scholarly journals Evolving Management of COVID-19: A Multi-institutional Otolaryngology Perspective

2020 ◽  
Vol 163 (2) ◽  
pp. 259-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johanna L. Wickemeyer ◽  
Kathleen R. Billings ◽  
Taher S. Valika
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
National Level ◽  
Current Data ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Increased Risk

Objective To provide evolving information on active protocols regarding inpatient, outpatient, procedural, and surgical case management taking place in otolaryngology practices in response to COVID-19. Study Type Cross-sectional multi-institutional survey. Methods An online survey of 55 otolaryngology departments across North America. Results As of March 25, 2020, almost all (n = 53 of 55, 96.3%) otolaryngology departments had canceled elective cases and were performing only urgent consults. Most residents continued to participate in operative cases (n = 45 of 49, 91.8%) and take call (n = 48 of 50, 96.0%). Of the respondents, 27 of 29 (93.1%) stated that they were deferring nonemergent tracheostomy procedures for the time being. The use of personal protective equipment followed a general trend of an increasing level of protection with an increased risk of the procedure; most (n = 49 of 54, 90.7%) incorporated N95 mask usage for bedside/clinic examinations with flexible laryngoscopy. Powered air-purifying respirators and N95 masks were used mainly for procedures involving the mucosal surfaces. Discussion Due to the high viral density in the nasal cavity and nasopharynx of patients with COVID-19, basic examinations and common otolaryngology procedures place practitioners at high risk of exposure. Although there is variability in practice among otolaryngologists across North America in managing the COVID-19 outbreak, most are primarily seeing urgent ambulatory and inpatient consultations. Most are also incorporating personal protective equipment appropriate to the level of transmission across mucous membranes. Implications for Practice In these rapidly evolving times, it is helpful to find solidarity and assurance among health care providers. Current data aimed to provide (1) perceived methods regarding the safe care of otolaryngology patients and (2) updated practice patterns at a national level.

scholarly journals A study on personal protective equipment use among health care providers, Tamil Nadu

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 1771 ◽  
Author(s):  
Archana Lakshmi P. A. ◽  
Gladius Jennifer H. ◽  
Meriton Stanly A. ◽  
Christina Mary Paul
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Tamil Nadu ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Appropriate Use ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Inappropriate Use

Background: Personal protective equipment (PPE) limits the health care workers contact with all secretions or biological products. This study was planned to find gaps between use of PPE among the health care providers (HCPs). The objective of the study was to evaluate appropriate use of PPE among health care providers in tertiary centres Tamil Nadu.Methods: A cross sectional study was done during November 2014 to October 2015 in two tertiary health care institutions. All health care providers (Doctors, nurses and technicians) who had more than one year experience and gave informed consent were included. Data collected by pretested structured questionnaire. Data analysis was done using SPSS 20v and summarized by descriptive statistics. Proportion and Chi-square was calculated at 5% α.Results: HCPs included in the study were 1060. Among them, there were 412(38.9%) doctors, 550 (51.9%) nurses and 98 (9.2%) technicians. Among 862 HCPs who work outside the operation theatre (OT) and ICU, appropriate uses of PPE were only 156 (18.1%). It was high among doctors 109 (31.5%) followed by nurses 39 (9.3%) and technicians 8 (8.2%) which was statistically significant p=0.0001. HCPs working in OT and ICU were 423 and 183 respectively. Among HCPs working in OT, appropriate use of gloves, mask, apron, gown and hair cover was 100%. But the use of goggles and shoe cover was very low. The reasons for inappropriate use of PPE was non availability 562 (78%) followed by not aware of the importance 77 (11%).Conclusions: The study showed inappropriate use and lack of adequate knowledge on infection control practices emphasizing that periodic re-training is needed. 

scholarly journals Different Perceptions of Parents and Children on Factors Influencing Sport Specialization

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Mayrena I. Hernandez ◽  
Kevin M. Biese ◽  
Dan A. Schaefer ◽  
Eric G. Post ◽  
David R. Bell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Youth Athletes ◽  
Risk Of Injury ◽  
Parents And Children ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Dyad Analysis ◽  
School Team ◽  
Level Of Agreement

Context: Sport specialization among youth athletes has been associated with increased risk of overuse injuries. Previous research demonstrates that children perceive specialization to be beneficial in making their high school team and receiving athletic college scholarships. Previous research demonstrates that parents play a significant role in their child’s sport experience. However, it is unknown if parents and children answer questions related to specialization factors in a similar manner. Objective: To evaluate the beliefs of youth athletes and parents on factors related to sport specialization and evaluate the level of agreement between dyads on sports specialization. Design: Cross-sectional. Setting: Online and paper surveys. Patients or Other Participants: Aim 1: 1998 participants (993 children and 1005 parents). Aim 2: 77 paired parent–child dyads. Interventions: Self-administered survey. Main Outcome Measures: The responses were summarized via frequency and proportions (%). Chi-squares were calculated between parent and child responses. Kappa coefficients were calculated for dyads to determine level of agreement. Sport specialization was classified using a common 3-point scale. Results: The parents were more concerned about risk of injury in sports compared with children (P < .001, χ2 = 231.4; parent: extremely: 7.1%; child: extremely: 3.7%). However, children were more likely to believe that specialization was associated with their chances of obtaining an athletic college scholarship compared with parents (P < .001, χ2 = 201.6; parent: very/extremely likely: 13.7%; child: very/extremely likely: 15.8%). Dyad subanalysis indicated a moderate level of agreement for “quitting other sports to focus on one sport” (κ = .50) and a low level of agreement for “identifying a primary sport” (κ = .30) and “training >8 months per year in primary sport” (κ = .32). Conclusions: Parents and youth athletes had differing beliefs on the factors related to sport specialization. Dyad analysis shows that parents and children answer sport specialization classification questions differently. Health care providers should be aware of these differences, and messaging should be individualized to the audience.

scholarly journals Parental COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy for children: vulnerability in an urban hotspot

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nina L. Alfieri ◽  
Jennifer D. Kusma ◽  
Nia Heard-Garris ◽  
Matthew M. Davis ◽  
Emily Golbeck ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Sociodemographic Factors ◽  
Cook County ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Demographic Groups ◽  
Publicly Insured

Abstract Objective To compare hesitancy toward a future COVID-19 vaccine for children of various sociodemographic groups in a major metropolitan area, and to understand how parents obtain information about COVID-19. Methods Cross-sectional online survey of parents with children < 18 years old in Chicago and Cook County, Illinois, in June 2020. We used logistic regression to determine the odds of parental COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (VH) for racial/ethnic and socioeconomic groups, controlling for sociodemographic factors and the sources where parents obtain information regarding COVID-19. Results Surveys were received from 1702 parents and 1425 were included in analyses. Overall, 33% of parents reported VH for their child. COVID-19 VH was higher among non-Hispanic Black parents compared with non-Hispanic White parents (Odds Ratio (OR) 2.65, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): (1.99–3.53), parents of publicly insured children compared with privately insured (OR 1.93, (1.53–2.42)) and among lower income groups. Parents receive information about COVID-19 from a variety of sources, and those who report using family, internet and health care providers as information sources (compared to those who don’t use each respective source) had lower odds of COVID-19 VH for their children. Conclusions The highest rates of hesitancy toward a future COVID-19 vaccine were found in demographic groups that have been the most severely affected by the pandemic. These groups may require targeted outreach efforts from trusted sources of information in order to promote equitable uptake of a future COVID-19 vaccine.

scholarly journals Personal protective equipment and infection prevention and control: a national survey of UK medical students and interim foundation doctors during the COVID-19 pandemic

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Jane Norton ◽  
Ioannis Georgiou ◽  
Alex Fung ◽  
Armin Nazari ◽  
Soham Bandyopadhyay ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Students ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Prevention And Control ◽  
Infection Prevention ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Infection Prevention And Control ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Multi Centre Study ◽  
And Control

Abstract Background The adequacy of personal protective equipment (PPE) and infection prevention and control (IPC) training in UK medical students and interim Foundation Year 1 (FiY1) doctors during the COVID-19 pandemic is unknown, as is its impact on COVID-19-related anxiety. Methods Cross-sectional, multi-centre study analysing self-reported adequacy of PPE and IPC training and correlation to a modified pandemic anxiety scale. Participants were current medical students and FiY1 doctors in the UK. Data were collected by an online survey. Results Participants reported that they received insufficient PPE information (43%) and IPC training (56%). Significantly, fewer participants identifying as women or BAME/mixed ethnicity reported receiving sufficient PPE information, compared with those identifying as men and White British/White Other, respectively. COVID-19-related anxiety was significantly higher in those without sufficient reported PPE or IPC training, in women compared with men, and in FiY1 doctors compared with medical students. Conclusions With medical students currently volunteering in and imminently returning to hospitals in an educational capacity, levels of self-reported PPE and IPC training are sub-optimal. Better training is paramount to avoid harm to patients and healthcare professionals and to reduce COVID-19-related anxiety among medical students and FiY1 doctors.

scholarly journals Preventing Facial Pressure Injury for Health Care Providers Adhering to COVID-19 Personal Protective Equipment Requirements

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (8) ◽  
pp. 418-427 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiske Smart ◽  
Francis Byron Opinion ◽  
Issam Darwich ◽  
Manal Aly Elnawasany ◽  
Chaitanya Kodange
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Pressure Injury

scholarly journals Physical assessment in pharmacy practice: Perspectives from pharmacists, nonpharmacist health care providers and the public

2021 ◽  
pp. 171516352110049
Author(s):  
Christine Leong ◽  
Leila Soufi
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Vital Signs ◽  
Pharmacy Practice ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Physical Assessment ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Future

Background: Physical assessment in pharmacy practice is not a new concept, yet the idea is still unfamiliar to many people. Canadian pharmacy graduates are expected to be trained in physical examination as it relates to drug therapy. However, standard delivery of course content in this area has not been clearly established, and previous publications have reported low uptake of this practice despite formal training. To aid the future development of a physical assessment course for pharmacists that is relevant to practice and will contribute to patient care, it is important to gather insight from practising pharmacists, health care providers and the public. Objective: To determine the type of physical assessment skills that would be of value to pharmacy practice and the benefits and barriers of these skills in practice from the perspectives of pharmacists, health care providers and the public. Methods: This was a cross-sectional online survey of pharmacists, nonpharmacist health care providers and the public. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis were used to describe data. Results: A total of 348 respondents (98 pharmacists, 154 nonpharmacist health care providers, 96 public) completed the survey. Most (64%) nonpharmacist providers were physiotherapists or occupational therapists (only 6.5% physicians). Most respondents felt that performing basic vital signs was relevant to pharmacy practice (79% pharmacists, 69% other providers, 79% public) and felt confident and comfortable about pharmacists using these skills. Palpation, percussion and auscultation were rated less favourably (<50% for most respondents). Nonpharmacist providers tended to be less favourable than pharmacist and public respondents. Seven themes related to benefits and 13 themes related to disadvantages of pharmacists performing physical assessment were identified. Conclusion: These findings provide insight into opinions about the value of pharmacists performing physical assessments. Consensus recommendations on performance expectations to improve recognition of pharmacists in this area is needed in the future. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2021;154:xx-xx.

scholarly journals Adverse effects of prolonged use of personal protective equipment among health care workers during COVID-19 pandemic

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. 4400
Author(s):  
Subhash Chand ◽  
Neeraj Sharma ◽  
Sanjay Kumar
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Health Care Workers ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Care Workers ◽  
Almost All

Background: To know adverse effects of prolonged use of (PPE) personal protective equipment among various categories of health care providers while taking care of COVID-19 patients.Methods: This study include health care workers involved in care of covid-19 positive patients admitted in COVID dedicated hospital. A preformed questionnaire based performa was distributed among health care providers. Questions were framed about various possible adverse effects of use of PPE. Duration of study was six month from first July 2020 to 31 December 2020. The data was obtained from questionnaire and thereafter analysed to determine the adverse effects of different parts of PPE among various categories of HCPs depending on their age, sex and duration of exposure.Results: A total of 150 health care workers of various categories were surveyed. Maximum numbers of health care workers were in the age group of 31-40 years. Most common side effects were itching, rash, suffocation and impaired cognition. N-95 masks, gloves and face shield when used caused maximum discomfort.Conclusions: COVID-19 is ongoing pandemic with uncertinity about its end. Health care workers are continuously exposed to COVID-19 positive patients and almost all the healthcare providers experienced discomfort while using PPE causing reduced work efficiency.

scholarly journals Availability and use of personal protective equipment and satisfaction of healthcare professionals during COVID-19 pandemic in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

2021 ◽  
Vol 79 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wakgari Deressa ◽  
Alemayehu Worku ◽  
Workeabeba Abebe ◽  
Muluken Gizaw ◽  
Wondwossen Amogne
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Addis Ababa ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Public Hospitals ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Healthcare Facilities ◽  
Increased Risk

Abstract Background Healthcare professionals (HCPs) are at the frontline in the fight against COVID-19 and are at an increased risk of becoming infected with coronavirus. Risk of infection can be minimized by use of proper personal protective equipment (PPE). The aim of this study was to assess the availability and use of PPE, and satisfaction of HCPs with PPE in six public hospitals in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted among 1134 HCPs in June 2020. A systematic random sampling and consecutive sampling techniques were used to select the study participants. Data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the data and Chi-square test was used to assess the association between the groups. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess factors associated with satisfaction of healthcare workers. Results The mean (±SD) age of the participants was 30.26 ± 6.43 year and 52.6% were females. Nurses constituted about 40% of the overall sample, followed by physicians (22.2%), interns (10.8%), midwives (10.3%) and others (16.7%). The majority (77%) of the HCPs reported that their hospital did not have adequate PPE. A critical shortage of N95 respirators was particularly reported, it only increased from 13 to 24% before and during COVID-19, respectively. The use of N95 increased from 9 to 21% before and during COVID-19, respectively. Almost 72% of the respondents were dissatisfied with the availability and use of PPE in their hospital. The independent predictors of the respondents’ satisfaction level about PPE were healthcare workers who reported that PPE was adequately available in the hospital (adjusted OR = 7.65, 95% CI:5.09–11.51), and preparedness to provide care to COVID-19 cases (adjusted OR = 2.07, 95% CI:1.42–3.03). Conclusions A critical shortage of appropriate PPE and high level of dissatisfaction with the availability and use of PPE were identified. Therefore, urgent efforts are needed to adequately supply the healthcare facilities with appropriate PPE to alleviate the challenges.

scholarly journals A national survey of potential acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines in healthcare workers in Egypt

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aliae AR Mohamed Hussein ◽  
Islam Galal ◽  
Nahed A Makhlouf ◽  
Hoda A Makhlouf ◽  
Howaida K Abd-Elaal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Chronic Diseases ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Genetic Mutation ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Health Care Employees ◽  
History Of

AbstractBackgroundSince the start of COVID-19 outbreak investigators are competing to develop and exam vaccines against COVID-19. It would be valuable to protect the population especially health care employees from COVID-19 infection. The success of COVID-19 vaccination programs will rely heavily on public willingness to accept the vaccine.AimsThis study aimed to describe the existing COVID-19 vaccine approval landscape among the health care providers and to identify the most probable cause of agreement or disagreement of COVID-19 vaccine.MethodsA cross-sectional online survey was done.ResultsThe present study included 496 health care employees, 55% were at age group from 18-45 years old. History of chronic diseases was recorded in 40.4%, and definite history of drug/food allergy in 10.1%. Only 13.5% totally agree to receive the vaccine, 32.4% somewhat agree and 40.9% disagreed to take the vaccine. Causes of disagreement were none safety, fear of genetic mutation and recent techniques and believe that the vaccine is not effective (57%, 20.2%, 17.7% and 16.6% respectively). The most trusted vaccine was the mRNA based vaccine. The age of health care employees and the presence of comorbidities or chronic diseases were the main factors related to COVID-19 acceptance (P<0.001 and 0.02 respectively).ConclusionVaccine hesitancy is not uncommon in healthcare employees in Egypt and this may be an alarming barrier of vaccine acceptance in the rest of population. There is an urgent need to start campaigns to increase the awareness of the vaccine importance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document