OBJECTIVE: To examine the psychological impact of COVID-19 on emergency HCWs and to understand how they are dealing with COVID-19 pandemic, their stress coping strategies or protective factors, and challenges while dealing with COVID-19 patients.
METHODS: Using a framework thematic analysis approach, 15 frontline emergency HCWs directly dealing with COVID-19 patients from April 2, 2020 to April 25, 2020. The semi-structured interviews were conducted face-to-face or by telephone. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Findings highlighted first major theme of stress coping, including, limiting media exposure, limited sharing of Covid-19 duty details, religious coping, just another emergency approach, altruism, and second major theme of Challenges includes, psychological response and noncompliance of public/denial by religious scholar.
CONCLUSIONS: Participants practiced and recommended various coping strategies to deal with stress and anxiety emerging from COVID-19 pandemic. Media was reported to be a principal source of raising stress and anxiety among the public. Religious coping as well as their passion to serve humanity and country were the commonly employed coping strategies.
METHODS: A qualitative study design in which 15 healthcare workers from nurses (4), pharmacists (3), medical technologies (4) and medical doctors (4) participated: two focus group of three to four participants each and eight in-depth interviews. The thematic sessions were identified, including occupational health and safety policy implementations, hazards experiences, barriers, and strategies for quality improvement for OSH. Focus groups and interviews using transcript-based analysis were identified relating to emerging themes on the challenges they had experienced while accessing provisions of OSH in their workplace.
RESULTS: Majority of the participants revealed the existence of policy on Occupational Health and Safety (provisions, guidelines and regulations on OHS from the government) and mentioned that there were limited OHS officers to supervise the healthcare workers in their workplace. Some have limited accessibility to the requirements of the implementation of OHS (free facemasks, gloves, disinfectants, machines, OSH staff, etc.) among healthcare workers, while the workload of the staff in the implementation of OHS in the workplace gradually increased. The results indicated that the respondents were knowledgeable in the implementation of OHS in the workplace, and that there was no existing ASEAN framework on the protection and promotion of the rights of healthcare workers in their workplace. Facilities need to improve health assessment, and to ensure constant evaluation of the existing laws for healthcare workers (quality assurance of existing policies) in their working areas. Direct access to OSH officers, occupational hazards education, emergency contact etc. must be improved. Adherence must be strengthened to fully comply with the OHS standards.
CONCLUSION: The researchers inferred that issues and concerns regarding compliance on provisions of occupational health and safety among health care workers must be properly addressed through immediate monitoring and reevaluation of personnel in terms of their knowledge and practices in OHS. Barriers and challenges have been identified in the study that can lead to improved compliance among healthcare workers in regards to OHS.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multicentre prospective cohort study was conducted among employees from 2 different public universities in Malaysia. Interventions include at least 2 sessions of behavioural therapy combined with free nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for 8 weeks. Participants were followed up for 6 months. Independent variables assessed were on sociodemographic and environmental tobacco smoke. Their quit status were determined at 1 week, 3 months and 6 months.
RESULTS: One hundred and eighty- five smokers volunteered to participate. Among the participants, 15% and 13% sustained quit at 3 months and 6 months respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that at 6 months, attending all 3 behavioural sessions predicted success. None of the environmental tobacco exposure variables were predictive of sustained cessation.
CONCLUSION: Individual predictors of success in intra-workplace smoking cessation programmes do not differ from the conventional clinic-based smoking cessation. Furthermore, environmental tobacco exposure in low intensity smoke-free workplaces has limited influence on smokers who succeeded in maintaining 6 months quitting.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective randomised control trial was conducted on smokers in a factory. A total of 163 participants were recruited and randomised into control and intervention groups using a table of random numbers. The intervention group received a ten-minute brief physician counselling session to quit smoking. Stages of smoking behaviour were measured in both groups using a translated and validated questionnaire at baseline, one month and three months post intervention.
RESULTS: There was a significant improvement in smoking behaviour at one-month post intervention (p=0.024, intention to treat analysis; OR=2.525; CI=1.109-5.747). This was not significant at three-month post intervention (p=0.946, intention to treat analysis; OR=1.026; 95% CI=0.486-2.168).
CONCLUSIONS: A session of brief physician counselling was effective in improving smokers' behaviour at workplace, but the effect was not sustained.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective interventional study with a before and after design requested a single group of 96 nurses in 15 wards actively providing chemotherapy to answer a self-administered questionnaire. A performance checklist was then used to determine the compliance of all these wards with the recommended safety measures. The first and second assessments took 2 months respectively with a 9-month intervention period. Pharmacist-based interventions included a series of technical, educational and administrative support measures consisting of the initiation of closed-system cytotoxic drug reconstitution (CDR) services, courses, training workshops and guideline updates.
RESULTS: The mean age of nurses was 32.2∓6.19 years. Most of them were female (93.8%) and married (72.9%). The mean knowledge score of nurses was significantly increased from 45.5∓10.52 to 73.4∓8.88 out of 100 (p<0.001) at the end of the second assessment. Overall, the mean practice score among the wards was improved from 7.6∓5.51 to 15.3∓2.55 out of 20 (p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The pharmacist-based interventions improved the knowledge, attitude and safe practices of nurses in cytotoxic drug handling. Further assessment may help to confirm the sustainability of the improved practices.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross- sectional study was conducted among 286 non-smokers from two healthcare training centres and two nearby colleges in Malaysia from January 2015 to April 2015. A standardized questionnaire was administered via staff and student emails. The questionnaire collected information on sociodemographic characteristics, support for a tobacco-free policy and perceived respiratory and sensory symptoms due to tobacco exposure. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to estimate the independent effects of supporting a tobacco-free campus.
RESULTS: The percentage of individuals supporting completely tobacco-free facilities was 83.2% (N=238), as opposed to 16.7% (N=48) in support of partially tobacco-free facilities. Compared to the supporters of partially tobacco-free facilities, non-smokers who supported completely tobacco-free health facilities were more likely to be female, have higher education levels, to be very concerned about the effects of other people smoking on their health and to perceive a tobacco-free policy as very important. In addition, they perceived that tobacco smoke bothered them at work by causing headaches and coughs and, in the past 4 weeks, had experienced difficulty breathing. In the multivariate model, after adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics and other factors, only experiencing coughs and headaches increased the odds of supporting a completely tobacco-free campus, up to 2.5- and 1.9-fold, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Coughs and headaches due to other people smoking at work enhances support for a completely tobacco-free campus among non-smokers.
METHOD: An explanatory mixed method research design was carried out on first year medical students at a private university in Malaysia. In Phase I, a survey was conducted to explore the effectiveness of jigsaw learning. Descriptive and inferential statistics were calculated using SPSS. In Phase II, a focus group interview was conducted to explore their in-depth experiences. Qualitative data were thematically analysed.
RESULTS: Fifty-seven students participated in the survey and seven students took part in the focus group interview. Quantitative data analysis showed a statistically significant improvement in the student's individual accountability, promotive interaction, positive interdependence, interpersonal skill, communication skill, teamwork skill, critical thinking and consensus building after jigsaw learning sessions. Qualitative data explained their experiences in-depth.
CONCLUSION: Jigsaw cooperative learning improves collaboration, communication, cooperation and critical thinking among the undergraduate medical students. Educators should use jigsaw learning methods to encourage effective collaboration and team working. Future studies should explore the effectiveness of the jigsaw cooperative learning technique in promoting interprofessional collaboration in the workplace.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted among randomly-selected 715 female nurses in Malaysia using pencil-and-paper self-reported questionnaires.
RESULTS: The majority of participants were ever married (87.0%), having children (76.2%), and work in hospital setting (64.8%). The level of household stressors was generally similar between hospital and non-hospital nurses. However, hospital nurses significantly perceived higher level of workplace stressors. Shift work is significantly associated with higher level of household and workplace stressors among nurses in both groups. The level of stress was significantly higher among hospital nurses. Both household and workplace stressors explained about 40% of stress status in both hospital and non-hospital nurses.
CONCLUSION: Hospital nurses are at higher risk of having stressors and stress as compared to non-hospital nurses, probably due to higher proportion of them involved in shift work. Hospital nurses should be given high priority in mitigating stress among nurses.