Caring for COVID-19 patients: Nurses' perceptions of the most critical issues and their impact on their well-being and performance.

AIMS: (1) Exploring nurses' perceptions of issues that impacted the quality of patient care and their own performance on COVID-19 wards; (2) examining nurses' perceptions of how these issues impacted their psychological state and level of performance; and (3) presenting recommendations for improving healthcare policies. BACKGROUND: Nurses played a critical role in caring for hospitalized COVID-19 patients and managing the disease. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 50 nurses (32 females), aged 31-58 years, 6-37 years' tenure, from eight hospitals across Israel. Prior to working in COVID-19 wards, they worked in internal medicine, emergency rooms, or intensive care units. Based on the COREQ checklist, these interviews were recorded and transcribed, and categorized into themes and subthemes. FINDINGS: The findings indicate that the unpreparedness of healthcare systems for the pandemic outbreak rendered nurses paying a high price at the personal and professional levels, which in turn may have impacted the levels of care that they provided. CONCLUSION: The rich, qualitative data source revealed important interactions between clinical, personal, social, and familial factors in determining distress levels and performance impairment. A nuanced understanding of the link between these stressors is key to developing and implementing policies that could mitigate deficiencies in the management of epidemics and pandemics in the future. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING AND HEALTH POLICIES: Changes should be made to government directives and healthcare policies, with an emphasis on increasing the nursing workforce, providing emotional support, ensuring availability of equipment and beds, optimizing work practices, developing transparent means of communication within teams, and clearly defining the areas of responsibility of nurses-in times of routine and crises.

Translation and Comprehensive Validation of the Hebrew Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPS 2.0).

OBJECTIVES: The study aim was to create an updated valid translation into Hebrew of the AHRQ's survey on patient safety culture for hospitals, version 2.0. It also suggested a supplementary section about workers' safety. Comparable and valid measurement tools are important for national and international benchmarking of patient safety culture in hospitals. METHODS: The process was carried out by a designated committee according to AHRQ translation guidelines. Methodology included several translation cycles, 6 semistructured cognitive interviews with health workers, and a web-based pilot survey at 6 general hospitals. Main analyses included an exploratory factor analysis, a comparison of the differences in results between versions 1 and 2 of the survey to the differences reported by AHRQ, and content analysis of open-ended questions. RESULTS: A total of 483 returned questionnaires met the inclusion criterion of at least 70% completion of the questionnaire. The demographic distributions suggested this sample to be satisfactory representative. Cronbach's alpha for the translated questionnaire was 0.95, meaning a high internal consistency between the survey items. An exploratory factor analysis revealed 8 underlying factors, and a secondary analysis further divided the first factor into 2 components. The factors structure generally resembled HSOPS 2.0 composite measures. Analyses of the new section about health workers' safety showed high involvement and possible common themes. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated good psychometric properties-high reliability and validity of the new translated version of the questionnaire. This paper may serve other countries who wish to translate and adapt the safety culture survey to different languages.

Remote Communications between Patients and General Practitioners: Do Patients Choose the Most Effective Communication Routes?

The use of remote communication between patients and general practitioners has greatly increased worldwide, especially following the COVID-19 outbreak. Yet, it is important to evaluate the impact of this shift on healthcare quality. This study aimed at evaluating remote healthcare quality by comparing four remote patient-to-physician communication modes used in Israel. The research methodology entailed criteria-based analysis conducted by healthcare quality experts and a subjective patient-perception questionnaire regarding the healthcare quality attributed to each mode and the extent to which each mode was used. Our findings indicate that the extent to which each mode is used was found to be inversely related to its rated quality. As such, the common assumption whereby patients tend to choose the mode of communication that will most likely ensure high service quality is refuted. Our findings also indicate that remote services often hinder the physician's understanding of the patient's clinical issues, as patients encounter difficulties in correctly articulating and conveying them; such services also hinder the patient's understanding of the recommended course of treatment. These findings should be addressed by policymakers for improving remote communication services to ensure optimal healthcare service quality.