Psychosocial ergonomics of the workplace of medical staff during the COVID-19 pandemic in three risk's dimensions: working hours, violence and the use of psychoactive drugs-a prospective pilot study.

Introduction: Workplace ergonomics should also be considered in the context of psychosocial factors affecting the worker, which have a real impact on occupational risk. The present study examined psychosocial risk factors in medical personnel in three domains: working hours, violence and substance abuse. Methods: The purpose of the present study is to assess the current state of psychosocial ergonomics of medical personnels by measuring occupational risks in the domains of: working hours, violence and psychoactive substance abuse. The survey is consisted of two parts: socio-demographic information of participants and participants' assements of psychosocial risk factors. Results: In more than half of the respondents (52%), increased risk was identified in the domain of working hours. Nearly half of the respondents (49.6%) have an identified high risk in the domain of violence, and more than half of the respondents (52%) are at high risk in the domain of psychoactive substance abuse. Discussion: Our findings show that the present psychosocial ergonomics of the Polish health system must be improved. The COVID-19 pandemic has been a compelling test to assess the current state. Our findings highlighted the fact that HCWs often worked overtime and that many cases of workplace violence and substance abuse were reported.

Assessment of selected psychosocial risk factors: stress, job burnout, and bullying in the case of medical staff as part of workplace ergonomics during the COVID-19 pandemic-A prospective pilot study.

Background: The purpose of the pilot study conducted by the authors was to assess occupational risk in selected areas of psychosocial risk factors among health professions in a pilot study. Medical staff working in the healthcare sector experience stress, job burnout and bullying on a daily basis. Monitoring occupational risks in the above areas provides an opportunity to take appropriate preventive measures. Methods: The prospective online survey included 143 health care workers from various professional groups. Eighteen participants did not complete the survey, and the results of 125 participants were eventually included in the analysis. The study used health and safety questionnaires in the healthcare sector, which are not widely used as screening tools in Poland. Results: The following statistical methods were performed in the study: the Mann-Whitney test, Kruskal-Wallis test, Dunn's test. In addition, multivariate analysis was performed. The results obtained in the study indicate that the questionnaires used in the study can be widely used by employers or occupational medicine as screening tools. Conclusions: Our findings show that level of education attainment in healthcare is correlated with higher chance of experiencing stress and burnout. Among the surveyed professions, nurses reported a higher amount of stress and burnout. Paramedics reported the highest chance of being bullied at work. This can be explained by their nature of work which requires directly interacting with patients and their families. In addition, it should be noted that the tools used can be successfully applied in workplaces as elements of workplace ergonomics assessment in the context of cognitive ergonomics.

Does Mental Health Affect the Decision to Vaccinate Against SARS-CoV-2? A Cross-Sectional Nationwide Study Before the Vaccine Campaign.

The COVID-19 pandemic generated a sense of threat in the society, leading to social isolation and mental health deterioration. A great deal of hope for the development of herd immunity was placed in preventive vaccinations. The survey, performed before vaccine campaign between September 26-October 27, 2020, during the second wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Poland with the Computer Assisted Web Interviews method. The study was partly community based and partly open to the public. Participants were invited to complete the survey using Google forms via social media (Facebook, WhatsApp). The survey was also distributed 54 times at the request of interested persons via e-mail. Total 1,043 questionnaires were assessed for eligibility and 41 were excluded (13 because of the age under 18, and 28 due to refusal to participate: non-response after sending questionnaire via e-mail). Finally 1,001 questionnaires were included to the study and statistical analysis was performed on the basis of the 1,001 responses. The questionnaire consisted of three parts: a sociodemographic survey, a questionnaire assessing the knowledge of the SARS-CoV-2 and the General Health Questionnaire-28. Participants also determined their attitude toward being vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. The questionnaire was completed by a total of 1,001 participants: 243 people declared that they will not get vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. Majority of people declaring the willingness to vaccinate were representatives of medical professions, suffering from chronic diseases, with higher values on the total GHQ-28 scale and the subscales: anxiety and insomnia, social dysfunction and somatic dysfunction. Loss of income, difficult access to health care, recognizing the restrictions as excessive and knowledge about COVID-19 were found as significant positive determinants of the reluctance to vaccinate. Greater readiness to vaccinate can be associated with greater certainty about its effectiveness and a hypothetical collectivist attitude. Experiencing anxiety and psychopathological symptoms are risk factors for infection, but can also be conducive to reliance on information about vaccination presented in the media. Reluctance to vaccinate may result from greater awareness of the complexity of the disease, and thus less faith in the effectiveness of vaccines.

Unknown Enemy and Psychopathological Responses: A Cross-Sectional Nationwide Study Assessing the Knowledge About COVID-19.

There is evidence that a lack of appropriate knowledge regarding global changes might be associated with various psychopathological responses. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that knowledge about COVID-19 correlates with the severity of psychopathological symptoms as measured by standardized questionnaires. The questionnaires were obtained using the Computer Assisted Web Interviews (CAWI) method during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Poland using the original COVID-19 knowledge questionnaire and the General Health Questionnaire-28 (GHQ-28). A series of bivariate tests and linear regression analyses were performed with a p < 0.05. All analyses were performed in Statistica 13.3. We enrolled 1,002 respondents. The rate of correct answers in the original questionnaire ranged from 44.6 to 84.1%, and the average was 60.1%. Four hundred and twenty participants (42%) met the criterion for the presence of relevant psychopathological symptoms. A significant negative correlation was found between the number of points obtained in the COVID-19 knowledge questionnaire and the GHQ-28 scores, both in relation to the total score and all its subscales. The following factors in the linear regression model were correlated with severity of somatic symptoms: knowledge about the COVID-19 pandemic (B = -0.12, P = 0.000), sex (B = 0.12, P = 0.000), use of psychiatric or psychological care (B = 0.20, P < 0.000) and chronic diseases (B = 0.09, P = 0.002). In this study, we observed a negative correlation between the knowledge about the COVID-19 pandemic and the severity of psychopathological symptoms. The results clearly indicate that the complexity of the global problem of the current pandemic is related to the development of psychopathological symptoms. However, longitudinal studies are needed to identify the direction of causality.

How should we teach cardiopulmonary resuscitation? Randomized multi-center study.

BACKGROUND: A 2017 update of the resuscitation guideline indicated the use of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) feedback devices as a resuscitation teaching method. The aim of the study was to compare the influence of two techniques of CPR teaching on the quality of resuscitation performed by medical students. METHODS: The study was designed as a prospective, randomized, simulation study and involved 115 first year students of medicine. The participants underwent a basic life support (BLS) course based on the American Heart Association guidelines, with the first group (experimental group) performing chest compressions to observe, in real-time, chest compression parameters indicated by software included in the simulator, and the second group (control group) performing compressions without this possibility. After a 10-minute resuscitation, the participants had a 30-minute break and then a 2-minute cycle of CPR. One month after the training, study participants performed CPR, without the possibility of observing real-time measurements regarding quality of chest compression. RESULTS: One month after the training, depth of chest compressions in the experimental and control group was 50 mm (IQR 46-54) vs. 39 mm (IQR 35-42; p = 0.001), compression rate 116 CPM (IQR 102-125) vs. 124 CPM (IQR 116-134; p = 0.034), chest relaxation 86% (IQR 68-89) vs. 74% (IQR 47-80; p = 0.031) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Observing real-time chest compression quality parameters during BLS training may improve the quality of chest compression one month after the training including correct hand positioning, compressions depth and rate compliance.

Mental Health of Medical and Non-Medical Professionals during the Peak of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Nationwide Study.

BACKGROUND: The study aimed to compare psychopathological expressions during the COVID-19 (novel coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic, as declared on March 11th 2020 by the World Health Organization, with respect to which institutional variables might distinguish the impact of COVID-19 in medical and non-medical professionals. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed nationwide between 16th March and the 26th April 2020 in Poland. A total of 2039 respondents representing all healthcare providers (59.8%) as well as other professionals filled in the sociodemographic section, the General Health Questionnaire-28 and the author's questionnaire with questions related to exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, the availability of protective measures, quarantine, change of working hours and place of employment during the pandemic, as well as feelings associated with the state of the pandemic. RESULTS: Medical professionals more often presented with relevant psychopathological symptoms (GHQ-28 (General Health Questionnaire-28) total score >24) than the non-medical group (60.8% vs. 48.0%, respectively) such as anxiety, insomnia and somatic symptoms even after adjustment for potential confounding factors. Male sex, older age and appropriate protective equipment were associated with significantly lower GHQ-28 total scores in medical professionals, whereas among non-medical professionals, male sex was associated with significantly lower GHQ-28 total scores. CONCLUSIONS: Somatic and anxiety symptoms as well as insomnia are more prevalent among medical staff than workers in other professions. Targeting the determinants of these differences should be included in interventions aimed at restoring psychological well-being in this specific population. Apparently, there are present gender differences in psychological responses that are independent of profession.

Comparison of the ETView Single Lumen and Macintosh laryngoscopes for endotracheal intubation in an airway manikin with immobilized cervical spine by novice paramedics: A randomized crossover manikin trial.

CONTEXT: Management of the airway of a trauma victim is considered challenging. Various approaches have been described to achieve airway control in this setup; many of them include video-assited viewing of the larynx during intubation. ETView Single Lumen (SL) is a novice single-use endotracheal tube equiped with a video camera and a light source at its distal tip. Its use was previously described in seeral clinical and training setups. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to evaluate the efficacy of the VivaSight SL compared with classic direct laryngoscopy performed with a Macintosh blade in a manikin-simulated trauma setup presenting various degrees of airway challenge when performed by inexperienced physicians. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: This was prospective, randomized, crossover, manikin trial. After short training on the ETView system, 67 novice paramedics attempted to perform oral intubation using both standard direct laryngoscopy (MAC group) and the VivaSight SL endotracheal tube (ETView group) in a randomized order on manikins in 3 increasingly more difficult scenarios (simple intubation, cervical spine manual stabilization, and with cervical collar in place). OUTCOME MEASURE: Overall success rate, time to intubation, number of intubation attempts, laryngeal view grade, dental compression, and overall participant satisfaction were monitored. RESULTS: Duration of intubation and number of attempts were significantly superior in the ETView group in the latter 2 more challenging scenarios. All other parameters showed superiority to the ETView group in all 3 scenarios. CONCLUSION: The VivaSight SL system performed better in a complex scenario of airway management of a trauma victim in need for cervical spine stabilization performed by novice caregivers compared to standard direct laryngoscopy and should be considered in this clinical setup.

Comparison of the Macintosh laryngoscope and blind intubation via the iGEL for Intubation With C-spine immobilization: A Randomized, crossover, manikin trial.

INTRODUCTION: Endotracheal intubation (ETI) using a Macintosh laryngoscope (MAC) requires the head to be positioned in a modified Jackson position, slightly reclined and elevated. Intubation of trauma patients with an injured neck or spine is therefore difficult, since the neck usually cannot be turned or is already immobilized in order to prevent further injury. The iGEL supraglottic airway seems optimal for such conditions due to its blind insertion without the need of a modified Jackson position. METHODS: Prospective, randomized, crossover study in 46 paramedics. Participants performing standard intubation and blind intubation via iGEL supraglottic airway device in three airway scenarios: Scenario A - normal airway; Scenario B - manual inline cervical immobilization, performed by an independent instructor; scenario C: cervical immobilization using a standard Patriot cervical extraction collar. RESULTS: In Scenario A, nearly all participants performed ETI successfully both with MAC and iGEL (100% vs. 95.7%). The time to intubation (TTI) using the MAC and iGEL amounted to 19 [IQR, 18-21]s vs. 12 [IQR, 11-13]s (P<0.001). Head extension angle as well as tooth compression were significantly better with the iGEL compared to the MAC (P<0.001). In scenario B and C, the results with the iGEL were significantly better than with MAC for all analyzed variables (TTI, success of first intubation attempt, head extension angle, tooth compression and VAS scores). CONCLUSION: We showed that blind intubation with the iGEL supraglottic airway was superior to ETI performed by paramedics in a simulated cervical immobilization scenario in a manikin in terms of success rate, time to definite tube placement, head extension angle, tooth compression, and rating.