Workforce strategies during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: a retrospective online survey at intensive care units in Germany.

BACKGROUND: As the COVID-19 pandemic swept across the globe at the beginning of 2020, healthcare systems were forced to rapidly adapt and expand to meet the sudden surge in demand for intensive care services. This study is the first systematic analysis of the strategies employed by German hospitals to recruit personnel and expand bed capacities during the first wave of the pandemic, and to evaluate the effectiveness of those recruitment measures. METHODS: 152 German hospitals with intensive care capacities were selected and invited to participate in an online-based retrospective survey. Factors like the geographic distribution, individual COVID burden and level of care were considered for inclusion in the sample. The data were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: A total of 41 hospitals participated in the survey. The additional demand for intensive care beds was met primarily by activating intensive care beds that were previously considered as non-operational in existing intensive care units (81% of respondents) and by upgrading recovery rooms (73%). The physician staffing requirements were met at approximately 75%, while the nursing staffing requirements were only met by about 45%. Staffing needs were met through reallocations/transfers (85%), staff recruitment from parental leave or retirement (49%), increased hours worked by internal staff (49%), new staff hiring (44%) and increased use of temporary staff (32%). Staff reallocations/transfers to critical care within a hospital were rated as the most effective measure. In this context, specialized personnel mostly from anesthesiology departments were appointed to intensive care medicine. CONCLUSIONS: Despite multiple recruitment efforts, the pandemic has exacerbated the nursing staff shortage. The reallocation of existing staff within hospitals was a key element in covering the staffing needs. However, additional measures and efforts are required in order to ensure that critically ill patients can be cared for without compromise. The results of this study may have important implications for healthcare providers and policymakers, offering an evidence-based foundation for responding to future public health emergencies with agility, efficiency, and success.

Recommendations of the Netzwerk Kindersimulation for the Implementation of Simulation-Based Pediatric Team Trainings: A Delphi Process.

BACKGROUND: Serious or life-threatening pediatric emergencies are rare. Patient outcomes largely depend on excellent teamwork and require regular simulation-based team training. Recommendations for pediatric simulation-based education are scarce. We aimed to develop evidence-based guidelines to inform simulation educators and healthcare stakeholders. METHODS: A modified three-round Delphi technique was used. The first guideline draft was formed through expert discussion and based on consensus (n = 10 Netzwerk Kindersimulation panelists). Delphi round 1 consisted of an individual and team revision of this version by the expert panelists. Delphi round 2 comprised an in-depth review by 12 external international expert reviewers and revision by the expert panel. Delphi round 3 involved a revisit of the guidelines by the external experts. Consensus was reached after three rounds. RESULTS: The final 23-page document was translated into English and adopted as international guidelines by the Swiss Society of Pediatrics (SGP/SSP), the German Society for Neonatology and Pediatric Intensive Care (GNPI), and the Austrian Society of Pediatrics. CONCLUSIONS: Our work constitutes comprehensive up-to-date guidelines for simulation-based team trainings and debriefings. High-quality simulation training provides standardized learning conditions for trainees. These guidelines will have a sustainable impact on standardized high-quality simulation-based education.

Safety management in times of crisis: Lessons learned from a nationwide status-analysis on German intensive care units during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: The status of Safety Management is highly relevant to evaluate an organization's ability to deal with unexpected events or errors, especially in times of crisis. However, it remains unclear to what extent Safety Management was developed and sufficiently implemented within the healthcare system during the COVID-19 pandemic. Providing insights of potential for improvement is expected to be directional for ongoing Safety Management efforts, in times of crisis and beyond. Method: A nationwide survey study was conducted among healthcare professionals and auxiliary staff on German Intensive Care Units (ICUs) evaluating their experiences during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Error Management and Patient Safety Culture (PSC) measures served to operationalize Safety Management. Data were analyzed descriptively and by using quantitative content analysis (QCA). Results: Results for n = 588 participants from 53 hospitals show that there is a gap between errors occurred, reported, documented, and addressed. QCA revealed that low quality of safety culture (27.8%) was the most mentioned reason for errors not being addressed. Overall, ratings of PSC ranged from 26.7 to 57.9% positive response with Staffing being the worst and Teamwork Within Units being the best rated dimension. While assessments showed a similar pattern, medical staff rated PSC on ICUs more positively in comparison to nursing staff. Conclusion: The status-analysis of Safety Management in times of crisis revealed relevant potential for improvement. Human Factor plays a crucial role in the occurrence and the way errors are dealt with on ICUs, but systemic factors should not be underestimated. Further intensified efforts specifically in the fields of staffing and error reporting, documentation and communication are needed to improve Safety Management on ICUs. These findings might also be applicable across nations and sectors beyond the medical field.

In-depth profiling of COVID-19 risk factors and preventive measures in healthcare workers.

PURPOSE: To determine risk factors for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in healthcare workers (HCWs), characterize symptoms, and evaluate preventive measures against SARS-CoV-2 spread in hospitals. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study conducted between May 27 and August 12, 2020, after the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, we obtained serological, epidemiological, occupational as well as COVID-19-related data at a quaternary care, multicenter hospital in Munich, Germany. RESULTS: 7554 HCWs participated, 2.2% of whom tested positive for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Multivariate analysis revealed increased COVID-19 risk for nurses (3.1% seropositivity, 95% CI 2.5-3.9%, p = 0.012), staff working on COVID-19 units (4.6% seropositivity, 95% CI 3.2-6.5%, p = 0.032), males (2.4% seropositivity, 95% CI 1.8-3.2%, p = 0.019), and HCWs reporting high-risk exposures to infected patients (5.5% seropositivity, 95% CI 4.0-7.5%, p = 0.0022) or outside of work (12.0% seropositivity, 95% CI 8.0-17.4%, p < 0.0001). Smoking was a protective factor (1.1% seropositivity, 95% CI 0.7-1.8% p = 0.00018) and the symptom taste disorder was strongly associated with COVID-19 (29.8% seropositivity, 95% CI 24.3-35.8%, p < 0.0001). An unbiased decision tree identified subgroups with different risk profiles. Working from home as a preventive measure did not protect against SARS-CoV-2 infection. A PCR-testing strategy focused on symptoms and high-risk exposures detected all larger COVID-19 outbreaks. CONCLUSION: Awareness of the identified COVID-19 risk factors and successful surveillance strategies are key to protecting HCWs against SARS-CoV-2, especially in settings with limited vaccination capacities or reduced vaccine efficacy.

Evaluation of simparteam - a needs-orientated team training format for obstetrics and neonatology.

INTRODUCTION: A standardized team-training program for healthcare professionals in obstetric units was developed based on an analysis of common causes for adverse events found in claims registries. The interdisciplinary and inter-professional training concept included both technical and non-technical skill training. Evaluation of the program was carried out in hospitals with respect to the immediate personal learning of participants and also regarding changes in safety culture. METHODS: Trainings in n=7 hospitals including n=270 participants was evaluated using questionnaires. These were administered at four points in time to staff from participating obstetric units: (1) 10 days ahead of the training (n=308), (2) on training day before (n=239), (3) right after training (n=248), and (4) 6 months after (n=188) the intervention. Questionnaires included several questions for technical and non-technical skills and the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety (HSOPS). RESULTS: Strong effects were found in the participants' perception of their own competence regarding technical skills and handling of emergencies. Small effects could be observed in the scales of the HSOPS questionnaire. Most effects differed depending on professional groups and hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Integrated technical and team management training can raise employees' confidence with complex emergency management skills and processes. Some indications for improvements on the patient safety culture level were detected. Furthermore, differences between professional groups and hospitals were found, indicating the need for more research on contributing factors for patient safety and for the success of crew resource management (CRM) trainings.

The human factor in medical emergency simulation.

Medical errors rank high amongst leading causes of death. Especially in emergency care, when there is limited time to think, the "human factor", the interface between human action and the environmental system, has been recognized to be a critical part that determines the outcome. Recent models of human error are based on the principle that critical incidents are of multifactorial origin and reflect insufficiencies of the underlying system itself. The Human Simulation Center (HSC) was built specifically to train interaction between medical teams and to investigate the human factor in medical emergencies. In the following article we present "MevidIO", a live-monitoring and debriefing application framework. Developed for a full-scale simulation center designed to model error transduction in medical emergency care process chains, the framework integrates educational and scientific aspects.