RESUMO
BackgroundThe Covid-19 pandemic has placed unprecedented pressure on healthcare systems and workers around the world. Such pressures may impact on working conditions, psychological wellbeing and perception of safety. In spite of this, no study has assessed the relationship between safety attitudes and psychological outcomes. Moreover, only limited studies have examined the relationship between personal characteristics and psychological outcomes during Covid-19. MethodsFrom 22nd March 2020 to 18th June 2020, healthcare workers from the United Kingdom, Poland, and Singapore were invited to participate using a self-administered questionnaire comprising the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ), Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) to evaluate safety culture, burnout and anxiety/depression. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine predictors of burnout, anxiety and depression. ResultsOf 3,537 healthcare workers who participated in the study, 2,364 (67%) screened positive for burnout, 701 (20%) for anxiety, and 389 (11%) for depression. Significant predictors of burnout included patient-facing roles: doctor (OR 2.10; 95% CI 1.49-2.95), nurse (OR 1.38; 95% CI 1.04-1.84), and other clinical (OR 2.02; 95% CI 1.45-2.82); being redeployed (OR 1.27; 95% CI 1.02-1.58), bottom quartile SAQ score (OR 2.43; 95% CI 1.98-2.99), anxiety (OR 4.87; 95% CI 3.92-6.06) and depression (OR 4.06; 95% CI 3.04-5.42). Factors significantly protective for burnout included being tested for SARS-CoV-2 (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.51-0.82) and top quartile SAQ score (OR 0.30; 95% CI 0.22-0.40). Significant factors associated with anxiety and depression, included burnout, gender, safety attitudes and job role. ConclusionOur findings demonstrate a significant burden of burnout, anxiety, and depression amongst healthcare workers. A strong association was seen between SARS-CoV-2 testing, safety attitudes, gender, job role, redeployment and psychological state. These findings highlight the importance of targeted support services for at risk groups and proactive SARS-CoV-2 testing of healthcare workers.
RESUMO
IntroductionCovid-19 has placed an unprecedented demand on healthcare systems worldwide. A positive safety culture is associated with improved patient safety and in turn patient outcomes. To date, no study has evaluated the impact of Covid-19 on safety culture. MethodsThe Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ) was used to investigate safety culture at a large UK teaching hospital during Covid-19. Findings were compared with baseline data from 2017. Incident reporting from the year preceding the pandemic was also examined. ResultsSignificant increased were seen in SAQ scores of doctors and other clinical staff, there was no change in the nursing group. During Covid-19, on univariate regression analysis, female gender, age 40-49 years, non-white ethnicity, and nursing job role were all associated with lower SAQ scores. Training and support for redeployment were associated with higher SAQ scores. On multivariate analysis, non-disclosed gender (-0.13), non-disclosed ethnicity (-0.11), nursing role (-0.15), and support (0.29) persisted to significance. A significant decrease (p<0.003) was seen in error reporting after the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic. DiscussionThis is the first study to report SAQ during Covid-19 and compare with baseline. Differences in SAQ scores were observed during Covid-19 between professional groups and compared to baseline. Reductions in incident reporting were also seen. These changes may reflect perception of risk, changes in volume or nature of work. High-quality support for redeployed staff may be associated with improved safety perception during future pandemics. WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ON THE SUBJECTO_LISafety culture is associated with patient safety and outcomes C_LIO_LIThis is the first study to investigate safety culture during the Covid-19 pandemic C_LIO_LIThis study uses the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ) and Datix incident reporting data to investigate determinants of safety climate during the Covid-19 pandemic. C_LIO_LISafety climate is context specific, this study is strengthened by the availability of benchmarking data from before the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic. C_LIO_LISignificant differences in SAQ scores between professional groups were observed during Covid-19. C_LIO_LIGender, ethnicity and job role were significant determinants of safety attitudes. C_LIO_LISupport during redeployment was associated with improved safety attitudes. C_LIO_LIThe number of incidents that were reported reduced significantly during Covid-19, although the number of events leading to harm remained constant. C_LI
RESUMO
BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic presents unparalleled challenges for the delivery of safe and effective care. In response, many health systems have chosen to restrict access to surgery and reallocate resources; the impact on the provision of surgical services has been profound, with huge numbers of patient now awaiting surgery at the risk of avoidable harm. The challenge now is how do hospitals transition from the current pandemic mode of operation back to business as usual, and ensure that all patients receive equitable, timely and high-quality surgical care during all phases of the public health crisis. Aims and MethodsThis case study takes carotid endarterectomy as a time-sensitive surgical procedure and simulates 400 compartmental demand modelling scenarios for managing surgical capacity in the UK for two years following the pandemic. ResultsA total of 7,69 patients will require carotid endarterectomy. In the worst-case scenario, if no additional capacity is provided on resumption of normal service, the waiting list may never be cleared, and no patient will receive surgery within the 2-week target; potentially leading to >1000 avoidable strokes. If surgical capacity is doubled after 1-month of resuming normal service, it will still take more than 6-months to clear the backlog, and 30.8% of patients will not undergo surgery within 2-weeks, with an average wait of 20.3 days for the proceeding 2 years. ConclusionsThis case study for carotid endarterectomy has shown that every healthcare system is going to have to make difficult decisions for balancing human and capital resources against the needs of patients. It has demonstrated that the timing and size of this effort will critically influence the ability of these systems to return to their baseline and continue to provide the highest quality care for all. The failure to sustainably increase surgical capacity early in the post-COVID-19 period will have significant long-term negative impacts on patients and is likely to result in avoidable harm.
