Validation of a French-language version of TeamSTEPPS® T-TPQ and T-TAQ questionnaires.

Teamwork training and evaluation are essential to enhance safety and quality of care. The lack of the psychometric testing of the TeamSTEPPS® Teamwork Attitudes Questionnaire (T-TAQ) and Teamwork Perceptions Questionnaire (T-TPQ) across different language and cultural settings has questioned their widespread use because such attitudes and perceptions are highly subjective and context-bound. The present study aims to translate the T-TAQ and T-TPQ into the French language and validate the psychometric properties of the two questionnaires in a public health context. A forward-backward translation process, panel reviewing, and pilot testing in two rounds were followed to develop the French versions. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Cronbach's alpha were used to examine the factor structure and internal consistency, whereas two-way mixed Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) was performed to assess test-retest reliability. A total of 235 healthcare professionals in the French-speaking community of Belgium completed the T-TAQ and T-TPQ. After two to four weeks, 102 participants took part in the second round. Despite good fit indices as revealed by the CFA and Cronbach's alpha from 0.53 to 0.75 for the five dimensions of the T-TAQ and 0.76 to 0.79 for the T-TPQ, the squared correlations among the constructs were higher than the average variance extracted. Two-way mixed ICCs indicated fair to good test-retest reliability for all the five constructs of the two questionnaires, except the leadership scale of the T-TAQ. The French-language versions of the T-TAQ and T-TPQ were semantically equivalent and culturally relevant with adequate test-retest reliability as compared to the English versions. These two instruments might be used to capture the overall attitude toward teamwork and perceptions of team skills and behaviors. Yet, further research is advisable to refine the scales to establish the discriminant validity of the different dimensions and discriminative power of the instruments.

Professionals' treatment goals for long-term benzodiazepine and Z-drugs management: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Benzodiazepines and Z-drugs (BZD/Z) are frequently prescribed for longer than recommended. Through their interactions with patients taking BZD/Z, primary care and mental health professionals play a key role in the management of this medication. AIM: To explore how primary care and mental health care professionals set treatment goals with users of long-term BZD/Z. DESIGN & SETTING: A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with professionals from mental health, addiction care, and primary care practices in Belgium. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews were conducted, online and in person, with 24 professionals working in mental health and primary care. Inductive thematic content analysis was performed. RESULTS: Seven themes were identified from the analysis. Professionals tended not to use the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-V) standard to diagnose a BZD/Z substance use disorder. They described criteria based on their experience. They identified diverse types of patients that influence their choice of treatment goals. Professionals appeared to position themselves according to their own treatment goals for their patients, either by promoting the goal of abstinence or harm reduction. Some of them reported feeling trapped into continuing to prescribe and considered BZD/Z withdrawal to be difficult. Some were afraid to engage in a conversation that might break the bond of trust with the patient. Few professionals mentioned patient participation in the treatment goal setting. They asked for targeted withdrawal recommendations, perceiving the current recommendations to be too broad. CONCLUSION: Whether primary care or mental health care professionals are more in favour of a total abstinence or a harm reduction approach to BZD/Z, professionals should be guided towards greater patient participation in setting and evaluating goals with patients taking BZD/Z.

Vaccine hesitancy for the COVID-19 vaccine booster dose among nursing home staff fully vaccinated with the primary vaccination course in Belgium.

In Belgium, nursing home (NH) staff (NHS) and residents were prioritised for the initial COVID-19 vaccination and successive booster doses. The vaccination campaign for the first booster started in September 2021 in Belgian NH. Our first study about vaccine hesitancy towards the COVID-19 vaccine in Belgian NHS already showed a degree of fear for the primary vaccination course (T1). This new study aims to evaluate vaccine hesitancy to get the first booster (T2) in a population of fully vaccinated (with two doses) NHS. A random stratified sample of NHS who received the primary vaccination course (N = 954) completed an online questionnaire on COVID-19 booster hesitancy (between 25/11/2021 and 22/01/2022). NHS who hesitated or refused the booster were asked for the main reason for their hesitation/refusal. Overall, 21.0 % of our population hesitated before, were still hesitating or refused the booster, NHS that were not hesitant at T1 being 5.7 times less likely to hesitate to get the first booster dose (Adjusted OR 0.179, 95 % CI: 0.120, 0.267). Although there was a slight reduction (23.5 % to 20.1 %) in the proportion of NHS who hesitated/refused vaccination at T1 compared to T2 (p = 0.034), the fear of unknown effects was the principal reason for hesitation/refusal, already mentioned in our first study. NHS were not reassured concerning their initial fears. Given the likelihood that booster vaccinations will be necessary over the coming years, a communication strategy specific to NHS should be implemented.

From prescribing dilemma to knowledge in practice: The ontological politics of benzodiazepines and Z-drugs.

The discrepancy between official guidelines and clinical practice is hardly more pronounced than in the case of benzodiazepines and Z-drugs, also known as benzodiazepine receptor agonists (BZRA). Using social-constructionist positioning theory, we unravel how health care professionals deal with the dilemma of prescribing this medication. Our results reveal a prescribing spectrum that is discursively organised around four different storylines used by professionals. The storylines are organised along three axes that are related to a) prescribers' opinions on prescribing and the negotiation of the related risks, b) the power dynamics between provider and patient in the prescribing process and c) the rhetorical use of arguments. The discerned storylines allow us to explore the emotional and moral side of prescribing and demarcate clinical mindlines -internalised tacit guidelines-that professionals adhere to when they prescribe. By relying on Annemarie Mol's conceptualisation of ontological politics, we explain how these storylines enact multiple versions of this class of medication and justify seemingly contradictory prescribing practices.

Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among Belgian nursing home residents and staff during the primary COVID-19 vaccination campaign.

BACKGROUND: Nursing home residents (NHR) and staff have been disproportionally affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and were therefore prioritised in the COVID-19 vaccination strategy. However, frail older adults, like NHR, are known to have decreased antibody responses upon vaccination targeting other viral antigens. OBJECTIVES: As real-world data on vaccine responsiveness, we assessed the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among Belgian NHR and staff during the primary COVID-19 vaccination campaign. METHODS: In total, we tested 1629 NHR and 1356 staff across 69 Belgian NHs for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG antibodies using rapid tests. We collected socio-demographic and COVID-19-related medical data through questionnaires. Sampling occurred between 1 February and 24 March 2021, in a randomly sampled population that received none, one or two BNT162b2 vaccine doses. RESULTS: We found that during the primary vaccination campaign with 59% of the study population fully vaccinated, 74% had SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Among fully vaccinated individuals only, fewer residents tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (77%) than staff (98%), suggesting an impaired vaccine-induced antibody response in the elderly, with lowest seroprevalences observed among infection naïve residents. COVID-19 vaccination status and previous SARS-CoV-2 infection were predictors for SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity. Alternatively, age ≥ 80 years old, the presence of comorbidities and high care dependency predicted SARS-CoV-2 seronegativity in NHR. CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the need for further monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 immunity upon vaccination in the elderly population, as their impaired humoral responses could imply insufficient protection against COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was retrospectively registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04738695).

Prevalence, incidence and longevity of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 among primary healthcare providers in Belgium: a prospective cohort study with 12 months of follow-up.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence, incidence and longevity of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 among primary healthcare providers (PHCPs). DESIGN: Prospective cohort study with 12 months of follow-up. SETTING: Primary care in Belgium. PARTICIPANTS: Any general practitioner (GP) working in primary care in Belgium and any other PHCP from the same GP practice who physically manages (examines, tests, treats) patients were eligible. A convenience sample of 3648 eligible PHCPs from 2001 GP practices registered for this study (3044 and 604 to start in December 2020 and January 2021, respectively). 3390 PHCPs (92,9%) participated in their first testing time point (2820 and 565, respectively) and 2557 PHCPs (70,1%) in the last testing time point (December 2021). INTERVENTIONS: Participants were asked to perform a rapid serological test targeting IgM and IgG against the receptor binding domain of SARS-CoV-2 and to complete an online questionnaire at each of maximum eight testing time points. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The prevalence, incidence and longevity of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 both after natural infection and after vaccination. RESULTS: Among all participants, 67% were women and 77% GPs. Median age was 43 years. The seroprevalence in December 2020 (before vaccination availability) was 15.1% (95% CI 13.5% to 16.6%), increased to 84.2% (95% CI 82.9% to 85.5%) in March 2021 (after vaccination availability) and reached 93.9% (95% CI 92.9% to 94.9%) in December 2021 (during booster vaccination availability and fourth (delta variant dominant) COVID-19 wave). Among not (yet) vaccinated participants the first monthly incidence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 was estimated to be 2.91% (95% CI 1.80% to 4.01%). The longevity of antibodies is higher in PHCPs with self-reported COVID-19 infection. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that occupational health measures provided sufficient protection when managing patients. High uptake of vaccination resulted in high seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in PHCPs in Belgium. Longevity of antibodies was supported by booster vaccination and virus circulation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04779424.

Vaccine Hesitancy towards the COVID-19 Vaccine in a Random National Sample of Belgian Nursing Home Staff Members.

In Belgium, nursing home staff (NHS) and residents were prioritised for COVID-19 vaccination. However, vaccine hesitancy may have impacted vaccination rates. In this study, a random stratified sample of NHS (N = 1142), vaccinated and unvaccinated, completed an online questionnaire on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (between 31 July and 15 November 2021). NHS who hesitated or refused the vaccine were asked for the main reason for their hesitation/refusal. Those who hesitated, but eventually accepted vaccination, were asked why they changed their minds. Overall, 29.5% of all respondents hesitated before accepting vaccination, were still hesitating, or refused vaccination. Principal reasons were fear of unknown future effects (55.1% of vaccinated participants that hesitated and 19.5% who refused), fear of side-effects (12.7% of vaccinated participants that hesitated and 12.2% who refused), and mistrust in vaccination (10.5% of vaccinated participants that hesitated and 12.2% who refused). For vaccinated participants who hesitated initially, protecting the vulnerable was the main reason they changed their minds. Given this degree of fear and proposals to mandate vaccination among healthcare workers, communicating with NHS on the safety and efficacy of the vaccine should be prioritised.

Declining Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies among Vaccinated Nursing Home Residents and Staff Six Months after the Primary BNT162b2 Vaccination Campaign in Belgium: A Prospective Cohort Study.

In the SCOPE study, we monitored SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in a national sample of residents and staff from Belgian nursing homes. Here, we report the seroprevalence among infected and infection-naive residents and staff after the primary COVID-19 vaccination campaign. Among 1554 vaccinated nursing home residents and 1082 vaccinated staff from 69 nursing homes in Belgium, we assessed the proportion having SARS-CoV-2 antibodies approximately two (April 2021), four (June 2021), and six months (August 2021) after a two-dose regimen of the BNT162b2 vaccine. We measured the seroprevalence using SARS-CoV-2 antibody rapid tests and collected socio-demographic and COVID-19 medical data using an online questionnaire. Two months after vaccination (baseline), we found a seroprevalence of 91% (95% CI: 89-93) among vaccinated residents and 99% (95% CI: 98-99) among vaccinated staff. Six months after vaccination, the seroprevalence significantly decreased to 68% (95% CI: 64-72) among residents and to 89% (95% CI; 86-91) among staff (p < 0.001). The seroprevalence was more likely to decrease among infection-naive residents, older residents, or residents with a high care dependency level. These findings emphasize the need for close monitoring of nursing home residents, as a substantial part of this population fails to mount a persistent antibody response after BNT162b2 vaccination.

Efficacy of a Short Role-Play Training on Breaking Bad News in the Emergency Department.

INTRODUCTION: Breaking bad news (BBN) in the emergency department (ED) represents a challenging and stressful situation for physicians. Many medical students and residents feel stressed and uncomfortable with such situations because of insufficient training. Our randomized controlled study aimed to assess the efficacy of a four-hour BBN simulation-based training on perceived self-efficacy, the BBN process, and communication skills. METHODS: Medical students and residents were randomized into a 160-hour ED clinical rotation without a formal BBN curriculum (control group [CG], n = 31) or a 156-hour ED clinical rotation and a four-hour BBN simulation-based training (training group [TG], n = 37). Both groups were assessed twice: once at the beginning of the rotation (pre-test) and again four weeks later. Assessments included a BBN evaluation via a simulation with two actors playing family members and the completion of a questionnaire on self-efficacy. Two blinded raters assessed the BBN process with the SPIKES (a delivery protocol for delivering bad news) competence form and communication skills with the modified BBN Assessment Schedule. RESULTS: Group-by-time effects adjusted by study year revealed a significant improvement in TG as compared with CG on self-efficacy (P < 0.001), the BBN process (P < 0.001), and communication skills (P < 0.001). TG showed a significant gain regarding the BBN process (+33.3%, P < 0.001). After the training, students with limited clinical experience prior to the rotation showed BBN performance skills equal to that of students in the CG who had greater clinical experience. CONCLUSION: A short BBN simulation-based training can be added to standard clinical rotations. It has the potential to significantly improve self-efficacy, the BBN process, and communication skills.