Physical and stressful psychological impacts of prolonged personal protective equipment use during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional survey study.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (HCWs) caring for COVID-19 infected patients are exposed to stressful and traumatic events with potential for severe and sustained adverse mental and physical health consequences. Our aim was to assess the magnitude of physical and mental health outcomes of HCWs due to the prolonged use of personal protective equipment (PPE) treating COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This cross-sectional study assessed the symptoms of stress, anxiety, insomnia, and psychological resilience using the Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemics (SAVE) scale, Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), and Resilience Scale (RS), respectively, in Italy between 1st February and 31st March 2022. The physical outcomes reported included vertigo, dyspnea, nausea, micturition desire, retroauricular pain, thirst, discomfort at work, physical fatigue, and thermal stress. The relationships between prolonged PPE use and psychological outcomes and physical discomforts were analyzed using Generalized Linear Models (GLMs). We calculated the factor mean scores and a binary outcome to measure study outcomes. FINDINGS: We found that 23% of the respondents reported stress related symptoms, 33% anxiety, 43% moderate to severe insomnia, and 67% reported moderate to very low resilience. The GLMs suggested that older people (>55 years old) are less likely to suffer from stress compared to younger people (<35 y.o); conversely, HCW aged more than 35 years are more inclined to suffer from insomnia than younger people (<35 y.o). Female HCW reported a lower probability of resilience than males. University employed HCWs were less likely to report anxiety than those who worked in a community hospital. The odds of suffering from insomnia for social workers was significantly higher than for other HCWs. Female HCW>3 years old, enrolled in training programs for nursing, social work, technical training and other healthcare professionals increased the probability of reported physical discomforts. HCW that worked on non COVID-19 wards and used PPE for low-medium exposure level, were at lower risks for lasting physical side effects as compared to the HCW who worked in high-risk PPE intense, COVID-19 environments. INTERPRETATION: The study suggests that frontline HCWs who had extensive PPE exposure while directly engaged in the diagnosis, treatment, and care for patients with COVID-19 are at significant risks for lasting physical and psychological harm and distress.

Changes in Acute Myocardial Infarction, Stroke, and Heart Failure Hospitalizations During COVID-19 Pandemic in Tuscany-An Interrupted Time Series Study.

Objectives: We evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on unplanned hospitalization rates for patients without COVID-19, including their length of stay, and in-hospital mortality, overall, and for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke, and heart failure in the Tuscany region of Italy. Methods: We carried out a population-based controlled interrupted time series study using segmented linear regression with an autoregressive error term based on admissions data from all public hospitals in Tuscany. The primary outcome measure was weekly hospitalization rates; secondary outcomes included length of stay, and in-hospital mortality. Results: The implementation of the pandemic-related mitigation measures and fear of infection was associated with large decreases in inpatient hospitalization rates overall (-182 [-234, -130]), unplanned hospitalization (-39 [-51, -26]), and for AMI (-1.32 [-1.98, -0.66]), stroke (-1.51 [-2.56, -0.44]), and heart failure (-8.7 [-11.1, -6.3]). Average length of stay and percent in-hospital mortality for select acute medical conditions did not change significantly. Conclusion: In Tuscany, Italy, the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with large reductions in hospitalization rates overall, as well as for heart failure, and the time sensitive conditions of AMI and stroke during the months January to July 2020.

Changes in Acute Myocardial Infarction, Stroke, and Heart Failure Hospitalizations During COVID-19 Pandemic in Tuscany—An Interrupted Time Series Study

Objectives: We evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on unplanned hospitalization rates for patients without COVID-19, including their length of stay, and in-hospital mortality, overall, and for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke, and heart failure in the Tuscany region of Italy. Methods: We carried out a population-based controlled interrupted time series study using segmented linear regression with an autoregressive error term based on admissions data from all public hospitals in Tuscany. The primary outcome measure was weekly hospitalization rates;secondary outcomes included length of stay, and in-hospital mortality. Results: The implementation of the pandemic-related mitigation measures and fear of infection was associated with large decreases in inpatient hospitalization rates overall (−182 [−234, −130]), unplanned hospitalization (−39 [−51, −26]), and for AMI (−1.32 [−1.98, −0.66]), stroke (−1.51 [−2.56, −0.44]), and heart failure (−8.7 [−11.1, −6.3]). Average length of stay and percent in-hospital mortality for select acute medical conditions did not change significantly. Conclusion: In Tuscany, Italy, the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with large reductions in hospitalization rates overall, as well as for heart failure, and the time sensitive conditions of AMI and stroke during the months January to July 2020.

Looking for the right balance between human and economic costs during COVID-19 outbreak.

Since the beginning of Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) disease outbreak, there has been a heated debate about public health measures, as they can presumably reduce human costs in the short term but can negatively impact economies and well-being over a longer period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To study the relationship between health and economic impact of COVID-19, we conducted a secondary research on Italian regions, combining official data (mortality due to COVID-19 and contractions in value added of production for a month of lockdown). Then, we added the tertiles of the number of people tested for COVID-19 and those of health aids to evaluate the correspondence with the outcome measures. RESULTS: Five regions out of 20, the most industrialized northern regions, which were affected both earlier and more severely by the outbreak, registered both mortality and economic value loss above the overall medians. The southern regions, which were affected later and less severely, had low mortality and less economic impact. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis shows that considering health and economic outcomes in the assessment of response to pandemics offers a bigger picture perspective of the outbreak and could allow policymakers and health managers to choose systemic, 'personalized' strategies, in case of a feared second epidemic wave.

International survey of COVID-19 management strategies.

BACKGROUND: While individual countries have gained considerable knowledge and experience in coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) management, an international, comparative perspective is lacking, particularly regarding the measures taken by different countries to tackle the pandemic. This paper elicits the views of health system staff, tapping into their personal expertise on how the pandemic was initially handled. METHODS: From May to July 2020, we conducted a cross-sectional, online, purpose-designed survey comprising 70 items. Email lists of contacts provided by the International Society for Quality in Health Care, the Italian Network for Safety in Health Care and the Australian Institute of Health Innovation were used to access healthcare professionals and managers across the world. We snowballed the survey to individuals and groups connected to these organizations. Key outcome measures were attitudes and information about institutional approaches taken; media communication; how acute hospitals were re-organized; primary health organization; personal protective equipment; and staffing and training. RESULTS: A total of 1131 survey participants from 97 countries across the World Health Organization (WHO) regions responded to the survey. Responses were from all six WHO regions; 57.9% were female and the majority had 10 or more years of experience in healthcare; almost half (46.5%) were physicians; and all other major clinical professional groups participated. As the pandemic progressed, most countries established an emergency task force, developed communication channels to citizens, organized health services to cope and put in place appropriate measures (e.g. pathways for COVID-19 patients, and testing, screening and tracing procedures). Some countries did this better than others. We found several significant differences between the WHO regions in how they are tackling the pandemic. For instance, while overall most respondents (71.4%) believed that there was an effective plan prior to the outbreak, this was only the case for 31.9% of respondents from the Pan American Health Organization compared with 90.7% of respondents from the South-East Asia Region (SEARO). Issues with swab testing (e.g. delay in communicating the swab outcome) were less frequently reported by respondents from SEARO and the Western Pacific Region compared with other regions. CONCLUSION: The world has progressed in its knowledge and sophistication in tackling the pandemic after early and often substantial obstacles were encountered. Most WHO regions have or are in the process of responding well, although some countries have not yet instituted widespread measures known to support mitigation, for example, effective swab testing and social control measures.