Dataset Information

A Mixed-Methods Study of Risk Factors and Experiences of Health Care Workers Tested for the Novel Coronavirus in Canada.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The aims of this study were to investigate occupational and non-work-related risk factors of coronavirus disease 2019 among health care workers (HCWs) in Vancouver Coastal Health, British Columbia, Canada, and to examine how HCWs described their experiences.

Methods

This was a matched case-control study using data from online and phone questionnaires with optional open-ended questions completed by HCWs who sought severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 testing between March 2020 and March 2021. Conditional logistic regression and thematic analysis were utilized.

Results

Providing direct care to coronavirus disease 2019 patients during the intermediate cohort period (adjusted odds ratio, 1.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.04 to 3.46) and community exposure to a known case in the late cohort period (adjusted odds ratio, 3.595%; confidence interval, 1.86 to 6.83) were associated with higher infection odds. Suboptimal communication, mental stress, and situations perceived as unsafe were common sources of dissatisfaction.

Conclusions

Varying levels of risk between occupational groups call for wider targeting of infection prevention measures. Strategies for mitigating community exposure and supporting HCW resilience are required.

SUBMITTER: Okpani AI

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9426315 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A Mixed-Methods Study of Risk Factors and Experiences of Health Care Workers Tested for the Novel Coronavirus in Canada.

Okpani Arnold Ikedichi AI Barker Stephen S Lockhart Karen K Grant Jennifer J Delgado-Ron Jorge Andrés JA Zungu Muzimkhulu M Naicker Nisha N Ehrlich Rodney R Yassi Annalee A

Journal of occupational and environmental medicine 20220614 9

<h4>Objective</h4>The aims of this study were to investigate occupational and non-work-related risk factors of coronavirus disease 2019 among health care workers (HCWs) in Vancouver Coastal Health, British Columbia, Canada, and to examine how HCWs described their experiences.<h4>Methods</h4>This was a matched case-control study using data from online and phone questionnaires with optional open-ended questions completed by HCWs who sought severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 testing be ...[more]

PMID: 35704778

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundVirtual care was rapidly integrated into pediatric health services during the COVID-19 pandemic. While virtual care offers many benefits, it is necessary to better understand the experiences of those who receive, deliver, and coordinate virtual care in order to support sustainable, high-quality, and patient-centered health care. To date, methods implemented to evaluate users' experiences of virtual care have been highly variable, making comparison and data synthesis difficult.ObjectiveThis study aims to describe evaluation strategies currently used to understand personal experiences with pediatric virtual care in Canada.MethodsIn this mixed methods environmental scan, we first distributed a web-based questionnaire to clinical, research, and operational leaders delivering and evaluating pediatric virtual care in Canada. The questionnaire collected information about how experiences with virtual care have been or are currently being evaluated and whether these evaluations included the perspectives of children or youth, families, providers, or support staff. Second, respondents were asked to share the questions they used in their evaluations, and a content analysis was performed to identify common question categories. Third, we conducted semistructured interviews to further explore our respondents' evaluation experiences across 4 domains-evaluation approaches, distribution methods, response rates, and lessons learned-and interest in a core set of questions for future evaluations.ResultsThere were 72 respondents to the web-based questionnaire; among those who had conducted an evaluation, we identified 15 unique evaluations, and 14 of those provided a copy of the tools used to evaluate virtual care. These evaluations measured the virtual care experiences of parents or caregivers (n=15, 100%), children or youth (n=11, 73%), health care providers (n=11, 73%), and support staff (n=4, 27%). The most common data collection method used was electronic questionnaires distributed by email. Two respondents used validated tools; the remainder modified existing tools or developed new tools. Content analysis of the 14 submitted questionnaires revealed that the most common questions were about overall participant satisfaction, the comparison of virtual care to in-person care, and whether participants would choose virtual care options in the future. Interview findings indicate respondents frequently relied on methods used by peers and that a standardized, core set of questions to evaluate experiences with virtual care would be helpful to improve evaluation practices and support pediatric health care delivery.ConclusionsAt our institution and elsewhere in Canada, experiences with pediatric virtual care have been evaluated using a variety of methods. A more consistent evaluation approach using standardized tools may enable more regular comparisons of experiences with virtual care and the synthesis of findings across health care settings. In turn, this may better inform our approach to virtual care, improve its integration into health systems, and facilitate sustainable, high-quality, patient-centered care.

Project description:BackgroundHealth systems are increasingly offering patient portals as tools for patients to access their health information with the goal of improving engagement in care. However, understanding health care providers' perspectives on patient portal implementation is crucial.ObjectiveThis study aimed to understand health care providers' experiences of implementing the MyChart patient portal, perspectives about its impact on patient care, clinical practice, and workload, and opportunities for improvement.MethodsUsing an explanatory sequential mixed methods approach, we conducted a web-based questionnaire and semistructured individual interviews with health care providers at a large Canadian community hospital, 6 months after MyChart was first offered to patients. We explored perspectives about the impact of MyChart on clinical practice, workload, and patient care. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis.ResultsIn total, 261 health care providers completed the web-based questionnaire, and 15 also participated in interviews. Participants agreed that patients should have access to their health information through MyChart and identified its benefits such as patients gaining a greater understanding of their own health, which could improve patient safety (160/255, 62%). While many health care providers agreed that MyChart supported better patient care (108/258, 42%), there was limited understanding of features available to patients and expectations for integrating MyChart into clinical routines. Concerns were raised about the potential negative impacts of MyChart on patient-provider relationships because sensitive notes or results could be inappropriately interpreted (109/251, 43%), and a potential increase in workload if additional portal features were introduced. Suggested opportunities for improvement included support for both patients and health care providers to learn about MyChart and establishing guidelines for health care providers on how to communicate information available in MyChart to patients.ConclusionsWhile health care providers acknowledged that MyChart improved patients' access to health information, its implementation introduced some friction and concerns. To reduce the risk of these challenges, health systems can benefit from engaging health care providers early to identify effective patient portal implementation strategies.

Project description:ImportanceHealth care workers exposed to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) could be psychologically stressed.ObjectiveTo assess the magnitude of mental health outcomes and associated factors among health care workers treating patients exposed to COVID-19 in China.Design, settings, and participantsThis cross-sectional, survey-based, region-stratified study collected demographic data and mental health measurements from 1257 health care workers in 34 hospitals from January 29, 2020, to February 3, 2020, in China. Health care workers in hospitals equipped with fever clinics or wards for patients with COVID-19 were eligible.Main outcomes and measuresThe degree of symptoms of depression, anxiety, insomnia, and distress was assessed by the Chinese versions of the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire, the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale, the 7-item Insomnia Severity Index, and the 22-item Impact of Event Scale-Revised, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with mental health outcomes.ResultsA total of 1257 of 1830 contacted individuals completed the survey, with a participation rate of 68.7%. A total of 813 (64.7%) were aged 26 to 40 years, and 964 (76.7%) were women. Of all participants, 764 (60.8%) were nurses, and 493 (39.2%) were physicians; 760 (60.5%) worked in hospitals in Wuhan, and 522 (41.5%) were frontline health care workers. A considerable proportion of participants reported symptoms of depression (634 [50.4%]), anxiety (560 [44.6%]), insomnia (427 [34.0%]), and distress (899 [71.5%]). Nurses, women, frontline health care workers, and those working in Wuhan, China, reported more severe degrees of all measurements of mental health symptoms than other health care workers (eg, median [IQR] Patient Health Questionnaire scores among physicians vs nurses: 4.0 [1.0-7.0] vs 5.0 [2.0-8.0]; P = .007; median [interquartile range {IQR}] Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale scores among men vs women: 2.0 [0-6.0] vs 4.0 [1.0-7.0]; P < .001; median [IQR] Insomnia Severity Index scores among frontline vs second-line workers: 6.0 [2.0-11.0] vs 4.0 [1.0-8.0]; P < .001; median [IQR] Impact of Event Scale-Revised scores among those in Wuhan vs those in Hubei outside Wuhan and those outside Hubei: 21.0 [8.5-34.5] vs 18.0 [6.0-28.0] in Hubei outside Wuhan and 15.0 [4.0-26.0] outside Hubei; P < .001). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed participants from outside Hubei province were associated with lower risk of experiencing symptoms of distress compared with those in Wuhan (odds ratio [OR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.43-0.88; P = .008). Frontline health care workers engaged in direct diagnosis, treatment, and care of patients with COVID-19 were associated with a higher risk of symptoms of depression (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.11-2.09; P = .01), anxiety (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.22-2.02; P < .001), insomnia (OR, 2.97; 95% CI, 1.92-4.60; P < .001), and distress (OR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.25-2.04; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceIn this survey of heath care workers in hospitals equipped with fever clinics or wards for patients with COVID-19 in Wuhan and other regions in China, participants reported experiencing psychological burden, especially nurses, women, those in Wuhan, and frontline health care workers directly engaged in the diagnosis, treatment, and care for patients with COVID-19.

Project description:IntroductionA mental health peer support program was implemented at two reference institutions in Central Catalonia. The program culturally and contextually adapted successful international projects by training people with experience of mental health problems and ensuring their employment in multidisciplinary health care teams. This study explores the influence of peer interventions in mental health on the three groups of participants: peer support workers, service users, and mental health professionals.MethodsA mixed observational method design included pre-, inter-, and post-experimental components and a qualitative description of the impact. The triangulation of the qualitative and quantitative findings showed its coherence and facilitated the understanding of the results. Outcomes and measures were as follows: self-stigma (Self-Stigma Questionnaire); life satisfaction (Scale of Satisfaction with Life); participation in relevant activities (Engagement in Meaningful Activities Survey); personal recovery (Scale-revised Recovery Assessment); occupational performance (Canadian Occupational Performance Measure); and attitudes toward mental illness (Community Attitudes toward Mental Illness).ResultsThe program showed beneficial effects on peer support workers' (PSW) perceptions of occupational performance, specifically on the ability to find work (p = 0.038), work as a peer support worker (p = 0.016), give to the community (p = 0.011), and satisfaction in the ability to find work (p = 0.031). The assessment made by the three groups of participants was very positive: the PSWs showed an increase in self-esteem and a feeling of usefulness; users of the service described the experience as a source of hope and optimism in their recovery process; and professionals described the program as a positive step in their professional growth.DiscussionThe peer-to-peer strategy is a source of hope in the personal recovery process, providing meaning to life for the PSWs while providing an extra source of support to service users in their process of personal recovery. The results offer us lines of improvement for future implementations. PSW's final emphasis has us reflecting on improvements to enhance their own wellness in mental health care services. The findings show the importance of working on life projects and their impact on the recovery process.

Project description:BackgroundBurnout among Health Care workers (HCWs) impacts on provider-patient relations and quality of care. Anova Health Institute (Anova) is a large South African non-profit organization and PEPFAR/USAID implementing partner. We conducted a study among HCWs providing HIV-related services in primary care settings in Johannesburg, South Africa, to examine levels of burnout, understand factors affecting workplace wellbeing, and explore strategies to prevent burnout.MethodsWe used a sequential mixed-method approach. Data were collected between February and April 2022. The first phase consisted of a survey using the Maslach Burnout Inventory Human Services Survey (MBI-HSS) to measure levels of burnout. We then interviewed a subset of survey participants to understand the experiences that may affect wellbeing. We used descriptive statistics to quantify burnout rates for each MBI dimension (emotional exhaustion, personal accomplishment, and depersonalization). Qualitative data analysis was guided by the Job Demands-Resources Framework that explores the interactions between demands and resources in the workplace.ResultsSurvey findings (n = 194) revealed that although depersonalization rates were low at 6%, 21% of participants had high emotional exhaustion and 24% reported low professional accomplishment. Less than half (41%, n = 80) had scores in the high category for any one of the three MBI-HSS dimensions. The MBI-HSS dimensions differed significantly by type of work and job title. Roving positions (HCW working in more than one health facility) were more likely to experience higher emotional exhaustion and lower professional accomplishment. Qualitative findings (n = 25) indicate that a number of job demands, including high workload, inadequate mental health support, and challenging relationships with stakeholders, had a negative effect on HCWs' wellbeing. However, finding meaningfulness in their work, working as a team, and practicing autonomy were experienced as resources that reduced the negative effect of these demands.ConclusionWhile measured burnout syndrome rates were low, various experiences negatively impacted at least one in five HCW. We identified key resources that provided buffering against workplace stressors. We recommend that as well as addressing key drivers of burnout, access to these resources should be fostered, for example by strengthening interventions that offer recognition, and promoting team interactions through social activities and support groups.

Dataset Information

A Mixed-Methods Study of Risk Factors and Experiences of Health Care Workers Tested for the Novel Coronavirus in Canada.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

A Mixed-Methods Study of Risk Factors and Experiences of Health Care Workers Tested for the Novel Coronavirus in Canada.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets