Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 6.354
Filter
1.
Arq. ciências saúde UNIPAR ; 26(3)set-dez. 2022.
Article in Portuguese | WHO COVID, LILACS (Americas) | ID: covidwho-2205389

ABSTRACT

Introdução: A violência contra à mulher é caracterizada especialmente pela desigualdade de gênero, diferença hierárquica, subordinação e pela agressividade do parceiro ou ex-parceiro. Entre os principais subtipos, cita-se; a violência física, psicológica, sexual, patrimonial e moral. Com o surgimento da pandemia de coronavírus em 2020 na tentativa de contenção da doença, medidas protetivas como o isolamento social aumentaram o convívio familiar. Dessa forma, as vítimas de violência passaram a ficar ainda mais tempo expostas aos seus agressores e consequentemente com maiores dificuldades para denunciar os abusos sofridos, pois a prestação dos serviços públicos, instituições de segurança e judiciais também foram restringidas. Objetivo: Caracterizar os casos de violência contra a mulher em tempos de pandemia de coronavírus em um município do Sudoeste do Paraná. Materiais e métodos: Trata-se de um estudo descritivo, documental e transversal com abordagem quantitativa realizada em um município do Sudoeste do Paraná a partir da coleta de dados, por meio das fichas de notificação de violência contra a mulher entre 2019 e 2021. Resultados e discussão: O estudo demonstrou prevalência de notificações no ano de 2019 em mulheres com idade de 12 a 18 anos (27,2%), brancas (71,3%), com ensino médio (21,9%), sendo ainda estudantes (23,1%) ou desempregadas (17,2%), sem companheiro (52,4%), residentes da área urbana (74%), heterossexuais (50,6%), sem possuir algum tipo de deficiência (51,8%). Ao verificar a tipologia da agressão com maior incidência, observou-se a lesão autoprovocada (53,6%) por meio da intoxicação /envenenamento (41,4%). Quanto a violência interpessoal, notou-se que a maioria das agressões foram ocasionadas pelo próprio cônjuge da vítima (12,4%), utilizando da força física (29,3%), salienta-se que o álcool não estava presente na maior parte das agressões. Conclusão: Evidencia-se a prevalência de violência autoprovocada (53,6%), em adolescentes com ensino médio, brancas, sem companheiro, residentes da área urbana, agredidas em ambiente domiciliar, motivadas por conflitos geracionais, sendo as violências mais incidentes a física por meio de envenenamento/intoxicação. Diante do exposto é importante abordar o fato de que é necessário realizar capacitações com os profissionais de saúde referente a ficha de notificação e orientá-los da importância de preenchê-la de forma correta, para haja a tomada de providências de acordo com cada necessidade.


Introduction: Introduction: Violence against women is characterized especially by gender inequality, hierarchical difference, subordination and aggressiveness of the partner or ex partner. Among the main subtypes are physical, psychological, sexual, patrimonial and moral violence. With the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 in an attempt to contain the disease, protective measures such as social isolation increased family coexistence. As a result, the victims of violence have been exposed to their aggressors for even longer and consequently find it more difficult to report the abuse they have suffered, since the provision of public services, security and judicial institutions have also been restricted. Objective: To characterize the cases of violence against women during the COVID-19 pandemic in a municipality in the southwest of Paraná. Materals and methods: This is a descriptive, documentary, and cross-sectional study with a quantitative approach carried out in a municipality in the Southwest of Paraná from data collection performed through the notification forms of violence against women notified between 2019 and 2021. Results and discussion: The study showed a prevalence of notifications in the year 2019 in women aged 12 to 18 years (27.2%), white (71.3%), with high school education (21.9%), being still students (23.1%) or unemployed (17.2%), without a partner (52.4%), residents of the urban area (74%), more specifically the Padre Ulrico neighborhood (12.4%), heterosexual (50.6%), without having any type of disability (51.8%). When checking the type of aggression with the highest incidence, we observed self-harm (53.6%) through intoxication/ poisoning (41.4%). As for interpersonal violence, it was noted that most aggressions were caused by the victim's own spouse (12.4%), using physical force (29.3%), and alcohol was not present in most aggressions. Conclusion: The prevalence of self- inflicted violence (53.6%) is evident in adolescents with high school education, white, without a partner, urban residents, assaulted in the home environment, motivated by generational conflicts, with the most incident violence being physical violence through poisoning/intoxication. Given the above, it is important to address the fact that it is necessary to conduct training with health professionals regarding the notification form and guide them on the importance of filling it out correctly, so that there is taking action according to each need.


Introducción: La violencia contra las mujeres se caracteriza especialmente por la desigualdad de género, la diferencia jerárquica, la subordinación y la agresividad de la pareja o ex pareja. Entre los principales subtipos, se menciona; la violencia física, psicológica, sexual, patrimonial y moral. Con la aparición de la pandemia de coronavirus en 2020 en un intento de contener la enfermedad, las medidas de protección como el aislamiento social han aumentado la convivencia familiar. Así, las víctimas de la violencia han quedado aún más expuestas a sus agresores y, en consecuencia, tienen mayores dificultades para denunciar los abusos sufridos, ya que también se ha restringido la prestación de servicios públicos, de seguridad y de instituciones judiciales. Objetivo: Caracterizar los casos de violencia contra la mujer en tiempos de pandemia de coronavirus en un municipio del sudoeste de Paraná. Materiales y métodos: Se trata de un estudio descriptivo, documental y transversal con enfoque cuantitativo realizado en un municipio del suroeste de Paraná a partir de la recolección de datos a través de las formas de notificación de la violencia contra las mujeres entre 2019 y 2021. Resultados y discusión: El estudio mostró una prevalencia de notificaciones en 2019 en mujeres de 12 a 18 años (27,2%), de raza blanca (71,3%), con estudios secundarios (21,9%), siendo aún estudiantes (23,1%) o desempleadas (17,2%), sin pareja (52,4%), residentes en el área urbana (74%), heterosexuales (50,6%), sin tener algún tipo de discapacidad (51,8%). Al verificar el tipo de agresión con mayor incidencia, se observó la lesión autoinfligida (53,6%) a través de la intoxicación / envenenamiento (41,4%). En cuanto a la violencia interpersonal, se observó que la mayoría de las agresiones fueron causadas por el propio cónyuge de la víctima (12,4%), utilizando la fuerza física (29,3%), se destaca que el alcohol no estuvo presente en la mayoría de las agresiones. Conclusión: Se evidencia la prevalencia de la violencia autoprovocada (53,6%), en adolescentes con educación médica, brancas, sin compañía, residentes del área urbana, agredidos en ambiente domiciliario, motivados por conflictos geracionales, siendo las violencias más incidentes a la física por medio de envenenamiento/intoxicación. Dado lo anterior es importante abordar el hecho de que es necesario realizar una capacitación con los profesionales de la salud respecto a la ficha de notificación y orientarlos sobre la importancia de llenarla correctamente, para que exista la toma de acciones de acuerdo a cada necesidad.


Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Pregnancy , Adolescent , Adult , Health Profile , Violence Against Women , Pandemics , COVID-19 , Poisoning , Social Isolation , Women , Wounds and Injuries , Cross-Sectional Studies/methods , Health Personnel , Health Personnel/education , Crime Victims/statistics & numerical data , Notification/statistics & numerical data , Aggression/psychology , Professional Training , Physical Abuse/statistics & numerical data
2.
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
3.
JMIR Public Health Surveill ; 7(6): e24312, 2021 06 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2197877

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 outbreak has imposed physical and psychological pressure on health care professionals, including frontline physicians. Hence, evaluating the mental health status of physicians during the current pandemic is important to define future preventive guidelines among health care stakeholders. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we intended to study alterations in the mental health status of Portuguese physicians working at the frontline during the COVID-19 pandemic and potential sociodemographic factors influencing their mental health status. METHODS: A nationwide survey was conducted during May 4-25, 2020, to infer differences in mental health status (depression, anxiety, stress, and obsessive compulsive symptoms) between Portuguese physicians working at the frontline during the COVID-19 pandemic and other nonfrontline physicians. A representative sample of 420 participants stratified by age, sex, and the geographic region was analyzed (200 frontline and 220 nonfrontline participants). Moreover, we explored the influence of several sociodemographic factors on mental health variables including age, sex, living conditions, and household composition. RESULTS: Our results show that being female (ß=1.1; t=2.5; P=.01) and working at the frontline (ß=1.4; t=2.9; P=.004) are potential risk factors for stress. In contrast, having a house with green space was a potentially beneficial factor for stress (ß=-1.5; t=-2.5; P=.01) and anxiety (ß=-1.1; t=-2.4; P=.02). CONCLUSIONS: It is important to apply protective mental health measures for physicians to avoid the long-term effects of stress, such as burnout.


Subject(s)
Burnout, Professional , COVID-19 , Mental Health , Pandemics , Physicians/psychology , Adult , Aged , Anxiety , Depression , Emergency Medical Services , Female , Health Personnel , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder , Portugal , Professional Role , SARS-CoV-2 , Stress, Psychological , Surveys and Questionnaires
4.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(36): e27105, 2021 Sep 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2191064

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: To assess the general Japanese population's thoughts on coronavirus disease of 2019 related discrimination by Tweets.Tweets were retrieved from search queries using the keywords "health care providers and discrimination (no hashtags)" and "corona and rural area (no hashtags)" via the Twitter application programming interface. Subsequently, a text-mining analysis was conducted on tokenized text data. R version 4.0.2 was used for the analysis.In total, 51,906 tweets for "corona and health care providers", 59,560 tweets for "corona and rural" were obtained between the search period of July 29, 2020 and September 30, 2020. The most common 20 words from the tokenized text data were translated to English. Word clouds with the original Japanese words are presented.Tweets for corona and health care providers did not suggest significant evidence of discrimination toward health care providers on Twitter. Results for corona and rural area, however, showed the unexpected word "murahachibu" (an outmoded word meaning ostracism), suggesting persistent strong social pressure to prevent bringing the disease to the community. This kind of pressure may not be supported by scientific facts. These results demonstrate the need for continued educational efforts to disseminate factual information to the public.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Data Mining , Health Personnel , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Isolation , COVID-19/psychology , Humans , Japan/epidemiology , Pandemics
5.
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
8.
Am J Manag Care ; 28(11): e417-e425, 2022 Nov 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2206466

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Nonmedical switching (NMS) is a change in a patient's treatment regimen for reasons other than lack of efficacy, intolerance, adverse effects, or poor adherence. We describe the impact of NMS on patients, health care workers, and health systems, focusing on NMS to in-class biologic alternatives in US patients with chronic, immune-mediated rheumatic and dermatologic conditions. Additionally, we evaluate the ways in which the COVID-19 pandemic may exacerbate the physical, psychological, and economic impacts of NMS. STUDY DESIGN: Narrative review. METHODS: We performed a search of MEDLINE's PubMed database from October 2015 to October 2020, with a repeat search in October 2021. Search terms included relevant keywords pertaining to NMS, biologics, and disease areas. Results were supplemented by a search of key congress abstracts from 2015 to 2021 and a targeted internet search. RESULTS: NMS increases medication abandonment, errors, and adverse effects, and it can lead to longer patient visits, increased follow-up visits, additional laboratory tests and procedures, and greater overall health care resource utilization (HCRU). The increased HCRU associated with NMS increases patients' financial burden due to additional co-pays and out-of-pocket costs. CONCLUSIONS: The decision to switch treatments should result from shared decision-making between health care providers (HCPs) and patients to achieve the best clinical outcomes and optimal HCRU. The issues related to NMS may be compounded by the financial and psychosocial stress on HCPs and patients created by the COVID-19 pandemic. HCPs should advocate for continuous patient treatment and be familiar with continuity of care legislation, appeals processes, and manufacturer assistance programs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Health Expenditures , Delivery of Health Care , Health Personnel
9.
Bull World Health Organ ; 100(6): 385-401A, 2022 Jun 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2198270

ABSTRACT

Objective: To estimate the prevalence of burnout among primary health-care professionals in low- and middle-income countries and to identify factors associated with burnout. Methods: We systematically searched nine databases up to February 2022 to identify studies investigating burnout in primary health-care professionals in low- and middle-income countries. There were no language limitations and we included observational studies. Two independent reviewers completed screening, study selection, data extraction and quality appraisal. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to estimate overall burnout prevalence as assessed using the Maslach Burnout Inventory subscales of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and personal accomplishment. We narratively report factors associated with burnout. Findings: The search returned 1568 articles. After selection, 60 studies from 20 countries were included in the narrative review and 31 were included in the meta-analysis. Three studies collected data during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic but provided limited evidence on the impact of the disease on burnout. The overall single-point prevalence of burnout ranged from 2.5% to 87.9% (43 studies). In the meta-analysis (31 studies), the pooled prevalence of a high level of emotional exhaustion was 28.1% (95% confidence interval, CI: 21.5-33.5), a high level of depersonalization was 16.4% (95% CI: 10.1-22.9) and a high level of reduced personal accomplishment was 31.9% (95% CI: 21.7-39.1). Conclusion: The substantial prevalence of burnout among primary health-care professionals in low- and middle-income countries has implications for patient safety, care quality and workforce planning. Further cross-sectional studies are needed to help identify evidence-based solutions, particularly in Africa and South-East Asia.


Subject(s)
Burnout, Professional , COVID-19 , Burnout, Professional/epidemiology , Burnout, Professional/psychology , Burnout, Psychological , Developing Countries , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Prevalence
10.
JMIR Public Health Surveill ; 8(10): e34927, 2022 10 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2198020

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Disproportionate risks of COVID-19 in congregate care facilities including long-term care homes, retirement homes, and shelters both affect and are affected by SARS-CoV-2 infections among facility staff. In cities across Canada, there has been a consistent trend of geographic clustering of COVID-19 cases. However, there is limited information on how COVID-19 among facility staff reflects urban neighborhood disparities, particularly when stratified by the social and structural determinants of community-level transmission. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the concentration of cumulative cases by geography and social and structural determinants across 3 mutually exclusive subgroups in the Greater Toronto Area (population: 7.1 million): community, facility staff, and health care workers (HCWs) in other settings. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, observational study using surveillance data on laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases (January 23 to December 13, 2020; prior to vaccination rollout). We derived neighborhood-level social and structural determinants from census data and generated Lorenz curves, Gini coefficients, and the Hoover index to visualize and quantify inequalities in cases. RESULTS: The hardest-hit neighborhoods (comprising 20% of the population) accounted for 53.87% (44,937/83,419) of community cases, 48.59% (2356/4849) of facility staff cases, and 42.34% (1669/3942) of other HCW cases. Compared with other HCWs, cases among facility staff reflected the distribution of community cases more closely. Cases among facility staff reflected greater social and structural inequalities (larger Gini coefficients) than those of other HCWs across all determinants. Facility staff cases were also more likely than community cases to be concentrated in lower-income neighborhoods (Gini 0.24, 95% CI 0.15-0.38 vs 0.14, 95% CI 0.08-0.21) with a higher household density (Gini 0.23, 95% CI 0.17-0.29 vs 0.17, 95% CI 0.12-0.22) and with a greater proportion working in other essential services (Gini 0.29, 95% CI 0.21-0.40 vs 0.22, 95% CI 0.17-0.28). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 cases among facility staff largely reflect neighborhood-level heterogeneity and disparities, even more so than cases among other HCWs. The findings signal the importance of interventions prioritized and tailored to the home geographies of facility staff in addition to workplace measures, including prioritization and reach of vaccination at home (neighborhood level) and at work.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel , Humans , Residence Characteristics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
11.
Anesth Analg ; 135(5): 899, 2022 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2196722

ABSTRACT

For over two years the resilience of humanity was tested with the coronavirus outbreak. At its outset the scientific community rallied and did its very best to disseminate accumulating knowledge in real time to contain the outbreak. Sobering lessons were learned in managing such a global crisis. Critical care anesthesiologists in particular were instrumental as decision makers and their insight is reflected in a review of how we may be better prepared in the future should another virus spread with such scale and severity. Members of the Society of Critical Care Anesthesiologists contribute to a special article in this issue that focuses on several broad themes that emerged from managing the pandemic. These include large scale decision making in health care systems, clinical management of a new disease, resource management with conversion of operating rooms to intensive care units, and health care provider well-being. These considerations are summarized in this infographic. It is heartening to see an article and an accompanying editorial in this issue that address what we have learned from our collective experience. It is a testament to the will of the scientific community and health care providers to evolve and overcome, to move beyond discouragement and prevail.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Health Personnel , Disease Outbreaks , Delivery of Health Care
12.
BMC Infect Dis ; 22(1): 587, 2022 Jul 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2196072

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (HCW) are at increased risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2. Vulnerable patient populations in particular must be protected, and clinics should not become transmission hotspots to avoid delaying medical treatments independent of COVID. Because asymptomatic transmission has been described, routine screening of asymptomatic HCW would potentially be able to interrupt chains of infection through early detection. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, Web of Science and WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus with regard to non-incident related testing of healthcare workers using polymerase chain reaction on May 4th 2021. Studies since January 2020 were included. An assessment of risk of bias and representativeness was performed. RESULTS: The search identified 39 studies with heterogeneous designs. Data collection of the included studies took place from January to August 2020. The studies were conducted worldwide and the sample size of the included HCW ranged from 70 to 9449 participants. In total, 1000 of 51,700 (1.9%) asymptomatic HCW were tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 using PCR testing. The proportion of positive test results ranged between 0 and 14.3%. No study reported on HCW-screening related reductions in infected person-days. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The heterogeneous proportions might be explained by different regional incidences, lock-downs, and pre-analytical pitfalls that reduce the sensitivity of the nasopharyngeal swab. The very high prevalence in some studies indicates that screening HCW for SARS-CoV-2 may be important particularly in geographical regions and pandemic periods with a high-incidence. With low numbers and an increasing rate of vaccinated HCW, a strict cost-benefit consideration must be made, especially in times of low incidences. Since we found no studies that reported on HCW-screening related reductions in infected person-days, re-evaluation should be done when these are available.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control , Delivery of Health Care , Health Personnel , Hospitals , Humans
13.
Epidemiol Infect ; 150: e186, 2022 Nov 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2185373

ABSTRACT

Healthcare workers (HCWs) have increased exposure and subsequent risk of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). This case-control study was conducted to investigate the contemporaneous risks associated with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection amongst HCWs following in-work exposure to a confirmed coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) case. We assessed the influence of demographic (age, sex, nationality, high risk co-morbidities and vaccination status) and work-related factors (job role, exposure location, contact type, personal protective equipment (PPE) use) on infection risk following nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 exposure. All contact tracing records within the hospital site during waves 1-3 of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ireland were screened to identify exposure events, cases and controls. In total, 285 cases and 1526 controls were enrolled, as a result of 1811 in-work exposure events with 745 index cases. We demonstrate that male sex, Eastern European nationality, exposure location, PPE use and vaccination status all impact the likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 infection following nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 exposure. The findings draw attention to the need for continuing emphasis on PPE use and its persisting benefit in the era of COVID-19 vaccinations. We suggest that non-work-related factors may influence infection risk seen in certain ethnic groups and that infection risk in high-risk HCW roles (e.g. nursing) may be the result of repeated exposures rather than risks inherent to a single event.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Male , Humans , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Case-Control Studies , Ireland/epidemiology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Health Personnel , Risk Factors , Hospitals
14.
Anesthesiology ; 134(1): 61-71, 2021 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2161186

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Disease severity in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may be associated with inoculation dose. This has triggered interest in intubation barrier devices to block droplet exposure; however, aerosol protection with these devices is not known. This study hypothesized that barrier devices reduce aerosol outside of the barrier. METHODS: Aerosol containment in closed, semiclosed, semiopen, and open barrier devices was investigated: (1) "glove box" sealed with gloves and caudal drape, (2) "drape tent" with a drape placed over a frame, (3) "slit box" with armholes and caudal end covered by vinyl slit diaphragms, (4) original "aerosol box," (5) collapsible "interlocking box," (6) "simple drape" over the patient, and (7) "no barrier." Containment was investigated by (1) vapor instillation at manikin's right arm with video-assisted visual evaluation and (2) submicrometer ammonium sulfate aerosol particles ejected through the manikin's mouth with ventilation and coughs. Samples were taken from standardized locations inside and around the barriers using a particle counter and a mass spectrometer. Aerosol evacuation from the devices was measured using standard hospital suction, a surgical smoke evacuator, and a Shop-Vac. RESULTS: Vapor experiments demonstrated leakage via arm holes and edges. Only closed and semiclosed devices and the aerosol box reduced aerosol particle counts (median [25th, 75th percentile]) at the operator's mouth compared to no barrier (combined median 29 [-11, 56], n = 5 vs. 157 [151, 166], n = 5). The other barrier devices provided less reduction in particle counts (133 [128, 137], n = 5). Aerosol evacuation to baseline required 15 min with standard suction and the Shop-Vac and 5 min with a smoke evacuator. CONCLUSIONS: Barrier devices may reduce exposure to droplets and aerosol. With meticulous tucking, the glove box and drape tent can retain aerosol during airway management. Devices that are not fully enclosed may direct aerosol toward the laryngoscopist. Aerosol evacuation reduces aerosol content inside fully enclosed devices. Barrier devices must be used in conjunction with body-worn personal protective equipment.


Subject(s)
Aerosols/analysis , COVID-19/prevention & control , Occupational Exposure/analysis , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment , Aerosols/adverse effects , Cough/prevention & control , Cough/virology , Health Personnel , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects
15.
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
16.
J Bras Pneumol ; 48(5): e20220018, 2022.
Article in English, Portuguese | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2156225

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate COVID-19 knowledge, attitudes, and practices among health care workers (HCWs) practicing in Latin American countries during the first surge of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This was a multinational cross-sectional survey study, using an online self-administered questionnaire. The final version of the questionnaire comprised 40 questions, organized in five sections: demographic and professional characteristics; COVID-19 knowledge; attitudes toward COVID-19; COVID-19 practices; and institutional resources. RESULTS: The study involved 251 HCWs from 19 Latin American countries who agreed to participate. In our sample, 77% of HCWs participated in some sort of institutional training on COVID-19, and 43% had a low COVID-19 knowledge score. COVID-19 knowledge was associated with the type of health center (public/private), availability of institutional training, and sources of information about COVID-19. Concerns about not providing adequate care were reported by 60% of the participants. The most commonly used ventilatory strategies were protective mechanical ventilation, alveolar recruitment maneuvers, and prone positioning, and the use of drugs to treat COVID-19 was mainly based on institutional protocols. CONCLUSIONS: In this multinational study in Latin America, almost half of HCWs had a low COVID-19 knowledge score, and the level of knowledge was associated with the type of institution, participation in institutional training, and information sources. HCWs considered that COVID-19 was very relevant, and more than half were concerned about not providing adequate care to patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Latin America/epidemiology , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Cross-Sectional Studies , Health Personnel
17.
Med J Aust ; 216(2): 106, 2022 02 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2155693
18.
Front Public Health ; 10: 904550, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2154831

ABSTRACT

Objective: After the unprecedented coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, the health status of the general population has suffered a huge threat, and the mental health of front-line healthcare providers has also encountered great challenges. Therefore, this study aims to: (1) investigate the prevalence and influencing factors of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among healthcare providers, and (2) verify the moderating role of self-efficacy in the influence of PTSD on mental health. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using an online survey of 1993 participants. The presence of depression, anxiety, self-efficacy, and PTSD was evaluated using screening tests from March 1. Sociodemographic and COVID-19-related data were also collected. A data analysis was performed using descriptive statistics, Pearson's correlation coefficient, and multiple linear regression. Results: The prevalence of PTSD among healthcare providers was 9.3%. PTSD was negatively correlated with self-efficacy (r = -0.265, P < 0.01), anxiety (r = -0.453, P < 0.01), and depression (r = 0.708, P < 0.01). Profession, daily working hours, maximum continuous working days, and daily sleep time were influencing factors of PTSD. A binary logistic regression analysis showed that physicians (OR = 2.254, 95% CI = 1.298, 3.914) and nurses (OR = 2.176, 95% CI = 1.337, 3.541) were more likely to experience PTSD than other healthcare providers. Conclusion: Self-efficacy has a moderating effect on the influence of PTSD on anxiety and depression. This suggests that health managers need to respond to the current psychological crisis of healthcare providers, implement appropriate psychological interventions, and minimize the psychological harm caused by COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Mental Health , Prevalence , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/epidemiology
19.
Bull World Health Organ ; 100(11): 676-688, 2022 Nov 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2154562

ABSTRACT

Objective: To systematically map the current evidence about the characteristics of health systems, providers and patients to design rehabilitation care for post coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) condition. Methods: We conducted a scoping review by searching the databases: MEDLINE®, Embase®, Web of Science, Cochrane COVID-19 Registry and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from inception to 22 April 2022. The search strategy included terms related to (i) post COVID-19 condition and other currently known terminologies; (ii) care models and pathways; and (iii) rehabilitation. We applied no language or study design restrictions. Two pairs of researchers independently screened title, abstracts and full-text articles and extracted data. We charted the evidence according to five topics: (i) care model components and functions; (ii) safe delivery of rehabilitation; (iii) referral principles; (iv) service delivery settings; and (v) health-care professionals. Findings: We screened 13 753 titles and abstracts, read 154 full-text articles, and included 37 articles. The current evidence is conceptual and expert based. Care model components included multidisciplinary teams, continuity or coordination of care, people-centred care and shared decision-making between clinicians and patients. Care model functions included standardized symptoms assessment, telehealth and virtual care and follow-up system. Rehabilitation services were integrated at all levels of a health system from primary care to tertiary hospital-based care. Health-care workers delivering services within a multidisciplinary team included mostly physiotherapists, occupational therapists and psychologists. Conclusion: Key policy messages include implementing a multilevel and multiprofessional model; leveraging country health systems' strengths and learning from other conditions; financing rehabilitation research providing standardized outcomes; and guidance to increase patient safety.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Health Personnel , Treatment Outcome , Delivery of Health Care
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL