RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has critically challenged healthcare systems globally. Examining the experiences of healthcare workers (HCWs) is important for optimizing ongoing and future pandemic responses. OBJECTIVES: In-depth exploration of Australian HCWs' experiences of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, with a focus on reported stressors vis-à-vis protective factors. METHODS: Individual interviews were performed with 63 HCWs in Australia. A range of professional streams and operational staff were included. Thematic analysis was performed. RESULTS: Thematic analysis identified stressors centred on paucity of, or changing, evidence, leading to absence of, or mistrust in, guidelines; unprecedented alterations to the autonomy and sense of control of clinicians; and deficiencies in communication and support. Key protective factors included: the development of clear guidance from respected clinical leaders or recognized clinical bodies, interpersonal support, and strong teamwork, leadership, and a sense of organizational preparedness. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insights into the key organizational sources of emotional stress for HCWs within pandemic responses and describes experiences of protective factors. HCWs experiencing unprecedented uncertainty, fear, and rapid change, rely on clear communication, strong leadership, guidelines endorsed by recognized expert groups or individuals, and have increased reliance on interpersonal support. Structured strategies for leadership and communication at team, service group and organizational levels, provision of psychological support, and consideration of the potential negative effects of centralizing control, would assist in ameliorating the extreme pressures of working within a pandemic environment.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Personal de Salud , Factores Protectores , SARS-CoV-2 , Australia/epidemiología , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , COVID-19/psicología , Personal de Salud/psicología , Humanos , Control de Infecciones/organización & administración , Control de Infecciones/normas , Pandemias/prevención & controlRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Pandemic planning has historically been oriented to respond to an influenza virus, with vaccination strategy being a key focus. As the current COVID-19 pandemic plays out, the Australian government is closely monitoring progress towards development of SARS-CoV2 vaccines as a definitive intervention. However, as in any pandemic, initial supply will likely be exceeded by demand due to limited manufacturing output. METHODS: We convened community juries in three Australian locations in 2019 to assess public acceptability and perceived legitimacy of influenza pandemic vaccination distribution strategies. Preparatory work included literature reviews on pandemic vaccine allocation strategies and on vaccine allocation ethics, and simulation modelling studies. We assumed vaccine would be provided to predefined priority groups. Jurors were then asked to recommend one of two strategies for distributing remaining early doses of vaccine: directly vaccinate people at higher risk of adverse outcomes from influenza; or indirectly protect the general population by vaccinating primary school students, who are most likely to spread infection. RESULTS: Thirty-four participants of diverse backgrounds and ages were recruited through random digit dialling and topic-blinded social media advertising. Juries heard evidence and arguments supporting different vaccine distribution strategies, and questioned expert presenters. All three community juries supported prioritising school children for influenza vaccination (aiming for indirect protection), one by 10-2 majority and two by consensus. Justifications included that indirect protection benefits more people and is likely to be more publicly acceptable. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of an influenza pandemic, informed citizens were not opposed to prioritising groups at higher risks of adverse outcomes, but if resources and epidemiological conditions allow, achieving population benefits should be a strategic priority. These insights may inform future SARS-CoV-2 vaccination strategies.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19/epidemiología , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/organización & administración , Programas de Inmunización/organización & administración , Vacunas contra la Influenza/provisión & distribución , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Pandemias/prevención & control , Vacunación/ética , Adolescente , Adulto , Australia/epidemiología , Niño , Femenino , Humanos , Esquemas de Inmunización , Vacunas contra la Influenza/administración & dosificación , Vacunas contra la Influenza/economía , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Gripe Humana/inmunología , Gripe Humana/virología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Orthomyxoviridae/inmunología , Salud Pública/economía , Salud Pública/métodos , SARS-CoV-2/patogenicidad , Vacunación/economía , Cobertura de Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Hendra virus (HeV) is endemic in Australian flying foxes, posing a threat to equine and human health. Equine vaccination remains the most effective risk mitigation strategy. Many horses remain unvaccinated - even in higher-risk regions. Debate surrounding the vaccine's use is characterised by conflicting perspectives, misunderstanding and mistrust. Private veterinary practitioners are critical to early identification of public health risk through recognition, sampling and management of suspect-equine-HeV-cases. However, managing such cases can be burdensome, with some veterinarians opting not to attend unvaccinated horses or to abandon equine practice because of risk posed by HeV disease and liability. OBJECTIVE: Ascertain the perspectives of informed citizens on what obligations (if any) private veterinarians have to attend unvaccinated horses with HeV or HeV-like disease. METHODS: Three citizens' juries were tasked with considering approaches to managing HeV risk in Australia, including (reported here) roles and obligations of private veterinarians in responding to HeV-suspect-cases. RESULTS: Jurors acknowledged that HeV management posed an important challenge for private veterinarians. A clear majority (27 of 31 jurors) voted that veterinarians should not be obliged to attend unvaccinated horses. All recognised that greater support for veterinarians should be a priority. CONCLUSIONS: When informed of HeV risks and strategies for control and management, citizens appreciated the need to support veterinarians performing this critical 'One Health' role for public benefit. The current governance framework within which zoonotic disease recognition and response operates limits the contingency and scope for increasing support and efficacy of these important veterinary public health practices.
Asunto(s)
Virus Hendra , Infecciones por Henipavirus/veterinaria , Enfermedades de los Caballos , Veterinarios , Animales , Australia , Caballos , Humanos , Práctica Privada , ZoonosisRESUMEN
STUDY QUESTION: Does an informed group of citizens endorse the clinical use of mitochondrial donation in a country where this is not currently permitted? SUMMARY ANSWER: After hearing balanced expert evidence and having opportunity for deliberation, a majority (11/14) of participants in a citizens' jury believed that children should be able to be born using mitochondrial donation. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Research suggests that patients, oocyte donors and health professionals support mitochondrial donation to prevent transmission of mitochondrial disease. Less is known about public acceptability of this novel reproductive technology, especially from evidence using deliberative methods. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This study comprised a citizens' jury, an established method for determining the views of a well-informed group of community members. The jury had 14 participants, and ran over one and a half days in 2017. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Jurors were members of the public with no experience of mitochondrial disease. They heard and engaged with relevant evidence and were asked to answer the question: 'Should Australia allow children to be born following mitochondrial donation?' MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Eleven jurors decided that Australia should allow children to be born following mitochondrial donation; 7 of whom added conditions such as the need to limit who can access the intervention. Three jurors decided that children should not (or not yet) be born using this intervention. All jurors were particularly interested in the reliability of evidence, licensing/regulatory mechanisms and the rights of children to access information about their oocyte donors. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Jurors' views were well informed and reflected critical deliberation and discussion, but are not intended to be representative of the whole population. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: When presented with high quality evidence, combined with opportunities to undertake structured deliberation of novel reproductive technologies, members of the public are able to engage in detailed discussions. This is the first study to use an established deliberative method to gauge public views towards mitochondrial donation. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was funded by a University of Sydney Industry and Community Collaboration Seed Award (2017), which was awarded contingent on additional funding from the Mito Foundation. Additional funding was provided by the Mito Foundation. The Foundation was not involved in jury facilitation or deliberation, nor analysis of research data. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.
Asunto(s)
Actitud , Enfermedades Mitocondriales/prevención & control , Terapia de Reemplazo Mitocondrial/legislación & jurisprudencia , Terapia de Reemplazo Mitocondrial/métodos , Donación de Oocito/legislación & jurisprudencia , Donación de Oocito/métodos , Opinión Pública , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Australia , Toma de Decisiones , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Formulación de Políticas , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To determine what veterinary students in Australia and New Zealand consider important competences in companion animal welfare and ethics (AWE) required on their first day of practice, and to explore how their priorities relate to gender and stage of study. METHODS: Undergraduate students at all veterinary schools in Australia and New Zealand were sent an online survey. A subset of questions required participants to rank the importance of preselected AWE topics pertaining to companion animals. Data were analysed to determine differences in the way students of different gender or academic stage prioritised each of these AWE topics. RESULTS: Of 3220 currently enrolled students, 851 participated in the survey: 79% were female, 17% male, 4% unspecified. Ranking of the AWE topics, from highest to lowest importance, was: neutering, companion animal husbandry, euthanasia, behaviour and training, animal breeding, over-servicing in relation to animal needs and cosmetic surgery. Female students consistently ranked competency in AWE issues surrounding neutering more highly than male students (P = 0.006). Students in senior years of study ranked the importance of competency in animal abuse/hoarding (P = 0.048), shelter medicine (P = 0.012) and animal breeding (P = 0.002) less highly than those in junior years. CONCLUSIONS: Australasian veterinary students placed more importance on competency in AWE issues associated with clinical practice (such as neutering and euthanasia) than on professional behaviours (such as over-servicing and animal breeding). However, we consider that emphasis should still be placed on developing graduate competency in the latter categories to reflect growing societal concerns about companion animal over-supply and inappropriate professional conduct.
Asunto(s)
Crianza de Animales Domésticos , Bienestar del Animal , Actitud , Estudiantes/psicología , Crianza de Animales Domésticos/ética , Bienestar del Animal/ética , Animales , Australia , Competencia Clínica , Eutanasia Animal , Femenino , Humanos , Internet , Masculino , Nueva Zelanda , Mascotas , Facultades de Medicina Veterinaria , Distribución por Sexo , Esterilización Reproductiva/psicología , Esterilización Reproductiva/veterinaria , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
Biomedical innovations are unlikely to provide effective and ethical tuberculosis (TB) control measures without complementary social science research. However, a strong interest in interdisciplinary work is often undermined by differences in language and concepts specific to each disciplinary approach. Accordingly, biological and social scientists need to learn how to communicate with each other. This article will outline key concepts relating to TB from medical anthropology and health sociology. Distilling these concepts in an introductory framework is intended to make this material accessible to researchers in laboratory, clinical and fieldwork settings, as well as to encourage more social scientists to engage with TB research among target groups critical for successful programmatic interventions. For pedagogical purposes, the relevant concepts are grouped into three categories: 1) structures and settings, which includes overarching themes such as syndemics, local biologies, medicalisation, structural violence and surveillance; 2) practices and processes, encompassing gender, stigma, taboo, and victim blaming; and 3) experience and enculturation, which includes illness narratives, biographical disruption and dynamic nominalism. By helping to navigate this literature, we hope to foster more cross-disciplinary conversations between qualitative and quantitative researchers. TB, a quintessential social disease, will be controlled more effectively using a multistranded research approach.