METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of reported MERS-CoV cases between December 2016 and January 2019, as retrieved from the World Health Organization. The aim of this study is to examine the epidemiology of reported cases and quantify the percentage of health care workers (HCWs) among reported cases.
RESULTS: There were 403 reported cases with a majority being men (n = 300; 74.4%). These cases were reported from Lebanon, Malaysia, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and United Arab Emirates. HCWs represented 26% and comorbidities were reported among 71% of non-HCWs and 1.9% among HCWs (P < .0001). Camel exposure and camel milk ingestion were reported in 64% each, and the majority (97.8%) of those with camel exposures had camel milk ingestion. There were 58% primary cases and 42% were secondary cases. The case fatality rate was 16% among HCWs compared with 34% among other patients (P = .001). The mean age ± SD was 47.65 ± 16.28 for HCWs versus 54.23 ± 17.34 for non-HCWs (P = .001).
CONCLUSIONS: MERS-CoV infection continues to have a high case fatality rate and a large proportion of patients were HCWs. Further understanding of the disease transmission and prevention mainly in health care settings are needed.
METHOD: A cross-sectional study among pharmacy students. Data were analyzed with Chi-square to find difference at p value < 0.05.
RESULTS: The majority of students (83.07%) responded showing a difference in gender and race. Students showed low willingness (9.2%) to assist patients and low confidence (36.1%) in their education about HIV/AIDS patients. Students recommended HIV testing for health care professionals (69.4%) and patients (75.9%) before surgical procedures. Students knew little about Post Exposure Prophylaxis (18.5%) or about the time for HIV to develop into AIDS (57.4%). About 40% of students were unaware of the inability of antivirals to treat HIV/AIDS. Students had low awareness for opportunistic infections (18.5%), and low agreement on competency to treat and counsel HIV patients (12.9%).
CONCLUSION: The study highlighted students' misconceptions, negative attitudes, and risk perceptions towards HIV/AIDS.
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.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The COVID-19 pandemic has extensively impacted global healthcare systems. We hypothesized that the degree of psychological impact would be higher for surgical providers deployed for COVID-19 work, certain surgical specialties, and for those who knew of someone diagnosed with, or who died, of COVID-19.
METHODS: We conducted a global web-based survey to investigate the psychological impact of COVID-19. The primary outcomes were the depression anxiety stress scale-21 and Impact of Event Scale-Revised scores.
RESULTS: A total of 4283 participants from 101 countries responded. 32.8%, 30.8%, 25.9%, and 24.0% screened positive for depression, anxiety, stress, and PTSD respectively. Respondents who knew someone who died of COVID-19 were more likely to screen positive for depression, anxiety, stress, and PTSD (OR 1.3, 1.6, 1.4, 1.7 respectively, all P < 0.05). Respondents who knew of someone diagnosed with COVID-19 were more likely to screen positive for depression, stress, and PTSD (OR 1.2, 1.2, and 1.3 respectively, all P < 0.05). Surgical specialties that operated in the head and neck region had higher psychological distress among its surgeons. Deployment for COVID- 19-related work was not associated with increased psychological distress.
CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic may have a mental health legacy outlasting its course. The long-term impact of this ongoing traumatic event underscores the importance of longitudinal mental health care for healthcare personnel, with particular attention to those who know of someone diagnosed with, or who died of COVID-19.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 122 year 4 medical students responded to this study. The Attitudes Towards Mental Illness (AMI) and Attitudes Towards Psychiatry (ATP) questionnaires were administered before and after an 8-week attachment in psychiatry.
RESULTS: We found that students had somewhat favourable attitudes towards psychiatry and mental illness at the start of their attachment, with a mean score of 108.34 on ATP (neutral score, 90) and 68.24 on AMI (neutral score, 60). There was a significant increase in the mean scores of both scales following the psychiatric attachment for female students (ATP: P = 0.003; AMI: P <0.0005), but not male students (ATP: P = 0.435; AMI: P = 0.283).
CONCLUSIONS: An 8-week clinical posting of fourth-year medical students in psychiatry was associated with an increase in positive attitudes to mental illness and to psychiatry among female students but not among male students.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional online study using a validated questionnaire was distributed to doctors (MD), assistant medical officers (AMO), and staff nurses (SN) at an urban tertiary Emergency Department. It comprised of 40 knowledge and 10 confidence-level questions related to resuscitation and airway management steps.
RESULTS: A total of 135 from 167 eligible EHCW were enrolled. 68.9% (n = 93) had high knowledge while 53.3% (n = 72) possessed high confidence level. Overall knowledge mean score was 32.96/40 (SD = 3.63) between MD (33.88±3.09), AMO (32.28±4.03), and SN (32.00±3.60), P= 0.025. EHCWs with a length of service (LOS) between 4-10 years had the highest knowledge compared to those with LOS <4-year (33.71±3.39 versus 31.21±3.19 P = 0.002). Airway-related knowledge was significantly different between the designations and LOS (P = 0.002 and P = 0.003, respectively). Overall, EHCW confidence level against LOS showed significant difference [F (2, 132) = 5.46, P = 0.005] with longer LOS showing better confidence. MD showed the highest confidence compared to AMO and SN (3.67±0.69, 3.53±0.68, 3.26±0.64) P = 0.049. The majority EHCW were confident in performing high-quality chest-compression, and handling of Personal Protective Equipment but less than half were confident in resuscitating, leading the resuscitation, managing the airway or being successful in first intubation attempt.
CONCLUSIONS: EHCW possessed good knowledge in airway and resuscitation of COVID-19 patients, but differed between designations and LOS. A longer LOS was associated with better confidence, but there were some aspects in airway management and resuscitation that needed improvement.
Methods: This study, stratified in pre-, during, and post-intervention periods, was conducted between February 2017 and March 2018 in two wards at a tertiary care hospital in Malaysia. Hand hygiene promotion was facilitated either by PICAs (study arm 1) or MSCAs (study arm 2), and the two wards were randomly allocated to one of the two interventions. Outcomes were: 1) perceived leadership styles of PICAs and MSCAs by staff, vocalised during question and answer sessions; 2) the social network connectedness and communication patterns between HCWs and change agents by applying social network analysis; and 3) hand hygiene leadership attributes obtained from HCWs in the post-intervention period by questionnaires.
Results: Hand hygiene compliance in study arm 1 and study arm 2 improved by from 48% (95% CI: 44-53%) to 66% (63-69%), and from 50% (44-55%) to 65% (60-69%), respectively. There was no significant difference between the two arms. Healthcare workers perceived that PICAs lead by example, while MSCAs applied an authoritarian top-down leadership style. The organisational culture of both wards was hierarchical, with little social interaction, but strong team cohesion. Position and networks of both PICAs and MSCAs were similar and generally weaker compared to the leaders who were nominated by HCWs in the post-intervention period. Healthcare workers on both wards perceived authoritative leadership to be the most desirable attribute for hand hygiene improvement.
Conclusion: Despite experiencing successful hand hygiene improvement from PICAs, HCWs expressed a preference for the existing top-down leadership structure. This highlights the limits of applying leadership models that are not supported by the local organisational culture.