scholarly journals Your Hair or Your Service: An Issue of Faith for Sikh Healthcare Professionals During the COVID-19 Pandemic

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rajinder Singh ◽  
Bhajneek Grewal
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Significant Proportion ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Staff ◽  
The United Kingdom

Abstract Sikh healthcare professionals make up a small but significant proportion of the workforce in the United Kingdom. The COVID-19 pandemic has presented healthcare staff across the country with challenges relating to safe clinical practice whilst wearing personal protective equipment (PPE). Practising Sikhs are mandated to keep their hair unshorn and have been negatively impacted by some standard PPE requirements. This article aims to raise awareness of this issue and provide suggestions on how this conflict can be resolved.

scholarly journals Recontacting in clinical practice: an investigation of the views of healthcare professionals and clinical scientists in the United Kingdom

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 275-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniele Carrieri ◽  
Sandi Dheensa ◽  
Shane Doheny ◽  
Angus J Clarke ◽  
Peter D Turnpenny ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Views Of Healthcare Professionals

scholarly journals The Impact Of COVID-19 On Out-Of-Hours Adult Hospice Care: An Online Survey

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felicity Hasson ◽  
Paul Slater ◽  
Anne Fee ◽  
Tracey McConnell ◽  
Sheila Payne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Out Of Hours ◽  
Care Services ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Palliative Care Services ◽  
The Impact

Abstract BackgroundGlobally COVID-19 has had a profound impact on the provision of healthcare, including palliative care. However, there is little evidence about the impact of COVID-19 on delivery of out-of-hours specialist palliative care services in the United Kingdom. The aim of the study is to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the delivery of out-of-hours community-based palliative care services.Methods A national online census survey of managers of adult hospices in the United Kingdom was undertaken. Survey were emailed to managers of adult hospices (n=150) who provided out-of-hours community palliative care services. Fifteen questions related specifically to the impact of COVID-19 and data were analysed thematically.ResultsEighty-one responses to the survey were returned (54% response rate); 59 were complete of which 47 contained COVID-19 data. Findings indicated that COVID-19 impacted on out-of-hours community-based palliative care. To meet increased patient need, hospices reconfigured services; redeployed staff; and introduced new policies and procedures to minimize virus transmission. Lack of integration between charitably and state funded palliative care providers was reported. The interconnected issues of the use and availability of Personal Protective Equipment (n=21) and infection control screening (n=12) resulted in changes in nursing practices due to fear of contagion for patients, carers and staff. Conclusions Survey findings suggest that due to increased demand for community palliative care services, hospices had to rapidly adapt and reconfigure services. Even though this response to the pandemic led to some service improvements, in the main, out-of-hours service reconfiguration resulted in challenges for hospices, including workforce issues, and availability of resources such as Personal Protective Equipment. These challenges were exacerbated by lack of integration with wider healthcare services. More research is required to fully understand the implications of such changes on the quality of care provided.

scholarly journals Access to personal protective equipment in healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom: results from a nationwide cohort study (UK-REACH)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher A Martin ◽  
Daniel Pan ◽  
Joshua Nazareth ◽  
Avinash Aujayeb ◽  
Luke Bryant ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Questionnaire Response ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Uk

Abstract Objectives: To determine the prevalence and predictors of self-reported access to appropriate personal protective equipment (aPPE) for healthcare workers (HCWs) in the United Kingdom (UK) during the first UK national COVID-19 lockdown (March 2020) and at the time of questionnaire response (December 2020 - February 2021). Design: Two cross sectional analyses using data from a questionnaire-based cohort study. Setting: Nationwide questionnaire from 4th December 2020 to 28th February 2021. Participants: A representative sample of HCWs or ancillary workers in a UK healthcare setting aged 16 or over, registered with one of seven main UK healthcare regulatory bodies. Main outcome measure: Binary measure of self-reported aPPE (access all of the time vs access most of the time or less frequently) at two timepoints: the first national lockdown in the UK (primary analysis) and at the time of questionnaire response (secondary analysis). Results: 10,508 HCWs were included in the primary analysis, and 12,252 in the secondary analysis. 3702 (35.2%) of HCWs reported aPPE at all times in the primary analysis; 6806 (83.9%) reported aPPE at all times in the secondary analysis. After adjustment (for age, sex, ethnicity, migration status, occupation, aerosol generating procedure exposure, work sector, work region, working hours, night shift frequency and trust in employing organisation), older HCWs (per decade increase in age: aOR 1.2, 95% CI 1.16 - 1.26, p<0.001) and those working in Intensive Care Units (1.61, 1.38 - 1.89, p<0.001) were more likely to report aPPE at all times. Those from Asian ethnic groups compared to White (0.77, 0.67 - 0.89, p<0.001), those in allied health professional (AHPs) and dental roles (vs those in medical roles; AHPs: 0.77, 0.68 - 0.87, p<0.001; dental: 0.63, 0.49 - 0.81, p<0.001), and those who saw a higher number of COVID-19 patients compared to those who saw none (≥21 patients 0.74, 0.61 - 0.90, p=0.003) were less likely to report aPPE at all times in the primary analysis. aPPE at all times was also not uniform across UK regions (reported access being better in South West and North East England than London). Those who trusted their employing organisation to deal with concerns about unsafe clinical practice, compared to those who did not, were twice as likely to report aPPE at all times (2.18, 1.97 - 2.40, p<0.001). With the exception of occupation, these factors were also significantly associated with aPPE at all times in the secondary analysis. Conclusions: We found that only a third of HCWs in the UK reported aPPE at all times during the period of the first lockdown and that aPPE had improved later in the pandemic. We also identified key sociodemographic and occupational determinants of aPPE during the first UK lockdown, the majority of which have persisted since lockdown was eased. These findings have important public health implications for HCWs, particularly as cases of infection and long-COVID continue to rise in the UK.

scholarly journals Mutual aid versus volunteerism: Autonomous PPE production in the Covid-19 pandemic crisis

2021 ◽  
pp. 030981682110576
Author(s):  
Katya Lachowicz ◽  
Jim Donaghey
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Private Sector ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
Social Needs ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Mutual Aid ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Political Economies ◽  
Critical Social

The Covid-19 pandemic crisis has confirmed neoliberal capitalism’s inability to meet critical social needs. In the United Kingdom, mutual aid initiatives based on ‘solidarity not charity’ blossomed in a context of state incompetence and private sector negligence – including Scrub Hub, a network of groups that autonomously produced personal protective equipment and provided it directly to health workers. Using a convergence of autonomist and anarchist perspectives, this article examines Scrub Hub as an example of emergent autonomous political economies and considers the challenges of resisting co-optation into volunteerist hierarchies and suppression by the neoliberal state.

scholarly journals Backlog to Surgery due to COVID-19 and Considerations to Address to Catch-up Safely

2020 ◽  
Vol 07 (03) ◽  
pp. 4-10
Author(s):  
Amy Lewis ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Care ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Elective Surgery ◽  
Health And Safety ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Staff ◽  
Multifaceted Approach ◽  
Catch Up ◽  
Key Aspects

On March 11th 2020, COVID-19 met all criteria to be considered a pandemic. The resulting halt in surgery led to an estimated 28.4 million elective surgery cancellations around the globe. Figures suggest that the backlog to surgery may take years to clear, causing huge detrimental effects to both the economy and the health of patients. Addressing this surgical backlog, whilst ensuring the health and safety of healthcare professionals and patients during surgery, will require a multifaceted approach. Key aspects, such as providing a sufficient and stable supply of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), adequate and efficient testing of healthcare staff and patients, and availability of post-acute care, need to be secured before surgery can recommence safely in this COVID-19 era.

scholarly journals PMMB COVID-19 Bulletin: United Kingdom (22nd April 2020)

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Loh Teng-Hern Tan ◽  
Vengadesh Letchumanan ◽  
Hooi-Leng Ser ◽  
Jodi Woan-Fei Law ◽  
Nurul-Syakima Ab Mutalib ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Health Threat ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The World ◽  
Public Health Threat ◽  
The Uk

COVID-19 has greatly impacted the world and posed an enormous public health threat. The United Kingdom is hit harder by the COVID-19 crisis than any other European countries, besides Italy, Spain and France. The UK government has come under heavy criticism for its response to COVID-19, with lack of preparedness, shortages of personal protective equipment and COVID-19 testing. Despite the lockdown is in place to slow the spread of COVID-19, UK death toll continues to surge. As of 21st April 2020, more than 120,000 confirmed COVID-19 cases and 16,000 deaths had been recorded in UK.

Recomendações de equipamentos de proteção individual no combate ao COVID-19

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (31) ◽  
pp. 87-95
Author(s):  
Nicole Maria Miyamoto Bettini ◽  
Fabiana Tomé Ramos ◽  
Priscila Masquetto Vieira de Almeida
Keyword(s):  
World Health Organization ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Health Personnel ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
World Health ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Effective Strategy ◽  
The World ◽  
Health Organization

A Organização Mundial da Saúde - OMS confirmou a circulação internacional do novo Coronavírus em janeiro de 2020, nomeando-o como COVID-19 e, declarando uma pandemia. É de extrema importância que durante a pandemia, os profissionais de saúde tenham acesso e conhecimento sobre o uso correto dos Equipamentos de Proteção Individual (EPIs) e suas indicações, tomando assim, as devidas precauções na prevenção de infecções. O presente estudo buscou identificar a padronização mundial quanto ao uso dos EPIs utilizados no atendimento a pacientes suspeitos e/ou confirmados de COVID-19 no Brasil, EUA, China, Espanha, Itália e demais países europeus. Os guidelines apresentam a padronização quanto ao uso dos EPIs utilizados no atendimento a suspeitos e/ou confirmados de COVID-19, indo ao encontro das recomendações fornecidas pela OMS. Até o momento, o uso de EPIs é sem dúvida a estratégia mais importante e eficaz para proteger os profissionais de saúde durante a assistência ao paciente com COVID-19.Descritores: Infecções por Coronavírus, Equipamento de Proteção Individual, Pessoal de Saúde, Enfermagem. Recommendations for personal protective equipment to combat COVID-19Abstract: The World Health Organization - WHO confirmed the international circulation of the new Coronavirus in January 2020, naming it as COVID-19 and declaring a pandemic. It is extremely important that during the pandemic, health professionals have access and knowledge about the correct use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and its indications, thus taking appropriate precautions to prevent infections. The present study sought to identify the worldwide standardization regarding the use of PPE utilized to take care of suspected and confirmed patients with COVID-19 in Brazil, USA, China, Spain, Italy and other European countries. The guidelines present a standardization regarding the use of PPE utilized to take care of suspected and confirmed with COVID-19, in line with the recommendations provided by WHO. To date, the use of PPE is undoubtedly the most important and effective strategy to protect healthcare professionals during care for patients with COVID-19.Descriptors: Coronavirus Infections, Personal Protective Equipment, Health Personnel, Nursing. Recomendaciones para el equipo de protección personal para combatir COVID-19Resumen: La Organización Mundial de la Salud - La OMS confirmó la circulación internacional del nuevo Coronavirus en enero de 2020, nombrándolo COVID-19 y declarando una pandemia. Es extremadamente importante que durante la pandemia, los profesionales de la salud tengan acceso y conocimiento sobre el uso correcto del Equipo de Protección Personal (EPP) y sus indicaciones, tomando así las precauciones adecuadas para prevenir infecciones. El presente estudio buscó identificar la estandarización mundial con respecto al uso de EPP utilizado para atender a pacientes sospechosos y/o confirmados con COVID-19 en Brasil, Estados Unidos, China, España, Italia y otros países europeos. Las pautas presentan la estandarización con respecto al uso de EPP utilizado para cuidar COVID-19 sospechoso y/o confirmado, de acuerdo con las recomendaciones proporcionadas por la OMS. Hasta la fecha, el uso de EPP es, sin duda, la estrategia más importante y efectiva para proteger a los profesionales de la salud durante la atención de pacientes con COVID-19.Descriptores: Infecciones por Coronavirus, Equipo de Protección Personal, Personal de Salud, Enfermería.

scholarly journals Adverse Effects of Personal Protective Equipment Among Intensive Care Unit Healthcare Professionals During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Scoping Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 237796082110261
Author(s):  
Takeshi Unoki ◽  
Hideaki Sakuramoto ◽  
Ryuhei Sato ◽  
Akira Ouchi ◽  
Tomoki Kuribara ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
World Health ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Medical Database ◽  
Publication Type ◽  
Skin Injuries

Introduction To avoid exposure to SARS-COV-2, healthcare professionals use personal protective equipment (PPE) while treating COVID-19 patients. Prior studies have revealed the adverse effects (AEs) of PPE on healthcare workers (HCWs); however, no review has focused on the AEs of PPE on HCWs in intensive care units (ICUs). This review aimed to identify the AEs of PPE on HCWs working in ICUs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods A scoping review was conducted. MEDLINE, CINAHL, the World Health Organization (WHO) global literature on COVID-19, and Igaku-chuo-zasshi (a Japanese medical database), Google Scholar, medRxiv, and Health Research Board (HRB) open research were searched from January 25–28, 2021. The extracted data included author(s) name, year of publication, country, language, article title, journal name, publication type, study methodology, population, outcome, and key findings. Results The initial search identified 691 articles and abstracts. Twenty-five articles were included in the analysis. The analysis comprised four key topics: studies focusing on PPE-related headache, voice disorders, skin manifestations, and miscellaneous AEs of PPE. The majority of AEs for HCWs in ICUs were induced by prolonged use of masks. Conclusion The AEs of PPE among HCWs in ICUs included heat, headaches, skin injuries, chest discomfort, and dyspnea. Studies with a focus on specific diseases were on skin injuries. Moreover, many AEs were induced by prolonged use of masks.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document