scholarly journals Health Care Workers’ Reasons for Choosing Between Two Different COVID-19 Prophylaxis Trials in an Acute Pandemic Context: Single-Center Questionnaire Study

10.2196/23441 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. e23441
Author(s):  
Alberto M Borobia ◽  
Irene García-García ◽  
Lucía Díaz-García ◽  
Amelia Rodríguez-Mariblanca ◽  
Lucía Martínez de Soto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Health Care Workers ◽  
Adverse Reactions ◽  
Primary Reason ◽  
Initial Screening ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Care Workers ◽  
Survey Participation ◽  
News Bulletin

Background In April 2020, two independent clinical trials to assess SARS-CoV-2 prophylaxis strategies among health care workers were initiated at our hospital: MeCOVID (melatonin vs placebo) and EPICOS (tenofovir disoproxil/emtricitabine vs hydroxychloroquine vs combination therapy vs placebo). Objective This study aimed to evaluate the reasons why health care workers chose to participate in the MeCOVID and EPICOS trials, as well as why they chose one over the other. Methods Both trials were offered to health care workers through an internal news bulletin. After an initial screening visit, all subjects were asked to respond to a web-based survey. Results In the first month, 206 health care workers were screened and 160 were randomized. The survey participation was high at 73.3%. Health care workers cited “to contribute to scientific knowledge” (n=80, 53.0%), followed by “to avoid SARS-CoV-2 infection” (n=33, 21.9%) and “the interest to be tested for SARS-CoV-2” (n=28, 18.5%), as their primary reasons to participate in the trials. We observed significant differences in the expected personal benefits across physicians and nurses (P=.01). The vast majority of volunteers (n=202, 98.0%) selected the MeCOVID trial, their primary reason being their concern regarding adverse reactions to treatments in the EPICOS trial (n=102, 69.4%). Conclusions Health care workers’ reasons to participate in prophylaxis trials in an acute pandemic context appear to be driven largely by their desire to contribute to science and to gain health benefits. Safety outweighed efficacy when choosing between the two clinical trials.

scholarly journals Healthcare workers’ reasons for choosing between two different COVID-19 prophylaxis trials in an acute pandemic context: Results from an online survey (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alberto Borobia ◽  
Irene García-García ◽  
Lucía Díaz-García ◽  
Amelia Rodríguez-Mariblanca ◽  
Lucía Martínez de Soto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Adverse Reactions ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Main Motivation ◽  
Survey Participation ◽  
News Bulletin ◽  
Motivation To Participate

BACKGROUND In April 2020, two independent clinical trials (CT) to assess SARS-Cov-2 prophylaxis in healthcare workers were started in our Hospital: MeCOVID (melatonin vs placebo) and EPICOS (tenofovir disoproxil/emtricitabine vs hydroxychloroquine vs the combination of both vs placebo). OBJECTIVE We aim to evaluate the motivations to participate and the reasons to choose one or another. METHODS Both CTs were offered to personnel through the internal news bulletin. After the screening visit, all subjects were asked to answer a web-based survey. RESULTS In the first month, 206 healthcare workers were screened and 160 randomized. Survey participation was quite high, 73.3%. The main motivation to participate was “to contribute to scientific knowledge” 53.0%, followed by “to avoid SARS-Cov-2 infection” and “the interest to be tested for SARS-CoV-2”. We found differences between physicians and nurses in the expected personal benefits (P<0.05). The vast majority of the volunteers selected the MeCOVID study, the main reason was the fear of adverse reactions associated with treatments in EPICOS, 69.4%. CONCLUSIONS Healthcare workers´ motivations to participate in prophylaxis trials in a pandemic context appear to be driven mostly by their desire to contribute to science and getting some health benefits. Safety seems to weight way more than efficacy to choose between CTs.

Methods for Evaluating the Protective Activity of Intravenous Immunoglobulins for Neonatal Pathogens: Entanglement or Encouragement?

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1990 ◽  
Vol 86 (6) ◽  
pp. 995-997
Author(s):  
CAROL J. BAKER ◽  
MORVEN S. EDWARDS
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Preterm Infants ◽  
Health Care Workers ◽  
Neonatal Sepsis ◽  
Adjunctive Therapy ◽  
Intravenous Immunoglobulins ◽  
Protective Activity ◽  
Care Workers ◽  
Incidence And Mortality

Reducing neonatal mortality is a goal common among health care workers. However, the means by which to achieve this goal may engender debate and cause confusion. It is inherently attractive to consider human immunoglobulin prepared for intravenous use as an adjunct to therapy for neonatal sepsis, especially in those preterm infants who have the highest incidence and mortality. Before we embark on difficult and costly clinical trials to determine the efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) as adjunctive therapy, however, two hurdles must be surmounted. Commercial preparations of IVIG must be proved to be safe in neonates and there must be the promise that their benefit will outweigh both risk and cost.

scholarly journals Vaccination willingness for COVID-19 among health care workers in Switzerland

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathrin Zuercher ◽  
Catrina Mugglin ◽  
Matthias Egger ◽  
Sandro Mueller ◽  
Michael Fluri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Workers ◽  
Vaccination Campaign ◽  
Vaccine Safety ◽  
Willingness To Accept ◽  
Medical Doctors ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Care Workers ◽  
Vaccination Hesitancy

Aims of the study: Vaccination is regarded as the most promising response to the COVID-19 pandemic. We assessed opinions towards COVID-19 vaccination, willingness to be vaccinated, and reasons for vaccination hesitancy among health care workers (HCWs). Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional, web-based survey among 3,793 HCWs in December 2020 in the Canton of Solothurn, Switzerland, before the start of the national COVID-19 vaccination campaign. Results: Median age was 43 years (interquartile range [IQR] 31-53), 2,841 were female (74.9%). 1,511 HCWs (39.8%) reported willingness to accept vaccination, while 1,114 (29.4%) were unsure, and 1,168 (30.8%) would decline vaccination. Among medical doctors, 76.1% were willing, while only 27.8% of nurses expressed willingness. Among 1,168 HCWs who would decline vaccination, 1,073 (91.9%) expressed concerns about vaccine safety and side effects. The willingness of HCWs to be vaccinated was associated with older age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.97, 95%Cl 1.71-2.27) and having been vaccinated for influenza this year (aOR 2.70, 95%Cl 2.20-3.31). HCWs who reported a lack of confidence in government were less likely to be willing to be vaccinated (aOR 0.58, 95%Cl 0.40-0.84), and women were less willing to be vaccinated than men (OR 0.33 (0.28-0.38). Conclusion: Less than half of HCWs reported willingness to be vaccinated before the campaign start, but proportions varied greatly depending on the profession and workplace. Strategies with clear and objective messages that particularly address the concerns of HCWs are needed if their willingness to be vaccinated is to be increased.

scholarly journals COVID-19 Fear Among Health Care Workers (HCW) and Non-HCW in IGMC, Shimla: An Online Questionnaire-Based Prospective Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Girish K Sharma ◽  
Pamposh Raina ◽  
Kailash C Barwal ◽  
Manjeet Kumar ◽  
Vineet Kumar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Workers ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Online Questionnaire ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Care Workers ◽  
Fear And Anxiety

The unremitting COVID-19 pandemic is evoking anxiety, fear, panic, and socio-occupational stress among human population all around the globe. This cross-sectional study was planned to assess the fear and anxiety because of COVID-19 pandemic among health care professionals, patients, and general public in IGMC, Shimla. A cross-sectional, web-based survey was conducted in month of December 2020. COVID-19 fear questionnaire was used to assess fear among participants. A total of 162 responses were received. Ninety-five (41.35%) respondents were males and 67(58.64%) were females. Average total score of COVID-19 fear based on questionnaire was 17.71 among the participants. The majority of respondents 67(41.4%) were afraid of COVID-19, 53(32.7%) were neutral, whereas 42 (25.9%) were not afraid of COVID-19. Sixty-two (38.3%) responders were uncomfortable thinking about COVID-19, whereas, 67(41.4%) were not uncomfortable. Only 22 (13.6%) participants felt their hands clammy when they thought of COVID-19, 78 (48.15%) respondents were afraid of losing their life, 78 (48.15%) respondents disagreed with the question of being nervous or anxious to hear news and stories of COVID-19. Thirteen (8%) participants were informed of sleeplessness, and 22 (13.5%) reported palpitations due to COVID-19 fear. COVID-19 fear was evident in 65.15% of all males and 55.8% of all females’ respondents, respectively. Seventy percent of participants of age more than 40 years were afraid of COVID-19, whereas only 54.83% participants of less than 40 years had COVID-19 fear. COVID-19 fear was more evident among non-HCW (74.42%) as compared to HCW in whom it was seen in 53.03% participants. Rampaging Pandemic has ingrained fear and anxiety among non-HCW as well as health care workers. But undeterred by COVID-19 fear, majority of participants didn’t fear death and didn’t have other effects of fear. Despite (can be used) surging pandemic when fear of COVID-19 is soaring, HCW and non-HCW could work, think, and live.

scholarly journals Association of Social Network Use With Increased Anxiety Related to the COVID-19 Pandemic in Anesthesiology, Intensive Care, and Emergency Medicine Teams: Cross-Sectional Web-Based Survey Study (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Clavier ◽  
Benjamin Popoff ◽  
Jean Selim ◽  
Marion Beuzelin ◽  
Melanie Roussel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Social Networks ◽  
Emergency Medicine ◽  
Critical Care ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Social Network ◽  
Health Care Workers ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Care Workers

BACKGROUND Critical care teams are on the front line of managing the COVID-19 pandemic, which is stressful for members of these teams. OBJECTIVE Our objective was to assess whether the use of social networks is associated with increased anxiety related to the COVID-19 pandemic among members of critical care teams. METHODS We distributed a web-based survey to physicians, residents, registered and auxiliary nurses, and nurse anesthetists providing critical care (anesthesiology, intensive care, or emergency medicine) in several French hospitals. The survey evaluated the respondents’ use of social networks, their sources of information on COVID-19, and their levels of anxiety and information regarding COVID-19 on analog scales from 0 to 10. RESULTS We included 641 respondents in the final analysis; 553 (86.3%) used social networks, spending a median time of 60 minutes (IQR 30-90) per day on these networks. COVID-19–related anxiety was higher in social network users than in health care workers who did not use these networks (median 6, IQR 5-8 vs median 5, IQR 3-7) in univariate (<i>P</i>=.02) and multivariate (<i>P</i>&lt;.001) analyses, with an average anxiety increase of 10% in social network users. Anxiety was higher among health care workers using social networks to obtain information on COVID-19 than among those using other sources (median 6, IQR 5-8 vs median 6, IQR 4-7; <i>P</i>=.04). Social network users considered that they were less informed about COVID-19 than those who did not use social networks (median 8, IQR 7-9 vs median 7, IQR 6-8; <i>P</i>&lt;.01). CONCLUSIONS Our results suggest that social networks contribute to increased anxiety in critical care teams. To protect their mental health, critical care professionals should consider limiting their use of these networks during the COVID-19 pandemic.

scholarly journals Feasibility of using postal and web-based surveys to estimate the prevalence of tuberculosis among health care workers in South Africa

PLoS ONE ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. e0197022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pinky N. Manana ◽  
Lazarus Kuonza ◽  
Alfred Musekiwa ◽  
Hendrik Koornhof ◽  
Ananta Nanoo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Workers ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Care Workers

scholarly journals A Web-Based, Mobile-Responsive Application to Screen Health Care Workers for COVID-19 Symptoms: Rapid Design, Deployment, and Usage

10.2196/19533 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (10) ◽  
pp. e19533
Author(s):  
Haipeng Zhang ◽  
Dimitar Dimitrov ◽  
Lynn Simpson ◽  
Nina Plaks ◽  
Balaji Singh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Workers ◽  
The United States ◽  
Time Of Day ◽  
The Self ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Symptom Screening ◽  
Care Workers ◽  
Self Service ◽  
Service Application

Background As of July 17, 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic has affected over 14 million people worldwide, with over 3.68 million cases in the United States. As the number of COVID-19 cases increased in Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health mandated that all health care workers be screened for symptoms daily prior to entering any hospital or health care facility. We rapidly created a digital COVID-19 symptom screening tool to enable this screening for a large, academic, integrated health care delivery system, Partners HealthCare, in Boston, Massachusetts. Objective The aim of this study is to describe the design and development of the COVID Pass COVID-19 symptom screening application and report aggregate usage data from the first three months of its use across the organization. Methods Using agile principles, we designed, tested, and implemented a solution over the span of one week using progressively customized development approaches as the requirements and use case become more solidified. We developed the minimum viable product (MVP) of a mobile-responsive, web-based, self-service application using research electronic data capture (REDCap). For employees without access to a computer or mobile device to use the self-service application, we established a manual process where in-person, socially distanced screeners asked employees entering the site if they have symptoms and then manually recorded the responses in an Office 365 Form. A custom .NET Framework application solution was developed as COVID Pass was scaled. We collected log data from the .NET application, REDCap, and Microsoft Office 365 from the first three months of enterprise deployment (March 30 to June 30, 2020). Aggregate descriptive statistics, including overall employee attestations by day and site, employee attestations by application method (COVID Pass automatic screening vs manual screening), employee attestations by time of day, and percentage of employees reporting COVID-19 symptoms, were obtained. Results We rapidly created the MVP and gradually deployed it across the hospitals in our organization. By the end of the first week, the screening application was being used by over 25,000 employees each weekday. After three months, 2,169,406 attestations were recorded with COVID Pass. Over this period, 1865/160,159 employees (1.2%) reported positive symptoms. 1,976,379 of the 2,169,406 attestations (91.1%) were generated from the self-service screening application. The remainder were generated either from manual attestation processes (174,865/2,169,406, 8.1%) or COVID Pass kiosks (25,133/2,169,406, 1.2%). Hospital staff continued to work 24 hours per day, with staff attestations peaking around shift changes between 7 and 8 AM, 2 and 3 PM, 4 and 6 PM, and 11 PM and midnight. Conclusions Using rapid, agile development, we quickly created and deployed a dedicated employee attestation application that gained widespread adoption and use within our health system. Further, we identified 1865 symptomatic employees who otherwise may have come to work, potentially putting others at risk. We share the story of our implementation, lessons learned, and source code (via GitHub) for other institutions who may want to implement similar solutions.

scholarly journals A web-based health education module and its impact on the preventive practices of health-care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 353-361
Author(s):  
Kiran Abbas ◽  
S Muhammad A Nawaz ◽  
Nazish Amin ◽  
Fareena M Soomro ◽  
Kanza Abid ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Education ◽  
Hand Hygiene ◽  
Health Care Workers ◽  
Post Intervention ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Preventive Practices ◽  
Preventative Measures ◽  
Care Workers ◽  
The Difference

Abstract Proper training on the preventive measures against COVID-19 among health-care workers is crucial for mitigating the spread of viral infection. The present study evaluated the efficacy of a brief web-based module on the practice of hand hygiene and respiratory etiquette among respective health-care workers. A comparative study was conducted with a total of 500 participants. A self-reported questionnaire was used for both pre- and post-intervention evaluation. The post-intervention assessment was conducted 1–2 weeks following the intervention. The difference in the practice of hand hygiene and respiratory etiquettes during work hours was recorded. We found that the intervention resulted in an evident difference in the use of alcohol-based hand sanitizer by the participating doctors before examining the patient. Interns showed a much higher propensity to wash their hands for at least 20 s, relative to other health-care workers. The difference between pre- and post-intervention handwashing for &gt;5 times/day was 6.5% in females and 4.5% in males. In short, the study was able to demonstrate that a web-based health education module is an effective tool for the education and promotion of preventative measures in hospital setups, which may ultimately aid in halting the spread of COVID-19 among health-care workers.

scholarly journals High Work-Related Stress and Anxiety as a Response to COVID-19 Among Health Care Workers in South Korea: Cross-sectional Online Survey Study (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Myung Hee Ahn ◽  
Yong-Wook Shin ◽  
Sooyeon Suh ◽  
Jeong Hye Kim ◽  
Hwa Jung Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Health Care Workers ◽  
Psychological Health ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Psychiatric History ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Care Workers ◽  
Nursing Professionals

BACKGROUND The COVID-19 outbreak had a severe impact on health care workers' psychological health. It is important to establish a process for psychological assessment and intervention for health care workers during epidemics. OBJECTIVE We investigated risk factors associated with psychological impacts for each health care worker group, to help optimize psychological interventions for health care workers in countries affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS Respondents (n=1787) from 2 hospitals in Korea completed a web-based survey during the period from April 14 to 30, 2020. The web-based survey collected demographic information, psychiatric history, and responses to the 9-item Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemics (SAVE-9), 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), and 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) scales. We performed logistic regression to assess contributing factors as predictor variables, using health care workers’ depression as outcome variables. RESULTS Among 1783 health care workers, nursing professionals had significantly higher levels of depression (PHQ-9 score: meannurse 5.5, SD 4.6; meanother 3.8, SD 4.2; <i>P</i>&lt;.001), general anxiety (GAD-7 score: meannurse 4.0, SD 4.1; meanother 2.7, SD 3.6; <i>P</i>&lt;.001), and virus-related anxiety symptoms (SAVE-9 score: meannurse 21.6, SD 5.9; meanother 18.6, SD 6.3; <i>P</i>&lt;.001). Among nursing professionals, single workers reported more severe depressive symptoms than married workers (PHQ-9 score ≥10; meannurse 20.3%; meanother 14.1%; <i>P</i>=.02), and junior (&lt;40 years) workers reported more anxiety about the viral epidemic (SAVE-9 anxiety score; meannurse 15.6, SD 4.1; meanother 14.7, SD 4.4; <i>P</i>=.002). Logistic regression revealed that hospital (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.45, 95% CI 1.06-1.99), nursing professionals (adjusted OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.02-1.98), single workers (adjusted OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.05-2.16), higher stress and anxiety to the viral infection (high SAVE-9 score, adjusted OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.17-1.24), and past psychiatric history (adjusted OR 3.26, 95% CI 2.15-4.96) were positively associated with depression. CONCLUSIONS Psychological support and interventions should be considered for health care workers, especially nursing professionals, those who are single, and those with high SAVE-9 scores. CLINICALTRIAL

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document