Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 73
Filter
2.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(5)2022 02 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1715362

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: It is common knowledge that first responders are among the helping professionals most at risk of burnout and psychological vulnerability. During the COVID-19 pandemic, their mental health has been subjected to various risk factors. METHODS: Data on socio-demographic characteristics, the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) and psychological vulnerability (SCL-90-R) were obtained from 228 subjects (55.3% female; M age = 45.23, SD = 13.14) grouped on the basis of their actual involvement during the emergency phases (82% First Responders and 18% Second Responders). RESULTS: First responders exceeded the MBI clinical cut-off, while SRs did not (χ² ≥ 0.5); specifically, EE = 89.8%, DP = 85.8%, and PA = 82.1%. The FR group showed a higher mean in the global severity index (GSI = 49.37) than did the SRs (=43.95), and the FR group exceeded the clinical cut-off in the SCL-90-R scales of SOM (51.06), ANX (52.40), and PHOB (53.60), while the SF group did so only for the PHOB scale (50.41). The MBI dimensions correlated significantly (p = 0.05) with all investigated clinical scales of the SCL-90-R. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency situations expose first responders to specific risk factors related to work performance and relational aspects, which contribute to increased psychological vulnerability and burnout.


Subject(s)
Burnout, Professional , COVID-19 , Emergency Responders , Anxiety/epidemiology , Burnout, Professional/epidemiology , Burnout, Professional/psychology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Depersonalization/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
3.
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med ; 30(1): 10, 2022 Feb 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1690900

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Dispatching first responders (FR) to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in addition to the emergency medical service has shown to increase survival. The promising development of FR systems over the past years has been challenged by the outbreak of COVID-19. Whilst increased numbers and worse outcomes of cardiac arrests during the pandemic suggest a need for expansion of FR schemes, appropriate risk management is required to protect first responders and patients from contracting COVID-19. This study investigated how European FR schemes were affected by the pandemic and what measures were taken to protect patients and responders from COVID-19. METHODS: To identify FR schemes in Europe we conducted a literature search and a web search. The schemes were contacted and invited to answer an online questionnaire during the second wave of the pandemic (December 2020/ January 2021) in Europe. RESULTS: We have identified 135 FR schemes in 28 countries and included responses from 47 FR schemes in 16 countries. 25 schemes reported deactivation due to COVID-19 at some point, whilst 22 schemes continued to operate throughout the pandemic. 39 schemes communicated a pandemic-specific algorithm to their first responders. Before the COVID-19 outbreak 20 FR systems did not provide any personal protective equipment (PPE). After the outbreak 19 schemes still did not provide any PPE. The majority of schemes experienced falling numbers of accepted call outs and decreasing registrations of new volunteers. Six schemes reported of FR having contracted COVID-19 on a mission. CONCLUSIONS: European FR schemes were considerably affected by the pandemic and exhibited a range of responses to protect patients and responders. Overall, FR schemes saw a decrease in activity, which was in stark contrast to the high demand caused by the increased incidence and mortality of OHCA during the pandemic. Given the important role FR play in the chain of survival, a balanced approach upholding the safety of patients and responders should be sought to keep FR schemes operational.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Emergency Responders , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/methods , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
4.
Int J Infect Dis ; 116: 167-173, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1670570

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Health care workers (HCW) are among the highest risk groups for acquisition of COVID-19 because of occupational exposures. The WHIP COVID-19 Study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as chemoprophylaxis for SARS-CoV-2 infection in this population. METHODS: HCW, first responders, and other occupationally high-risk participants were enrolled in a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical study of HCQ from April to October 2020. The trial compared daily versus weekly HCQ with placebo and with a prospective cohort on HCQ for autoimmune diseases. Participants were followed for 8 weeks. Serology or a positive polymerase chain reaction test was used to determine laboratory confirmed clinical cases. RESULTS: A total of 624 participants were randomized to placebo (n = 200), weekly HCQ (n = 201), daily HCQ (n = 197). For the primary safety end point, 279 (44.7%) participants experienced adverse event (AE) level II or lower (total AEs n = 589), similar rates in all randomized groups (P = .188) with no hospitalizations or interventions required. Only 4 laboratory confirmed COVID-19 cases occurred, with 2 in the placebo arm and one in each HCQ randomized arm. CONCLUSIONS: This randomized placebo-controlled trial was able to demonstrate the safety of HCQ outpatient chemoprophylaxis in high-risk groups against COVID-19. Future studies of chemoprophylaxis for SARS-CoV-2 are needed as the epidemic continues worldwide.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergency Responders , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Personnel , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
5.
J Gen Intern Med ; 37(2): 397-408, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1669970

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has greatly affected front-line health care workers (HCW) and first responders (FR). The specific components of COVID-19 related occupational stressors (CROS) associated with psychiatric symptoms and reduced occupational functioning or retention remain poorly understood. OBJECTIVES: Examine the relationships between total and factored CROS, psychiatric symptoms, and occupational outcomes. DESIGN: Observational, self-report, single time-point online assessment. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 510 US HCW (N = 301) and FR (N = 200) with occupational duties affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: CROS were assessed using a custom 17-item questionnaire. Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, insomnia, and generalized anxiety symptoms were assessed using the PTSD Checklist-5 (PCL5), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ9), Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), and General Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD7). Respondents' likelihood of leaving current field and occupational functioning were assessed with 2-item PROMIS subscales. Relationships were modeled using multivariable regression. Open-ended responses were coded using rapid template analysis. RESULTS: CROS total scores correlated significantly with all four psychiatric symptom domains (R's = .42-.53), likelihood of leaving one's current occupation (R = .18), and trouble doing usual work (R = .28), all p's < .001. Half of HCW indicated a decreased likelihood of staying in their current occupation as a result of the pandemic. CROS were fit to a 3-factor model consisting of risk, demoralization, and volume factors. All CROS factors were associated with psychiatric symptom burden, but demoralization was most prominently associated with psychiatric symptoms and negative occupational outcomes. Among psychiatric symptoms, PTSD symptoms were most strongly associated with negative occupational outcomes. Open-ended statements emphasized lack of protection and support, increased occupational demands, and emotional impact of work duties. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: These results demonstrate potentially treatable psychiatric symptoms in HCW and FR experiencing CROS, impacting both wellbeing and the health care system. Mitigating CROS, particularly by addressing factors driving demoralization, may improve HCW and FR mental health, occupational functioning, and retention.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergency Responders , Occupational Health , Anxiety , Depression/diagnosis , Depression/epidemiology , Health Personnel , Humans , Occupations , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Influenza Other Respir Viruses ; 16(3): 585-593, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1621931

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We sought to evaluate the impact of changes in estimates of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness on the incidence of laboratory-confirmed infection among frontline workers at high risk for SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: We analyzed data from a prospective frontline worker cohort to estimate the incidence of COVID-19 by month as well as the association of COVID-19 vaccination, occupation, demographics, physical distancing, and mask use with infection risk. Participants completed baseline and quarterly surveys, and each week self-collected mid-turbinate nasal swabs and reported symptoms. RESULTS: Among 1018 unvaccinated and 3531 fully vaccinated workers, the monthly incidence of laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in January 2021 was 13.9 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.4-17.4), declining to 0.5 (95% CI -0.4-1.4) per 1000 person-weeks in June. By September 2021, when the Delta variant predominated, incidence had once again risen to 13.6 (95% CI 7.8-19.4) per 1000 person-weeks. In contrast, there was no reportable incidence among fully vaccinated participants at the end of January 2021, and incidence remained low until September 2021 when it rose modestly to 4.1 (95% CI 1.9-3.8) per 1000. Below average facemask use was associated with a higher risk of infection for unvaccinated participants during exposure to persons who may have COVID-19 and vaccinated participants during hours in the community. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccination was significantly associated with a lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection despite Delta variant predominance. Our data demonstrate the added protective benefit of facemask use among both unvaccinated and vaccinated frontline workers.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergency Responders , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Incidence , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Vaccination
7.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(2)2022 01 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1613783

ABSTRACT

Although COVID-19 vaccines are widely available in the U.S. and much of the world, many have chosen to forgo this vaccination. Emergency medical services (EMS) professionals, despite their role on the frontlines and interactions with COVID-positive patients, are not immune to vaccine hesitancy. Via a survey conducted in April 2021, we investigated the extent to which first responders in the U.S. trusted various information sources to provide reliable information about COVID-19 vaccines. Those vaccinated generally trusted healthcare providers as a source of information, but unvaccinated first responders had fairly low trust in this information source-a group to which they, themselves, belong. Additionally, regardless of vaccination status, trust in all levels of government, employers, and their community as sources of information was low. Free-response explanations provided some context to these findings, such as preference for other COVID-19 management options, including drugs proven ineffective. A trusted source of COVID-19 vaccination information is not readily apparent. Individuals expressed a strong desire for the autonomy to make vaccination decisions for themselves, as opposed to mandates. Potential reasons for low trust, possible solutions to address them, generalizability to the broader public, and implications of low trust in official institutions are discussed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergency Responders , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Trust , Vaccination
8.
Soc Sci Med ; 294: 114639, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1586485

ABSTRACT

This comparative study of community organizations serving marginalized youth in New York City and Amsterdam utilized a novel ethnographic approach called reverse engineering to identify techniques for social change that are active in each organization, adaptable and translatable to other contexts. It found that youth-serving organizations led flexible responses to the crisis of COVID-19 as it affected those marginalized by race, immigrant status, housing instability, religion and gender. The organizations employed techniques that they had previously developed to cultivate youth well-being - among them connectivity, safe space, and creativity - to mount tailored responses to COVID-19 related crises. In New York City, these groups addressed crises of material survival resources (personal protective equipment, food, housing) whereas in Amsterdam, youth-serving organizations focused on social connections and emotional well-being as the government met more of participants' material needs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergency Responders , Adolescent , Humans , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Occup Med (Lond) ; 72(3): 225-228, 2022 Apr 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1562221

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Providing frontline support places first responders at a high risk for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. AIMS: This study was aimed to determine the anti-SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in a cohort of first responders (i.e. firefighters/paramedics), to detect the underascertainment rate and to assess risk factors associated with seropositivity. METHODS: We conducted a serological survey among 745 first responders in Germany during 27 November and 4 December 2020 to determine the anti-SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence using Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay (Roche Diagnostics, Mannheim, Germany). As part of the examination, participants were asked to provide information on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-like-symptoms, information on sociodemographic characteristics and workplace risk factors for a SARS-CoV-2 infection and any prior COVID-19 infection. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression analysis were performed and seroprevalence estimates were adjusted for test sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: The test-adjusted seroprevalence was 4% (95% CI 3.1-6.2) and the underascertainment rate was 2.3. Of those tested SARS-CoV-2 antibody positive, 41% were aware that they had been infected in the past. Seropositivity was elevated among paramedics who worked in the emergency rescue team providing first level of pre-hospital emergency care (6% [95% CI 3.4-8.6]) and those directly exposed to a COVID-19 case (5% [95% CI 3.5-8.1]). Overall, the seroprevalence and the underascertainment rate were higher among first responders than among the general population. CONCLUSIONS: The high seroprevalence and underascertainment rate highlight the need to mitigate potential transmission within and between first responders and patients. Workplace control measures such as increased and regular COVID-19-testing and the prompt vaccination of all personnel are necessary.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergency Responders , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Seroepidemiologic Studies
10.
J Infect Dis ; 224(11): 1873-1877, 2021 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1545974

ABSTRACT

We estimated the distributions of duration of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid shedding and time to reinfection among 137 persons with at least 2 positive nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) results from March to September 2020. We analyzed gaps of varying length between subsequent positive and negative NAAT results and estimated a mean duration of nucleic acid shedding of 30.1 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 26.3-34.5). Mean time to reinfection was 89.1 days (95% CI, 75.3-103.5). Together, these indicate that a 90-day period between positive NAAT results can reliably define reinfection in immunocompetent persons although reinfection can occur at shorter intervals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergency Responders , Health Personnel , Reinfection , Virus Shedding , Humans , RNA, Viral , SARS-CoV-2
11.
PLoS One ; 16(11): e0259703, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1506037

ABSTRACT

Two mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273) against severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are globally authorized as a two-dose regimen. Understanding the magnitude and duration of protective immune responses is vital to curbing the pandemic. We enrolled 461 high-risk health services workers at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) and first responders in the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACoFD) to assess the humoral responses in previously infected (PI) and infection naïve (NPI) individuals to mRNA-based vaccines (BNT162b2/Pfizer- BioNTech or mRNA-1273/Moderna). A chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay was used to detect antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 Spike in vaccinees prior to (n = 21) and following each vaccine dose (n = 246 following dose 1 and n = 315 following dose 2), and at days 31-60 (n = 110) and 61-90 (n = 190) following completion of the 2-dose series. Both vaccines induced robust antibody responses in all immunocompetent individuals. Previously infected individuals achieved higher median peak titers (p = 0.002) and had a slower rate of decay (p = 0.047) than infection-naïve individuals. mRNA-1273 vaccinated infection-naïve individuals demonstrated modestly higher titers following each dose (p = 0.005 and p = 0.029, respectively) and slower rates of antibody decay (p = 0.003) than those who received BNT162b2. A subset of previously infected individuals (25%) required both doses in order to reach peak antibody titers. The biologic significance of the differences between previously infected individuals and between the mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 vaccines remains uncertain, but may have important implications for booster strategies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Immunity, Humoral , SARS-CoV-2 , Academic Medical Centers , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Antibody Formation , California/epidemiology , Emergency Medical Services , Emergency Responders , Health Personnel , Humans , Immunoassay , RNA, Messenger/metabolism , Universities
12.
MEDICC Rev ; 24(1): 19-20, 2022 01 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1471363

ABSTRACT

Soaring summer temperatures, systematic urban and political violence, unreliable infrastructure-power outages, water shortages, sporadic transportation and interruption of other basic services-plus the illness, death and economic straits wrought by COVID-19, are what Haitians awake to every day. On the morning of August 14, 2021, they also woke to the earth in the throes of violent, lethal convulsions caused by a 7.2-magnitude earthquake, along the same fault line responsible for the devastating 2010 disaster and stronger still. As if this weren't enough, Tropical Storm Grace was bearing down on the nation, about to dump biblical amounts of rain on the heels of Tropical Storm Fred. When the Haitian President was assassinated on July 7, Haiti still had not received a single dose of any COVID-19 vaccine-indeed, it was the last country in the Americas to receive vaccines. Later that month, 500,000 doses arrived in the country, donated by the United States via COVAX, the WHO-led initiative to assure at least some vaccines reached low- and middle-income countries. In Haiti, getting those vaccines into the arms of the population is beset by cold chain, distribution and bureaucratic problems, and compounded by widespread vaccine hesitancy; when the earthquake struck, only 14,074 of those doses had been administered.[1,2] Suddenly there was a new, more urgent tragedy, the earthquake leaving thousands of dead, injured and displaced-perhaps hundreds of thousands once the real tally emerges. As in the 2010 quake, the doctors, nurses and technicians comprising Cuba's medical team in Haiti-a commitment Cuba has maintained with its Caribbean neighbor since 1998-were among the first responders. The 2010 relief effort included an additional 1500 health professionals and specialists from Cuba's Henry Reeve Emergency Medical Contingent. Just 24 hours after the August 14th quake, MEDICC Review spoke by phone with Dr Luis Orlando Oliveros-Serrano in Port-au-Prince, where he coordinates Cuba's medical team in Haiti. His disaster response experience had already taken him to Haiti twice before and to Pakistan, Bolivia and beyond.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergency Responders , COVID-19 Vaccines , Cuba , Haiti , Humans , Male , SARS-CoV-2 , United States
13.
J Infect Dis ; 225(4): 578-586, 2022 02 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1462363

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Immunoglobulin A (IgA) is an important component of the early immune response to SARS-CoV-2. Prior serosurveys in high-risk groups employing IgG testing alone have provided discordant estimates. The potential added benefit of IgA in serosurveys has not been established. METHODS: Longitudinal serosurvey of first responders (police, emergency medical service providers, fire fighters, and other staff) employing 3 serologic tests (anti-spike IgA, anti-spike IgG, and anti-nucleocapsid IgG) correlated with surveys assessing occupational and nonoccupational risk, exposure to COVID-19, and illnesses consistent with COVID-19. RESULTS: Twelve percent of first responders in Colorado at baseline and 22% at follow-up were assessed as having SARS-CoV-2 infection. Five percent at baseline and 6% at follow-up were seropositive only for IgA. Among those IgA positive only at baseline, the majority (69%) had a positive antibody at follow-up; 45% of those infected at baseline and 33% at follow-up were asymptomatic. At all time points, the estimated cumulative incidence in our study was higher than that in the general population. CONCLUSIONS: First responders are at high risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2. IgA testing identified a significant portion of cases missed by IgG testing and its use as part of serologic surveys may improve retrospective identification of asymptomatic infection.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/analysis , Asymptomatic Infections , COVID-19 , Emergency Responders , Immunoglobulin A/analysis , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/immunology , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/analysis , Retrospective Studies
14.
BMC Emerg Med ; 21(1): 95, 2021 08 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1440901

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: As the first link in the chain of providing healthcare services in the frontline of the battle against COVID-19, emergency medical services (EMS) personnel are faced with various challenges, which affect their professional performance. The present study aimed to identify some strategies to manage the COVID-19-related challenges faced by the pre-hospital emergency care personnel in the south of Iran. METHODS: In this qualitative descriptive study, 27 pre-hospital emergency care personnel who were selected through the purposeful sampling method. Data were collected through 27 semi-structured, in-depth, individual interviews. The collected data were then analyzed based on the Granheim and Lundman's method. RESULTS: Analysis of the data resulted in the identification of 3 main themes and eight sub-themes. These three main themes were as follows: comprehensive and systematic planning, provision of medical equipment, and reduction of professional challenges. CONCLUSION: The findings of the present study showed that, during the COVID-19 crisis, emergency medical services personnel should be provided with a comprehensive and systematic protocol to provide pre-hospital care and their performance should be assessed in terms of a set of scientific standards. Due to lack of equipment and work overload in the current crisis, emergency medical services personnel are faced with many psychological challenges, which adversely affect their quality of pre-hospital emergency care. Furthermore, emergency care senior managers should develop comprehensive protocols, provide more equipment, and eliminate professional challenges to pave the ground for improving the quality and safety of the healthcare services in pre-hospital emergency care during the current COVID-19 crisis.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Emergency Medical Services/organization & administration , Emergency Responders/psychology , Health Personnel/psychology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Emergencies , Humans , Iran , Occupational Health , Pandemics , Qualitative Research , SARS-CoV-2
15.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(34): 1167-1169, 2021 Aug 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1374686

ABSTRACT

During December 14, 2020-April 10, 2021, data from the HEROES-RECOVER Cohorts,* a network of prospective cohorts among frontline workers, showed that the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were approximately 90% effective in preventing symptomatic and asymptomatic infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, in real-world conditions (1,2). This report updates vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates including all COVID-19 vaccines available through August 14, 2021, and examines whether VE differs for adults with increasing time since completion of all recommended vaccine doses. VE before and during SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance, which coincided with an increase in reported COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough infections, were compared (3,4).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Emergency Responders/statistics & numerical data , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Cohort Studies , Humans , Time Factors , United States/epidemiology , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Vaccines, Synthetic
16.
J Healthc Risk Manag ; 41(2): 46-55, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1372744

ABSTRACT

As one of the initial ten sites in Ohio designated to receive and distribute the first COVID-19 vaccines in December 2020, we initiated a self-reported IRB-approved research survey to describe the demographics, side-effects, and missed work time experienced by front-line health care workers in an urban tertiary care center and a rural regional hospital. First responders from both the urban and rural surrounding communities were also included in the initial Tier 1A vaccine distribution. The primary outcome measure was to identify the most frequently experienced side effects from the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, based on type of vaccine, first or second dose, age, gender, race and occupation. The secondary outcome measure was to document the total number of work shifts missed after receiving the vaccine. Of interest to health care risk managers, the survey identified the most common side effects and resulting missed time from work broken down by type of vaccine and first or second dose. This information will be helpful for those institutions who have not yet vaccinated a majority of their work force, employees who still need their second dose, and for strategic scheduling of employees when booster doses become available later in the year.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergency Responders , Vaccines , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Personnel, Hospital , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Tertiary Care Centers
17.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(15)2021 Jul 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1339570

ABSTRACT

During emergencies, areas with higher social vulnerability experience an increased risk for negative health outcomes. However, research has not extrapolated this concept to understand how the workers who respond to these areas may be affected. Researchers from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) merged approximately 160,000 emergency response calls received from three fire departments during the COVID-19 pandemic with the CDC's publicly available Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) to examine the utility of SVI as a leading indicator of occupational health and safety risks. Multiple regressions, binomial logit models, and relative weights analyses were used to answer the research questions. Researchers found that higher social vulnerability on household composition, minority/language, and housing/transportation increase the risk of first responders' exposure to SARS-CoV-2. Higher socioeconomic, household, and minority vulnerability were significantly associated with response calls that required emergency treatment and transport in comparison to fire-related or other calls that are also managed by fire departments. These results have implications for more strategic emergency response planning during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as improving Total Worker Health® and future of work initiatives at the worker and workplace levels within the fire service industry.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergency Medical Services , Emergency Responders , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , United States
18.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(3): e822-e825, 2021 08 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1338686

ABSTRACT

A severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 serosurvey among first responder/healthcare personnel showed that loss of taste/smell was most predictive of seropositivity; percent seropositivity increased with number of coronavirus disease 2019 symptoms. However, 22.9% with 9 symptoms were seronegative, and 8.3% with no symptoms were seropositive. These findings demonstrate limitations of symptom-based surveillance and importance of testing.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergency Responders , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Seroepidemiologic Studies
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL