Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 15 de 15
Filter
2.
PLoS One ; 16(9): e0257567, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1430542

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic continues to overwhelm health systems across the globe. We aimed to assess the readiness of hospitals in Nigeria to respond to the COVID-19 outbreak. METHOD: Between April and October 2020, hospital representatives completed a modified World Health Organisation (WHO) COVID-19 hospital readiness checklist consisting of 13 components and 124 indicators. Readiness scores were classified as adequate (score ≥80%), moderate (score 50-79.9%) and not ready (score <50%). RESULTS: Among 20 (17 tertiary and three secondary) hospitals from all six geopolitical zones of Nigeria, readiness score ranged from 28.2% to 88.7% (median 68.4%), and only three (15%) hospitals had adequate readiness. There was a median of 15 isolation beds, four ICU beds and four ventilators per hospital, but over 45% of hospitals established isolation facilities and procured ventilators after the onset of COVID-19. Of the 13 readiness components, the lowest readiness scores were reported for surge capacity (61.1%), human resources (59.1%), staff welfare (50%) and availability of critical items (47.7%). CONCLUSION: Most hospitals in Nigeria were not adequately prepared to respond to the COVID-19 outbreak. Current efforts to strengthen hospital preparedness should prioritize challenges related to surge capacity, critical care for COVID-19 patients, and staff welfare and protection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Surveys and Questionnaires , Hospitals/supply & distribution , Humans , Nigeria/epidemiology , Surge Capacity
4.
J Microbiol Immunol Infect ; 54(1): 4-11, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1272562

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 outbreak has led to a focus by public health practitioners and scholars on ways to limit spread while facing unprecedented challenges and resource constraints. Recent COVID-19-specific enhanced Traffic Control Bundling (eTCB) recommendations provide a cogent framework for managing patient care pathways and reducing health care worker (HCW) and patient exposure to SARS-CoV-2. eTCB has been applied broadly and has proven to be effective in limiting fomite and droplet transmissions in hospitals and between hospitals and the surrounding community. At the same time, resource constrained conditions involving limited personal protective equipment (PPE), low testing availability, and variability in physical space can require modifications in the way hospitals implement eTCB. While eTCB has come to be viewed as a standard of practice, COVID-19 related resource constraints often require hospital implementation teams to customize eTCB solutions. We provide and describe a cross-functional, collaborative on-the-ground adaptive application of eTCB initially piloted at two hospitals and subsequently reproduced at 16 additional hospitals and health systems in the US to date. By effectively facilitating eTCB deployment, hospital leaders and practitioners can establish clearer 'zones of risk' and related protective practices that prevent transmission to HCWs and patients. We outline key insights and recommendations gained from recent implementation under the aforementioned constraints and a cross-functional team process that can be utilized by hospitals to most effectively adapt eTCB under resource constraints.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/prevention & control , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19 Testing/standards , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals/supply & distribution , Humans , Infection Control/standards , Infection Control/statistics & numerical data , Personal Protective Equipment/standards , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , United States/epidemiology
5.
BMJ Open ; 11(1): e042945, 2021 01 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1050402

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we describe the pattern of bed occupancy across England during the peak of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Descriptive survey. SETTING: All non-specialist secondary care providers in England from 27 March27to 5 June 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Acute (non-specialist) trusts with a type 1 (ie, 24 hours/day, consultant-led) accident and emergency department (n=125), Nightingale (field) hospitals (n=7) and independent sector secondary care providers (n=195). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Two thresholds for 'safe occupancy' were used: 85% as per the Royal College of Emergency Medicine and 92% as per NHS Improvement. RESULTS: At peak availability, there were 2711 additional beds compatible with mechanical ventilation across England, reflecting a 53% increase in capacity, and occupancy never exceeded 62%. A consequence of the repurposing of beds meant that at the trough there were 8.7% (8508) fewer general and acute beds across England, but occupancy never exceeded 72%. The closest to full occupancy of general and acute bed (surge) capacity that any trust in England reached was 99.8% . For beds compatible with mechanical ventilation there were 326 trust-days (3.7%) spent above 85% of surge capacity and 154 trust-days (1.8%) spent above 92%. 23 trusts spent a cumulative 81 days at 100% saturation of their surge ventilator bed capacity (median number of days per trust=1, range: 1-17). However, only three sustainability and transformation partnerships (aggregates of geographically co-located trusts) reached 100% saturation of their mechanical ventilation beds. CONCLUSIONS: Throughout the first wave of the pandemic, an adequate supply of all bed types existed at a national level. However, due to an unequal distribution of bed utilisation, many trusts spent a significant period operating above 'safe-occupancy' thresholds despite substantial capacity in geographically co-located trusts, a key operational issue to address in preparing for future waves.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospital Bed Capacity , Hospitals/supply & distribution , Surge Capacity , Ventilators, Mechanical/supply & distribution , Bed Occupancy/statistics & numerical data , England/epidemiology , Health Personnel , Humans , Intensive Care Units/supply & distribution , SARS-CoV-2 , State Medicine
6.
Arch Ital Urol Androl ; 92(4)2020 Dec 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-993777

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Overview of bladder cancer (BC) management in Italy during the first month of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020) with head to head comparison of the data from March 2019, considered "usual activity" period. The aim is to analyze performance of different Italian Centers in North, Center and South, with a special eye for Lombardy (the Italian epicenter). PATIENTS AND METHODS: During April 2020, a survey containing 14 multiple-choice questions focused on general staffing and surgical activity related to BC during the months of March 2019 and March 2020 was sent to 32 Italian Centers. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics (v26) software. A Medline search was performed, in order to attempt a comparative analysis with published papers. RESULTS: 28 Centers answered, for a response rate of 87.5%. Most of the urology staff in the Lombardy region were employed in COVID wards (p = 0.003), with a statistically significant reduction in the number of radical cystectomies (RC) performed during that time (p = 0.036). The total amount of RC across Italy remained the same between 2019 and 2020, however there was an increase in the number of surgeries performed in the Southern region. This was most likely due to travel restrictions limiting travel the North. The number of Trans-Urethral Resection of Bladder Tumors (TURBT) (p = 0.046) was higher in Academic Centers (AC) in 2020 (p = 0.037). CONCLUSIONS: The data of our survey, although limited, represents a snap shot of the management of BC during the first month of the COVD-19 pandemic, which posed a major challenge for cancer centers seeking to provide care during an extremely dynamic clinical and political situation which requires maximum flexibility to be appropriately managed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/surgery , Health Care Surveys/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals/supply & distribution , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Time Factors , Urologic Surgical Procedures, Male/statistics & numerical data
8.
CMAJ Open ; 8(3): E593-E604, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-789886

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In pandemics, local hospitals need to anticipate a surge in health care needs. We examined the modelled surge because of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic that was used to inform the early hospital-level response against cases as they transpired. METHODS: To estimate hospital-level surge in March and April 2020, we simulated a range of scenarios of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spread in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), Canada, using the best available data at the time. We applied outputs to hospital-specific data to estimate surge over 6 weeks at 2 hospitals (St. Michael's Hospital and St. Joseph's Health Centre). We examined multiple scenarios, wherein the default (R0 = 2.4) resembled the early trajectory (to Mar. 25, 2020), and compared the default model projections with observed COVID-19 admissions in each hospital from Mar. 25 to May 6, 2020. RESULTS: For the hospitals to remain below non-ICU bed capacity, the default pessimistic scenario required a reduction in non-COVID-19 inpatient care by 38% and 28%, respectively, with St. Michael's Hospital requiring 40 new ICU beds and St. Joseph's Health Centre reducing its ICU beds for non-COVID-19 care by 6%. The absolute difference between default-projected and observed census of inpatients with COVID-19 at each hospital was less than 20 from Mar. 25 to Apr. 11; projected and observed cases diverged widely thereafter. Uncertainty in local epidemiological features was more influential than uncertainty in clinical severity. INTERPRETATION: Scenario-based analyses were reliable in estimating short-term cases, but would require frequent re-analyses. Distribution of the city's surge was expected to vary across hospitals, and community-level strategies were key to mitigating each hospital's surge.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Surge Capacity/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19/virology , Canada/epidemiology , Forecasting/methods , Health Services Needs and Demand/trends , Hospitals/supply & distribution , Humans , Inpatients/statistics & numerical data , Models, Theoretical , SARS-CoV-2/genetics
10.
Infect Dis Health ; 25(4): 227-232, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-548522

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Low-resource countries with fragile healthcare systems lack trained healthcare professionals and specialized resources for COVID-19 patient hospitalization, including mechanical ventilators. Additional socio-economic complications such as civil war and financial crisis in Libya and other low-resource countries further complicate healthcare delivery. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey evaluating hospital and intensive care unit's capacity and readiness was performed from 16 leading Libyan hospitals in March 2020. In addition, a survey was conducted among 400 doctors who worked in these hospitals to evaluate the status of personal protective equipment. RESULTS: Out of 16 hospitals, the highest hospital capacity was 1000 in-patient beds, while the lowest was 25 beds with a median of 200 (IQR 52-417, range 25-1000) hospital beds. However, a median of only eight (IQR 6-14, range 3-37) available functioning ICU beds were reported in these hospitals. Only 9 (IQR 4.5-14, range 2-20) mechanical ventilators were reported and none of the hospitals had a reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction machine for COVID-19 testing. Moreover, they relied on one of two central laboratories located in major cities. Our PPE survey revealed that 56.7% hospitals lacked PPE and 53% of healthcare workers reported that they did not receive proper PPE training. In addition, 70% reported that they were buying the PPE themselves as hospitals did not provide them. CONCLUSION: This study provides an alarming overview of the unpreparedness of Libyan hospitals for detecting and treating patients with COVID-19 and limiting the spread of the pandemic.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Health Resources/supply & distribution , Intensive Care Units/supply & distribution , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/statistics & numerical data , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Delivery of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Health Facilities/supply & distribution , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals/supply & distribution , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Libya/epidemiology , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment/statistics & numerical data , Personal Protective Equipment/supply & distribution , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , Ventilators, Mechanical/supply & distribution , World Health Organization
14.
JMIR Public Health Surveill ; 6(2): e18961, 2020 04 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-38765

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: As the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is widely spreading across the United States, there is a concern about the overloading of the nation's health care capacity. The expansion of telehealth services is expected to deliver timely care for the initial screening of symptomatic patients while minimizing exposure in health care facilities, to protect health care providers and other patients. However, it is currently unknown whether US hospitals have the telehealth capacity to meet the increasing demand and needs of patients during this pandemic. OBJECTIVE: We investigated the population-level internet search volume for telehealth (as a proxy of population interest and demand) with the number of new COVID-19 cases and the proportion of hospitals that adopted a telehealth system in all US states. METHODS: We used internet search volume data from Google Trends to measure population-level interest in telehealth and telemedicine between January 21, 2020 (when the first COVID-19 case was reported), and March 18, 2020. Data on COVID-19 cases in the United States were obtained from the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resources Center. We also used data from the 2018 American Hospital Association Annual Survey to estimate the proportion of hospitals that adopted telehealth (including telemedicine and electronic visits) and those with the capability of telemedicine intensive care unit (tele-ICU). Pearson correlation was used to examine the relations of population search volume for telehealth and telemedicine (composite score) with the cumulative numbers of COVID-19 cases in the United States during the study period and the proportion of hospitals with telehealth and tele-ICU capabilities. RESULTS: We found that US population-level interest in telehealth increased as the number of COVID-19 cases increased, with a strong correlation (r=0.948, P<.001). We observed a higher population-level interest in telehealth in the Northeast and West census region, whereas the proportion of hospitals that adopted telehealth was higher in the Midwest region. There was no significant association between population interest and the proportion of hospitals that adopted telehealth (r=0.055, P=.70) nor hospitals having tele-ICU capability (r=-0.073, P=.61). CONCLUSIONS: As the number of COVID-19 cases increases, so does the US population's interest in telehealth. However, the level of population interest did not correlate with the proportion of hospitals providing telehealth services in the United States, suggesting that increased population demand may not be met with the current telehealth capacity. Telecommunication infrastructures in US hospitals may lack the capability to address the ongoing health care needs of patients with other health conditions. More practical investment is needed to deploy the telehealth system rapidly against the impending patient surge.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Cross-Sectional Studies , Hospitals/supply & distribution , Humans , Intensive Care Units/supply & distribution , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States/epidemiology
15.
Res Social Adm Pharm ; 17(1): 1978-1983, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-34770

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) is caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus that was first detected at the end of December 2019. The epidemic has affected various regions of China in different degrees. As the situations evolve, the COVID-19 had been confirmed in many countries, and made a assessment that it can be characterized as a pandemic by the World Health Organization on March 11, 2020. Drugs are the main treatment of COVID-19 patients. Pharmaceutical service offers drug safety ensurance for COVID-19 patients. According to COVID-19 prevention and control policy and requirements, combined with series of diagnosis and treatment plans, pharmacists in the first provincial-level COVID-19 diagnosis and treatment unit in Jilin Province in Northeast China have established the management practices of drug supply and pharmaceutical care from four aspects: personnel, drugs supply management, off-label drug use management and pharmaceutical care. During the outbreak, the pharmaceutical department of THJU completed its assigned workload to ensure drug supply. So far, no nosocomial infections and medication errors have occurred, which has stabilized the mood of the staff and boosted the pharmacists' confidence in fighting the epidemic. For the treatment of COVID-19, pharmacists conducted adverse reaction monitoring and participated in the multidisciplinary consultation of COVID-19. Up to now, the COVID-19 patients admitted to THJU have not shown any new serious adverse reactions and been cured finally. The hospital pharmacy department timely adjusted the work mode, and the formed management practices is a powerful guarantee for the prevention and control of the COVID-19 epidemic. This paper summarized the details and practices of drug supply and pharmaceutical services management to provide experience for the people who involving in COVID-19 prevention and contain in other abroad epidemic areas.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Hospitals/supply & distribution , Off-Label Use , Pharmaceutical Preparations/supply & distribution , Pharmaceutical Services/supply & distribution , Pharmacy Service, Hospital/supply & distribution , COVID-19/epidemiology , China/epidemiology , Epidemics , Hospitalization/trends , Hospitals/trends , Humans , Pharmaceutical Services/trends , Pharmacy Service, Hospital/trends
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL