Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
Expert Rev Endocrinol Metab ; 16(4): 181-189, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34096441

ABSTRACT

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the entire population with the most deleterious effects in elders. Elders, especially those with diabetes, are at the highest risk of COVID-19 related adverse outcomes and mortality. This is usually linked to the comorbidities that accumulate with age, diabetes-related chronic inflammation, and the pandemic's psychosocial effects.Areas covered: We present some approaches to manage these complicated elderly patients with diabetes during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the inpatient setting, we suggest similar (pre-pandemic) glycemic targets and emphasize the importance of using IV insulin and possible use of continuous glucose monitoring to reduce exposure and PPE utilization. Outside the hospital, we recommend optimal glycemic control within the limits imposed by considerations of safety. We also describe the advantages and challenges of using various technological platforms in clinical care.Expert opinion: The COVID-19 pandemic has lifted the veil off serious deficiencies in the infrastructures for care at both the individual level and the population level and also highlighted some of the strengths, all of which affect individuals with diabetes and COVID-19. We anticipate that things will not return to 'normal' after the COVID-19 pandemic has run its course, but rather they will be superseded by 'New Normal.'


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Diabetes Mellitus/drug therapy , Inflammation/complications , Personal Protective Equipment/ethics , Administration, Intravenous , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Blood Glucose/analysis , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/mortality , Chronic Disease , Comorbidity , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnosis , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Disease Management , Humans , Hypoglycemic Agents/administration & dosage , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Insulin/administration & dosage , Insulin/therapeutic use , Patient Education as Topic/methods , Personal Protective Equipment/standards , Prevalence , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Telemedicine/methods
2.
Sci Prog ; 104(2): 368504211023282, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34152874

ABSTRACT

The surgical theatre is associated with the highest mortality rates since the onslaught of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, Operating Department Practitioners (ODPs) are neglected human resources for health in regards to both professional development and research for patient safety; even though they are key practitioners with respect to infection control during surgeries. Therefore, this study aims to describe challenges faced by ODPs during the pandemic. The secondary aim is to use empirical evidence to inform the public health sector management about both ODP professional development and improvement in surgical procedures, with a specific focus on pandemics. A qualitative study has been conducted. Data collection was based on an interview guide with open-ended questions. Interviews with 39 ODPs in public sector teaching hospitals of Pakistan who have been working during the COVID-19 pandemic were part of the analysis. Content analysis was used to generate themes. Ten themes related to challenges faced by ODPs in delivering services during the pandemic for securing patient safety were identified: (i) Disparity in training for prevention of COVID-19; (ii) Shortcomings in COVID-19 testing; (iii) Supply shortages of personal protective equipment; (iv) Challenges in maintaining physical distance and prevention protocols; (v) Human resource shortages and role burden; (vi) Problems with hospital administration; (vii) Exclusion and hierarchy; (viii) Teamwork limitations and other communication issues; (ix) Error Management; and (x) Anxiety and fear. The public health sector, in Pakistan and other developing regions, needs to invest in the professional development of ODPs and improve resources and structures for surgical procedures, during pandemics and otherwise.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Infection Control/organization & administration , Pandemics , Surgeons/organization & administration , Surgery Department, Hospital/organization & administration , Adult , Anxiety/psychology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/psychology , COVID-19 Testing , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pakistan/epidemiology , Personal Protective Equipment/ethics , Personal Protective Equipment/supply & distribution , Public Health , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Surgeons/psychology , Surgical Procedures, Operative/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires , Workforce/organization & administration
8.
J Am Coll Surg ; 230(6): 1111-1113, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32278727

ABSTRACT

This article proposes systems for the fair distribution of scarce resources to healthcare providers. It builds on classic ethical structures and adapts them to the equitable distribution of personal protective equipment (PPE) to clinicians at risk of contracting novel corona virus-19 (COVID-19). The article also defines systems of allocation that are generally considered unethical and are to be avoided. We emphasize that policies must be transparent, collaborative, applied equally, and have a system of accountability. It is recognized that unless the supply of PPE is quickly replenished, or viable alternatives to traditional equipment are devised in the coming days to weeks, hospitals and healthcare systems will face the difficult task of rationing PPE to at-risk clinicians. This paper suggests an ethical framework for that process.


Subject(s)
Ethics, Medical , Health Care Rationing/ethics , Pandemics/ethics , Personal Protective Equipment/supply & distribution , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Infection Control/instrumentation , Morals , Personal Protective Equipment/ethics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31614408

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To determine if an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) could be used to evaluate and monitor hand hygiene and personal protective equipment (PPE) proficiency for medical interns in the United States. METHODS: Interns in July 2015 (N=123, Cohort 1) without OSCE-based contact precaution evaluation and teaching were evaluated early 2016 by OSCE for hand hygiene and PPE proficiency. They performed poorly. Therefore, the new interns entering July 2016 (N=151, Cohort 2) were immediately tested in the same OSCE station as Cohort 1 and provided feedback and teaching. Cohort 2 was then retested in the OSCE station early 2017. The Mann Whitney U test was used to compare Cohort 1 vs. Cohort 2 performances on checklist items. Cohort 2 performance differences at the beginning and end of the intern year were compared using McNemar's X2 test for paired nominal data. RESULTS: Checklist items were scored, summed and reported as percent correct. In Cohort 2, the mean percent correct was higher in posttest than pretest, 92% vs. 77% )(P <0 .0001). The passing rate (100% correct) was significantly higher, 55% vs. 16%. Comparing Cohort 1 and Cohort 2 at the end of intern year, the mean percent correct was higher for Cohort 2 compared to Cohort 1, 95% vs 90% (P < 0.0001). 55% of the Cohort 2 passed (a perfect score) compared to 24% in Cohort 1 (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: An OSCE can be utilized to evaluate and monitor hand hygiene and PPE proficiency for interns in the United States.


Subject(s)
Hand Hygiene/methods , Personal Protective Equipment/ethics , Physical Examination/standards , Checklist , Cohort Studies , Hand Hygiene/standards , Humans , Internship and Residency/ethics , Mindfulness , Personal Protective Equipment/standards , Physical Examination/statistics & numerical data , Task Performance and Analysis , United States/epidemiology , Universal Precautions/methods
10.
Nurs Ethics ; 26(2): 611-624, 2019 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28617193

ABSTRACT

Hospital infection control practices known as Contact Precautions are recommended for the management of people with pathogens such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus or vancomycin-resistant Enterococci. Background: The patient is isolated, and staff are required to wear gloves, and a gown or apron when providing care. A notice is displayed to remind staff of these requirements and an 'alert' message is placed in the patient's medical record. Objective: The aim of this article is to discuss and explore whether practices used in hospitals to reduce the transmission of endemic antibiotic-resistant organisms are ethically justified in today's healthcare environment in the developed world. In order to do this, the history of the development of these practices is summarised, and the evidence base for their effectiveness is reviewed. Key bioethics principles are then discussed and contextualised from the perspective of hospital infection prevention and control, and an ethically superior model for the prevention and control of healthcare associated infection is proposed.


Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care/ethics , Iatrogenic Disease/prevention & control , Infection Control/standards , Delivery of Health Care/standards , Ethics, Medical , Humans , Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus/pathogenicity , Personal Protective Equipment/ethics , Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci/pathogenicity
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...