Comparison of hospitalist morale in a COVID-19 alternate care site (ACS) to hospitalist morale in conventional hospitals in Maryland.

BACKGROUND: Morale and burnout were concerns for hospitalists prior to the COVID-19 pandemic; these concerns were amplified as COVID-19 spread and hospitals experienced unprecedented stress. In contrast to prior literature, our study assesses both satisfaction and the importance of various factors. This study examines morale of hospitalists early in the COVID-19 pandemic in two settings: conventional hospitals and a COVID-19 Alternate Care site (ACS) in the same geographic region in Maryland. Multiple studies published early in the pandemic show low morale in COVID-19 hospitals. METHODS: In a cross-sectional survey study, we analyze data from the Hospitalist Morale Index (HMI) administered between September 2020 and March 2021 to determine the pandemic's impact on hospitalist morale. RESULTS: Surprisingly, our study found morale in the ACS was better than morale at the conventional hospitals. ACS hospitalists and conventional hospitalists were demographically similar. Our results show that a significantly higher proportion of conventional hospitalists reported burnout compared to the ACS hospitalists. General quality of life was rated significantly higher in the ACS group than the conventional group. Significantly more ACS hospitalists were invested in making their group outstanding. Five main HMI domains were examined with questions on a 5-point rating scale: Clinical Factors, Workload, Material Rewards, Leadership, and Appreciation/Acknowledgement. ACS hospitalists rated most measures higher than conventional hospitalists; largest differences were observed in Clinical Factors and Appreciation/Acknowledgement domains. Narrative comments from ACS hospitalists revealed strong identification with the mission of the ACS and pride in contributing during a crisis. One key difference between the two groups explains these findings: provider autonomy. The ACS staff chose the position and the assignment, while conventional hospitalists caring for COVID-19 patients could not readily opt out of this work. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that autonomy in assignments with risk has implications for morale and burnout.

Implementation and Accuracy of BinaxNOW Rapid Antigen COVID-19 Test in Asymptomatic and Symptomatic Populations in a High-Volume Self-Referred Testing Site.

Rapid antigen tests are simple to perform and provide results within 15 min. We describe our implementation and assess performance of the BinaxNOW COVID-19 Antigen Test (Abbott Laboratories) in 6,099 adults at a self-referred walk-up testing site. Participants were grouped by self-reported COVID-19 exposure and symptom status. Most (89%) were asymptomatic, of whom 17% reported potential exposure. Overall test sensitivity compared with reference laboratory reverse-transcription [RT] PCR testing was 81% (95% confidence interval [CI] 75%, 86%). It was higher in symptomatic (87%; 95% CI 80%, 91%) than asymptomatic (71%; 95% CI 61%, 80%) individuals. Sensitivity was 82% (95% CI 66%, 91%) for asymptomatic individuals with potential exposure and 64% (95% CI 51%, 76%) for those with no exposure. Specificity was greater than 99% for all groups. BinaxNOW has high accuracy among symptomatic individuals and is below the FDA threshold for emergency use authorization in asymptomatic individuals. Nonetheless, rapid antigen testing quickly identifies positive among those with symptoms and/or close contact exposure and could expedite isolation and treatment. IMPORTANCE The BinaxNOW rapid antigen COVID-19 test had a sensitivity of 87% in symptomatic and 71% asymptomatic individuals when performed by health care workers in a high-throughput setting. The performance may expedite isolation decisions or referrals for time-sensitive monoclonal antibody treatment in communities where timely COVID PCR tests are unavailable.

The influence of anesthesia on heart rate complexity during elective and urgent surgery in 128 patients.

BACKGROUND: As an emerging "new vital sign," heart rate complexity (by sample entropy [SampEn]) has been shown to be a useful trauma triage tool by predicting occult physiologic compromise and need for life-saving interventions. Sample entropy may be confounded by anesthesia possibly limiting its value intraoperatively. We investigated the effects of anesthesia on SampEn during elective and urgent surgical procedures. We hypothesized that SampEn is reduced by general anesthesia. METHODS: With institutional review board-approved waiver of informed consent, 128 patients undergoing elective or urgent general surgery were prospectively enrolled. Real-time heart rate complexity was calculated using SampEn through electrocardiogram recordings of 200 consecutive beats in a continuous sliding-window fashion. We recorded SampEn starting 10 minutes before induction until 10 minutes after emergence from anesthesia. The time before induction of anesthesia was categorized as period 1, the time after induction and before emergence as period 2 (intraoperative), and the time after emergence as period 3. We analyzed SampEn changes as patients moved between the different periods and made 3 comparisons: from period 1 with period 2 (comparison A), from period 2 with period 3 (comparison B). We also compared period 1 with period 3 SampEn (comparison C). RESULTS: The mean SampEn value for all patients before induction of anesthesia was 1.55 ± 0.58. In each 1 of the 3, comparisons there was a decline in SampEn. Comparison A had a mean decrease of 0.53 ± 0.55 (P < .0001), comparison B had a decrease of 0.13 ± 0.52 (P < .0051), and the mean SampEn difference for comparison C was 0.66 ± 0.53 (P < .0001). Certain pharmacologics had significant effect on SampEn as did need for urgent surgery and American Society of Anesthesiologists class. CONCLUSION: Sample entropy decreases after induction of anesthesia and continues to decrease even immediately after emergence in patients without any immediately life-threatening conditions. This finding may complicate interpretation low complexity as a predictor of life-saving interventions in patients in the perioperative period.

Experiences with weight change in African-American breast cancer survivors.

Although weight gain is a common side effect of breast cancer treatment, limited empirical data are available on how African-American breast cancer survivors react to changes in their weight following diagnosis and treatment. The purpose of this study was to explore psychological and behavioral reactions to weight change in African-American breast cancer survivors. We conducted a qualitative study to explore reactions to weight change following diagnosis and treatment in 34 African-American breast cancer survivors. Forty-seven percent of women reported gaining weight, 32% reported weight loss, and 21% reported no changes in their weight. Regardless of whether women gained or lost weight, these changes were viewed as stressors that caused psychological distress and health concerns. However, some women had positive reactions to weight loss, especially if they had been heavy prior to diagnosis. Women exercised and changed their dietary behaviors following treatment. Despite this, women reported being frustrated with not being able to control changes in their weight. These results suggest that changes in weight may be a critical component of breast cancer survivorship in African-American women. It may be important to provide African-American breast cancer survivors with information about the causes and implications of weight change and strategies for weight control after treatment as part of their follow-up care.