres may be markedly affected by differences in age, with sensitivity estimates of 89% in those over 60 years but 61% in those ≤30 years. Conclusions:  HCWs in acute medical units and those working closely with COVID-19 patients were at highest risk of infection, though whether these are infections acquired from patients or other staff is unknown. Current serological assays may underestimate seroprevalence in younger age groups if validated using sera from older and/or more severe COVID-19 cases.

COVID-19 Transmission in Healthcare Professionals in the First Period of the Pandemic

Objective: We aimed to evaluate the spread of COVID-19 among healthcare workers diagnosed with COVID-19 at the beginning of the COVID-19 epidemic and to draw attention to the importance of the correct and effective use of personal protective equipment.Methods: This is a descriptive, cross-sectional, retrospective study. The research universe consisted of healthcare workers and administrative and technical personnel working at a university hospital who were diagnosed with COVID-19 at the beginning of the pandemic. The sample consisted of 100 healthcare workers diagnosed with COVID-19 and agreed to participate in the study. Data were collected between 10 June -30 July 2020. The "Evaluation of the Transmission Status of Healthcare Workers Diagnosed with COVID-19 Questionnaire" questionnaire, which included questions about demographic and disease information, COVID-19 transmission, and personal protective equipment usage parameters, was used as the data collection tool. The questionnaire was filled face to face or by telephone calls by the researchers.Results: Of the participants, 41% stated that they had never worked in the COVID unit, 33% worked only on duty in the COVID unit, and 26% stated that they constantly worked in the COVID unit;32% had contact with a patient diagnosed with COVID-19 in the last 14 days. Regarding the use of personal protective equip-ment, 51% stated that they did not have any problems, and 52% stated that they had not received any training.Conclusion: Frontline healthcare workers can be infected during the pandemic. Inadequacies in the use of personal protective equipment, omissions, failure to carry out systematic training and practices, and neglecting the use of pro-tective equipment in social environments increase the risk of transmission.

The Image of Healthcare and Healthcare Professionals in the Russian Television Media Agenda in 2019-2021

In this article, we analyze the image of healthcare and health professionals in the Russian television media agenda before and during the COVID-19 pan-demic and determine the frequency and content of health-related news reports on federal and regional evening newscasts for 2019-2021 (by the example of two news programs-Vremya, Channel One, and Vesti. Don, channel Russia-1). Content analysis of news reports was conducted by the Southern Federal University research team (Rostov-on-Don, Russia) in the course of the RFBR-supported research project on social well-being of the medical community in a complex epidemiological situation. Altogether, we have analyzed 1096 evening Vremya newscasts and 784 Vesti. Don newscasts. The sample set included 244 Vremya news items (about 19% of the total number), and 152 Vesti. Don news items (about 17%, respectively). The sampling was random mechanical (with a certain preset interval). The coded categories and units of analysis were registered as cards, one card per each news item. As the categories for analysis, we have selected topic, genre, nature, locality, length, central figure in a news piece, and presence of a challenge or a problem situation. Unit of count-news piece. On both federal and regional television in general, there was a significant increase in the number of news stories on healthcare from 2019 to 2021. In 2020 and 2021, the thematic angle has changed radically towards the news on the pandemic of a 2019 coronavirus disease and vaccination against it. It should be noted that the main heroes of health-related news reports were and still are neither doctors, nor patients, but representatives of the authorities and Rospotrebnadzor;the share of reports about ordinary doctors was decreasing;with the launch of COVID-19 vaccination, the number of news items featuring mid-level health professionals went up;on the other hand, as COVID-19 was spreading, scientists and inventors appeared in health-related news less frequently, especially in regional news;the pandemic has significantly shifted the focus from child patients to adults, and especially to the elderly. Keywords: medicine, healthcare, healthcare worker, doctor, nursing staff, media agenda, media, COVID-19 pandemic, coronavirus, content analysis, television, news story, in-depth interview

Hybrid Immunity for COVID-19 in Bolivian Healthcare Workers.

Introduction Vaccination is one of the pillars for the prevention of COVID-19 in healthcare workers (HCWs). The present study aims to determine the effectiveness of vaccination for COVID-19 as well as hybrid immunity in previously infected HCWs in a hospital in a developing country. Methods An observational study was carried out on health personnel with a complete COVID-19 vaccination schedule according to their previous infection status, with a follow-up period of 15 months. Results In this study, 335 subjects were enrolled, of which 32.8% had a previous infection with COVID-19. The safety of vaccines was determined by estimating the presence of adverse effects of vaccination and immunization (AEVI), with the first and second doses showing an incidence of 8.2% and 9.5% respectively, during the second and third waves. Around 5.7% of immunized personnel were sick and 8.4% in the fourth wave; the serum value of neutralizing antibodies was normal at 60.2% with no differences between vaccines (p=0.164). However, in personnel with hybrid immunity, there were normal levels of antibodies in 81.8% of cases (p= 0.023), fewer days of medical leave (6.4 days (standard deviation=1.4) (p=0.067)), higher immunoglobin values ​​(p=0.011) and an insignificantly (p=0.248) lower rate of COVID-19 presentation. Conclusion Vaccination, when applied to people who previously acquired natural immunity, generates a hybrid immunity that is robust, and could have a longer duration, as well as greater efficacy for new COVID-19 variants of concern.

Creative arts intervention to reduce burnout and decrease psychological distress in healthcare professionals: A qualitative analysis

Creative arts therapy (CAT) can potentially mitigate the unprecedented levels of healthcare professional (HCP) burnout that have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. However, empirical evidence about the impact of CAT programs is lacking. We conducted focus groups with HCPs (N = 20) who participated in a 12-week CAT clinical trial to enhance the understanding of the effectiveness of the intervention. For HCPs experiencing burnout and psychological distress, our CAT program supported healing and resiliency through building a sense of community. Participants reported that several programmatic components contributed to this sense of community including: 1) diversity of participants' disciplines, roles, and geographic locations;2) physical separation between the conduct of the CAT program and their primary place of employment;3) facilitator skill;4) collectively contributing to a group project;and 5) being pushed out of their "comfort zone" through the creative activity. Although participants described the particular need for the CAT program in light of additional stressors induced by the COVID-19 pandemic, they believed that this program would have been beneficial pre-pandemic and in the future. To build long-term resiliency, participants suggested that CAT interventions should continue after the 12-week program.Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd

A Gesture Controlled System to Train and Guide the Healthcare Workers While Donning and Doffing Personal Protective Equipment

During the COVID-19 outbreak, many healthcare workers (HCWs) have been infected because they failed to comply with the correct process of donning and doffing personal protective equipment (PPE). Based on this, we develop a gesture-controlled system that not only can train HCWs but also can give HCWs real-time guidance during the process of donning and doffing PPE. It can effectively prevent the infection of HCWs. We first use the hand detection algorithm to locate the position of the HCWs, helping them to enter the proper area. Then they can use our gesture recognition algorithm to control the playback of the videos which guides them in donning and doffing PPE. We verify the effectiveness of the system through a series of experiments. The results show the great value of our system in the protection of HCWs. © 2022 IEEE.

Wearing N95 masks decreases the odor discrimination ability of healthcare workers: a self-controlled before-after study.

Objective: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the N95 mask is an essential piece of protective equipment for healthcare workers. However, the N95 mask may inhibit air exchange and odor penetration. Our study aimed to determine whether the use of N95 masks affects the odor discrimination ability of healthcare workers. Methods: In our study, all the participants were asked to complete three olfactory tests. Each test involved 12 different odors. The participants completed the test while wearing an N95 mask, a surgical mask, and no mask. The score for each olfactory test was documented. Results: The olfactory test score was significantly lower when the participants wore N95 masks than when they did not wear a mask (7 vs. 10, p < 0.01). The score was also lower when the participants wore N95 masks than surgical masks (7 vs. 8, p < 0.01). Conclusion: Wearing N95 masks decreases the odor discrimination ability of healthcare workers. Therefore, we suggest that healthcare workers seek other clues when diagnosing disease with a characteristic odor.