The evolving personal, professional and physical impact on healthcare professionals during three COVID-19 waves: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to huge pressure on not only healthcare systems, but also on healthcare professionals. OBJECTIVE: As the pandemic continues, the aim of this study is to evaluate how 10 reactions of healthcare professionals evolved during the first 18 months of COVID-19. METHODS: A repeated cross-sectional study was performed with eight measurement points between April 2020 and September 2021 in Belgium. Participants were asked how frequently (on a scale of 0-10) they experienced positive and negative reactions during normal circumstances and during past week, referred to as before and during COVID-19, respectively. These reactions were stress, fatigue, difficulty sleeping, muscle strain, hypervigilance, leaving profession, headache, doubting knowledge and skills, flashbacks and fear. RESULTS: In total, 13 308 respondents were included in our study. During both the first (March 2020) and second COVID-19 peak (November 2020), the measured personal, professional and physical reactions were significantly higher compared to before COVID-19. The third wave in April 2021 was shorter and less severe with regard to hospital admissions and deaths, yet an important impact on healthcare professionals could still be observed. 'Fatigue,' 'stress,' 'difficulty sleeping' and 'muscle strain' are the most worrying reactions in September 2021, which are increasing compared to the previous measurements. CONCLUSION: Our results showed that acute stress reactions decreased over time but that chronic stress reactions and professional reactions, such as 'intent to leave,' increased. Healthcare organizations and policy makers should realize that 18 months after the start of COVID-19 almost all of the measured reactions continue to be more prevalent than before COVID-19. Moreover, the continuous increase over the last three measurement periods of the number of healthcare professionals who want to leave their profession is alarming. Continuous follow-up of the personal, professional and physical reactions is more than necessary.

Implementation of a pediatric early warning score tool in a pediatric oncology Ward in Palestine.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric Early Warning Scores (PEWS) are nurse-administered clinical assessment tools utilizing vital signs and patient signs and symptoms to screen for patients at risk for clinical deterioration.1-3 When utilizing a PEWS system, which consists of an escalation algorithm to alert physicians of high risk patients requiring a bedside evaluation and assessment, studies have demonstrated that PEWS systems can decrease pediatric intensive care (PICU) utilization, in-hospital cardiac arrests, and overall decreased mortality in high income settings. Yet, many hospital based settings in low and lower middle income countries (LMIC) lack systems in place for early identification of patients at risk for clinical deterioration. METHODS: A contextually adapted 16-h pediatric resuscitation program included training of a PEWS tool followed by implementation and integration of a PEWS system in a pediatric hematology/oncology ward in Beit Jala, Palestine. Four PDSA cycles were implemented post-implementation to improve uptake and scoring of PEWS which included PEWS tool integration into an existing electronic medical record (EMR), escalation algorithm and job aid implementation, data audits and ward feedback. RESULTS: Frequency of complete PEWS vital sign documentation reached a mean of 89.9%. The frequency and accuracy of PEWS scores steadily increased during the post-implementation period, consistently above 89% in both categories starting from data audit four and continuing thereafter. Accuracy of PEWS scoring was unable to be assessed during week 1 and 2 of data audits due to challenges with PEWS integration into the existing EMR (PDSA cycle 1) which were resolved by the 3rd week of data auditing (PDSA cycle 2). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a PEWS scoring tool in an LMIC pediatric oncology inpatient unit is feasible and can improve frequency of vital sign collection and generate accurate PEWS scores. CONTRIBUTION TO THE LITERATURE: This study demonstrates how to effectively implement a PEWS scoring tool into an LMIC clinical setting. This study demonstrates how to utilize a robust feedback mechanism to ensure a quality program uptake. This study demonstrates an effective international partnership model that other institutions may utilize for implementation science.

Human factors and ergonomics systems approach to the COVID-19 healthcare crisis.

A human factors and ergonomics (HFE) systems approach offers a model for adjusting work systems and care processes in response to a healthcare crisis such as COVID-19. Using the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model of work system and patient safety, we describe various work system barriers and facilitators experienced by healthcare workers during the COVID-19 crisis. We propose a set of five principles based on this HFE systems approach related to novel pandemic: (i) deferring to local expertise, (ii) facilitating adaptive behaviors, (iii) enhancing interactions between system elements and levels along the patient journey, (iv) re-purposing existing processes and (v) encouraging dynamic continuous learning.

COVID-19 is having a destructive impact on health-care workers' mental well-being.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may aggravate workplace conditions that impact health-care workers' mental health. However, it can also place other stresses on workers outside of their work. This study determines the effect of COVID-19 on symptoms of negative and positive mental health and the workforce's experience with various sources of support. Effect modification by demographic variables was also studied. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey study, conducted between 2 April and 4 May 2020 (two waves), led to a convenience sample of 4509 health-care workers in Flanders (Belgium), including paramedics (40.6%), nurses (33.4%), doctors (13.4%) and management staff (12.2%). About three in four were employed in university and acute hospitals (29.6%), primary care practices (25.7%), residential care centers (21.3%) or care sites for disabled and mental health care. In each of the two waves, participants were asked how frequently (on a scale of 0-10) they experienced positive and negative mental health symptoms during normal circumstances and during last week, referred to as before and during COVID-19, respectively. These symptoms were stress, hypervigilance, fatigue, difficulty sleeping, unable to relax, fear, irregular lifestyle, flashback, difficulty concentrating, feeling unhappy and dejected, failing to recognize their own emotional response, doubting knowledge and skills and feeling uncomfortable within the team. Associations between COVID-19 and mental health symptoms were estimated by cumulative logit models and reported as odds ratios. The needed support was our secondary outcome and was reported as the degree to which health-care workers relied on sources of support and how they experienced them. RESULTS: All symptoms were significantly more pronounced during versus before COVID-19. For hypervigilance, there was a 12-fold odds (odds ratio 12.24, 95% confidence interval 11.11-13.49) during versus before COVID-19. Positive professional symptoms such as the feeling that one can make a difference were less frequently experienced. The association between COVID-19 and mental health was generally strongest for the age group 30-49 years, females, nurses and residential care centers. Health-care workers reported to rely on support from relatives and peers. A considerable proportion, respectively, 18 and 27%, reported the need for professional guidance from psychologists and more support from their leadership. CONCLUSIONS: The toll of the crisis has been heavy on health-care workers. Those who carry leadership positions at an organizational or system level should take this opportunity to develop targeted strategies to mitigate key stressors of health-care workers' mental well-being.

Reduction and follow-up of hospital discharge letter delay using Little's law.

QUALITY PROBLEM: As discharge letters (DL) hold important information for healthcare professionals and especially for general practitioners, rapid and efficient finalization is required. We describe a project aiming to reduce DL submission within 8 days in our Urology Department (UD), as required by the local Hospital Board (HB). INITIAL ASSESSMENT AND CHOICE OF SOLUTION: A team was built in UD with staff members and one external expert to study the root causes of delayed DL creation and develop sustainable strategies to improve and monitor the process, including habits changing, training and application of Little's Law. IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION: The study started on January 2015 and ended up on March 2016, involving 908 and 616 DL for old and new process, respectively. The new process decreased the average delay of DL completion from 24.88 days to 14.7 days. Standard deviation of total average delay for DL completion fell from 10.1 days to 7.5 days. We identified four steps needed to DL creation and allowed maximum 2 days for every step completion. No additional resources were employed. LESSONS LEARNED: We were able to improve the process of DL creation, by analysing its steps and reducing their variability. This can be easily transposed to other medical departments.

Utilization of non-US educated nurses in US hospitals: implications for hospital mortality.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether, and under what circumstance, US hospital employment of non-US-educated nurses is associated with patient outcomes. DESIGN: Observational study of primary data from 2006 to 2007 surveys of hospital nurses in four states (California, Florida, New Jersey and Pennsylvania). The direct and interacting effects of hospital nurse staffing and the percentage of non-US-educated nurses on 30-day surgical patient mortality and failure-to-rescue were estimated before and after controlling for patient and hospital characteristics. PARTICIPANTS: Data from registered nurse respondents practicing in 665 hospitals were pooled with patient discharge data from state agencies. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURE(S): Thirty-day surgical patient mortality and failure-to-rescue. RESULTS: The effect of non-US-educated nurses on both mortality and failure-to-rescue is nil in hospitals with lower than average patient to nurse ratios, but pronounced in hospitals with average and poor nurse to patient ratios. In hospitals in which patient-to-nurse ratios are 5:1 or higher, mortality is higher when 25% or more nurses are educated outside of the USA than when <25% of nurses are non-US-educated. Moreover, the effect of having >25% non-US-educated nurses becomes increasingly deleterious as patient-to-nurse ratios increase beyond 5:1. CONCLUSIONS: Employing non-US-educated nurses has a negative impact on patient mortality except where patient-to-nurse ratios are lower than average. Thus, US hospitals should give priority to achieving adequate nurse staffing levels, and be wary of hiring large percentages of non-US-educated nurses unless patient-to-nurse ratios are low.