The Nursing Professional Development Practitioner During a Pandemic: Achieving the Hat Trick.

The nursing professional development practitioner's call to action at a large, acute care academic facility during the novel coronavirus pandemic required adaptability and resiliency. When rapid, unprecedented challenges altered nursing professional development workflow, a department of 16 practitioners split into three teams. The teams achieved goals by meeting the demand for education and training of frontline staff during the surge in novel coronavirus patients.

Racial Bias Among Emergency Providers: Strategies to Mitigate Its Adverse Effects.

The Research to Practice column presents an analysis of current and controversial research findings with implications for practice change relevant to emergency care settings. This review critiques Johnson et al.'s (2016) investigation, titled "The Impact of Cognitive Stressors in the Emergency Department on Physician Implicit Racial Bias," that examined emergency department characteristics and stressors and their effects on physician racial bias and decision making. Their findings suggest that unconscious biases can affect clinical decisions when providers experience increased cognitive stress. The implications are significant for emergency providers as resources are especially strained during the COVID-19 pandemic and as the adverse effects of unconscious bias on health disparities and patient outcomes have become clearly apparent. Implicit bias training (IBT) is recommended for emergency providers and has significant implications for medical and nurse educators in executing and evaluating IBT outcomes.

COVID-19 and telehealth: Applying telehealth and telemedicine in a pandemic.

ABSTRACT: In this second article of a three-part series, we explore how stakeholders can be educated on the use of telehealth technology and telemedicine. We address the need for staff and patient support for the transition to telehealth and offer suggestions to NPs for appropriate presentation and interaction with interdisciplinary teams and patients regarding telehealth.

How the experience of medical assistance in dying changed during the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada: a qualitative study of providers.

BACKGROUND: In March 2020, all levels of government introduced various strategies to reduce the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to document how the experience of providing medical assistance in dying (MAiD) changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study using semistructured interviews with key informants in Canada who provided or coordinated MAiD before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. We interviewed participants from April to June 2020 by telephone or email. We collected and analyzed data in an iterative manner and reached theme saturation. Our team reached consensus on the major themes and subthemes. RESULTS: We interviewed 1 MAiD coordinator and 15 providers, including 14 physicians and 1 nurse practitioner. We identified 4 main themes. The most important theme was the perception that the pandemic increased the suffering of patients receiving MAiD by isolating them from loved ones and reducing available services. Providers were distressed by the difficulty of establishing rapport and closeness at the end of life, given the requirements for physical distancing and personal protective equipment. They were concerned about the spread of SARS-CoV-2, and found it difficult to enforce rules about distancing and the number of people present. Logistics and access to MAiD became more difficult because of the new restrictions, but there were many adaptations to solve these problems. INTERPRETATION: Providers and coordinators had many challenges in providing MAiD during the COVID-19 pandemic, including their perception that the suffering of their patients increased. Some changes in how MAiD is provided that have occurred during the pandemic, including more telemedicine assessments and virtual witnessing, are likely to remain after the pandemic and may improve service.

Hospitalist perspectives on barriers to recommend and potential benefit of the COVID-19 vaccine.

Background: Hospitalists, comprised of nurse practitioners and physician assistants (collectively, advanced practice providers [APPs]) and physicians, have opportunities to counsel patients and reduce SARS-CoV-2 related coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy. However, hospitalist perspectives on the COVID-19 vaccine and potential differences between APPs and physicians are unknown. Understanding hospitalist perspectives could help to address vaccine hesitancy among patients.Methods: We conducted an online survey of hospitalists at Mayo Clinic sites in Arizona, Florida, Minnesota, and Wisconsin from 14 December 2020 through 4 January 2021. We collected demographic information and assessed perspectives on the COVID-19 vaccine and, for comparison, on the influenza vaccine. Descriptive statistics were used to compare responses between APPs and physicians.Results: The overall response rate was 42.7% (n = 128/300) and comprised of 53.9% women (n = 69/128) and 41.4% APPs (n = 53/128). Most hospitalists reported receiving or planning to receive vaccination against COVID-19 (93.7%; n = 119/128) and influenza (97.7%; n = 125/128). Most hospitalists reported they would advise 100% of patients to receive the COVID-19 vaccine (66% for APPs; 74.7% for physicians) and influenza vaccine (83% for APPs; 80% for physicians). Barriers to recommending the COVID-19 vaccine included patient health status and vaccine safety profile. Hospitalists reported that patients and coworkers receiving the COVID-19 vaccine would reduce their anxiety (~80% of hospitalists), social isolation (~64% of hospitalists), and improve their emotional support (~40% of hospitalists). APP and physician responses were similar. The possible reduction in social isolation was associated with higher odds of hospitalists advising all patients to receive the COVID-19 vaccine (adjusted odds ratio 2.95 [95% confidence interval, 1.32-6.59]; P< .008), whereas hospitalist age, gender, and profession showed no association.Conclusion: Most hospitalists would reportedly advise patients to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Barriers to this recommendation included patient health status and vaccine safety. Hospitalists are an important resource to provide patient education and reduce COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

In the time of COVID .

ABSTRACT: JAANP Fellow Dr. Leslie-Faith Morritt Taub, NYU Adult-Gerontology Primary Care Program Director, describes the emotional, political, and social impact of COVID-19 on one graduating cohort of nurse practitioner (NP) students at New York University and one incoming cohort of students. Through the lens of a seasoned professor she describes the changes to her teaching methods because she leads these students through the course work and clinical work required to take on the role of the NP in the midst of a global pandemic in the heart of New York City.

A Video-based Debriefing Program to Support Emergency Medicine Clinician Well-being During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Emergency clinicians on the frontline of the coronavirus pandemic experience a range of emotions including anxiety, fear, and grief. Debriefing can help clinicians process these emotions, but the coronavirus pandemic makes it difficult to create a physically and psychologically safe space in the emergency department (ED) to perform this intervention. In response, we piloted a video-based debriefing program to support emergency clinician well-being. We report the details of our program and results of our evaluation of its acceptability and perceived value to emergency clinicians during the pandemic. METHODS: ED attending physicians, resident physicians, and non-physician practitioners (NPP) at our quaternary-care academic medical center were invited to participate in role-based, weekly one-hour facilitated debriefings using Zoom. ED attendings with experience in debriefing led each session and used an explorative approach that focused on empathy and normalizing reactions. At the end of the pilot, we distributed to participants an anonymous 10-point survey that included multiple-answer questions and visual analogue scales. RESULTS: We completed 18 debriefings with 68 unique participants (29 attending physicians, 6 resident physicians, and 33 NPPs. A total of 76% of participants responded to our survey and 77% of respondents participated in at least two debriefings. Emergency clinicians reported that the most common reasons to participate in the debriefings were "to enhance my sense of community and connection" (81%) followed by "to support colleagues" (75%). Debriefing with members of the same role group (92%) and the Zoom platform (81%) were considered to be helpful aspects of the debriefing structure. Although emergency clinicians found these sessions to be useful (78.8 +/- 17.6) interquartile range: 73-89), NPPs were less comfortable speaking up (58.5 +/- 23.6) than attending physicians (77.8 +/- 25.0) (p = < 0.008). CONCLUSION: Emergency clinicians participating in a video-based debriefing program during the coronavirus pandemic found it to be an acceptable and useful approach to support emotional well-being. Our program provided participants with a platform to support each other and maintain a sense of community and connection. Other EDs should consider implementing a debriefing program to safeguard the emotional well-being of their emergency clinician workforce.