RESUMO
Returning to work can be a serious issue for patients who have undergone intensive care. Previous studies have reported a relatively low return-to-work prevalence among such patients. Some patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) experience severe pneumonia and require intensive care, including mechanical ventilation. However, little is known about the return-to-work prevalence among such patients. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature describing the return-to-work prevalence among COVID-19 patients who received intensive care. The eligibility criteria were determined based on the medical condition, context, and population framework of each study, as follows: (1) full-text observational studies, (2) context: COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU, (3) condition: return-to-work prevalence after ICU discharge, and (4) population: critically ill patients who are 18 years and older. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. Review articles, case reports, letters to the editor, and comments without data involving return-to-work prevalence were excluded. We searched the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE, via PubMed), the Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL, via EBSCOhost), and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) databases from their inception till July 26, 2022, and updated the search on June 14, 2023. Specifically, we collected studies reporting data on the return-to-work prevalence among COVID-19 patients after receiving intensive care. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist for Prevalence Studies. Pre-developed standard forms were used for data collection, and pooled prevalence for return-to-work was calculated. Out of the 2221 available records, 42 full texts were reviewed, 20 of which were included in the qualitative synthesis. The number of return-to-work cases reported at 0-3 months, 4-6 months, and 7-12 months were three, 11, and nine, respectively. At 0-3 months, the pooled prevalence was 0.49 (three trials; n = 73; 95% CI: 0.15-0.84; I2 = 82%). At 4-6 months, the pooled prevalence was 0.57 (11 trials; n = 900; 95% CI: 0.40-0.73; I2 = 92%). Finally, at 7-12 months, the pooled prevalence was 0.64 (nine trials; n = 281; 95% CI: 0.50-0.77; I2 = 80%). However, the overall quality of the included studies was low. Based on the results, approximately one-third of COVID-19 patients did not return to work 12 months after receiving intensive care. Given the quality and limitations of the studies, a more detailed and extensive cohort study is required; also, concerned authorities should implement adequate measures in terms of providing integrated job support for this patient population.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: To avoid exposure to SARS-COV-2, healthcare professionals use personal protective equipment (PPE) while treating COVID-19 patients. Prior studies have revealed the adverse effects (AEs) of PPE on healthcare workers (HCWs); however, no review has focused on the AEs of PPE on HCWs in intensive care units (ICUs). This review aimed to identify the AEs of PPE on HCWs working in ICUs during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted. MEDLINE, CINAHL, the World Health Organization (WHO) global literature on COVID-19, and Igaku-chuo-zasshi (a Japanese medical database), Google Scholar, medRxiv, and Health Research Board (HRB) open research were searched from January 25-28, 2021. The extracted data included author(s) name, year of publication, country, language, article title, journal name, publication type, study methodology, population, outcome, and key findings. RESULTS: The initial search identified 691 articles and abstracts. Twenty-five articles were included in the analysis. The analysis comprised four key topics: studies focusing on PPE-related headache, voice disorders, skin manifestations, and miscellaneous AEs of PPE. The majority of AEs for HCWs in ICUs were induced by prolonged use of masks. CONCLUSION: The AEs of PPE among HCWs in ICUs included heat, headaches, skin injuries, chest discomfort, and dyspnea. Studies with a focus on specific diseases were on skin injuries. Moreover, many AEs were induced by prolonged use of masks.
