Psychological distress among frontline workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Novel virus outbreaks, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, may increase psychological distress among frontline workers. Psychological distress may lead to reduced performance, reduced employability or even burnout. In the present study, we assessed experienced psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic from a self-determination theory perspective. METHODS: This mixed-methods study, with repeated measures, used surveys (quantitative data) combined with audio diaries (qualitative data) to assess work-related COVID-19 experiences, psychological need satisfaction and frustration, and psychological distress over time. Forty-six participants (nurses, junior doctors, and consultants) completed 259 surveys and shared 60 audio diaries. Surveys and audio diaries were analysed separately. RESULTS: Quantitative results indicated that perceived psychological distress during COVID-19 was higher than pre-COVID-19 and fluctuated over time. Need frustration, specifically autonomy and competence, was positively associated with psychological distress, while need satisfaction, especially relatedness, was negatively associated with psychological distress. In the qualitative, thematic analysis, we observed that especially organisational logistics (rostering, work-life balance, and internal communication) frustrated autonomy, and unfamiliarity with COVID-19 frustrated competence. Despite many need frustrating experiences, a strong connection with colleagues and patients were important sources of relatedness support (i.e. need satisfaction) that seemed to mitigate psychological distress. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in an increase of psychological distress among frontline workers. Both need frustration and need satisfaction explained unique variance of psychological distress, but seemed to originate from different sources. Challenging times require healthcare organisations to better support their professionals by tailored formal and informal support. We propose to address both indirect (e.g. organisation) and direct (e.g. colleagues) elements of the clinical and social environment in order to reduce need frustration and enhance need satisfaction.

[Prevention of severe infections in patients with hyposplenism or asplenia]. / Voorkómen van ernstige infecties bij patiënten met hypo- of asplenie.

Each year, up to a 1000 splenectomies are performed in the Netherlands. Aside from patients without a spleen, there is also a large group of patients with hyposplenism or functional asplenia due to other primary diseases. All these patients are at risk of developing severe infections, such as post-splenectomy sepsis (PSS), which is associated with very high mortality. However PSS can partly be prevented by taking simple measures such as immunizations and prophylactic or early use of antibiotics. Healthcare professionals in first and secondary care in the Netherlands are generally not well informed about which preventive measures should be taken to prevent these infections, resulting in often suboptimal management of patients. In this article, recommendations are given on vaccination and administration of antibiotics to prevent severe infections such as PSS in this group of patients.

Hyposplenism: comparison of different methods for determining splenic function.

Asplenic patients are at risk for pneumococcal sepsis. Patients with hyposplenic function, such as associated with sickle cell disease (SCD), are also at risk. However, tests to assess splenic function are either unavailable or lacking standardization. The aim of this study was to compare different methods for determining splenic function. Eighteen patients with SCD (i.e., 10 heterozygous (SC) and 8 homozygous (SS) SCD patients), and eight splenectomized patients were compared to 10 controls. All subjects underwent spleen scintigraphy, after which functional splenic volumes (FSV) were calculated. FSV was compared to immunological function and B cell-subsets, as well as phagocytic function represented by the presence of Howell Jolly bodies (HJB) and percentages of pitted red cells (PIT). Heterozygous SCD (SC) patients had increased splenic volumes, but diminished FSV, homozygous SCD (SS) patients were asplenic. Splenectomized and SS patients had a strongly reduced phagocytic and immunological function. SC patients had reduced anti-polysaccharide responses without an increase in PIT. FSV correlated significantly with phagocytic and immunological function. HJB were indicative of splenic dysfunction, HJB absence was not indicative of normal functioning splenic tissue. Although visualizing HJB is methodologically advantageous to PIT, both are valid biomarkers of splenic dysfunction. The amount of non-switched memory B cells is strongly correlated to FSV.

Physicians report barriers to deliver best practice care for asplenic patients: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Current management of asplenic patients is not in compliance with best practice standards, such as defined by the British Committee for Standards in Haematology. To improve quality of care, factors inhibiting best practice care delivery need to be identified first. With this study, we aimed to identify and quantify physicians' barriers to adhere to best practice management of asplenic patients in The Netherlands. METHODS AND PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: A cross-sectional survey, preceded by multiple focus group discussions, was performed among Dutch physicians responsible for prevention of infections in asplenic patients, including specialists (of Internal medicine and Surgery) and general practitioners (GPs). Forty seven GPs and seventy three hospital specialists returned the questionnaire, yielding response rates of 47% and 36.5% respectively. Physicians reported several barriers to deliver best practice. For both GPs and specialists, the most frequently listed barriers were: poor patient knowledge (>80% of hospital specialists and GPs) and lack of clarity about which physician is responsible for the management of asplenic patients (50% of Internists, 46% of Surgeons, 55% of GPs). Both GPs and hospital specialists expressed to experience a lack of mutual trust: specialists were uncertain whether the GP would follow their advice given on patient discharge (33-59%), whereas half of GPs was not convinced that specialists' discharge letters contained the correct recommendations. Almost all physicians (>90%) indicated that availability of a national guideline would improve adherence to best practice, especially if accessible online. CONCLUSION: This study showed that, in accordance with reports on international performance, care delivery for asplenic patients in The Netherlands is suboptimal. We identified and quantified perceived barriers by physicians that prevent adherence to post-splenectomy guidelines for the first time. Better transmural collaboration and better informed patients are likely to improve the quality of care of the asplenic patient population. A national, online-available guideline is urgently required.