ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Although COVID-19 attracted attention to the environments of professional nursing practice, triggering a series of responses to address some of the most pressing problems, it is important to identify the size and scope of other weaknesses that have emerged. METHODS: In an observational and cross-sectional study, using the Scale for the Evaluation of the Environment of Professional Nursing Practice, 752 nurses from a Portuguese university hospital, provided socio-demographic and professional data about the components structure, process and outcome of their professional nursing environment. Data collection took place from June 1-30, 2020, immediately after the first critical period of the COVID-19 pandemic in Portugal. RESULTS: In the analysed environment of professional nursing practice, Process factors were favourable to the quality of care, while the Structure and Outcome factors had a moderately favourable effect. Structure factors related to work contexts (Pâ<â.001) and nursing functions in patient care areas with COVID-19 (Pâ=â.001). Process factors related significantly to work contexts (Pâ<â.001). A significant association was found between Outcome factors and work contexts (Pâ<â.001) and nursing functions in patient care areas with COVID-19 (Pâ=â.005). CONCLUSION: The environments of professional nursing practice in the hospital under study are moderately favourable to the quality of care. However, the need to invest in nurses' participation, involvement and professional qualification is clear. Maintenance of a sustainable nursing workforce requires attention to be given to ensuring that practice environments are conducive to the quality of care and geared to promoting professional involvement and job satisfaction among nurses.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: To analyse the impact of the COVID-19 epidemic and the lockdown measures on the follow-up and control of chronic diseases in primary care. METHODS: Retrospective study in 288 primary care practices (PCP) of the Catalan Institute of Health. We analysed the results of 34 indicators of the Healthcare quality standard (EQA), comprising different types: treatment (4), follow-up (5), control (10), screening (7), vaccinations (4) and quaternary prevention (4). For each PCP, we calculated each indicator's percentage of change in February, March and April 2020 respective to the results of the previous month; and used the T-Student test for paired data to compare them with the percentage of change in the same month of the previous year. We defined indicators with a negative effect those with a greater negative change or a lesser positive change in 2020 in comparison to 2019; and indicators with a positive effect those with a greater positive change or a lesser negative change. RESULTS: We observed a negative effect on 85% of the EQA indicators in March and 68% in April. 90% of the control indicators had a negative effect, highlighting the control of LDL cholesterol with a reduction of - 2.69% (95%CI - 3.17% to - 2.23%) in March and - 3.41% (95%CI - 3.82% to - 3.01%) in April; and the control of blood pressure with a reduction of - 2.13% (95%CI - 2.34% to - 1.9%) and - 2.59% (95%CI - 2.8% to - 2.37%). The indicators with the greatest negative effect were those of screening, such as the indicator of diabetic foot screening with a negative effect of - 2.86% (95%CI - 3.33% to - 2.39%) and - 4.13% (95%CI - 4.55% to - 3.71%) in March and April, respectively. Only one vaccination indicator, adult Measles-Mumps-Rubella vaccine, had a negative effect in both months. Finally, among the indicators of quaternary prevention, we observed negative effects in March and April although in that case a lower inadequacy that means better clinical outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 epidemic and the lockdown measures have significantly reduced the results of the follow-up, control, screening and vaccination indicators for patients in primary care. On the other hand, the indicators for quaternary prevention have been strengthened and their results have improved.