Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 57
Filter
2.
Psychiatr Danub ; 32(1): 22-24, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2100747

ABSTRACT

This work gives an overview of the methods of scenic expression which can be used to help cope with the crisis caused by the global threat of the coronavirus pandemic. The virus is new, the vaccine has not been developed yet and there are no unified prevention and post-prevention policies. In the following lines some modified elements of psychodrama interventions are presented including the ways of preventing the retraumatization of the patient (protagonist). This can be achieved by conscious reliving of the trauma and by activating new, transformative roles to guide the protagonist on his way to recovery.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/psychology , Patients , Pneumonia, Viral/psychology , Psychodrama , Psychological Trauma , COVID-19 , Humans , Pandemics , Patients/psychology , Psychological Trauma/etiology , Psychological Trauma/therapy , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Am J Otolaryngol ; 43(5): 103525, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1944084

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate perspectives of patients, family members, caregivers (PFC), and healthcare professionals (HCP) on tracheostomy care during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The cross-sectional survey investigating barriers and facilitators to tracheostomy care was collaboratively developed by patients, family members, nurses, speech-language pathologists, respiratory care practitioners, physicians, and surgeons. The survey was distributed to the Global Tracheostomy Collaborative's learning community, and responses were analyzed. RESULTS: Survey respondents (n = 191) from 17 countries included individuals with a tracheostomy (85 [45 %]), families/caregivers (43 [22 %]), and diverse HCP (63 [33.0 %]). Overall, 94 % of respondents reported concern that patients with tracheostomy were at increased risk of critical illness from SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19; 93 % reported fear or anxiety. With respect to prioritization of care, 38 % of PFC versus 16 % of HCP reported concern that patients with tracheostomies might not be valued or prioritized (p = 0.002). Respondents also differed in fear of contracting COVID-19 (69 % PFC vs. 49 % HCP group, p = 0.009); concern for hospitalization (55.5 % PFC vs. 27 % HCP, p < 0.001); access to medical personnel (34 % PFC vs. 14 % HCP, p = 0.005); and concern about canceled appointments (62 % PFC vs. 41 % HCP, p = 0.01). Respondents from both groups reported severe stress and fatigue, sleep deprivation, lack of breaks, and lack of support (70 % PFC vs. 65 % HCP, p = 0.54). Virtual telecare seldom met perceived needs. CONCLUSION: PFC with a tracheostomy perceived most risks more acutely than HCP in this global sample. Broad stakeholder engagement is necessary to achieve creative, patient-driven solutions to maintain connection, communication, and access for patients with a tracheostomy.


Subject(s)
Caregivers , Communication , Family , Patients , Postoperative Care/methods , Tracheostomy , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Caregivers/psychology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Family/psychology , Fatigue , Humans , Nurses/psychology , Pandemics , Patients/psychology , Physicians/psychology , Postoperative Care/standards , SARS-CoV-2 , Sleep Deprivation , Speech Therapy/psychology , Stress, Psychological , Surgeons/psychology
4.
J Pain Symptom Manage ; 63(6): 971-979, 2022 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1693215

ABSTRACT

CONTEXT: Many hospice patients were physically separated from family members and healthcare professionals during the early COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVES: Researchers sought to describe the lived experience of physical separation for hospice patients and family caregivers who adhered to public health guidelines intended to limit the transmission of COVID-19 in the spring of 2020. METHODS: Researchers performed a secondary analysis of qualitative data collected during a multi-site clinical trial of an intervention that incorporated family caregivers into care plan reviews during biweekly hospice interdisciplinary team meetings. Twenty-eight adult family caregivers of hospice patients with cancer participated in at least one care plan review between March 7, 2020 and June 10, 2020. The final analytic dataset included the transcribed content of 60 care plan reviews, which were analyzed via reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Hospice patients and their family caregivers experienced physical separation as interrupted care that resulted in the potential for unmet informational, functional, and social and emotional needs. Connection strategies employed to adapt to care interruptions and address patient and caregiver needs were not consistently effective. CONCLUSION: Inclusive, innovative connection strategies are needed to ensure that high-quality end-of-life care is provided to hospice patients and their family caregivers when physical presence must be limited.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Caregivers , Hospice Care , Patients , Physical Distancing , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Caregivers/psychology , Clinical Trials as Topic , Humans , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Pandemics , Patients/psychology , Qualitative Research
6.
PLoS One ; 16(5): e0251410, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1604261

ABSTRACT

The objective of this study was to explore the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 epidemic on ongoing and upcoming drug clinical trials. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinical trial staff and clinical trial subjects were surveyed by questionnaire in this study. The results of interviews and questionnaire showed that coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has led to many changes in the implementation of drug clinical trials, including: a variety of meetings being held online webinars using various platforms, telemedicine and follow-up by video, A large number of deviations from protocol and losses of follow-up, delivery of clinical trial drugs by express, additional workload caused by screening for coronavirus, and anxiety of subjects. These results suggest that the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak has hindered the progress and damaged the quality of clinical trials. The online meeting, remote follow-up, express delivery of drugs and remote monitoring in the epidemic environment can ensure the progress of clinical trials to a certain extent, but they cannot fully guarantee the quality as before.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/pathology , Clinical Trials as Topic , Adult , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Anxiety/etiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Humans , Interviews as Topic , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Patients/psychology , Research Personnel/psychology , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Surveys and Questionnaires , Telemedicine , Young Adult , COVID-19 Drug Treatment
7.
Rinsho Shinkeigaku ; 62(1): 8-14, 2022 Jan 28.
Article in Japanese | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1579997

ABSTRACT

We conducted the multicenter questionnaire survey targeting patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) in order to investigate the impacts on their daily lives and their requests to hospitals in the pandemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Mainly using open-ended questionnaire, we asked their anxiety, troubles they are facing, and requests toward hospitals in the pandemic of SARS-CoV-2. Two hundred fifth-eight PD patients answered the questionnaire. There were various opinions about anxiety such as "PD patients are susceptible and vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2" (36.8%). Concerning the troubles in the pandemic, the most frequent answer was that they couldn't participate in the rehabilitation and elderly day care (38.4%). Relatively many PD patients requested telemedicine (29.5%), whereas some people hoped face-to-face medical care (8.1%). There were demands about the delivery of medications (50.0%), the establishment of telephone consultations (43.8%), resources for rehabilitation at home (43.8%). The medical care adapted to the anxiety, trouble and requests of PD patients will be required in the era when we have to live with SARS-CoV-2.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Care Surveys , Health Surveys , Pandemics , Parkinson Disease/psychology , Parkinson Disease/therapy , Patients/psychology , Aged , Anxiety , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Parkinson Disease/rehabilitation , Telemedicine
8.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 23711, 2021 12 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1565733

ABSTRACT

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, evidence shows the negative psychological impact of lockdown measures in the general population. It is also important to identify predictors of psychological distress in vulnerable people, particularly patients with history of depressive episodes (the most prevalent psychiatric disorder), in order to adapt mental health strategies for future lockdown measures. This study aim was to (1) compare in 69 healthy controls (HC) and 346 patients with a major depressive episode in the two previous years (PP) self-reported psychological symptoms (depression, anxiety, insomnia, suicidal ideation, traumatic stress, anger) and living conditions during the first national French lockdown, and (2) identify predictors of significant psychological distress in PP. The levels of psychological symptoms were very low in HC compared with PP, independently of the living conditions. Half of PP had no psychiatric contact during the lockdown. Loneliness and boredom were independent predictors of depression, anxiety and insomnia, whereas daily physical activity was a protective factor. Virtual contacts protected against suicidal ideation. Our results highlight the need of specific strategies to target loneliness and boredom and to improve care access, including telepsychiatry. Longitudinal studies must investigate the COVID-19 pandemic psychological impact in clinical samples.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Depressive Disorder, Major/psychology , Mood Disorders/psychology , Patients/psychology , Quarantine/psychology , Adaptation, Psychological , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Anger , Anxiety/psychology , Boredom , Female , France , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Loneliness/psychology , Male , Mental Health/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Patients/statistics & numerical data , Psychological Distress , SARS-CoV-2 , Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders/psychology , Social Conditions/statistics & numerical data , Social Determinants of Health , Stress Disorders, Traumatic/psychology , Suicidal Ideation , Telemedicine , Young Adult
9.
Ophthalmology ; 129(3): 258-266, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1540882

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Emerging evidence suggests that the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is disrupting health behaviors such as medication adherence. The objective of this study was to determine whether adherence to ocular hypotensive medication was affected by the pandemic and to identify factors associated with this change. DESIGN: In this cohort study, we used a controlled interrupted time series design in which the interruption was the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States on March 13, 2020. The 300-day monitoring period, which evenly bracketed this declaration, started on October 16, 2019, and ended on August 10, 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with primary open-angle glaucoma enrolled in an ongoing longitudinal National Institutes of Health-funded study initiated before the onset of the pandemic were selected if they were prescribed ocular hypotensive medication and had adherence data spanning the 300-day period. METHODS: We applied segmented regression analysis using a "slope change following a lag" impact model to obtain the adherence slopes in the periods before and after the segmentation. We compared the 2 slopes using the Davies test. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measure was daily adherence to ocular hypotensive medication, defined as the number of doses taken divided by the number of doses prescribed, expressed in percent. Adherence was measured objectively using Medication Event Monitoring System caps. We assessed the associations between change in adherence and demographic, clinical, and psychosocial factors. RESULTS: The sample included 79 patients (mean age, 71 years [standard deviation, 8 years]). Segmented regression identified a breakpoint at day 28 after the declaration of the pandemic. The slope in the period after the breakpoint (-0.04%/day) was significantly different from zero (P < 0.001) and from the slope in the period before the breakpoint (0.006%/day; P < 0.001). Mean adherence in the period before the segmentation breakpoint was significantly worse in Black patients (median, IQR: 80.6%, 36.2%) compared with White patients (median, IQR: 97.2%, 8.7%; chi-square, 15.4; P = 0.0004). A significant positive association was observed between the Connor-Davidson resilience score and the change in slope between the periods before and after the breakpoint (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to ocular hypotensive medication worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic and seems to be related to patient resilience. This collateral consequence of the pandemic may translate into vision loss that may manifest beyond its containment.


Subject(s)
Antihypertensive Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/epidemiology , Glaucoma, Open-Angle/drug therapy , Medication Adherence/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2 , Aged , Cohort Studies , Drug Prescriptions/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Intraocular Pressure , Male , Middle Aged , Ophthalmic Solutions , Patients/psychology , Psychology , Resilience, Psychological , United States/epidemiology
13.
Psychiatr Q ; 92(4): 1785-1796, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1378979

ABSTRACT

The need for consultation-liaison psychiatry on COVID-19 wards has substantially increased since the start of the pandemic. In this cross-sectional study, we aimed to summarize the characteristics of patients admitted to the post-COVID-19 ward of the American University of Beirut Medical Center who received a psychiatric consultation. We collected relevant sociodemographic and medical data, information about past psychiatric history, psychiatry consultation details, hospital course, and disposition outcome. We also conducted chi-square and binary logistic regression analyses to assess the association between the different variables and disposition outcome. A total of 52 patients (mean age 57.33 years; equal gender distribution) were seen by the psychiatry consult-liaison team. Most had medical comorbidities and 21.2% required intubation. The most prevalent psychiatric diagnoses were delirium (30.8%), major depressive episode (15.4%), and other anxiety disorder (15.4%). Pharmacological management was implemented in 90.4% of cases and mainly included second-generation antipsychotics (36.5%). Non-pharmacological interventions consisted of those related to delirium and therapy for anxiety. Only intubation was significantly associated with disposition outcome (p = 0.004). This study highlights the various psychiatric themes emerging during the acute and post-acute periods of hospitalization for COVID-19. Hospitalized individuals recovering from the infection should be diligently screened and referred to the psychiatry consultation-liaison team to ensure the implementation of appropriate interventions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mental Disorders , Mental Health Services , Patients , Referral and Consultation , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Mental Disorders/therapy , Mental Health Services/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Patients/psychology , Patients/statistics & numerical data , Referral and Consultation/statistics & numerical data
14.
PLoS One ; 16(8): e0256578, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1378137

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Concern about long waiting times for elective surgeries is not a recent phenomenon, but it has been heightened by the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and its associated measures. One way to alleviate the problem might be to use prioritisation methods for patients on the waiting list and a wide range of research is available on such methods. However, significant variations and inconsistencies have been reported in prioritisation protocols from various specialties, institutions, and health systems. To bridge the evidence gap in existing literature, this comprehensive systematic review will synthesise global evidence on policy strategies with a unique insight to patient prioritisation methods to reduce waiting times for elective surgeries. This will provide evidence that might help with the tremendous burden of surgical disease that is now apparent in many countries because of operations that were delayed or cancelled due to the COVID-19 pandemic and inform policy for sustainable healthcare management systems. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library, with our most recent searches in January 2020. Articles published after 2013 on major elective surgery lists of adult patients were eligible, but cancer and cancer-related surgeries were excluded. Both randomised and non-randomised studies were eligible and the quality of studies was assessed with ROBINS-I and CASP tools. We registered the review in PROSPERO (CRD42019158455) and reported it in accordance with the PRISMA statement. RESULTS: The electronic search in five bibliographic databases yielded 7543 records (PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Cochrane) and 17 eligible articles were identified in the screening. There were four quasi-experimental studies, 11 observational studies and two systematic reviews. These demonstrated moderate to low risk of bias in their research methods. Three studies tested generic approaches using common prioritisation systems for all elective surgeries in common. The other studies assessed specific prioritisation approaches for re-ordering the waiting list for a particular surgical specialty. CONCLUSIONS: Explicit prioritisation tools with a standardised scoring system based on clear evidence-based criteria are likely to reduce waiting times and improve equitable access to health care. Multiple attributes need to be considered in defining a fair prioritisation system to overcome limitations with local variations and discriminations. Collating evidence from a diverse body of research provides a single framework to improve the quality and efficiency of elective surgical care provision in a variety of health settings. Universal prioritisation tools with vertical and horizontal equity would help with re-ordering patients on waiting lists for elective surgery and reduce waiting times.


Subject(s)
Elective Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Databases, Factual , Humans , Pandemics , Patients/psychology , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Waiting Lists
15.
PLoS One ; 16(8): e0256544, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1374151

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) represent a vulnerable population potentially negatively affected by COVID-19-associated reallocation of healthcare resources. Here, we report the impact of COVID-19 on the management of HCC patients in a large tertiary care hospital. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed clinical data of HCC patients who presented at the Vienna General Hospital, between 01/DEC/2019 and 30/JUN/2020. We compared patient care before (period 1) and after (period 2) implementation of COVID-19-associated healthcare restrictions on 16/MAR/2020. RESULTS: Of 126 patients, majority was male (n = 104, 83%) with a mean age of 66±11 years. Half of patients (n = 57, 45%) had impaired liver function (Child-Pugh stage B/C) and 91 (72%) had intermediate-advanced stage HCC (BCLC B-D). New treatment, was initiated in 68 (54%) patients. Number of new HCC diagnoses did not differ between the two periods (n = 14 vs. 14). While personal visits were reduced, an increase in teleconsultation was observed (period 2). Number of patients with visit delays (n = 31 (30%) vs. n = 10 (10%); p = 0.001) and imaging delays (n = 25 (25%) vs. n = 7 (7%); p = 0.001) was higher in period 2. Accordingly, a reduced number of patients was discussed in interdisciplinary tumor boards (lowest number in April (n = 24), compared to a median number of 57 patients during period 1). Median number of elective/non-elective admissions was not different between the periods. One patient contracted COVID-19 with lethal outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in patient care included reduced personal contacts but increased telephone visits, and delays in diagnostic procedures. The effects on long-term outcome need to be determined.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/diagnosis , Liver Neoplasms/diagnosis , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/virology , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/mortality , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/pathology , Delayed Diagnosis , Female , Humans , Liver Neoplasms/drug therapy , Liver Neoplasms/mortality , Liver Neoplasms/pathology , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Staging , Pandemics , Patients/psychology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Survival Rate , Telemedicine , Tertiary Care Centers
16.
Nurs Outlook ; 69(1): 13-21, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1368740

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The rapidly evolving COVID-19 pandemic has become a global health crisis. Several factors influencing risk perception have been identified, including knowledge of the disease, information sources, and emotional states. Prior studies on COVID-19-related risk perception primarily focused on the general public, with little data available on COVID-19 patients. PURPOSE: To investigate COVID-19 patients' risk perception, knowledge of the disease, information sources, and emotional states in the epicenter, Wuhan, during the COVID-19 outbreak in China. METHODS: Data were collected online using self-administered electronic questionnaire developed with reference to previous relevant studies and publications by the World Health Organization. FINDINGS: A higher level of perceived risk was found in relation to COVID-19 as compared to other potential health threats. Knowledge gaps existed regarding transmission and prevention of COVID-19. Additionally, risk perception was negatively related to knowledge and positively related to depressive states. Moreover, social media was a primary source for COVID-19 information, whereas the most trusted sources were health professionals. DISCUSSION: Realistic perception of risk should be encouraged considering both physical and mental health while developing relevant strategies. Furthermore, risk communication needs to be specifically tailored for various target groups, such as the elderly and mentally vulnerable individuals, with the adoption of popular media platforms.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Patients/psychology , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , China/epidemiology , Consumer Health Information/statistics & numerical data , Emotions , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patients/statistics & numerical data , Risk Assessment , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult
17.
CMAJ ; 193(30): E1198-E1199, 2021 08 03.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1341519
18.
PLoS One ; 16(7): e0253664, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1311283

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound worldwide impact. Vietnam, a lower middle-income country with limited resources, has successfully slowed this pandemic. The objectives of this report are to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the research activities of an ongoing hypertension trial using a storytelling intervention in Vietnam. METHODS: Data were collected in a mixed-methods study among 86 patients and 10 health care workers participating in a clinical trial designed to improve hypertension control. Several questions related to the impact of COVID-19 on patient's daily activities and adherence to the study interventions were included in the follow-up visits. A focus group discussion was conducted among health care workers to discuss the impact of COVID-19 on research related activities. RESULTS: Fewer patients in the intervention group reported that they faced difficulties in adhering to prescribed study interventions, wanted to receive a call from a dedicated hotline, or have a visit from a community health worker as compared with those in the comparison group. Most study patients are willing to participate in future health research studies. When asked about the potential use of mobile phones in health research studies, fewer patients in the intervention group felt comfortable using a mobile phone for the delivery of intervention and interviews compared with those in the comparison condition. Community health workers shared that they visited patient's homes more often than previously due to the pandemic and health care workers had to perform more virus containment activities without a corresponding increase in ancillary staff. CONCLUSIONS: Both patients and health care workers in Vietnam faced difficulties in adhering to recommended trial interventions and procedures. Multiple approaches for intervention delivery and data collection are needed to overcome these difficulties during future health crises and enhance the implementation of future research studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov. Registration number: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03590691 (registration date July 17, 2018).


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Clinical Laboratory Services/standards , Clinical Trials as Topic , Medical Laboratory Personnel/psychology , Patients/psychology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Clinical Laboratory Services/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Hypertension/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Compliance , Vietnam
19.
Psychiatr Q ; 92(4): 1549-1563, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1258235

ABSTRACT

The current study aimed to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of people with OCD and the degree of family accommodation (FA) by live-in family members across phases of the lockdown measures imposed by the Belgian government. Forty-nine OCD patients and 26 live-in family members participated in the study. We assessed OCD symptom severity and FA of the live-in family members, as well as depressive symptoms, anxiety and stress levels and COVID-19 related psychological distress of patients and family members at four different timepoints: one month after the start of the lockdown (T1), during the gradual relaxation (T2), between the two waves (T3) and during the second wave (T4). Results showed that although COVID-19 related stress increased and decreased in accordance with the waxing and waning pattern of the pandemic, OCD symptoms showed an initial slight increase followed by a decrease at T3 and again at T4. Changes in family members' accommodation of symptoms followed the same course as the OCD symptoms. Furthermore, OCD symptoms correlated with depressive symptoms, anxiety and stress levels and COVID-19 related distress at all timepoints. It is important to involve family members in the treatment of OCD even during a pandemic. Clinicians should also pay attention to symptoms of depression, anxiety and stress during OCD treatment. Further research is necessary to entangle the causal relationship between OCD symptoms, FA and symptoms of depression, anxiety and stress.


Subject(s)
Adaptation, Psychological , COVID-19 , Family , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder , Pandemics , Patients , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/psychology , Communicable Disease Control , Family/psychology , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder/epidemiology , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder/psychology , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder/therapy , Patients/psychology
20.
Indian J Med Ethics ; VI(1): 1-5, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1257354

ABSTRACT

Violence against medical professionals and destruction of hospital property by frustrated patients and their relatives occur frequently in India (1) and in other countries (2, 3). However, harassment of healthcare workers by the police has, so far, not been an issue in the Indian healthcare system. Now, cases of harassment of medical professionals by the police have emerged during the Covid-19 pandemic. Ironically, both doctors and police personnel have been considered "frontline heroes" against the pandemic in India. We present some cases of such attacks.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Health Personnel/psychology , Patients/psychology , Police/psychology , Workplace Violence/psychology , Adult , Female , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Humans , India , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Police/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2 , Workplace Violence/statistics & numerical data
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL