Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 123
Filter
1.
Nursing ; 52(6): 40-41, 2022 Jun 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1860913
3.
Trials ; 23(1): 303, 2022 Apr 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1789127

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has quickly become a global pandemic with a substantial number of deaths and is a considerable burden for healthcare systems worldwide. Although most cases are paucisymptomatic and limited to the viral infection-related symptoms, some patients evolve to a second phase, with an impaired inflammatory response (cytokine storm) that may lead to acute respiratory distress syndrome and death. This is thought to be caused by increased bradykinin synthesis. METHODS: ICAT-COVID is a multicenter, randomized, open-label, proof-of-concept phase II clinical trial assessing the clinical efficacy and safety of adding icatibant to the standard of care in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 without invasive mechanical ventilation. Patients hospitalized with a confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia diagnosis (RT-PCR or antigen test ≤ 10 days prior to randomization, and radiographic evidence of pulmonary infiltrates), rated "4" or "5" on the WHO's clinical status scale, are eligible. Patients will be randomized on a 1:1 ratio to either standard of care-plus-icatibant (experimental group) or to standard of care alone (control group). The experimental group will receive 30 mg of icatibant subcutaneously 3 times a day for 3 days (for a total of 9 doses). The expected sample size is 120 patients (60 per group) from 2 sites in Spain. Primary outcomes are the efficacy and safety of Icatibant. The main efficacy outcome is the number of patients reaching grades "2" or "1" on the WHO scale within 10 days of starting treatment. Secondary outcomes include "long-term efficacy": number of patients discharged who do not present COVID-19-related relapse or comorbidity up until 28 days after discharge, and mortality. DISCUSSION: Icatibant, a bradykinin type 2 receptor antagonist with proven effectiveness and safety against hereditary angioedema attacks, may be beneficial for COVID-19 patients by inhibiting bradykinin's action on endothelial cells and by inhibiting the SARS-CoV-2 M protease. Our working hypothesis is that treatment with standard of care-plus-icatibant is effective and safe to treat patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 admitted to hospital for pneumonia without invasive mechanical ventilation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT 2020-002166-13. CLINICALTRIALS: gov NCT04978051.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Bradykinin/adverse effects , Bradykinin/analogs & derivatives , Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic , Endothelial Cells , Hospital Units , Humans , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Respiration, Artificial , Treatment Outcome
4.
Ann Vasc Surg ; 80: 104-112, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1596282

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to examine the COVID-19 pandemic and its associated impact on the provision of vascular services, and the pattern of presentation and practice in a tertiary referral vascular unit. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study from a prospectively maintained data-base comparing two time frames, Period 1(15th March-30th May 2019-P1) and Period 2(15th March-30th May 2020-P2)All the patients who presented for a vascular review in the 2 timeframes were included. Metrics of service and patient care episodes were collected and compared including, the number of emergency referrals, patient encounters, consultations, emergency admissions and interventions. Impact on key hospital resources such as critical care and imaging facilities during the two time periods were also examined. RESULTS: There was an absolute reduction of 44% in the number of patients who required urgent or emergency treatment from P1 to P2 (141 vs 79). We noted a non-significant trend towards an increase in the proportion of patients presenting with Chronic Limb Threatening Ischaemia (CLTI) Rutherford 5&6 (P=0.09) as well as a reduction in the proportion of admissions related to Aortic Aneurysm (P=0.21). There was a significant absolute reduction of 77% in all vascular interventions from P1 to P2 with the greatest reductions noted in Carotid (P=0.02), Deep Venous (P=0.003) and Aortic interventions (P=0.016). The number of lower limb interventions also decreased though there was a significant increase as a relative proportion of all vascular interventions in P2 (P=0.001). There was an absolute reduction in the number of scans performed for vascular pathology; Duplex scans reduced by 86%(P<0.002), CT scans by 68%(P<0.003) and MRIs by 74%(P<0.009). CONCLUSION: We report a decrease in urgent and emergency vascular presentations, admissions and interventions. The reduction in patients presenting with lower limb pathology was not as significant as other vascular conditions, resulting in a significant rise in interventions for CLTI and DFI as a proportion of all vascular interventions. These observations will help guide the provision of vascular services during future pandemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospital Units/statistics & numerical data , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Tertiary Healthcare/statistics & numerical data , Vascular Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Workload/statistics & numerical data , Ambulatory Care/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care/statistics & numerical data , Facilities and Services Utilization , Humans , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/statistics & numerical data , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/statistics & numerical data , United Kingdom
6.
Am J Trop Med Hyg ; 106(1): 108-113, 2021 12 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1547589

ABSTRACT

The objective was to compare the profile and outcomes of older adults admitted to a geriatric short-stay unit for COVID-19, to those of older adults admitted to the same unit for seasonal influenza infection. This was an observational study performed in a General Hospital in France. Patients ≥ 70 years admitted to a geriatric short-stay unit for COVID-19 between March 18 and November 15, 2020 were included. They were compared with patients of the same age group, admitted to the same geriatric short-stay unit for seasonal influenza infection over the periods January to March 2019 and January to March 2020. Data collection included demographic information, medical history, clinical signs and symptoms, outcomes, and hospital discharge patterns. Descriptive and intergroup comparison analyses were performed. In total, 153 patients were included in the study, 82 in the seasonal influenza group, and 71 in the COVID-19 group. The average age was 87.6 ± 4.8 and 87.6 ± 6.5 years in the COVID-19 and seasonal influenza groups, respectively. There was no difference between groups regarding the Charlson comorbidity index (3.4 ± 3.0 versus 3.4 ± 2.8). The seasonal influenza group more often had fever, cough, sputum, and renal failure, whereas the COVID-19 group more often experienced diarrhea, and death. The COVID-19 group was frequently living in collective housing. The profile at admission of older adults hospitalized for COVID-19 or seasonal influenza infection was similar. Although fever and respiratory signs were less common in the COVID-19 group, these patients experienced more complications (such as renal failure or oxygen therapy requirement) and higher mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/mortality , Female , France , Geriatrics , Hospital Units , Hospitalization , Humans , Influenza, Human/mortality , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Retrospective Studies , Seasons
7.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 21284, 2021 10 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1493215

ABSTRACT

We quantified the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the air of different hospital settings and the autopsy room of the largest medical centre in Sao Paulo, Brazil. Real-time reverse-transcription PCR was used to determine the presence of the envelope protein of SARS-CoV-2 and the nucleocapsid protein genes. The E-gene was detected in 5 out of 6 samples at the ICU-COVID-19 ward and in 5 out of 7 samples at the ward-COVID-19. Similarly, in the non-dedicated facilities, the E-gene was detected in 5 out of 6 samples collected in the ICU and 4 out of 7 samples in the ward. In the necropsy room, 6 out of 7 samples were positive for the E-gene. When both wards were compared, the non-COVID ward presented a significantly higher concentration of the E-gene than in the COVID-19 ward (p = 0.003). There was no significant difference in E-gene concentration between the ICU-COVID-19 and the ICU (p = 0.548). Likewise, there was no significant difference among E-gene concentrations found in the autopsy room versus the ICUs and wards (dedicated or not) (p = 0.245). Our results show the widespread presence of aerosol contamination in different hospital units.


Subject(s)
Air Microbiology , COVID-19/virology , Hospitals , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Aerosols , Autopsy , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , Genome, Viral , Hospital Units , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Pandemics , Pathology Department, Hospital , RNA, Viral/analysis , RNA, Viral/genetics , Virion/genetics , Virion/isolation & purification
9.
Psychosomatics ; 61(6): 662-671, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1386490

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Patients with psychiatric illnesses are particularly vulnerable to highly contagious, droplet-spread organisms such as SARS-CoV-2. Patients with mental illnesses may not be able to consistently follow up behavioral prescriptions to avoid contagion, and they are frequently found in settings with close contact and inadequate infection control, such as group homes, homeless shelters, residential rehabilitation centers, and correctional facilities. Furthermore, inpatient psychiatry settings are generally designed as communal spaces, with heavy emphasis on group and milieu therapies. As such, inpatient psychiatry services are vulnerable to rampant spread of contagion. OBJECTIVE: With this in mind, the authors outline the decision process and ultimate design and implementation of a regional inpatient psychiatry unit for patients infected with asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 and share key points for consideration in implementing future units elsewhere. CONCLUSION: A major takeaway point of the analysis is the particular expertise of trained experts in psychosomatic medicine for treating patients infected with SARS-CoV-2.


Subject(s)
Asymptomatic Infections , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Hospital Design and Construction/methods , Hospital Units , Hospitalization , Infection Control/methods , Mental Disorders/therapy , Personnel Staffing and Scheduling/organization & administration , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Humans , Involuntary Commitment , Mental Disorders/complications , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment , Psychiatric Department, Hospital , Psychotherapy, Group/methods , Recreation , SARS-CoV-2 , Ventilation/methods , Visitors to Patients
11.
Oral Oncol ; 124: 105439, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1328781

ABSTRACT

AIM: To understand the impact of COVID pandemic on the activity and patients' care of the Head and Neck regional Unit, temporary moved in a COVID-free hospital. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the yearly activity of the "Head & Neck Cancer Unit" at the Azienda Ospedali Riuniti Marche Nord (Italy) during 2020 (COVID-19 pandemic) and we compared it with the one performed in 2019. Statistical analyses were performed using Chi-square. RESULTS: No significant differences were observed comparing the total number of patients treated for H&N squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) in 2019 with the ones in 2020. Moreover, no differences were identified in term of cancer stage at the moment of the surgery between 2019 and 2020. On the contrary, a significant reduction in the number of surgical procedures carried out for thyroid (p < 0.05) and skin (p < 0.001) malignancies was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Despite Covid-19 limitations, our institution was able to preserve the number of major oncologic procedures without negative impact on patients' care. We believe that the creation of specific COVID-free hospital can be the key preserve quality of care in epidemic emergency.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Head and Neck Neoplasms , Pandemics , Surgical Oncology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Head and Neck Neoplasms/surgery , Hospital Units , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies
12.
Semin Dial ; 34(5): 360-367, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1309792

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Maintenance hemodialysis (MHD) patients face disadvantages with higher risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection, atypical manifestations, and associated multiple comorbidities. We describe patients' outcomes with symptomatic COVID-19 on MHD in a large cohort of patients from India. METHODS: Data were collected prospectively from hemodialysis units in 11 public and private hospitals between March 15, 2020, and July 31, 2020. The survival determinants were analyzed using stepwise backward elimination cox-regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 263 total patients (mean age 51.76 ± 13.63 years and males 173) on MHD with symptomatic COVID-19, 35 (13.3%) died. Those who died were older (p = 0.01), had higher frequency of diabetic kidney disease (p = 0.001), comorbidities (p = 0.04), and severe COVID-19 (p = 0.001). Mortality was higher among patients on twice-weekly MHD than thrice-weekly (p = 0.001) and dialysis through central venous catheter (CVC) as compared to arteriovenous fistula (p = 0.001). On multivariate analysis, CVC use (HR 2.53, 95% CI 1.26-5.07, p = 0.009), disease severity (HR = 3.54, 95% CI 1.52-8.26, p = 0.003), and noninvasive ventilatory support (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.25-0.99, p = 0.049) had significant effect on mortality. CONCLUSION: The adjusted mortality risk of COVID-19 in MHD patients is high in patients associated with severe COVID-19 and patients having CVC as vascular access.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Renal Dialysis , Age Factors , Catheterization, Central Venous/adverse effects , Comorbidity , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospital Units , Humans , India/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Noninvasive Ventilation , Prospective Studies , Severity of Illness Index
14.
Neurodiagn J ; 61(2): 95-103, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1263635

ABSTRACT

Due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the state of Texas-limited elective procedures to conserve beds and personal protective equipment (PPE); therefore, between March 22 and May 18, 2020, admission to the epilepsy monitoring unit (EMU) was limited only to urgent and emergent cases. We evaluated clinical characteristics and outcomes of these patients who were admitted to the EMU. Nineteen patients were admitted (one patient twice) with average age of 36.26 years (11 female) and average length of stay 3 days (range: 2-9 days). At least one event was captured on continuous EEG (cEEG) and video monitoring in all 20 admissions (atypical in one). One patient had both epileptic (ES) and psychogenic non-epileptic seizures (PNES) while 10 had PNES and 9 had ES. In 8 of 9 patients with ES, medications were changed, while in 5 patients with PNES, anti-epileptic drugs (AED) were stopped; the remaining 5 were not on medications. Of the 14 patients who had seen an epileptologist pre-admission, 13 (or 93%) had their diagnosis confirmed by EMU stay; a statistically significant finding. While typically an elective admission, in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic, urgent and emergent EMU admissions were required for increased seizure or event frequency. In the vast majority of patients (13 of 19), admission lead to medication changes to either better control seizures or to change therapeutics as appropriate when PNES was identified.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Epilepsy , Hospitalization/legislation & jurisprudence , Adult , Aged , Clinical Decision-Making , Epilepsy/diagnosis , Epilepsy/therapy , Female , Hospital Units , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Monitoring, Physiologic , SARS-CoV-2 , Seizures/diagnosis , Seizures/therapy , Young Adult
15.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 43(4): 474-480, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1226396

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Physical distancing among healthcare workers (HCWs) is an essential strategy in preventing HCW-to-HCWs transmission of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). OBJECTIVE: To understand barriers to physical distancing among HCWs on an inpatient unit and identify strategies for improvement. DESIGN: Qualitative study including observations and semistructured interviews conducted over 3 months. SETTING: A non-COVID-19 adult general medical unit in an academic tertiary-care hospital. PARTICIPANTS: HCWs based on the unit. METHODS: We performed a qualitative study in which we (1) observed HCW activities and proximity to each other on the unit during weekday shifts July-October 2020 and (2) conducted semi-structured interviews of HCWs to understand their experiences with and perspectives of physical distancing in the hospital. Qualitative data were coded based on a human-factors engineering model. RESULTS: We completed 25 hours of observations and 20 HCW interviews. High-risk interactions often occurred during handoffs of care at shift changes and patient rounds, when HCWs gathered regularly in close proximity for at least 15 minutes. Identified barriers included spacing and availability of computers, the need to communicate confidential patient information, and the desire to maintain relationships at work. CONCLUSIONS: Physical distancing can be improved in hospitals by restructuring computer workstations, work rooms, and break rooms; applying visible cognitive aids; adapting shift times; and supporting rounds and meetings with virtual conferencing. Additional strategies to promote staff adherence to physical distancing include rewarding positive behaviors, having peer leaders model physical distancing, and encouraging additional safe avenues for social connection at a safe distance.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Adult , COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Personnel , Hospital Units , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Physical Distancing , SARS-CoV-2
16.
Gen Hosp Psychiatry ; 71: 76-81, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1219479

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Use of virtual reality (VR) in healthcare has expanded in recent years. The challenges faced by patients with prolonged COVID-19-related hospitalizations - social isolation, disability, neurologic sequelae, adjustment-related anxiety, depression, and stress - may be mitigated by the novel use of VR as one modality of a comprehensive rehabilitation plan. This descriptive study aimed to understand patient satisfaction and perceived benefit of virtual reality on a COVID-19 recovery unit, as well as the logistical and operational feasibility of providing VR content for patients and staff. MATERIALS AND METHODS: During the COVID-19 surge in New York City in 2020, the COVID-19 Recovery Unit (CRU) of a large academic hospital invited patients and staff to participate in VR sessions with three categories of experience: (1) Guided meditation, (2) Exploration of natural environments, (3) Cognitive stimulation games. Patients and staff were surveyed about satisfaction and perceived benefit. RESULTS: 13 patients and 11 staff were surveyed, with median patient satisfaction scores of 9 out of 10, with ten representing "extremely satisfied," and median staff satisfaction scores of 10. 13/13 patients answered "yes" to recommending the therapy to others, and 12/13 answered "yes" to perceived enhancement of their treatment. 11/11 staff answered "yes" to recommending the therapy to others, and 11/11 answered "yes" to perceived enhancement of their wellbeing. DISCUSSION: A VR program implemented on a COVID-19 rehabilitation unit for patients and healthcare providers was rated as highly satisfactory with perceived benefit by survey respondents. Participants commented that the use of VR was useful in coping with isolation and loneliness, and could be implemented within the context of clinical care for COVID-19 patients as part of a comprehensive rehabilitation model. The use of VR was also logistically and operationally feasible on the CRU. Future work to compare benefits of VR to standard neuropsychological rehabilitation is needed.


Subject(s)
Anxiety/psychology , COVID-19/rehabilitation , Depression/psychology , Patient Satisfaction , Social Isolation/psychology , Stress, Psychological/psychology , Virtual Reality , Adaptation, Psychological , COVID-19/psychology , Feasibility Studies , Hospital Units , Hospitalization , Humans , Loneliness/psychology , Medical Staff, Hospital , Meditation , Nature , New York City , Nursing Staff, Hospital , SARS-CoV-2 , Video Games
18.
BMC Nephrol ; 22(1): 144, 2021 04 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1197344

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) is a novel coronavirus associated with high mortality rates. The use of Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) has been recognised as a management option for severe COVID-19 (NHS, Specialty guides for patient management during the coronavirus pandemic Guidance for the role and use of non-invasive respiratory support in adult patients with coronavirus (confirmed or suspected), https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng159 ). We offered ward-based CPAP to COVID-19, dialysis patients not suitable for escalation to ICU. The aim of the study was to evaluate the use of CPAP for COVID-19 dialysis patients compared to non-dialysis COVID-19 patients outside of the intensive care setting. We further aimed to investigate factors associated with improved outcomes. METHODS: Data was collected from a single centre (Royal Preston Hospital, UK), from March to June 2020. Treatment outcomes were compared for dialysis and non-dialysis dependent patients who received CPAP with limitations on their escalation and resuscitation status. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox regression models were used to compare outcomes. The primary study outcome was 30 day mortality. Confounders including length of admission, systemic anticoagulation and ultrafiltration volumes on dialysis were also analysed. RESULTS: Over the study period, 40 dialysis patients tested positive for COVID-19, with 30 requiring hospital admission. 93% (n = 28) required supplementary oxygen and 12% (n = 9) required CPAP on the ward. These patients were compared to a serial selection of 14 non-dialysis patients treated with CPAP during the same period. Results showed a significant difference in 30 day survival rates between the two groups: 88.9% in the dialysis group vs. 21.4% in the non-dialysis group. Statistical modelling showed that anticoagulation was also an important factor and correlated with better outcomes. CONCLUSION: This is to the best of our knowledge, the largest series of COVID-19 dialysis patients treated with CPAP in a ward-based setting. In general, dialysis dependent patients have multiple co-morbidities including cardiovascular disease and diabetes mellitus making them vulnerable to COVID-19 and not always suitable for treatment in ICU. We showed a significantly lower 30 day mortality rate with the use of CPAP in the dialysis group (11.1%) compared to the non-dialysis group (78.6%). Despite a small sample size, we believe this study provides impetus for further work clarifying the role of CPAP in treating COVID-19 dialysis dependent patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Continuous Positive Airway Pressure/methods , Kidney Failure, Chronic/therapy , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , COVID-19/complications , Female , Hospital Units , Hospitalization , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Kidney Failure, Chronic/complications , Male , Middle Aged , Mortality , Nephrology , Renal Dialysis , SARS-CoV-2 , Survival Rate
19.
Int J Med Sci ; 18(10): 2146-2154, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1190600

ABSTRACT

Objectives: To report a COVID-19 outbreak among workers and inpatients at a medical ward for especially vulnerable patients. Methods: Descriptive study of a nosocomial COVID-19 outbreak registered in March-April 2020 at medical ward of onco-hematological patients in an Spanish hospital. Confirmed cases were hospitalized patients, healthcare and non-healthcare workers who tested positive by PCR on a nasopharyngeal swab. Results: Twenty-two COVID-19 cases (12 workers and 10 inpatients) were laboratory-confirmed. Initial cases were a healthcare provider and a visitor who tested positive. The median patients age was 73 years (range 62-88). The main reason of admission was haematological in 8 patients and oncologic in 2. All patients followed an immunosuppressive treatment, 5/10 with high-flow oxygen nebulizations. Five patients presented a moderate/serious evolution, and 5 patients died. The mean workers age was 42.1±10.9. One healthworker required Intensive Care Unit admission, and all of them recovered completely. Conclusions: In the hospital setting, close patients surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 is essential, especially in immunosuppressed patients. Replacing nebulizations or high-flow oxygen therapies, when other equivalent options were available, to reduce dispersion, and controlling ventilation ducts, together with hygiene measures and an active follow-up on inpatients, visitors and workers appear to be important in preventing nosocomial outbreaks.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Infection Control/methods , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/mortality , Disease Outbreaks , Female , Health Personnel , Hematologic Diseases/therapy , Hospital Units , Humans , Immunocompromised Host , Inpatients , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Nebulizers and Vaporizers , Spain
20.
Front Public Health ; 9: 632608, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1172989

ABSTRACT

Background: SARS-CoV-2 spreads rapidly around the world, and some patients present gastrointestinal symptoms. The existence of the virus in the gastrointestinal tract makes digestive endoscopy a high-risk operation, which associated with an increased risk of infection rate in healthcare workers. This study aimed at exploring current knowledge, practice and attitudes of healthcare workers in endoscopy units in China regarding the status of occupational protection during COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A cross-sectional study of a national online survey involving 717 healthcare workers in endoscopy units from 94 medical structures in 24 provinces and municipalities around China was conducted online via a questionnaire platform called Wenjuanxing (wjx.cn). The data were analyzed using correlation approaches, Kruskal-Wallis test for independent samples, and linear regression models. Results: Most Chinese healthcare workers in endoscopy units had a good knowledge of COVID-19 (median: 10; range: 7-12), showed a strikingly positive attitude (median: 65; range: 39-65), and carried out good practice (median: 47; range: 14-50) in strengthening the protection, disinfection and management of COVID-19. In terms of attitudes, female staff was more concerned about protection against COVID-19 than male staff (KW = 8.146, P = 0.004). Nurses performed better in both attitude (KW = 2.600, P = 0.009) and practice (KW = 6.358, P < 0.001) than endoscopic physicians when carrying out personal protection, patient care and environmental disinfection against SARS-CoV-2 infection. More positive attitudes in protection were related to better protective behavior in endoscopic daily medical work (r = 0.312; P < 0.001). Conclusion: The findings of this study suggest that Chinese endoscopy healthcare workers have an excellent mastery of knowledge about COVID-19, which is transformed into positive beliefs and attitudes, contributing to good practice during daily endoscopic procedures. Medical staff may benefit from further education. With the gradual normalization amid the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, protection and management in endoscopy units may be changed accordingly.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Health Personnel , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Adult , Aged , China/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Endoscopy , Female , Hospital Units , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL