Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 702
Filter
1.
West J Emerg Med ; 23(4): 570-578, 2022 Jul 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20237020

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Unvaccinated emergency medical services (EMS) personnel are at increased risk of contracting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and potentially transmitting the virus to their families, coworkers, and patients. Effective vaccines for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 virus exist; however, vaccination rates among EMS professionals remain largely unknown. Consequently, we sought to document vaccination rates of EMS professionals and identify predictors of vaccination uptake. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of North Carolina EMS professionals after the COVID-19 vaccines were widely available. The survey assessed vaccination status as well as beliefs regarding COVID-19 illness and vaccine effectiveness. Prediction of vaccine uptake was modeled using logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 860 EMS professionals completed the survey, of whom 74.7% reported receiving the COVID-19 vaccination. Most respondents believed that COVID-19 is a serious threat to the population, that they are personally at higher risk of infection, that vaccine side effects are outweighed by illness prevention, and the vaccine is safe and effective. Despite this, only 18.7% supported mandatory vaccination for EMS professionals. Statistically significant differences were observed between the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups regarding vaccine safety and effectiveness, recall of employer vaccine recommendation, perceived risk of infection, degree of threat to the population, and trust in government to take actions to limit the spread of disease. Unvaccinated respondents cited reasons such as belief in personal health and natural immunity as protectors against infection, concerns about vaccine safety and effectiveness, inadequate vaccine knowledge, and lack of an employer mandate for declining the vaccine. Predictors of vaccination included belief in vaccine safety (odds ratio [OR] 5.5, P=<0.001) and effectiveness (OR 4.6, P=<0.001); importance of vaccination to protect patients (OR 15.5, P=<0.001); perceived personal risk of infection (OR 1.8, P=0.04); previous receipt of influenza vaccine (OR 2.5, P=0.003); and sufficient knowledge to make an informed decision about vaccination (OR 2.4, P=0.024). CONCLUSION: In this survey of EMS professionals, over a quarter remained unvaccinated for COVID-19. Given the identified predictors of vaccine acceptance, EMS systems should focus on countering misinformation through employee educational campaigns as well as on developing policies regarding workforce immunization requirements.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Emergency Medical Services , Health Personnel , Vaccination , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , COVID-19 Vaccines/supply & distribution , Cross-Sectional Studies , Decision Making , Health Personnel/psychology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Health Surveys , Humans , Influenza Vaccines/administration & dosage , North Carolina , Occupational Health , Patient Safety , Vaccination/legislation & jurisprudence , Vaccination/psychology , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data
3.
N Engl J Med ; 388(12): 1101-1110, 2023 Mar 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2271571

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Despite widespread adoption of surveillance testing for coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) among staff members in skilled nursing facilities, evidence is limited regarding its relationship with outcomes among facility residents. METHODS: Using data obtained from 2020 to 2022, we performed a retrospective cohort study of testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among staff members in 13,424 skilled nursing facilities during three pandemic periods: before vaccine approval, before the B.1.1.529 (omicron) variant wave, and during the omicron wave. We assessed staff testing volumes during weeks without Covid-19 cases relative to other skilled nursing facilities in the same county, along with Covid-19 cases and deaths among residents during potential outbreaks (defined as the occurrence of a case after 2 weeks with no cases). We reported adjusted differences in outcomes between high-testing facilities (90th percentile of test volume) and low-testing facilities (10th percentile). The two primary outcomes were the weekly cumulative number of Covid-19 cases and related deaths among residents during potential outbreaks. RESULTS: During the overall study period, 519.7 cases of Covid-19 per 100 potential outbreaks were reported among residents of high-testing facilities as compared with 591.2 cases among residents of low-testing facilities (adjusted difference, -71.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], -91.3 to -51.6). During the same period, 42.7 deaths per 100 potential outbreaks occurred in high-testing facilities as compared with 49.8 deaths in low-testing facilities (adjusted difference, -7.1; 95% CI, -11.0 to -3.2). Before vaccine availability, high- and low-testing facilities had 759.9 cases and 1060.2 cases, respectively, per 100 potential outbreaks (adjusted difference, -300.3; 95% CI, -377.1 to -223.5), along with 125.2 and 166.8 deaths (adjusted difference, -41.6; 95% CI, -57.8 to -25.5). Before the omicron wave, the numbers of cases and deaths were similar in high- and low-testing facilities; during the omicron wave, high-testing facilities had fewer cases among residents, but deaths were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Greater surveillance testing of staff members at skilled nursing facilities was associated with clinically meaningful reductions in Covid-19 cases and deaths among residents, particularly before vaccine availability.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Disease Outbreaks , Health Personnel , Population Surveillance , Skilled Nursing Facilities , Humans , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/prevention & control , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Disease Outbreaks/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Skilled Nursing Facilities/standards , Skilled Nursing Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Health Personnel/standards , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Population Surveillance/methods , Patients/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data
4.
Viruses ; 14(2)2022 01 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2285589

ABSTRACT

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The aim of the study was to estimate the SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence among HCWs in Cochabamba, Bolivia and to determine the potential risk factors. In January 2021, a cross-sectional SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence study was conducted in 783 volunteer clinical and non-clinical HCWs in tertiary care facilities. It was based on IgG detection using ELISA, chemiluminiscence, and seroneutralisation tests from dried blood spots. Analysis revealed a high seroprevalence (43.4%) of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies. The combination of anosmia and ageusia (OR: 68.11; 95%-CI 24.83-186.80) was predictive of seropositivity. Belonging to the cleaning staff (OR: 1.94; 95%-CI 1.09-3.45), having more than two children in the same house (OR: 1.74; 95%-CI 1.12-2.71), and having been in contact with a close relative with COVID-19 (OR: 3.53; 95%-CI 2.24-5.58) were identified as risk factors for seropositivity in a multivariate analysis. A total of 47.5% of participants had received medication for COVID-19 treatment or prevention, and only ~50% of symptomatic subjects accessed PCR or antigenic testing. This study confirms a massive SARS-CoV-2 attack rate among HCWs in Cochabamba by the end of January 2021. The main risk factors identified are having a low-skilled job, living with children, and having been in contact with an infected relative in the household.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/immunology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Bolivia/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Immunoglobulin G/immunology , Male , Middle Aged , Prevalence , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Tertiary Healthcare/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
5.
JMIR Public Health Surveill ; 7(6): e27189, 2021 06 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2197904

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, swab tests proved to be effective in containing the infection and served as a means for early diagnosis and contact tracing. However, little evidence exists regarding the correct timing for the execution of the swab test, especially for asymptomatic individuals and health care workers. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to analyze changes in the positive findings over time in individual SARS-CoV-2 swab tests during a health surveillance program. METHODS: The study was conducted with 2071 health care workers at the University Hospital of Verona, with a known date of close contact with a patient with COVID-19, between February 29 and April 17, 2020. The health care workers underwent a health surveillance program with repeated swab tests to track their virological status. A generalized additive mixed model was used to investigate how the probability of a positive test result changes over time since the last known date of close contact, in an overall sample of individuals who tested positive for COVID-19 and in a subset of individuals with an initial negative swab test finding before being proven positive, to assess different surveillance time intervals. RESULTS: Among the 2071 health care workers in this study, 191 (9.2%) tested positive for COVID-19, and 103 (54%) were asymptomatic with no differences based on sex or age. Among 49 (25.7%) cases, the initial swab test yielded negative findings after close contact with a patient with COVID-19. Sex, age, symptoms, and the time of sampling were not different between individuals with an initial negative swab test finding and those who initially tested positive after close contact. In the overall sample, the estimated probability of testing positive was 0.74 on day 1 after close contact, which increased to 0.77 between days 5 and 8. In the 3 different scenarios for scheduled repeated testing intervals (3, 5, and 7 days) in the subgroup of individuals with an initially negative swab test finding, the probability peaked on the sixth, ninth and tenth, and 13th and 14th days, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Swab tests can initially yield false-negative outcomes. The probability of testing positive increases from day 1, peaking between days 5 and 8 after close contact with a patient with COVID-19. Early testing, especially in this final time window, is recommended together with a health surveillance program scheduled in close intervals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/diagnosis , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Contact Tracing/methods , False Negative Reactions , Female , Humans , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/statistics & numerical data , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Time Factors
6.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(21): e26102, 2021 May 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2191016

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: Healthcare workers (HWs) perform a critical role not only in the clinical management of patients but also in providing adequate infection control and prevention measures and waste management procedures to be implemented in healthcare facilities. The aim of this study was to evaluate the awareness and knowledge of COVID-19 infection control precautions and waste management procedures among HWs in Saudi Arabian hospitals.This was a descriptive, cross-sectional study. Information on knowledge, awareness, and practice of infection control and waste management procedures were obtained from the HWs using a structured questionnaire. A thematic analysis was used to analyze the data.Our findings indicated that most of the study participants were knowledgeable, with a mean score of 78.3%. In total, 92.5%, 90.3%, and 91.7% of the participants were aware of the infection control precautions, COVID-19 waste management procedures, the availability of infection control supplies, respectively. HWs' Knowledge regarding waste management and infection control procedures correlated significantly with sex (P ≤ .001 and <.001), education (P = .024 and .043), and working experience (P = .029 and .009), respectively.Most participants appreciated the importance of their role in infection control, surveillance, and monitoring of the ongoing safety practices in their patients as well as their facilities and communities.


Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Infection Control/standards , Medical Waste Disposal/standards , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19/virology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Facilities/standards , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infection Control/organization & administration , Infection Control/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics/prevention & control , Practice Guidelines as Topic , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Saudi Arabia/epidemiology , Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
7.
Elife ; 92020 08 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2155740

ABSTRACT

We conducted voluntary Covid-19 testing programmes for symptomatic and asymptomatic staff at a UK teaching hospital using naso-/oro-pharyngeal PCR testing and immunoassays for IgG antibodies. 1128/10,034 (11.2%) staff had evidence of Covid-19 at some time. Using questionnaire data provided on potential risk-factors, staff with a confirmed household contact were at greatest risk (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.82 [95%CI 3.45-6.72]). Higher rates of Covid-19 were seen in staff working in Covid-19-facing areas (22.6% vs. 8.6% elsewhere) (aOR 2.47 [1.99-3.08]). Controlling for Covid-19-facing status, risks were heterogenous across the hospital, with higher rates in acute medicine (1.52 [1.07-2.16]) and sporadic outbreaks in areas with few or no Covid-19 patients. Covid-19 intensive care unit staff were relatively protected (0.44 [0.28-0.69]), likely by a bundle of PPE-related measures. Positive results were more likely in Black (1.66 [1.25-2.21]) and Asian (1.51 [1.28-1.77]) staff, independent of role or working location, and in porters and cleaners (2.06 [1.34-3.15]).


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Adolescent , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Asymptomatic Infections/epidemiology , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Female , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Incidence , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/statistics & numerical data , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Risk , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Young Adult
9.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 42(4): 392-398, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2096426

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The seroprevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) IgG antibody was evaluated among employees of a Veterans Affairs healthcare system to assess potential risk factors for transmission and infection. METHODS: All employees were invited to participate in a questionnaire and serological survey to detect antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 as part of a facility-wide quality improvement and infection prevention initiative regardless of clinical or nonclinical duties. The initiative was conducted from June 8 to July 8, 2020. RESULTS: Of the 2,900 employees, 51% participated in the study, revealing a positive SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence of 4.9% (72 of 1,476; 95% CI, 3.8%-6.1%). There were no statistically significant differences in the presence of antibody based on gender, age, frontline worker status, job title, performance of aerosol-generating procedures, or exposure to known patients with coronavirus infectious disease 2019 (COVID-19) within the hospital. Employees who reported exposure to a known COVID-19 case outside work had a significantly higher seroprevalence at 14.8% (23 of 155) compared to those who did not 3.7% (48 of 1,296; OR, 4.53; 95% CI, 2.67-7.68; P < .0001). Notably, 29% of seropositive employees reported no history of symptoms for SARS-CoV-2 infection. CONCLUSIONS: The seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 among employees was not significantly different among those who provided direct patient care and those who did not, suggesting that facility-wide infection control measures were effective. Employees who reported direct personal contact with COVID-19-positive persons outside work were more likely to have SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Employee exposure to SARS-CoV-2 outside work may introduce infection into hospitals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2 , Seroepidemiologic Studies , United States Department of Veterans Affairs/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/etiology , Female , Humans , Male , Michigan/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Occupational Exposure/statistics & numerical data , Risk Factors , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
10.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 42(4): 388-391, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2096421

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Presenteeism is an expensive and challenging problem in the healthcare industry. In anticipation of the staffing challenges expected with the COVID-19 pandemic, we examined a decade of payroll data for a healthcare workforce. We aimed to determine the effect of seasonal influenza-like illness (ILI) on absences to support COVID-19 staffing plans. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Large academic medical center in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Employees of the academic medical center who were on payroll between the years of 2009 and 2019. METHODS: Biweekly institutional payroll data was evaluated for unscheduled absences as a marker for acute illness-related work absences. Linear regression models, stratified by payroll status (salaried vs hourly employees) were developed for unscheduled absences as a function of local ILI. RESULTS: Both hours worked and unscheduled absences were significantly related to the community prevalence of influenza-like illness in our cohort. These effects were stronger in hourly employees. CONCLUSIONS: Organizations should target their messaging at encouraging salaried staff to stay home when ill.


Subject(s)
Absenteeism , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Presenteeism/statistics & numerical data , Workforce , Academic Medical Centers/organization & administration , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Epidemics , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Minnesota/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies
13.
JAMA ; 328(16): 1639-1641, 2022 10 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2094108

ABSTRACT

This study examines changes in unemployment among US health care workers from January 2015 to April 2022, before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Personnel , Health Workforce , Unemployment , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2 , Unemployment/statistics & numerical data , Health Workforce/statistics & numerical data
14.
JCO Glob Oncol ; 7: 464-473, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2054022

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To evaluate stress levels among the health care workers (HCWs) of the radiation oncology community in Asian countries. METHODS: HCWs of the radiation oncology departments from 29 tertiary cancer care centers of Bangladesh, India, Indonesia and Nepal were studied from May 2020 to July 2020. A total of 758 eligible HCWs were identified. The 7-Item Generalized Anxiety Disorder, 9-Item Patient Health Questionnaire, and 22-Item Impact of Events Scale-Revised were used for assessing anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder. Univariate and multivariate analysis was done to identify the causative factors affecting mental health. RESULTS: A total of 758 participants from 794 HCWs were analyzed. The median age was 31 years (IQR, 27-28). The incidence of moderate to severe levels of anxiety, depression, and stress was 34.8%, 31.2%, and 18.2%, respectively. Severe personal concerns were noticed by 60.9% of the staff. On multivariate analysis, the presence of commonly reported symptoms of COVID-19 during the previous 2 weeks, contact history (harzard ratio [HR], 2.04; CI, 1.15 to 3.63), and compliance with precautionary measures (HR, 1.69; CI, 1.19 to 2.45) for COVID-19 significantly predicted for increasing anxiety (HR, 2.67; CI, 1.93 to 3.70), depression (HR, 3.38; CI 2.36 to 4.84), and stress (HR, 2.89; CI, 1.88 to 4.43) (P < .001). A significant regional variation was also noticed for anxiety, stress, and personal concerns. CONCLUSION: This survey conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic revealed that a significant proportion of HCWs in the radiation oncology community experiences moderate to severe levels of anxiety, depression, and stress. This trend is alarming and it is important to identify and intervene at the right time to improve the mental health of HCWs to avoid any long-term impacts.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Radiation Oncology/statistics & numerical data , Stress, Psychological/prevention & control , Surveys and Questionnaires , Adult , Anxiety Disorders/epidemiology , Anxiety Disorders/prevention & control , Anxiety Disorders/psychology , Bangladesh/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/prevention & control , Depression/psychology , Female , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , India/epidemiology , Indonesia/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Nepal/epidemiology , Pandemics , Radiation Oncology/methods , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/epidemiology , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/prevention & control , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/psychology , Stress, Psychological/epidemiology , Stress, Psychological/psychology
15.
Front Public Health ; 10: 963673, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2022989

ABSTRACT

Background: As unprecedented and prolonged crisis, healthcare workers (HCWs) are at high risk of developing psychological disorders. We investigated the psychological impact of COVID-19 pandemic on HCWs. Methods: This cross-sectional study randomly recruited 439 HCWs in Hunan Cancer Hospital via a web-based sampling method from June 1st 2021 to March 31st 2022. Anxiety and depression levels were measured using Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). The Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) was used to assess the presence and severity of PTSD. Fear was measured by modified scale of SARS. Data were collected based on these questionnaires. Differences in fear, anxiety, depression and PTSD among HCWs with different clinical characteristics were analyzed using a multivariate analysis of variance. The Cronbach's alpha scores in our samples were calculated to evaluate the internal consistency of HADS, fear scale and PCL-5. Results: The prevalence of anxiety, depression, and PTSD in HCWs was 15.7, 9.6, and 12.8%, respectively. Females and nurses were with higher fear level (P < 0.05) and higher PTSD levels (P < 0.05). Further analysis of female HCWs revealed that PTSD levels in the 35-59 years-old age group were higher than that in other groups; while married female HCWs were with increased fear than single HCWs. The internal consistency was good, with Cronbach's α = 0.88, 0.80 and 0.84 for HADS, fear scale, and PCL, respectively. Conclusion: Gender, marital status, and age are related to different level of psychological disorders in HCWs. Clinical supportive care should be implemented for specific group of HCWs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Personnel , Pandemics , Adult , Anxiety/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Personnel/psychology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged
16.
ANS Adv Nurs Sci ; 44(3): 183-194, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1961172

ABSTRACT

In this article, we apply Agamben's theory of biopower and other related concepts to the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. We explore the similarities between the COVID-19 pandemic and the pandemic of racism. Concepts such as bios, zoe, homo sacer, and states of exception can be applied to understand inequities among marginalized communities in the COVID-19 pandemic. We recommend that nurses and health care workers use critical conscientization and structural competency to increase awareness and develop interventions to undo the injustices related to biopower faced by many in the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Attitude to Health , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Health Status Disparities , Racism/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/psychology , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Public Health , Racism/psychology , Social Environment , United States
17.
Psychosom Med ; 83(4): 387-396, 2021 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1931976

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to quantify the prevalence of the adverse mental health outcomes in medical staff working in the hospital settings during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and explore the relative distribution of anxiety and depressive symptoms. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, WANFANG DATA, and VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals were searched for articles published from January 1, 2019, to April 19, 2020. The prevalence estimates of adverse mental health symptoms in medical staff were pooled using the random-effects model. RESULTS: A total of 35 articles and data of 25,343 medical staff were used in the final analysis. The pooled prevalence estimates in medical staff during the COVID-19 pandemic were as follows (ordered from high to low): fear-related symptoms, 67% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 61%-73%); high levels of perceived stress, 56% (95% CI = 32%-79%), anxiety symptoms, 41% (95% CI = 35%-47%); insomnia, 41% (95% CI = 33%-50%); posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms, 38% (95% CI = 34%-43%); depressive symptoms, 27% (95% CI = 20%-34%); and somatic symptoms, 16% (95% CI = 3%-36%). The subgroup analysis revealed that the prevalence estimates of fear-related symptoms were consistently high. CONCLUSIONS: Medical staff during the COVID-19 epidemic have a high prevalence of adverse mental health symptoms. Data-based strategies are needed to optimize mental health of medical staff and other health care professionals during times of high demand such as the COVID-19 and other epidemics.PROSPERO Registration: CRD42020182433.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Health Personnel/psychology , Mental Disorders/etiology , Mental Health/statistics & numerical data , Occupational Diseases/etiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Occupational Diseases/epidemiology , Pandemics
18.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ; 21(1): 670, 2021 Oct 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1923522

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus currently cause a lot of pressure on the health system. Accordingly, many changes occurred in the way of providing health care, including pregnancy and childbirth care. To our knowledge, no studies on experiences of maternity care Providers during the COVID-19 Pandemic have been published in Iran. We aimed to discover their experiences on pregnancy and childbirth care during the current COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This study was a qualitative research performed with a descriptive phenomenological approach. The used sampling method was purposive sampling by taking the maximum variation possible into account, which continued until data saturation. Accordingly, in-depth and semi-structured interviews were conducted by including 12 participants, as 4 gynecologists, 6 midwives working in the hospitals and private offices, and 2 midwives working in the health centers. Data were analyzed using Colaizzi's seven stage method with MAXQDA10 software. RESULTS: Data analysis led to the extraction of 3 themes, 9 categories, and 25 subcategories. The themes were as follows: "Fear of Disease", "Burnout", and "Lessons Learned from the COVID-19 Pandemic", respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Maternal health care providers experience emotional and psychological stress and work challenges during the current COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, comprehensive support should be provided for the protection of their physical and mental health statuses. By working as a team, utilizing the capacity of telemedicine to care and follow up mothers, and providing maternity care at home, some emerged challenges to maternal care services can be overcome.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Health Personnel/psychology , Maternal Health Services/statistics & numerical data , Perinatal Care/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Burnout, Psychological/psychology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Emotions/physiology , Female , Gynecology/statistics & numerical data , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Interviews as Topic , Iran/epidemiology , Maternal Health Services/trends , Middle Aged , Midwifery/statistics & numerical data , Perinatal Care/organization & administration , Phobic Disorders/psychology , Pregnancy , Qualitative Research , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Stress, Psychological/psychology , Telemedicine/methods
19.
PLoS One ; 17(2): e0263078, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1883624

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 posed the healthcare professionals at enormous risk during this pandemic era while vaccination was recommended as one of the effective preventive approaches. It was visualized that almost all health workforces would be under vaccination on a priority basis as they are the frontline fighters during this pandemic. This study was designed to explore the reality regarding infection and vaccination status of COVID-19 among healthcare professionals of Bangladesh. It was a web-based cross-sectional survey and conducted among 300 healthcare professionals available in the academic platform of Bangladesh. A multivariate logistic regression model was used for the analytical exploration. Adjusted and Unadjusted Odds Ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated for the specified setting indicators. A Chi-square test was used to observe the association. Ethical issues were maintained according to the guidance of the declaration of Helsinki. Study revealed that 41% of all respondents identified as COVID-19 positive whereas a significant number (18.3%) found as non-vaccinated due to registration issues as 52.70%, misconception regarding vaccination as 29.10%, and health-related issues as 18.20%. Respondents of more than 50 years of age found more significant on having positive infection rather than the younger age groups. Predictors for the non-vaccination guided that male respondents (COR/p = 3.49/0.01), allied health professionals, and respondents from the public organizations (p = 0.01) who were ≤29 (AOR/p = 4.45/0.01) years of age significantly identified as non-vaccinated. As the older female groups were found more infected and a significant number of health care professionals found as non-vaccinated, implementation of specific strategies and policies are needed to ensure the safety precautions and vaccination among such COVID-19 frontiers.


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Bangladesh/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/psychology , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Infectious Disease Transmission, Professional-to-Patient/prevention & control , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/psychology , Vaccination Hesitancy/statistics & numerical data
20.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 24443, 2021 12 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1852476

ABSTRACT

We investigate, through a data-driven contact tracing model, the transmission of COVID-19 inside buses during distinct phases of the pandemic in a large Brazilian city. From this microscopic approach, we recover the networks of close contacts within consecutive time windows. A longitudinal comparison is then performed by upscaling the traced contacts with the transmission computed from a mean-field compartmental model for the entire city. Our results show that the effective reproduction numbers inside the buses, [Formula: see text], and in the city, [Formula: see text], followed a compatible behavior during the first wave of the local outbreak. Moreover, by distinguishing the close contacts of healthcare workers in the buses, we discovered that their transmission, [Formula: see text], during the same period, was systematically higher than [Formula: see text]. This result reinforces the need for special public transportation policies for highly exposed groups of people.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/transmission , Contact Tracing/methods , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Disease Outbreaks , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Models, Theoretical , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Transportation
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL