Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 220
Filter
1.
Health Econ Policy Law ; : 1-18, 2021 Jun 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2016490

ABSTRACT

The scarcity of medical resources is widely recognized, and therefore priority setting is inevitable. This study examines whether Portuguese healthcare professionals (physicians vs nurses): (i) share the moral guidance proposed by ethicists and (ii) attitudes toward prioritization criteria vary among individual and professional characteristics. A sample of 254 healthcare professionals were confronted with hypothetical prioritization scenarios involving two patients distinguished by personal or health characteristics. Descriptive statistics and parametric analyses were performed to evaluate and compare the adherence of both groups of healthcare professionals regarding 10 rationing criteria: waiting time, treatment prognosis measured in life expectancy and quality of life, severity of health conditions measured in pain and immediate risk of dying, age discrimination measured in favoring the young over older and favoring the youngest over the young, merit evaluated positively or negatively, and parenthood. The findings show a slight adherence to the criteria. Waiting time and patient pain were the conditions considered fairer by respondents in contrast with the ethicists normative. Preferences for distributive justice vary by professional group and among participants with different political orientations, rationing experience, years of experience, and level of satisfaction with the NHS. Decision-makers should consider the opinion of ethicists, but also those of healthcare professionals to legitimize explicit guidelines.

2.
Indian J Palliat Care ; 26(Suppl 1): S21-S26, 2020 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1792222

ABSTRACT

CONTEXT: The coronavirus pandemic has put an unprecedented burden on the health-care workers who are the cornerstone of the work system, preparing to mitigate its effects. Due to the lack of protective equipments, guidelines for managing patients, or proper training and education regarding the same, health care professionals (HCPs) working in non-COVID areas may face even greater problems than those working in COVID areas of a hospital. Our aim was to find out the concerns of HCPs working in non-COVID areas. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: After obtaining institutional ethics approval, a descriptive cross-sectional study was planned. An online Google-based questionnaire was rolled out to all doctors through various social media platforms who were dealing with COVID-negative patients. RESULTS: We received a total of 110 responses. 84.5% of participants were concerned about the risk of infection to self and family, 67.3% were concerned by the disruption of their daily activities. 56.4% of HCPs were disturbed by the lack of any concrete protocol for patient management. Less staff availability, delay in discharging duties toward their patients, and increased workload were other concerns. More than half of the doctors received N-95 masks whenever required and were trained in donning and doffing of Personal protective equipment. Sixty-eight percemt of our respondents labeled their current quality of life as stressful. CONCLUSION: It is the need of the hour to develop a comprehensive strategy focussing on the above challenges that HCPs working in non-COVID areas are facing. This will go a long way in not only providing holistic care to the patients but also in controlling this pandemic.

3.
Indian J Palliat Care ; 26(Suppl 1): S90-S94, 2020 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1792218

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Health-care professionals (HCPs) are the frontline warriors in the time of this uncertain and unpredictable crisis of COVID. They face many challenges while caring for these patients, yet they are expected to cope with it and deliver their duties for the betterment of humankind. Our primary aim was to identify and assess the concerns of HCPs working in COVID area in a tertiary institutional isolation center. METHODOLOGY: An online Google-based questionnaire survey was distributed through various social media platforms after approval of the institutional review board to a total of 100 HCPs who were treating and managing COVID-positive patients. RESULTS: Of 100 responses, 72% were concerned about the risk of infection to self and family, while 46% reported disruption of their daily activities at a personal level. At the institutional level, 17% were concerned about inadequate personal protective equipment-related challenges. 20% had inadequate knowledge and training about COVID. 16% of participants were anxious all the time, 11% feared all the time, and 12% had stress all the time while treating COVID patients. Connectedness and communication with family and friends, word of appreciation, music, and TV were few strategies to cope up with these challenges. CONCLUSION: There is a need to identify and address the concerns and challenges faced by HCPs and to develop a comprehensive strategy and guideline to provide a holistic care and to ensure their security in the workplace.

4.
Can J Anaesth ; 67(10): 1424-1430, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1777852

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Risk to healthcare workers treating asymptomatic patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the operating room depends on multiple factors. This review examines the evidence for asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic carriage of SARS-CoV-2, the risk of transmission from asymptomatic patients, and the specific risks associated with aerosol-generating procedures. Protective measures, such as minimization of aerosols and use of personal protective equipment in the setting of treating asymptomatic patients, are also reviewed. SOURCE: We examined the published literature as well as Societal guidelines. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: There is evidence that a proportion of those infected with SARS-CoV-2 have detectable viral loads prior to exhibiting symptoms, or without ever developing symptoms. The degree of risk of transmission from asymptomatic patients to healthcare providers will depend on the prevalence of disease in the population, which is difficult to assess without widespread population screening. Aerosol-generating procedures increase the odds of viral transmission from infected symptomatic patients to healthcare providers, but transmission from asymptomatic patients has not been reported. Techniques to minimize aerosolization and appropriate personal protective equipment may help reduce the risk to healthcare workers in the operating room. Some societal guidelines recommend the use of airborne precautions during aerosol-generating procedures on asymptomatic patients during the coronavirus disease pandemic, although evidence supporting this practice is limited. CONCLUSION: Viral transmission from patients exhibiting no symptoms in the operating room is plausible and efforts to reduce risk to healthcare providers include reducing aerosolization and wearing appropriate personal protective equipment, the feasibility of which will vary based on geographic risk and equipment availability.


RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Le risque encouru par les travailleurs de la santé traitant des patients asymptomatiques infectés par le syndrome respiratoire aigu sévère du coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) en salle d'opération dépend de plusieurs facteurs. Ce compte rendu examine les données probantes concernant la présence asymptomatique ou pré-symptomatique du SARS-CoV-2, le risque de transmission des patients asymptomatiques, et les risques spécifiques associés aux interventions générant des aérosols. Nous passons également en revue différentes mesures de protection, telles que la minimisation des aérosols et l'utilisation d'équipements de protection individuelle, dans un contexte de traitement de patients asymptomatiques. SOURCE: Nous avons examiné la littérature publiée ainsi que les directives sociétales. CONSTATATIONS PRINCIPALES: Selon certaines données probantes, une proportion des personnes infectées par le SARS-CoV-2 possèdent des charges virales détectables avant la présence de symptômes, voire même sans manifestation de symptômes. Le degré de risque de transmission des patients asymptomatiques aux travailleurs de la santé dépendra de la prévalence de la maladie dans la population, une donnée difficile à évaluer sans dépistage généralisé. Les interventions générant des aérosols augmentent le risque de transmission virale des patients symptomatiques infectés aux travailleurs de la santé, mais la transmission de patients asymptomatiques n'a pas été rapportée. Les techniques visant à minimiser l'aérosolisation et les équipements de protection individuelle adaptés pourraient être utiles pour réduire le risque des travailleurs de la santé en salle d'opération. Certaines directives régionales et nationales recommandent le recours à des précautions contre la transmission par voie aérienne durant les interventions générant des aérosols pratiquées sur des patients asymptomatiques pendant la pandémie de coronavirus, bien que les données probantes appuyant cette pratique soient limitées. CONCLUSION: La transmission virale des patients asymptomatiques en salle d'opération est plausible et les efforts visant à réduire le risque pour les travailleurs de la santé comprennent la réduction de l'aérosolisation et le port d'équipements de protection individuelle adaptés, deux mesures dont la faisabilité variera en fonction du risque géographique et de la disponibilité des équipements.


Subject(s)
Asymptomatic Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Aerosols , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , Carrier State/epidemiology , Carrier State/virology , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Health Personnel , Humans , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Curr Psychol ; 40(12): 6324-6332, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1525630

ABSTRACT

The prevalence of COVID-19 disease continues to be a significant psychosocial status among health care workers (HCWs) and the general population worldwide. This cross sectional study aimed to compare the psychosocial status between healthcare workers and general population during the prevalence of COVID-19 disease in southeast Iran. Totally 415 health care workers of a medical service center for COVID-19 patients and 1023 people of general population participated in the study. An online socio-demographic characteristics questionnaire, General Health Questionnaire (GHQ -28), and Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item (GAD-7) were utilized to evaluate psychosocial status. According to GHQ, the psychological disorders of the HCWs were significantly higher than that of the general population (P < 0.001). According to GAD-7, no significant difference was found between general population and HCWs. Multivariate logistic analysis showed no difference between general population and HCWs in the psychological disorder. Although HCWs suffered from psychological disorders more than general population, nearly one third to half of the participants in both groups had psychosocial disorders.

7.
Ghana Med J ; 54(4 Suppl): 62-70, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1436196

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an ongoing pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). There is limited information on the safety of drugs used for the treatment of COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: Objective of this study is to describe the pattern of stimulated spontaneous adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports received from healthcare professionals for SARS-CoV-2 positive patients in Ghana and lessons learnt particularly for low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: This is a study of individual case safety reports (ICSRs) received from healthcare professionals between 1st April 2020 to 31st July 2020 in SARS-CoV-2 positive patients in Ghana. The ICSRs were retrieved from the SafetyWatch System and descriptive statistics used to describe the ADRs by System Organ Classification and Preferred Term. RESULTS: Information was received from 40 COVID-19 Treatment Centres across the country with 9 centres submitting a total of 53 ICSRs containing 101 ADRs; approximately two ADRs per ICSR. Females accounted for 29(54.7%) of the ICSRs and males 24(45.3%). Newly reported ADRs of interest were one report each of tremor for doxycycline; scrotal pain, dyspnoea, gait disturbances and dysgeusia for chloroquine; and dry throat, hyperhidrosis, restlessness and micturition frequency increased for hydroxychloroquine. A strong spontaneous system with the availability of focal persons at the Treatment Centres played a key role in reporting ADRs during the pandemic. CONCLUSION: This is the first experience with spontaneous reporting during COVID-19 pandemic in Ghana. The profile of most of the ADRs reported appears consistent with what is expected from the summary of product characteristics. A study with a larger sample size with well-defined denominator in future studies is paramount in determining the relative risk of these medications in SARS-CoV-2 positive patients. FUNDING: None declared.


Subject(s)
Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/drug therapy , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Aged , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/virology , Female , Ghana/epidemiology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies
8.
J Aerosol Sci ; 152: 105693, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1392358

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought an unprecedented crisis to the global health sector. When discharging COVID-19 patients in accordance with throat or nasal swab protocols using RT-PCR, the potential risk of reintroducing the infection source to humans and the environment must be resolved. Here, 14 patients including 10 COVID-19 subjects were recruited; exhaled breath condensate (EBC), air samples and surface swabs were collected and analyzed for SARS-CoV-2 using reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in four hospitals with applied natural ventilation and disinfection practices in Wuhan. Here we discovered that 22.2% of COVID-19 patients (n = 9), who were ready for hospital discharge based on current guidelines, had SARS-CoV-2 in their exhaled breath (~105 RNA copies/m3). Although fewer surface swabs (3.1%, n = 318) tested positive, medical equipment such as face shield frequently contacted/used by healthcare workers and the work shift floor were contaminated by SARS-CoV-2 (3-8 viruses/cm2). Three of the air samples (n = 44) including those collected using a robot-assisted sampler were detected positive by a digital PCR with a concentration level of 9-219 viruses/m3. RT-PCR diagnosis using throat swab specimens had a failure rate of more than 22% in safely discharging COVID-19 patients who were otherwise still exhaling the SARS-CoV-2 by a rate of estimated ~1400 RNA copies per minute into the air. Direct surface contact might not represent a major transmission route, and lower positive rate of air sample (6.8%) was likely due to natural ventilation (1.6-3.3 m/s) and regular disinfection practices. While there is a critical need for strengthening hospital discharge standards in preventing re-emergence of COVID-19 spread, use of breath sample as a supplement specimen could further guard the hospital discharge to ensure the safety of the public and minimize the pandemic re-emergence risk.

10.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 42(9): 1150-1152, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1387085
11.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 4: CD013582, 2020 04 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1372688

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: This review is one of a series of rapid reviews that Cochrane contributors have prepared to inform the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. When new respiratory infectious diseases become widespread, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers' adherence to infection prevention and control (IPC) guidelines becomes even more important. Strategies in these guidelines include the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) such as masks, face shields, gloves and gowns; the separation of patients with respiratory infections from others; and stricter cleaning routines. These strategies can be difficult and time-consuming to adhere to in practice. Authorities and healthcare facilities therefore need to consider how best to support healthcare workers to implement them. OBJECTIVES: To identify barriers and facilitators to healthcare workers' adherence to IPC guidelines for respiratory infectious diseases. SEARCH METHODS: We searched OVID MEDLINE on 26 March 2020. As we searched only one database due to time constraints, we also undertook a rigorous and comprehensive scoping exercise and search of the reference lists of key papers. We did not apply any date limit or language limits. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included qualitative and mixed-methods studies (with a distinct qualitative component) that focused on the experiences and perceptions of healthcare workers towards factors that impact on their ability to adhere to IPC guidelines for respiratory infectious diseases. We included studies of any type of healthcare worker with responsibility for patient care. We included studies that focused on IPC guidelines (local, national or international) for respiratory infectious diseases in any healthcare setting. These selection criteria were framed by an understanding of the needs of health workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Four review authors independently assessed the titles, abstracts and full texts identified by our search. We used a prespecified sampling frame to sample from the eligible studies, aiming to capture a range of respiratory infectious disease types, geographical spread and data-rich studies. We extracted data using a data extraction form designed for this synthesis. We assessed methodological limitations using an adapted version of the Critical Skills Appraisal Programme (CASP) tool. We used a 'best fit framework approach' to analyse and synthesise the evidence. This provided upfront analytical categories, with scope for further thematic analysis. We used the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach to assess our confidence in each finding. We examined each review finding to identify factors that may influence intervention implementation and developed implications for practice. MAIN RESULTS: We found 36 relevant studies and sampled 20 of these studies for our analysis. Ten of these studies were from Asia, four from Africa, four from Central and North America and two from Australia. The studies explored the views and experiences of nurses, doctors and other healthcare workers when dealing with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), H1N1, MERS (Middle East respiratory syndrome), tuberculosis (TB), or seasonal influenza. Most of these healthcare workers worked in hospitals; others worked in primary and community care settings. Our review points to several barriers and facilitators that influenced healthcare workers' ability to adhere to IPC guidelines. The following factors are based on findings assessed as of moderate to high confidence. Healthcare workers felt unsure as to how to adhere to local guidelines when they were long and ambiguous or did not reflect national or international guidelines. They could feel overwhelmed because local guidelines were constantly changing. They also described how IPC strategies led to increased workloads and fatigue, for instance because they had to use PPE and take on additional cleaning. Healthcare workers described how their responses to IPC guidelines were influenced by the level of support they felt that they received from their management team. Clear communication about IPC guidelines was seen as vital. But healthcare workers pointed to a lack of training about the infection itself and about how to use PPE. They also thought it was a problem when training was not mandatory. Sufficient space to isolate patients was also seen as vital. A lack of isolation rooms, anterooms and shower facilities was a problem. Other important practical measures described by healthcare workers included minimising overcrowding, fast-tracking infected patients, restricting visitors, and providing easy access to handwashing facilities. A lack of PPE, and equipment that was of poor quality, was a serious concern for healthcare workers and managers. They also pointed to the need to adjust the volume of supplies as infection outbreaks continued. Healthcare workers believed that they followed IPC guidance more closely when they saw the value of it. Some healthcare workers felt motivated to follow the guidance because of fear of infecting themselves or their families, or because they felt responsible for their patients. Some healthcare workers found it difficult to use masks and other equipment when it made patients feel isolated, frightened or stigmatised. Healthcare workers also found masks and other equipment uncomfortable to use. The workplace culture could also influence whether healthcare workers followed IPC guidelines or not. Across many of the findings, healthcare workers pointed to the importance of including all staff, including cleaning staff, porters, kitchen staff and other support staff when implementing IPC guidelines. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare workers point to several factors that influence their ability and willingness to follow IPC guidelines when managing respiratory infectious diseases. These include factors tied to the guideline itself and how it is communicated, support from managers, workplace culture, training, physical space, access to and trust in personal protective equipment, and a desire to deliver good patient care. The review also highlights the importance of including all facility staff, including support staff, when implementing IPC guidelines.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Guideline Adherence , Health Personnel , Infection Control , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Guideline Adherence/standards , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Patient Isolation , Personal Protective Equipment , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Universal Precautions
12.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 42(9): 1046-1052, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1368877

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To describe the pattern of transmission of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during 2 nosocomial outbreaks of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with regard to the possibility of airborne transmission. DESIGN: Contact investigations with active case finding were used to assess the pattern of spread from 2 COVID-19 index patients. SETTING: A community hospital and university medical center in the United States, in February and March, 2020, early in the COVID-19 pandemic. PATIENTS: Two index patients and 421 exposed healthcare workers. METHODS: Exposed healthcare workers (HCWs) were identified by analyzing the electronic medical record (EMR) and conducting active case finding in combination with structured interviews. Healthcare coworkers (HCWs) were tested for COVID-19 by obtaining oropharyngeal/nasopharyngeal specimens, and RT-PCR testing was used to detect SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: Two separate index patients were admitted in February and March 2020, without initial suspicion for COVID-19 and without contact or droplet precautions in place; both patients underwent several aerosol-generating procedures in this context. In total, 421 HCWs were exposed in total, and the results of the case contact investigations identified 8 secondary infections in HCWs. In all 8 cases, the HCWs had close contact with the index patients without sufficient personal protective equipment. Importantly, despite multiple aerosol-generating procedures, there was no evidence of airborne transmission. CONCLUSION: These observations suggest that, at least in a healthcare setting, most SARS-CoV-2 transmission is likely to take place during close contact with infected patients through respiratory droplets, rather than by long-distance airborne transmission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Health Personnel , Humans , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
13.
Disaster Med Public Health Prep ; : 1-9, 2021 Jun 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1361589

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Rapidly growing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has brought unprecedented challenges to the health system in Nepal. The main objective of this study was to explore the health system preparedness for COVID-19 and its impacts on frontline health-care workers in Nepal. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted among 32 health-care workers who were involved in clinical care of COVID-19 patients and four policy-makers who were responsible for COVID-19 control and management at central and provincial level. Interviews were conducted through telephone or Internet-based tools such as Zoom and Skype. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed into English, and coded using inductive and deductive approaches. RESULTS: Both health-care workers and policy-makers reported failure to initiate pre-emptive control measures at the early stages of the outbreak as the pivot in pandemic control. Although several measures were rolled out when cases started to appear, the overall health system preparedness was low. The poor governance, and coordination between three tiers of government was compounded by the inadequate personal protective equipment for health-care workers, insufficient isolation beds for patients, and poor engagement of the private sector. Frontline health-care workers experienced various degrees of stigma because of their profession and yet were able to maintain their motivation to continue serving patients. CONCLUSION: Preparedness for COVID-19 was affected by the poor coordination between three tiers of governance. Specifically, the lack of human resources, inadequate logistic chain management and laboratory facilities for testing COVID-19 appeared to have jeopardized the health system preparedness and escalated the pandemic in Nepal. Despite the poor preparedness, and health and safety concerns, health-care workers maintained their motivation. There is an urgent need for an effective coordination mechanism between various tiers of health structure (including private sector) in addition to incentivizing the health-care workers for the current and future pandemics.

14.
Aust N Z J Public Health ; 45(4): 318-324, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1343798

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To examine the perceptions of health professionals regarding the gaps in mental health service provision in Australia and their need for assistance in managing patients with mental illness. METHOD: A total of 570 health professionals participated in an anonymous online survey in January 2018 that assessed: i) health professionals' current levels of need for assistance in the management of patients with mental health conditions; and ii) perceived gaps in the mental health care system, and how these can be addressed. Data were analysed using a mixed-methods approach. RESULTS: Of those surveyed, 71.2% of health professionals and 77.3% of general practitioners reported that they required assistance in managing their patients with at least one stage of care for at least one type of mental disorder. Qualitative analyses revealed eight major themes in health professionals' perceptions of gaps in mental health service provision, including affordability and accessibility, the problems with crisis-driven care and the 'missing middle'. CONCLUSION: Overall, the results of this study provide a concerning insight into the substantial gaps in mental health care within the Australian system. Implications for public health: The results of this study add weight to ongoing calls for reform of and increased investment in the Australian mental health care system.


Subject(s)
Clinical Competence , Community Mental Health Services/organization & administration , Health Personnel/psychology , Mental Health/statistics & numerical data , Primary Health Care/organization & administration , Adult , Aged , Australia , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Male , Mental Disorders , Mental Health Services , Middle Aged , Surveys and Questionnaires
15.
JMIR Res Protoc ; 10(5): e29562, 2021 May 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1304555

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Health care workers (HCWs) have been working on the front lines of the COVID-19 pandemic with high risks of viral exposure, infection, and transmission. Standard COVID-19 testing is insufficient to protect HCWs from these risks and prevent the spread of disease. Continuous monitoring of physiological data with wearable sensors, self-monitoring of symptoms, and asymptomatic COVID-19 testing may aid in the early detection of COVID-19 in HCWs and may help reduce further transmission among HCWs, patients, and families. OBJECTIVE: By using wearable sensors, smartphone-based symptom logging, and biospecimens, this project aims to assist HCWs in self-monitoring COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, longitudinal study of HCWs at a single institution. The study duration was 1 year, wherein participants were instructed on the continuous use of two wearable sensors (Fitbit Charge 3 smartwatch and TempTraq temperature patches) for up to 30 days. Participants consented to provide biospecimens (ie, nasal swabs, saliva swabs, and blood) for up to 1 year from study entry. Using a smartphone app called Roadmap 2.0, participants entered a daily mood score, submitted daily COVID-19 symptoms, and completed demographic and health-related quality of life surveys at study entry and 30 days later. Semistructured qualitative interviews were also conducted at the end of the 30-day period, following completion of daily mood and symptoms reporting as well as continuous wearable sensor use. RESULTS: A total of 226 HCWs were enrolled between April 28 and December 7, 2020. The last participant completed the 30-day study procedures on January 16, 2021. Data collection will continue through January 2023, and data analyses are ongoing. CONCLUSIONS: Using wearable sensors, smartphone-based symptom logging and survey completion, and biospecimen collections, this study will potentially provide data on the prevalence of COVID-19 infection among HCWs at a single institution. The study will also assess the feasibility of leveraging wearable sensors and self-monitoring of symptoms in an HCW population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04756869; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04756869. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/29562.

16.
J Med Internet Res ; 2021 May 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1295586

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During lockdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine has become a necessary component of clinical practice for the purpose of providing safer patient care, and it has been used to support the healthcare needs of COVID-19 patients and routine primary care patients alike. However, this change has not been fully consolidated. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to analyse the determinants of healthcare professionals' intention to use the eConsulta digital clinical consultations tool in the post-COVID-19 context. METHODS: A literature review of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) allowed us to construct a theoretical model and establish a set of hypotheses derived from it about the influence that a variety of different factors relating to both healthcare professionals and the institutions where they work had on those professionals' intention to use eConsulta. In order to confirm the proposed model, a mixed qualitative and quantitative methodology was used, and a questionnaire was designed to serve as the data collection instrument. The data were analysed using univariate and bivariate analysis techniques. To confirm the theoretical model, exploratory factor analysis and binary logistic regression were applied. RESULTS: The most important variables were those referring to perceived benefits (B=2.408) and the type of use that individuals habitually made of eConsulta (B=0.715). Environmental pressure (B=0.678), experience of technology (B=0.542), gender (B=0.639) and the degree of eConsulta implementation (B=0.266) were other variables influencing the intention to use the tool in the post-COVID-19 context. When replicating the previous analysis by professional group, experience of technology and gender in the physician group, and experience of the tool's use and the centre where a professional works in the nurse group, were found to be of considerable importance. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation and use of eConsulta had increased significantly as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the majority of the healthcare professionals were satisfied with its use in practice and planned to incorporate it into their practices in the post-COVID-19 context. Perceived benefits and environmental pressure were determining factors in the attitude towards and intention to use eConsulta.

17.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(1): e199-e205, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1290577

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the risk of death for health-care workers (HCW) with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in Mexico City during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and describe the associated factors in hospitalized HCW, compared with non-HCW. METHODS: We analyzed data from laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 cases registered from 27 February-31 August 2020 in Mexico City's public database. Individuals were classified as non-HCW or HCW (subcategorized as physicians, nurses, and other HCW). In hospitalized individuals, a multivariate logistic regression model was used to analyze the potential factors associated with death and compare mortality risks among groups. RESULTS: A total of 125 665 patients were included. Of these, 13.1% were HCW (28% physicians, 38% nurses, and 34% other HCW). Compared with non-HCW, HCW were more frequently female, were younger, and had fewer comorbidities. Overall, 25 771 (20.5%) were treated as inpatients and 11 182 (8.9%) deaths were reported. Deaths in the total population (9.9% vs 1.9%, respectively; P < .001) and in hospitalized patients (39.6% vs 19.3%, respectively; P < .001) were significantly higher in non-HCW than in HCW. In hospitalized patients, using a multivariate model, the risk of death was lower in HCW in general (odds ratio [OR], 0.53) than in non-HCW, and the risks were also lower by specific occupation (OR for physicians, 0.60; OR for nurses, 0.29; OR for other HCW 0.61). CONCLUSIONS: HCW represent an important proportion of individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection in Mexico City. While the mortality risk is lower in HCW compared to non-HCW, a high mortality rate in hospitalized patients was observed in this study. Among HCW, nurses had a lower risk of death compared to physicians and other HCW.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Female , Health Personnel , Humans , Mexico , Pandemics
18.
Front Psychol ; 12: 618874, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1278439

ABSTRACT

Fear to contamination is an easy-to-provoke, intense, hard-to-control, and extraordinarily persistent fear. A worsening of preexisting psychiatric disorders was observed during the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) outbreak, and several studies suggest that those with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) may be more affected than any other group of people. In the face of worsening OCD symptoms, there is a need for mental health professionals to provide the support needed not only to treat patients who still report symptoms, but also to improve relapse prevention. In this line, it is recommended to improve alternative strategies such as online consultations and digital psychiatry. The aim of this study is to develop augmented reality (AR) stimuli that are clinically relevant for patients with cleaning OCD and assess their efficiency to obtain emotionally significant responses. Four AR stimuli were developed: a plastic bag full of garbage, a piece of bread with mold, a dirty sports shoe, and a piece of rotten meat. All stimuli were shown to a clinical group (17 patients with cleaning OCD) and a control group (11 patients without OCD). Relevant results were the design of the AR stimuli. These stimuli were validated with the statistical difference in perceived anxiety in the meat stimuli between the clinical and control groups. Nevertheless, when looking at effect sizes, all stimuli present effect sizes from small (plastic bag) to large (meat), with both shoe and bread between small and medium effect sizes. These results are a valuable support for the clinical use of these AR stimuli in the treatment of cleaning OCD.

19.
Front Pediatr ; 9: 668484, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1268271

ABSTRACT

Since its appearance in Wuhan in mid-December 2019, acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) related 19 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has spread dramatically worldwide. It soon became apparent that the incidence of pediatric COVID-19 was much lower than the adult form. Morbidity in children is characterized by a variable clinical presentation and course. Symptoms are similar to those of other acute respiratory viral infections, the upper airways being more affected than the lower airways. Thus far, over 90% of children who tested positive for the virus presented mild or moderate symptoms and signs. Most children were asymptomatic, and only a few cases were severe, unlike in the adult population. Deaths have been rare and occurred mainly in children with underlying morbidity. Factors as reduced angiotensin-converting enzyme receptor expression, increased activation of the interferon-related innate immune response, and trained immunity have been implicated in the relative resistance to COVID-19 in children, however the underlying pathogenesis and mechanism of action remain to be established. While at the pandemic outbreak, mild respiratory manifestations were the most frequently described symptoms in children, subsequent reports suggested that the clinical course of COVID-19 is more complex than initially thought. Thanks to the experience acquired in adults, the diagnosis of pediatric SARS-CoV-2 infection has improved with time. Data on the treatment of children are sparse, however, several antiviral trials are ongoing. The purpose of this narrative review is to summarize current understanding of pediatric SARS-CoV-2 infection and provide more accurate information for healthcare workers and improve the care of patients.

20.
Crit Care Explor ; 3(6): e0454, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1262254

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES/BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is used as rescue therapy for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome in whom conventional therapy has failed prior to an Extra Corporeal Membrane Oxygenator to rescue Lung Injury in Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome trial. Since then, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation has been incorporated as part of the standard treatment algorithm in many centers for patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. Since the emergence of coronavirus disease 2019 in early 2020, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation has been used effectively as rescue therapy and as a bridge to recovery in some patients with refractory respiratory failure. DESIGN SUBJECT AND INTERVENTION: We present a 38-year-old male healthcare worker diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 and progressed to critical condition with severe surgical emphysema on a high-flow nasal cannula with Fio2 100%, a flow of 40 L/min, and a maximum oxygen saturation of 88%. He was successfully treated by applying awake extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, without a need for invasive mechanical ventilation, to avoid worsening barotrauma and hemodynamic compromise potentially induced by positive pressure ventilation. MAIN RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is one of the first cases to be reported in the literature on the use of awake extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as a "treatment" for barotrauma due to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome in a coronavirus disease 2019 patient, without the need for invasive mechanical ventilation. In selected patients with severe respiratory failure, awake extracorporeal membrane oxygenation can be used as a salvage treatment and obviate the need for invasive mechanical ventilation.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL