Project description:AimsTo synthesize available data on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical supervision practices of healthcare workers and students in healthcare settings.DesignA quantitative rapid review of the literature.Data sourcesA search of MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library and Scopus for English language papers published between December 2019 (initial onset of the pandemic) to March 2021.Review methodsUsing the World Health Organization and Cochrane guidelines for rapid reviews, following an identification of relevant papers and data extraction, a narrative synthesis approach was used to develop themes.ResultsEight studies met the inclusion criteria. Four themes identified from data synthesis were nature and extent of disruptions to clinical supervision, unmet need for psychological support, supervisors also need support and unpacking telesupervision. Findings highlight the extent and nature of disruption to clinical supervision at the point of care. Further information on factors that facilitate high-quality telesupervision have come to light.ConclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic has placed tremendous burden on healthcare workers compromising their own health and well-being. It is essential to restore effective clinical supervision practices at the point of care, so as to enhance patient, healthcare worker and organizational outcomes into the post-COVID-19 pandemic period.ImpactThis review has provided initial evidence on the adverse impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical supervision of healthcare workers and students at the point of care. Available evidence indicates the urgent need to restore effective and high-quality clinical supervision practices in health settings. The review has highlighted a paucity of studies in this area, calling for further high-quality studies.
Project description:Given the longevity of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is important to address the perceptions and experiences associated with the progression of the pandemic. This narrative can inform future strategies aimed at mitigating moral distress, injury, and chronic stress that restores resilience and well-being of HCWs. In this context, a longitudinal survey design was undertaken to explore how health care workers are experiencing the COVID-19 pandemic over time. A qualitative design was employed to analyze the open ended survey responses using a thematic analysis approach. All physicians and staff at an academic health science centre in Toronto, Ontario, Canada were invited to participate in the survey. The majority of survey respondents were nurses and physicians, followed by researchers/scientists, administrative assistants, laboratory technicians, managers, social workers, occupational therapists, administrators, clerks and medical imaging technologists. The inductive analysis revealed three themes that contributed to moral tensions and injury: 1) experiencing stress and distress with staffing shortages, increased patient care needs, and visitor restrictions; 2) feeling devalued and invisible due to lack of support and inequities; and 3) polarizing anti- and pro-public health measures and incivility. Study findings highlight the spectrum, magnitude, and severity of the emotional, psychological, and physical stress leading to moral injury experienced by the healthcare workforce. Our findings also point to continued, renewed, and new efforts in enhancing both individual and collective moral resilience to mitigate current and prevent future moral tensions and injury.
Project description:BackgroundIn the wake of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, demand for deep cleaning and environmental services workers grew exponentially. Although there is extant literature examining the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare workers, less emphasis has been placed on environmental services workers, who play an equally important front-line role.AimTo examine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on environmental services workers employed in healthcare settings.MethodsScoping review methodology. A search strategy was developed, in consultation with a medical information specialist, employing various combinations of the keywords [(environmental services worker OR health attendant OR housekeeping) AND (COVID OR coronavirus OR pandemic OR epidemic)]. Four bibliographical databases were searched from inception to 5th July 2022: OVID Medline, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Cochrane Database.ResultsIn total, 24 studies were included in this review. The studies were generally cross-sectional in design. Seroprevalence studies highlighted significantly higher rates of COVID-19 among environmental services workers (housekeeping, cleaning and janitorial staff) compared with other clinical and non-clinical staff in the same institutions. In addition, based on qualitative interviews, environmental services workers experienced greater psychological stress working during the pandemic.ConclusionsEnvironmental services workers were particularly vulnerable to increased work stress and COVID-19 during the pandemic. Health systems need to do more to support these workers. Further research could investigate specific policy and procedural changes to benefit this under-recognized group in the greater healthcare workforce.
Project description:RNA was extracted from whole blood of subjects collected in Tempus tubes prior to COVID-19 mRNA booster vaccination. D01 and D21 correspond to samples collected at pre-dose 1 and pre-dose 2 respectively. RNA was also extracted from blood collected at indicated time points post-vaccination. DB1, DB2, DB4 and DB7 correspond to booster day 1 (pre-booster), booster day 2, booster day 4 and booster day 7 respectively. The case subject experienced cardiac complication following mRNA booster vaccination. We performed gene expression analysis of case versus controls over time.
Project description:IntroductionPart of the patients infected by COVID-19 have at least one lasting sequel of the disease and may be framed in the concept of long Covid. These sequelae can compromise the quality of life, increase dependence on other people for personal care, impair the performance of activities of daily living, thus compromising work activities and harming the health of the worker. This protocol aims to critically synthesize the scientific evidence on the effects of Covid-19 among workers and its impact on their health status and professional life.MethodSearches will be performed in MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library Central, Web of Science, Scopus, LILACS and Epistemonikos. Included studies will be those that report the prevalence of long-term signs and symptoms in workers and/or the impact on their health status and work performance, which may be associated with Covid-19 infection. Data extraction will be conducted by 3 reviewers independently. For data synthesis, a results report will be carried out, based on the main outcome of this study.DiscussionThis review will provide evidence to support health surveillance to help decision makers (i.e. healthcare providers, stakeholders and governments) regarding long-term Covid.Trial registrationPROSPERO registration number: CRD42021288120. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021288120.
Project description:Background: Although healthcare workers (HCWs) in long-term care (LTC) have experienced significant emotional and psychological distress throughout the pandemic, little is known about their unique experiences. Objective: This scoping review synthesizes existing research on the experiences of HCWs in LTC during the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: Following Arksey and O'Malley's framework, data published between March 2020 to June 2022, were extracted from six databases. Results: Among 3808 articles screened, 40 articles were included in the final analysis. Analyses revealed three interrelated themes: carrying the load (moral distress); building pressure and burning out (emotional exhaustion); and working through it (a sense of duty to care). Conclusion: Given the impacts of the pandemic on both HCW wellbeing and patient care, every effort must be made to address the LTC workforce crisis and evaluate best practices for supporting HCWs experiencing mental health concerns during and post-COVID-19.
Project description:Purpose of reviewWe aim to provide quantitative evidence on the psychological impact of epidemic/pandemic outbreaks (i.e., SARS, MERS, COVID-19, ebola, and influenza A) on healthcare workers (HCWs).Recent findingsForty-four studies are included in this review. Between 11 and 73.4% of HCWs, mainly including physicians, nurses, and auxiliary staff, reported post-traumatic stress symptoms during outbreaks, with symptoms lasting after 1-3 years in 10-40%. Depressive symptoms are reported in 27.5-50.7%, insomnia symptoms in 34-36.1%, and severe anxiety symptoms in 45%. General psychiatric symptoms during outbreaks have a range comprised between 17.3 and 75.3%; high levels of stress related to working are reported in 18.1 to 80.1%. Several individual and work-related features can be considered risk or protective factors, such as personality characteristics, the level of exposure to affected patients, and organizational support. Empirical evidence underlines the need to address the detrimental effects of epidemic/pandemic outbreaks on HCWs' mental health. Recommendations should include the assessment and promotion of coping strategies and resilience, special attention to frontline HCWs, provision of adequate protective supplies, and organization of online support services.
Project description:Personal protective equipment (PPE) can potentiate heat stress, which may have a negative impact on the wearer's performance, safety and well-being. In view of this, a survey was distributed to healthcare workers (HCWs) required to wear PPE during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in the UK to evaluate perceived levels of heat stress and its consequences. Respondents reported experiencing several heat-related illness symptoms, and heat stress impaired both cognitive and physical performance. The majority of respondents stated that wearing PPE made their job more difficult. These, and additional, responses suggest that modification to current working practices is required urgently to improve the resilience of HCWs to wearing PPE during pandemics.
Project description:BackgroundMore than a year after recovering from COVID-19, a large proportion of individuals, many of whom work in the healthcare sector, still report olfactory dysfunctions. However, olfactory dysfunction was common already before the COVID-19 pandemic, making it necessary to also consider the existing baseline prevalence of olfactory dysfunction. To establish the adjusted prevalence of COVID-19 related olfactory dysfunction, we assessed smell function in healthcare workers who had contracted COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic using psychophysical testing.MethodsParticipants were continuously tested for SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies since the beginning of the pandemic. To assess the baseline rate of olfactory dysfunction in the population and to control for the possibility of skewed recruitment of individuals with prior olfactory dysfunction, consistent SARS-CoV-2 IgG naïve individuals were tested as a control group.ResultsFifteen months after contracting COVID-19, 37% of healthcare workers demonstrated a quantitative reduction in their sense of smell, compared to only 20% of the individuals in the control group. Fifty-one percent of COVID-19-recovered individuals reported qualitative symptoms, compared to only 5% in the control group. In a follow-up study 2.6 years after COVID-19 diagnosis, 24% of all tested recovered individuals still experienced parosmia.ConclusionsIn summary, 65% of healthcare workers experienced parosmia/hyposmia 15 months after contracting COVID-19. When compared to a control group, the prevalence of olfactory dysfunction in the population increased by 41 percentage points. Parosmia symptoms were still lingering two-and-a half years later in 24% of SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals. Given the amount of time between infection and testing, it is possible that the olfactory problems may not be fully reversible in a plurality of individuals.