Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 43
Filter
1.
PLoS One ; 17(2): e0245182, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1674002

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Working under pandemic conditions exposes health care workers (HCWs) to infection risk and psychological strain. A better understanding of HCWs' experiences of following local infection prevention and control (IPC) procedures during COVID-19 is urgently needed to inform strategies for protecting the psychical and psychological health of HCWs. The objective of this study was therefore to capture the perceptions of hospital HCWs on local IPC procedures and the impact on their emotional wellbeing during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe. METHODS: Participants were recruited in two sampling rounds of an international cross-sectional survey. Sampling took place between 31 March and 17 April 2020 via existing research networks and between 14 May and 31 August 2020 via online convenience sampling. Main outcome measures were behavioural determinants of HCWs' adherence to IPC guidelines and the WHO-5 Well-Being Index, a validated scale of 0-100 reflecting emotional wellbeing. The WHO-5 was interpreted as a score below or above 50 points, a cut-off score used in previous literature to screen for depression. RESULTS: 2289 HCWs from 40 countries in Europe participated. Mean age was 42 (±11) years, 66% were female, 47% and 39% were medical doctors and nurses, respectively. 74% (n = 1699) of HCWs were directly treating patients with COVID-19, of which 32% (n = 527) reported they were fearful of caring for these patients. HCWs reported high levels of concern about COVID-19 infection risk to themselves (71%) and their family (82%) as a result of their job. 40% of HCWs considered that getting infected with COVID-19 was not within their control. This feeling was more common among junior than senior HCWs (46% versus 38%, P value < .01). Sufficient COVID-19-specific IPC training, confidence in PPE use and institutional trust were positively associated with the feeling that becoming infected with COVID-19 was within their control. Female HCWs were more likely than males to report a WHO-5 score below 50 points (aOR 1.5 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2-1.8). CONCLUSIONS: In Europe, the COVID-19 pandemic has had a differential impact on those providing direct COVID-19 patient care, junior staff and women. Health facilities must be aware of these differential impacts, build trust and provide tailored support for this vital workforce during the current COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Guidelines as Topic/standards , Health Personnel/psychology , Hospitals/standards , Infection Control/statistics & numerical data , Personal Protective Equipment/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , COVID-19/virology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Europe/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Patient Care/methods , Patient Care/standards
2.
PLoS One ; 16(12): e0259996, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1592627

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate (1) the relationship between heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems and bioaerosol concentrations in hospital rooms, and (2) the effectiveness of laminar air flow (LAF) and high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) according to the indoor bioaerosol concentrations. METHODS: Databases of Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and Web of Science were searched from 1st January 2000 to 31st December 2020. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the quality of the studies. The samples obtained from different areas of hospitals were grouped and described statistically. Furthermore, the meta-analysis of LAF and HEPA were performed using random-effects models. The methodological quality of the studies included in the meta-analysis was assessed using the checklist recommended by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. RESULTS: The mean CFU/m3 of the conventional HVAC rooms and enhanced HVAC rooms was lower than that of rooms without HVAC systems. Furthermore, the use of the HEPA filter reduced bacteria by 113.13 (95% CI: -197.89, -28.38) CFU/m3 and fungi by 6.53 (95% CI: -10.50, -2.55) CFU/m3. Meanwhile, the indoor bacterial concentration of LAF systems decreased by 40.05 (95% CI: -55.52, -24.58) CFU/m3 compared to that of conventional HVAC systems. CONCLUSIONS: The HVAC systems in hospitals can effectively remove bioaerosols. Further, the use of HEPA filters is an effective option for areas that are under-ventilated and require additional protection. However, other components of the LAF system other than the HEPA filter are not conducive to removing airborne bacteria and fungi. LIMITATION OF STUDY: Although our study analysed the overall trend of indoor bioaerosols, the conclusions cannot be extrapolated to rare, hard-to-culture, and highly pathogenic species, as well as species complexes. These species require specific culture conditions or different sampling requirements. Investigating the effects of HVAC systems on these species via conventional culture counting methods is challenging and further analysis that includes combining molecular identification methods is necessary. STRENGTH OF THE STUDY: Our study was the first meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of HVAC systems on indoor bioaerosols through microbial incubation count. Our study demonstrated that HVAC systems could effectively reduce overall bioaerosol concentrations to maintain better indoor air quality. Moreover, our study provided further evidence that other components of the LAF system other than the HEPA filter are not conducive to removing airborne bacteria and fungi. PRACTICAL IMPLICATION: Our research showed that HEPA filters are more effective at removing bioaerosols in HVAC systems than the current LAF system. Therefore, instead of opting for the more costly LAF system, a filter with a higher filtration rate would be a better choice for indoor environments that require higher air quality; this is valuable for operating room construction and maintenance budget allocation.


Subject(s)
Air Conditioning/instrumentation , Air Pollution, Indoor/prevention & control , Environmental Monitoring/methods , Filtration/standards , Heating/instrumentation , Hospitals/standards , Ventilation/instrumentation , Air Pollution, Indoor/analysis , Environmental Monitoring/instrumentation , Equipment and Supplies, Hospital , Humans
3.
J Infect Dev Ctries ; 15(8): 1074-1079, 2021 08 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1405468

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Public life in China is gradually returning to normal with strong measures in coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) control. Because of the long-term effects of COVID-19, medical institutions had to make timely adjustments to control policies and priorities to balance between COVID-19 prevention and daily medical services. METHODOLOGY: The framework for infection prevention and control in the inpatient department was effectively organized at both hospital and department levels. A series of prevention and control strategies was implemented under this leadership: application of rigorous risk assessment and triage before admission through a query list; classifying patients into three risk levels and providing corresponding medical treatment and emergency handling; establishing new ward visiting criteria for visitors; designing procedures for PPE and stockpile management; executing specialized disinfection and medical waste policies. RESULTS: Till June 2020, the bed occupancy had recovered from 20.0% to 88.1%. In total, 13045 patients were received in our hospital, of which 54 and 127 patients were identified as high-risk and medium-risk, respectively, and 2 patients in the high-risk group were eventually laboratory-confirmed with COVID-19. No hospital-acquired infection of COVID-19 has been observed since the emergency appeared. CONCLUSIONS: The strategies ensured early detection and targeted prevention of COVID-19 following the COVID-19 pandemic, which improved the recovery of medical services after the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Infection Control/methods , COVID-19/epidemiology , China/epidemiology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/virology , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals/standards , Humans , Infection Control/instrumentation , Inpatients/statistics & numerical data , Patient Isolation/methods , Personal Protective Equipment , Risk Assessment , Triage
4.
Photochem Photobiol ; 97(3): 549-551, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1388389

ABSTRACT

Although the environmental control measure of ultraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI) for disinfection has not been widely used in the United States and some parts of the world in the past few decades, this technology has been well applied in Russia. UVGI technology has been particularly useful with regard to limiting TB transmission in medical facilities. There is good evidence that UV-C (180-280 nm) air disinfection can be a helpful intervention in reducing transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Disinfection/methods , Hospitals/standards , SARS-CoV-2/radiation effects , Ultraviolet Rays , Virus Inactivation/radiation effects , Air Microbiology , Air Pollution, Indoor/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , Disinfection/instrumentation , Humans , Infection Control , Russia
5.
Am J Trop Med Hyg ; 105(2): 372-374, 2021 Jun 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1371031

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has demanded rapid institutional responses to meet the needs of patients and employees in the face of a serious new disease. To support the well-being of frontline staff, a series of debriefing sessions was used to drive a rapid-cycle quality-improvement process. The goals were to confidentially determine personal coping strategies used by staff, provide an opportunity for staff cross-learning, identify what staff needed most, and provide a real-time feedback loop for decision-makers to create rapid changes to support staff safety and coping. Data were collected via sticky notes on flip charts to protect confidentiality. Management reviewed the data daily. Institutional responses to problems identified during debrief sessions were tracked, visualized, addressed, and shared with staff. More than 10% of staff participated over a 2-week period. Feedback influenced institutional decisions to improve staff schedules, transportation, and COVID-19 training.


Subject(s)
Adaptation, Psychological , COVID-19/epidemiology , Faith-Based Organizations/statistics & numerical data , Tertiary Healthcare/methods , Tertiary Healthcare/statistics & numerical data , Faith-Based Organizations/standards , Hospitals/standards , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Kenya/epidemiology , Medical Staff, Hospital/education , Medical Staff, Hospital/psychology , Medical Staff, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Quality of Health Care/organization & administration , Quality of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Tertiary Healthcare/standards
8.
Maturitas ; 149: 34-36, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1240502

ABSTRACT

Nosocomial COVID-19 in older patients has a high mortality rate. We describe an outbreak of COVID-19 in a geriatric acute care unit (GACU) in March/April 2020 and the lessons learnt regarding prevention. Thirty-six patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 during that 2-month period, in France's "first wave" of SARS-CoV-2 infections. Thirty (83.3%) were considered nosocomial. Attributable mortality reached 33.3% in these patients. Healthcare workers (HCW) were not spared, with an overall attack rate of 36.8%, but the rate was especially high among nurse assistants (68.2%). Repeated testing, single rooms, hand hygiene, and good use of personal protective equipment are paramount in GACUs to prevent in-hospital COVID-19 outbreaks.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/transmission , Cross Infection/virology , Health Personnel/standards , Hospitals/standards , Infection Control/organization & administration , Personal Protective Equipment/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/virology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Cross Infection/transmission , Female , Humans , Infection Control/standards , Male
9.
Vox Sang ; 116(5): 497-503, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1241034

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Numerous concerns regarding maintenance of blood inventory have been raised after SARS-CoV-2 pandemic outbreak. These concerns were based on the experience of blood centres in previous pandemics where shortage of blood components was reported. The present study had tried to understand the impact of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on blood collection and demand as well as the impact of disaster planning in maintaining an adequate inventory. METHODS: Data related to blood supply and demand were collected retrospectively using blood bank management software for pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 time period and compared. Strategies adopted and effects of changes in existing disaster plans to maintain an adequate inventory were studied. RESULTS: A drastic fall in the red cell inventory was observed as compared to pre-COVID-19 time period was observed due to disproportionate decrease in blood collection (1/6 to 1/9 of the previous collection) and demand (1/2 of the previous demand). The buffer stock fell gradually over a period of three weeks with cancellation of planned blood donation drives. A buffer stock equivalent to 2-week inventory led to adequate inventory in the initial lockdown periods. Similar fall was observed in the platelet inventory with reduction in the blood collection but almost a proportionate reduction in the platelet demand led to adequate inventory. No increase in wastage was observed for both red cells and platelets during this period. DISCUSSION: A buffer stock of blood and blood components, strict adherence to the transfusion triggers, good coordination with the clinical staff and a prospective review of blood transfusion requests to ensure rational blood transfusion were some of the steps which helped us to successfully maintain transfusion requirements in the initial phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. Use of first-in-first-out policy prevented any wastage due to outdating of blood.


Subject(s)
Blood Banks/organization & administration , Blood Safety/standards , COVID-19/epidemiology , Blood Banks/standards , Blood Donors/supply & distribution , Blood Safety/methods , Hospitals/standards , Humans
10.
S Afr Med J ; 111(2): 100-105, 2021 01 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1168064

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in many hospitals severely limiting or denying parents access to their hospitalised children. This article provides guidance for hospital managers, healthcare staff, district-level managers and provincial managers on parental access to hospitalised children during a pandemic such as COVID-19. It: (i) summarises legal and ethical issues around parental visitation rights; (ii) highlights four guiding principles; (iii) provides 10 practical recommendations to facilitate safe parental access to hospitalised children; (iv) highlights additional considerations if the mother is COVID-19-positive; and (v) provides considerations for fathers. In summary, it is a child's right to have access to his or her parents during hospitalisation, and parents should have access to their hospitalised children; during an infectious disease pandemic such as COVID-19, there is a responsibility to ensure that parental visitation is implemented in a reasonable and safe manner. Separation should only occur in exceptional circumstances, e.g. if adequate in-hospital facilities do not exist to jointly accommodate the parent/caregiver and the newborn/infant/child. Both parents should be allowed access to hospitalised children, under strict infection prevention and control (IPC) measures and with implementation of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), including handwashing/sanitisation, face masks and physical distancing. Newborns/infants and their parents/caregivers have a reasonably high likelihood of having similar COVID-19 status, and should be managed as a dyad rather than as individuals. Every hospital should provide lodger/boarder facilities for mothers who are COVID-19-positive, COVID-19-negative or persons under investigation (PUI), separately, with stringent IPC measures and NPIs. If facilities are limited, breastfeeding mothers should be prioritised, in the following order: (i) COVID-19-negative; (ii) COVID-19 PUI; and (iii) COVID-19-positive. Breastfeeding, or breastmilk feeding, should be promoted, supported and protected, and skin-to-skin care of newborns with the mother/caregiver (with IPC measures) should be discussed and practised as far as possible. Surgical masks should be provided to all parents/caregivers and replaced daily throughout the hospital stay. Parents should be referred to social services and local community resources to ensure that multidisciplinary support is provided. Hospitals should develop individual-level policies and share these with staff and parents. Additionally, hospitals should ideally track the effect of parental visitation rights on hospital-based COVID-19 outbreaks, the mental health of hospitalised children, and their rate of recovery.


Subject(s)
Child Health/standards , Child, Hospitalized/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals/standards , Infection Control/standards , Patient Isolation/standards , Visitors to Patients/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 , Child , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , South Africa
11.
J Glob Health ; 10(2): 020507, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1154782

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In a surgical setting, COVID-19 patients may trigger in-hospital outbreaks and have worse postoperative outcomes. Despite these risks, there have been no consistent statements on surgical guidelines regarding the perioperative screening or management of COVID-19 patients, and we do not have objective global data that describe the current conditions surrounding this issue. This study aimed to clarify the current global surgical practice including COVID-19 screening, preventive measures and in-hospital infection under the COVID-19 pandemic, and to clarify the international gaps on infection control policies among countries worldwide. METHODS: During April 2-8, 2020, a cross-sectional online survey on surgical practice was distributed to surgeons worldwide through international surgical societies, social media and personal contacts. Main outcome and measures included preventive measures and screening policies of COVID-19 in surgical practice and centers' experiences of in-hospital COVID-19 infection. Data were analyzed by country's cumulative deaths number by April 8, 2020 (high risk, >5000; intermediate risk, 100-5000; low risk, <100). RESULTS: A total of 936 centers in 71 countries responded to the survey (high risk, 330 centers; intermediate risk, 242 centers; low risk, 364 centers). In the majority (71.9%) of the centers, local guidelines recommended preoperative testing based on symptoms or suspicious radiologic findings. Universal testing for every surgical patient was recommended in only 18.4% of the centers. In-hospital COVID-19 infection was reported from 31.5% of the centers, with higher rates in higher risk countries (high risk, 53.6%; intermediate risk, 26.4%; low risk, 14.8%; P < 0.001). Of the 295 centers that experienced in-hospital COVID-19 infection, 122 (41.4%) failed to trace it and 58 (19.7%) reported the infection originating from asymptomatic patients/staff members. Higher risk countries adopted more preventive measures including universal testing, routine testing of hospital staff and use of dedicated personal protective equipment in operation theatres, but there were remarkable discrepancies across the countries. CONCLUSIONS: This large international survey captured the global surgical practice under the COVID-19 pandemic and highlighted the insufficient preoperative screening of COVID-19 in the current surgical practice. More intensive screening programs will be necessary particularly in severely affected countries/institutions. STUDY REGISTRATION: Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04344197.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Infection Control/statistics & numerical data , Mass Screening/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Surgical Procedures, Operative/standards , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Cross Infection/virology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Hospitals/standards , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infection Control/standards , Mass Screening/standards , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Policy , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/standards , SARS-CoV-2 , Surgical Procedures, Operative/adverse effects , Surveys and Questionnaires
13.
Photochem Photobiol ; 97(3): 549-551, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1138220

ABSTRACT

Although the environmental control measure of ultraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI) for disinfection has not been widely used in the United States and some parts of the world in the past few decades, this technology has been well applied in Russia. UVGI technology has been particularly useful with regard to limiting TB transmission in medical facilities. There is good evidence that UV-C (180-280 nm) air disinfection can be a helpful intervention in reducing transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Disinfection/methods , Hospitals/standards , SARS-CoV-2/radiation effects , Ultraviolet Rays , Virus Inactivation/radiation effects , Air Microbiology , Air Pollution, Indoor/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , Disinfection/instrumentation , Humans , Infection Control , Russia
14.
J Med Internet Res ; 23(3): e24804, 2021 03 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1127919

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic poses a major challenge to people's everyday lives. In the context of hospitalization, the pandemic is expected to have a strong influence on affective reactions and preventive behaviors. Research is needed to develop evidence-driven strategies for coping with the challenges of the pandemic. Therefore, this survey study investigates the effects that personality traits, risk-taking behaviors, and anxiety have on medical service-related affective reactions and anticipated behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify key factors that are associated with individuals' concerns about hygiene in hospitals and the postponement of surgeries. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, web-based survey of 929 residents in Germany (women: 792/929, 85.3%; age: mean 35.2 years, SD 12.9 years). Hypotheses were tested by conducting a saturated path analysis. RESULTS: We found that anxiety had a direct effect on people's concerns about safety (ß=-.12, 95% CI -.20 to -.05) and hygiene in hospitals (ß=.16, 95% CI .08 to .23). Risk-taking behaviors and personality traits were not associated with concerns about safety and hygiene in hospitals or anticipated behaviors. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that distinct interventions and information campaigns are not necessary for individuals with different personality traits or different levels of risk-taking behavior. However, we recommend that health care workers should carefully address anxiety when interacting with patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Hospitals/standards , Hygiene/standards , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Internet , Male , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Surveys and Questionnaires
15.
J Hosp Infect ; 109: 68-77, 2021 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1047671

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has presented an enormous challenge to healthcare providers worldwide. The appropriate use of personal protective equipment (PPE) has been essential to ensure staff and patient safety. The 'PPE Helper Programme' was developed at a large London hospital group to counteract suboptimal PPE practice. Based on a behaviour change model of capability, opportunity and motivation (COM-B), the programme provided PPE support, advice and education to ward staff. AIM: Evaluation of the PPE Helper Programme. METHODS: Clinical and non-clinical ward staff completed a questionnaire informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework and COM-B model. The questionnaire was available in paper and electronic versions. Quantitative responses were analysed using descriptive and non-parametric statistics, and free-text responses were analysed thematically. FINDINGS: Over a 6-week period, PPE helpers made 268 ward visits. Overall, 261 questionnaires were available for analysis. Across the Trust, 68% of respondents reported having had contact with a PPE helper. Staff who had encountered a PPE helper responded significantly more positively to a range of statements about using PPE than staff who had not encountered a PPE helper. Black and minority ethnic staff were significantly more anxious regarding the adequacy of PPE. Non-clinical and redeployed staff (e.g. domestic staff) were most positive about the impact of PPE helpers. Free-text comments showed that staff found the PPE Helper Programme supportive and would have liked it earlier in the pandemic. CONCLUSION: The PPE Helper Programme is a feasible and beneficial intervention for providing support, advice and education to ward staff during infectious disease outbreaks.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/education , Hospitals/standards , Personal Protective Equipment/standards , Preventive Health Services/standards , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Infection Control/standards , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , London/epidemiology , Pandemics , Surveys and Questionnaires
17.
Am J Infect Control ; 49(4): 489-491, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-971205

ABSTRACT

During the COVID-19 crisis, disposable N-95 filtering face piece respirators became a critical supply in many health care institutions. Infection preventionists nationwide struggled with ensuring their facilities had personal protective equipment available while utilizing crisis capacity strategies. Many facilities began using US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and US Food and Drug Administration guidance to disinfect and reprocess N95 respirators for extended use. N95 respirators are collected for all clinical units on a scheduled basis by the sterile processing department (SPD) in individually labeled bins. Bins are checked into SPD and logged into electronic system to track mask volumes by unit. Masks are inspected by SPD team members, packaged in sterile peel packs on the decontamination side and sent to the clean side of the department. Masks are then reprocessed in the appropriate equipment based on the US Food and Drug Administration Emergency Use Authorization guidelines. The facility was able to provide a consistent method of N95 reprocessing throughout the facility. Utilizing an interdisciplinary team to include the operating room, infection preventionist, SPD, and nursing leadership to troubleshoot and identify barriers on a routine basis was key to making the program a success for the many months of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Disinfection/methods , Hospital Departments/organization & administration , Hospitals/standards , N95 Respirators/standards , SARS-CoV-2 , Decontamination , Equipment Reuse/standards , Humans
18.
Anesthesiology ; 132(6): 1317-1332, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-944425

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 outbreak has led to 80,409 diagnosed cases and 3,012 deaths in mainland China based on the data released on March 4, 2020. Approximately 3.2% of patients with COVID-19 required intubation and invasive ventilation at some point in the disease course. Providing best practices regarding intubation and ventilation for an overwhelming number of patients with COVID-19 amid an enhanced risk of cross-infection is a daunting undertaking. The authors presented the experience of caring for the critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Wuhan. It is extremely important to follow strict self-protection precautions. Timely, but not premature, intubation is crucial to counter a progressively enlarging oxygen debt despite high-flow oxygen therapy and bilevel positive airway pressure ventilation. Thorough preparation, satisfactory preoxygenation, modified rapid sequence induction, and rapid intubation using a video laryngoscope are widely used intubation strategies in Wuhan. Lung-protective ventilation, prone position ventilation, and adequate sedation and analgesia are essential components of ventilation management.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , Intubation, Intratracheal/standards , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Respiration, Artificial/standards , COVID-19 , China , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Hospitals/standards , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Patient Selection , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission
19.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 27(2): 264-268, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-932986

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To compare survival of individuals with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treated in hospitals that either did or did not routinely treat patients with hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine. METHODS: We analysed data of COVID-19 patients treated in nine hospitals in the Netherlands. Inclusion dates ranged from 27 February to 15 May 2020, when the Dutch national guidelines no longer supported the use of (hydroxy)chloroquine. Seven hospitals routinely treated patients with (hydroxy)chloroquine, two hospitals did not. Primary outcome was 21-day all-cause mortality. We performed a survival analysis using log-rank test and Cox regression with adjustment for age, sex and covariates based on premorbid health, disease severity and the use of steroids for adult respiratory distress syndrome, including dexamethasone. RESULTS: Among 1949 individuals, 21-day mortality was 21.5% in 1596 patients treated in hospitals that routinely prescribed (hydroxy)chloroquine, and 15.0% in 353 patients treated in hospitals that did not. In the adjusted Cox regression models this difference disappeared, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.09 (95% CI 0.81-1.47). When stratified by treatment actually received in individual patients, the use of (hydroxy)chloroquine was associated with an increased 21-day mortality (HR 1.58; 95% CI 1.24-2.02) in the full model. CONCLUSIONS: After adjustment for confounders, mortality was not significantly different in hospitals that routinely treated patients with (hydroxy)chloroquine compared with hospitals that did not. We compared outcomes of hospital strategies rather than outcomes of individual patients to reduce the chance of indication bias. This study adds evidence against the use of (hydroxy)chloroquine in hospitalised patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , Chloroquine/therapeutic use , Hospitals/standards , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/pathology , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Male , Middle Aged , Netherlands/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Standard of Care
20.
Int J Qual Health Care ; 33(1)2021 Feb 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-929988

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To highlight clinical and operational issues, identify factors that shape patient responses in Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) and test the correlations between composite measures and overall hospital ratings. DESIGN: Responses to HCAHPS surveys were used in a partial correlation analysis to ascertain those HCAHPS composite measures that most relate to overall hospital ratings. The linear mean scores for the composite measures and individual and global items were analyzed with descriptive analysis and correlation analysis via JMP and SPSS statistical software. SETTING: HCAHPS is a patient satisfaction survey required by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services for hospitals in the USA. The survey is for adult inpatients, excluding psychiatric patients. PARTICIPANTS: 3382 US hospitals. INTERVENTION: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Pearson correlation coefficients for the six composite measures and overall hospital rating. RESULTS: The partial correlations for overall hospital rating and three composite measures are positive and moderately strong for care transition (0.445) and nurse communication (0.369) and weak for doctor communication (0.066). CONCLUSIONS: From a health policy standpoint, it is imperative that hospital administrators stress open and clear communication between providers and patients to avoid problems ranging from misdiagnosis to incorrect treatment. Additional research is needed to determine how the coronavirus of 2019 pandemic influences patients' perceptions of quality and willingness to recommend hospitals at a time when nurses and physicians show symptoms of burnout due to heavy workloads and inadequate personal protective equipment.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospitals/standards , Patient Satisfaction , Professional-Patient Relations , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL