Fallen angels and forgotten heroes: A descriptive qualitative study exploring the impact of the angel and hero narrative on critical care nurses.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of the labels 'heroes' and 'angels' to describe nurses (and especially critical care nurses) became prevalent. While often well intentioned, the use of these labels may not be the most positive image of nurses and the nursing profession. Critical care nurses have not previously been given the opportunity to provide their perceptions of the angel/hero narrative and the impact this may have on their practice and working environments. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to explore the perspectives of critical care nurses and discover their perceptions about the angel/hero narrative and its impact on their clinical practice, safe working environments, and professional development during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A semistructured qualitative virtual interview study was conducted with critical care nurses from the United Kingdom, Australia, and North America. Digital audio data were transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis of the transcribed data was performed. The COREQ guidelines were used to report the study. FINDINGS: Twenty-three critical care nurses located in the United Kingdom, Australia, and North America participated. Four themes were synthesised: history repeating, gender stereotypes, political pawns, and forgotten heroes. CONCLUSIONS: Critical care nurses did not perceive the hero and angel labels positively. Participants were concerned about unrealistic expectations, potential safety workplace risks, and poor remuneration related to these narratives. Participants perceived that context and intention were important in the interpretation of these narratives; they spoke with pride about their work and called for improved representations of their role, recognition, and work conditions.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on critical care healthcare professionals' work practices and wellbeing: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Burnout and other psychological comorbidities were evident prior to the COVID-19 pandemic for critical care healthcare professionals (HCPs) who have been at the forefront of the health response. Current research suggests an escalation or worsening of these impacts as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to undertake an in-depth exploration of the impact of the evolving COVID-19 pandemic on the wellbeing of HCPs working in critical care. METHODS: This was a qualitative study using online focus groups (n = 5) with critical care HCPs (n = 31, 7 medical doctors and 24 nurses) in 2021: one with United Kingdom-based participants (n = 11) and four with Australia-based participants (n = 20). Thematic analysis of qualitative data from focus groups was performed using Gibbs framework. FINDINGS: Five themes were synthesised: transformation of anxiety and fear throughout the pandemic, the burden of responsibility, moral distress, COVID-19 intruding into all aspects of life, and strategies and factors that sustained wellbeing during the pandemic. Moral distress was a dominant feature, and intrusiveness of the pandemic into all aspects of life was a novel finding. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has adversely impacted critical care HCPs and their work experience and wellbeing. The intrusiveness of the pandemic into all aspects of life was a novel finding. Moral distress was a predominate feature of their experience. Leaders of healthcare organisations should ensure that interventions to improve and maintain the wellbeing of HCPs are implemented.

Critical care health professionals' self-reported needs for wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic: A thematic analysis of survey responses.

BACKGROUND: Critical care healthcare professionals are a key part of any pandemic response and are at an increased risk for physical and psychological harm, yet their self-reported suggestions to ameliorate the negative effects of pandemics on their wellbeing have rarely been sought. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to explore and interpret themes of critical care healthcare professionals' responses to the question 'What do you think could assist your wellbeing during the COVID-19 crisis?' METHODS: A descriptive study using an online survey, performed in April 2020, investigating pandemic preparedness and psychological burden during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic among critical care professionals was carried out. Informal snowball sampling was used. Thematic analysis of qualitative data from an open-ended survey item was informed by Braun and Clark. FINDINGS: Eighty percent (2387/3770) of respondents completed the open-ended survey. Three themes were generated from the synthesis: adequate resourcing for the role; consistent, clear information, and prioritised communications; and the need for genuine kindness and provision of support for healthcare professional wellbeing. CONCLUSIONS: There is merit for considering the perceptions, concerns, and suggestions of critical care clinicians during a pandemic. Suggestions included simple measures to maintain physical and mental health, clear messaging, consistent information, trust in health and political leaders, supportive working environments, specific training, and allowances for personal circumstances. This information is important for health and political leaders and policy makers to implement strategies to reduce the burden associated with delivering care in the context of a pandemic.

Australian critical care nurses' knowledge, preparedness, and experiences of managing SARS-COV-2 and COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has again highlighted the crucial role of healthcare workers in case management, disease surveillance, policy development, and healthcare education and training. The ongoing pandemic demonstrates the importance of having an emergency response plan that accounts for the safety of frontline healthcare workers, including those working in critical care settings. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to explore Australian critical care nurses' knowledge, preparedness, and experiences of managing patients diagnosed with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection (SARS-CoV-2) and COVID-19. METHODS: An exploratory cross-sectional study of Australian critical care nurses was conducted between June and September 2020. An anonymised online survey was sent to Australian College of Critical Care Nurses' members to collect information about their knowledge, preparedness, and experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise and report data. RESULTS: A total of 157 critical care nurses participated, with 138 fully complete surveys analysed. Most respondents reported 'good' to 'very good' level of knowledge about COVID-19 and obtained up-to-date COVID-19 information from international and local sources. Regarding managing patients with COVID-19, 82.3% felt sufficiently prepared at the time of data collection, and 93.4% had received specific education, training, or instruction. Most participants were involved in assessing (89.3%) and treating (92.4%) patients with COVID-19. Varying levels of concerns about SARS-CoV-2 infection were expressed by respondents, and 55.7% thought the pandemic had increased their workload. The most frequent concerns expressed by participants were a lack of appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) and fear of PPE shortage. CONCLUSIONS: While most nurses expressed sufficient preparedness for managing COVID-19 patients, specific education had been undertaken and experiential learning was evident. Fears of insufficient or lack of appropriate PPE made the response more difficult for nurses and the community. Preparedness and responsiveness are critical to successful management of the COVID-19 pandemic and future outbreaks of emerging infectious diseases.

Impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on critical care healthcare workers' depression, anxiety, and stress levels.

AIM: The aim of the study was to determine levels of depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms and factors associated with psychological burden amongst critical care healthcare workers in the early stages of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. METHODS: An anonymous Web-based survey distributed in April 2020. All healthcare workers employed in a critical care setting were eligible to participate. Invitations to the survey were distributed through Australian and New Zealand critical care societies and social media platforms. The primary outcome was the proportion of healthcare workers who reported moderate to extremely severe scores on the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale-21 (DASS-21). RESULTS: Of the 3770 complete responses, 3039 (80.6%) were from Australia. A total of 2871 respondents (76.2%) were women; the median age was 41 years. Nurses made up 2269 (60.2%) of respondents, with most (2029 [53.8%]) working in intensive care units. Overall, 813 (21.6%) respondents reported moderate to extremely severe depression, 1078 (28.6%) reported moderate to extremely severe anxiety, and 1057 (28.0%) reported moderate to extremely severe stress scores. Mean ± standard deviation values of DASS-21 depression, anxiety, and stress scores amongst woman vs men was as follows: 8.0 ± 8.2 vs 7.1 ± 8.2 (p = 0.003), 7.2 ± 7.5 vs 5.0 ± 6.7 (p < 0.001), and 14.4 ± 9.6 vs 12.5 ± 9.4 (p < 0.001), respectively. After adjusting for significant confounders, clinical concerns associated with higher DASS-21 scores included not being clinically prepared (ß = 4.2, p < 0.001), an inadequate workforce (ß = 2.4, p = 0.001), having to triage patients owing to lack of beds and/or equipment (ß = 2.6, p = 0.001), virus transmission to friends and family (ß = 2.1, p = 0.009), contracting coronavirus disease 2019 (ß = 2.8, p = 0.011), being responsible for other staff members (ß = 3.1, p < 0.001), and being asked to work in an area that was not in the respondents' expertise (ß = 5.7, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In this survey of critical care healthcare workers, between 22 and 29% of respondents reported moderate to extremely severe depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms, with women reporting higher scores than men. Although female gender appears to play a role, modifiable factors also contribute to psychological burden and should be studied further.