Dataset Information

[COVID-19 vaccination strategy for employees of German hospitals: results of a survey of infection control practitioners within the B-FAST project].

ABSTRACT:

Background and aim

At the beginning of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign in Germany, employees in medical facilities were prioritised for vaccination against SARS-CoV‑2 due to the high risk of exposure and contact with vulnerable groups. Hospitals were therefore encouraged to organise and implement the vaccination of their employees as soon as possible. The aim of the study was to record the practice regarding the vaccination strategy for employees in German hospitals.

Methods

In a self-developed cross-sectional study, infection control practitioners of all German university hospitals as well as non-university hospitals in Lower Saxony and Bavaria were surveyed in March 2021. The data were stratified according to the characteristics of university hospitals and non-university hospitals.

Results

Of 416 invitations sent out, 100 questionnaires (university hospitals: 33; non-university hospitals: 67) were completed. University hospitals reported greater vaccination capacity than non-university hospitals, but a limiting factor was uncertain vaccine supply. Vaccination information campaigns were planned or had already been conducted in 89% of clinics. About two-thirds of the respondents (70%) said they did not plan to conduct antibody tests on vaccinated employees. A follow-up of vaccinated employees to detect possible SARS-CoV‑2 infections by PCR was planned by 41% of the respondents. In case of detection of SARS-CoV‑2 infection, 72% of the respondents had planned further diagnostic procedures.

Discussion

All hospitals were able to achieve rapid implementation of COVID-19 vaccination of their employees. At the time of the survey, there was also much uncertainty regarding the management of breakthrough infections as well as the need for booster vaccinations.

SUBMITTER: Scheithauer S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9589530 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

[COVID-19 vaccination strategy for employees of German hospitals: results of a survey of infection control practitioners within the B-FAST project].

Scheithauer Simone S Bludau Anna A Heinemann Stephanie S Anton Martina M Knolle Percy P

Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz 20221021 12

<h4>Background and aim</h4>At the beginning of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign in Germany, employees in medical facilities were prioritised for vaccination against SARS-CoV‑2 due to the high risk of exposure and contact with vulnerable groups. Hospitals were therefore encouraged to organise and implement the vaccination of their employees as soon as possible. The aim of the study was to record the practice regarding the vaccination strategy for employees in German hospitals.<h4>Methods</h4>In ...[more]

PMID: 36269337

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOrganizational health literacy (OHL) describes conditions and measures in healthcare institutions to enable patients to make good health-related decisions. By providing easy access to and appropriate communication of understandable information to use and navigate the facility, healthcare organizations can contribute to strengthening patients' health literacy and self-management. The extent of OHL implementation in German hospitals remains largely unknown. This study aims to fill this gap in our knowledge by investigating OHL-related activities reported by hospital managers.MethodsBetween November and December 2022, we conducted a national online survey among medical, nursing and administrative hospital managers with hospitals that operate more than 50 beds. The data were collected via the health literate health care organization ten item questionnaire (HLHO-10) and supplemented by sociodemographic questions and an open-ended question. We applied variance and correlation analyses to investigate the data.ResultsOf 3,301 invited hospital managers, 371 participated in the survey (response rate 11%). The overall mean score for HLHO-10 was 4.6 (SD = 1.1) on a 7-point Likert scale, indicating a moderate level of OHL implementation. Hospital managers stated that hospitals concentrate on helping patients find their way around and communicating the costs of treatment transparently and clearly; conversely, that active patient participation in the design and evaluation of health information is rare in care settings, and that health information is seldom provided to patients through a range of media. For the practical implementation of the OHL, most hospital managers mentioned activities regarding communication standards, such as providing information materials.ConclusionsGiven their unique position as hubs of human interaction, hospitals provide an ideal opportunity to promote the adoption of OHL. By actively involving patients, hospitals can better tailor their approaches to meet patient needs and preferences. Compared to studies from oncology centres in Germany and 20 Italian hospitals, the average HLHO-10 score of this study is lower. While some aspects of OHL are already embedded in inpatient care, it is imperative that OHL is thoroughly embedded in the hospitals' organizational culture and plays a fundamental role in the daily operations of the institution. This could be done, for instance, by more explicitly addressing the topic of health literacy in staff communication training.

Project description:BackgroundWhile substantial placebo and nocebo effects have been documented in antidepressant clinical trials, physicians' awareness of the nonspecific effects in routine antidepressant treatment remains unclear. The study investigated physicians' beliefs and explanatory models regarding the desired effects and undesired side effects of antidepressants, with specific emphasis on nonspecific effects accounted for by placebo and nocebo mechanisms.MethodsAn online survey was conducted among 87 physicians (40.2% psychiatrists, 25.3% neurologists, 24.1% general practitioners, 12.6% internists, 21.8% other). The survey assessed the physician's beliefs in antidepressant effectiveness, as well as 6 explanatory models regarding antidepressant effectiveness and 8 explanatory models for the occurrence of side effects.ResultsMost physicians (89.7%) believed in the effectiveness of antidepressants while acknowledging a considerable role of the placebo effect by attributing around 40% of the total effects to nonspecific factors. For both antidepressant effectiveness and the occurrence of side effects, pharmacological effects were rated as most important (93.1% and 80.5% agreement), but physicians also attributed a substantial role to the patients' expectations (63.2% and 58.6%) and experiences (60.9% and 56.3%). Concerning the physician's own role in promoting nonspecific effects in antidepressant effectiveness, highest endorsements were found for the quality of the physician-patient-relationship (58.6%) and own expectations (41.4%). When asked about side effects, fewer participants agreed that informing the patient about known side effects (25.2%) or the physicians' expectations themselves (17.2%) could induce side effects.ConclusionPhysicians, when prescribing antidepressants, are generally open towards nonspecific treatment mechanisms. However, they consider their own influence as less important than the patient's side, especially when it comes to the explanation of unwanted side effects. Awareness of the possible beneficial as well as malicious role of nonspecific mechanisms should be fostered as the first step towards optimizing antidepressant treatment by promoting placebo while avoiding nocebo effects.

Project description:BackgroundThere are several international guidelines on oxytocin regimens for induction and augmentation of labour, but no agreement on a standardised regimen in Germany. This study collated and reviewed the oxytocin regimens used for labour augmentation in university hospitals, with the long-term aim of contributing to the development of a national clinical guideline.MethodsGermany has 34 university hospital compounds, representing 39 maternity units. In this observational study we asked units to provide standard operational procedures on oxytocin augmentation during labour or provide the details in a structured survey. Data were collected on the dosage of oxytocin, type and volume of solutions used, indications and contraindications for use and discontinuation, case-specific administration, and on who developed the procedures. Findings were analysed descriptively.ResultsA total of 35 (90%) units participated in this study. Standard operating procedures were available in 24 units (69%), seven units (20%) did not have procedures and information was missing from four units (11%). Midwives participated in the development of standard operating procedures in 15 units (43%). Infusions were most commonly prepared using six units of oxytocin in 500 ml 0.9% normal saline solution (12 mU/ml). The infusions were started at 120 mU/hour and increased by 120 mU/hour at 20-min intervals up to a maximum dosage of 1200 mU/hour. The most common indication for use was delayed progress in labour. Infusions were stopped when uterine contractions became hypertonic and/or the fetal heart rate showed signs of distress. Most of the practices described aligned with international guidance. All units used reduced oxytocin dosages for women with a history of previous caesareans section, as recommended in the international guidelines, and restrictive use was advised in multiparous women. The main difference between units related to combined use of amniotomy and oxytocin, recommended by three guidelines but used in only four maternity units (11%).ConclusionsWhile there was considerable variation in the oxytocin augmentation procedures, most but not all practices used in these 35 German maternity units were comparable. Establishing a national guideline on the criteria for and administration of oxytocin for augmentation of labour would eliminate the observed differences and minimise risk of administration and medication error.

Project description:Background and research questionIn case of events such as a cyber attack or a mass casualty incident, ad hoc measures have to be taken in hospitals. As part of the critical infrastructure, hospitals are required by law to prepare, update and exercise alarm and emergency plans for various special situations. The processes and instruments involved for emergency response are defined in the hospital alert and emergency planning. The present study aims to explain with which resources and for which special situations hospitals are prepared.MethodsA prospective, exploratory, anonymous survey of hospitals in Germany was conducted. Hospitals with both internal medicine and surgery departments were included. Out of 2497 hospitals listed in the German Hospital Directory ( www.deutsches-krankenhaus-verzeichnis.de ), 1049 met the inclusion criteria. After correcting for hospital groups with shared administrations, 850 employees were identified and contacted by e‑mail. Quality and risk management managers were asked about resources, risks, and content of their own hospital alert and emergency planning using a standardized questionnaire. The survey was conducted using the online platform EFS Survey (Tivian XI GmbH, Cologne) via www.unipark.de . Access to the survey was via a nonpersonalized hyperlink. Apart from the size and type of hospital surveyed, no data were collected that would allow identification of an individual person.ResultsOf the participating hospitals 45% (n = 43) were primary care hospitals, 24% (n = 23) were specialty care hospitals, 10% (n = 9) were nonuniversity maximum care hospitals, and 21% (n = 20) were university maximum care hospitals. In total 95 hospitals participated in the survey, of which 98% (n = 93) reported having a hospital alert and emergency plan. Preparation for individual scenarios varied widely. Of the participating hospitals 45% (n = 43) reported having been the target of cyber attacks with an emphasis on maximum care hospitals (55%, n = 11 of 20). Technical redundancy for computer systems is available in 67% (n = 63) of participating hospitals, while independent means of communication exist in 50% (n = 47) of hospitals. A physician-staffed crisis and disaster management unit existed in 60% (n = 56) of the surveyed hospitals. At least a part time position for planning issues was installed in 12 hospitals.ConclusionMost participating hospitals are aware of the need for a hospital alert and emergency plan and have various scenario-specific plans in place. Especially mass casualty events, fire and hospital evacuation scenarios are uniformly covered among participating hospitals; however, gaps appear to exist not only for chemical, biological or radionuclear situations but also especially in the area of extreme weather events and infrastructure failures. Only about two thirds of all participating hospitals have contingency plans for water supply and/or heating failures. An important limitation of the study is the comparatively low response rate of 12.9% (n = 95 of 850). While primary care hospitals were underrepresented in the study, 32% of Germany's larger hospitals (> 800 beds) participated. In the future, there is a particular need to engage enough medical staff in the area of hospital alert and emergency planning and refunding of these measures by hospitals.

Project description:Background: Simulation trainings offer the opportunity to replicate parts of or entire processes of medical care in a controlled environment. Some hospitals operate simulation centres dedicated to training their staff. Which organisational factors support or impede the implementation of such units in hospitals? Methods: In an exploratory survey experts and decision makers in German hospitals were interviewed. The answers were evaluated qualitatively in order to identify patterns in argumentation. Among the eleven participants were practitioners heading simulation centres (n=4), managers or executives in charge of finances (n=2), medical directors or head physicians with disciplinary responsibility for medical personnel (n=3), and researchers who deal with simulation trainings in medicine (n=2). The interview partners were guaranteed confidentiality in order to allow for them to speak freely about the obstacles and weaknesses in their respective organisations. Results: The interviewees showed a very heterogeneous picture of the simulation trainings in their respective hospitals in terms of content as well as target groups. Asked about purpose and benefit of simulation centres, subgroups of the interviewees gave various arguments. Financing is comprised of subsidies, fees from external participants, and of vocational training budgets. Several obstacles for the implementation were mentioned such as insufficient error culture, deficient interaction of quality and risk management, high equipment costs, or staffing levels that are too low to schedule entire teams for vocational trainings. Conclusions: Patterns in argumentation could be identified that support the implementation and operation of simulation centres in hospitals. Yet strikingly enough there were no coherent arguments i.e. there was no uniform reasoning of aim and purpose of simulation centres. Furthermore, the survey indicated the need to approach quality- and risk management more holistically wherefore simulation centres could offer laboratory environments. All in all, the survey indicates that the assessment of success and economic benefits of simulation centres haven't yet been examined thoroughly.

Dataset Information

[COVID-19 vaccination strategy for employees of German hospitals: results of a survey of infection control practitioners within the B-FAST project].

Background and aim

Methods

Results

Discussion

Publications

[COVID-19 vaccination strategy for employees of German hospitals: results of a survey of infection control practitioners within the B-FAST project].

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets