Dataset Information

The Influence of the COVID-19 Pandemic on ICU Organization, Care Processes, and Frontline Clinician Experiences: A Qualitative Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in unprecedented adjustments to ICU organization and care processes globally.

Research questions

Did hospital emergency responses to the COVID-19 pandemic differ depending on hospital setting? Which strategies worked well to mitigate strain as perceived by intensivists?

Study design and methods

Between August and November 2020, we carried out semistructured interviews of intensivists from tertiary and community hospitals across six regions in the United States that experienced early or large surges of COVID-19 patients, or both. We identified themes of hospital emergency responses using the four S framework of acute surge planning: space, staff, stuff, system.

Results

Thirty-three intensivists from seven tertiary and six community hospitals participated. Clinicians across both settings believed that canceling elective surgeries was helpful to increase ICU capabilities and that hospitals should establish clearly defined thresholds at which surgeries are limited during future surge events. ICU staff was the most limited resource; staff shortages were improved by the use of tiered staffing models, just-in-time training for non-ICU clinicians, designated treatment teams, and deployment of trainees. Personal protective equipment (PPE) shortages and reuse were widespread, causing substantial distress among clinicians; hands-on PPE training was helpful to reduce clinicians' anxiety. Transparency and involvement of frontline clinicians as stakeholders were important components of effective emergency responses and helped to maintain trust among staff.

Interpretation

We identified several strategies potentially to mitigate strain as perceived by intensivists working in both tertiary and community hospital settings. Our study also demonstrated the importance of trust and transparency between frontline staff and hospital leadership as key components of effective emergency responses during public health crises.

SUBMITTER: Vranas KC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8164514 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, nurses have played vital roles in clinical treatment. Their success in providing adequate care services depends on their psychological state, which determines their physical health, work status, therapeutic outcomes, and response to public health emergencies. However, a limited number of studies have evaluated psychological care needs from the perspective of nurses. This study aimed to describe the psychological care needs for frontline nurses in the course of the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsThis was a qualitative descriptive study. Data were collected through semi-structured in-depth interviews with 15 frontline nurses who had been involved in the care of COVID-19 positive patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, and received psychological care. The conventional content analysis was used to identify themes from the interview transcripts.ResultsFour major themes about the psychological care needs of frontline nurses were identified: (1) psychological service providers (categories: professional service team, trustworthy person or group, ability to empathize with nurses); (2) problems with psychological care (categories: lack of universal screening and focused attention, online group counseling lacks targeting, psychological interventions lack individualization); (3) psychological care content (categories: mental health-related education, recognition of nurses' contributions, problem-solving therapy, psychological counseling and venting); (4) organization and management of psychological services (categories: focus on the psychological care needs of frontline nurses, build a standardized psychological service process system).ConclusionIt is important to understand individual psychological care needs of frontline nurses and to provide them with tailor-made psychological care that meet their needs. This will improve their mental health, promote clinical care and quality responses to public health emergencies.

Project description:ObjectiveTo describe the drivers of distress and motivations faced by interdisciplinary clinicians who were on the frontline caring for patients with COVID-19.Design50 semistructured interviews. Transcripts were analysed using qualitative thematic analysis.SettingA safety-net hospital in Denver, Colorado.ParticipantsInterdisciplinary frontline clinicians including physicians, advance practice providers, nurses, respiratory therapists and paramedics providing inpatient hospital care to patients hospitalised for COVID-19.ResultsFifty clinicians (32 women and 18 men) participated. Five themes with respective subthemes (in parentheses) were identified: depersonalisation and barriers to care (impeding rapport and compassion, focusing on infection risk at the expense of high-quality care, grief from witnessing patients suffer in isolation), powerless in uncertainty (inescapable awareness of personal risk, therapeutic doubt in a void of evidence, confronting ethical dilemmas, struggling with dynamic and unfamiliar challenges), overwhelmed and exhausted (burden of personal protective equipment (PPE), information overload and confusion, overstretched by additional responsibilities at work, compounded by personal life stressors, feeling vulnerable and dispensable, compassion fatigue, distress from the disproportionate impact on socially oppressed communities), bolstering morale and confidence (motivated by community and family support, equipped with data), and driven by moral duty (responsibility to patient care and community, collegial solidarity and collaboration, contributing to the greater good).ConclusionFrontline clinicians reported distress due to the challenges of PPE, uncertainty and powerlessness, new responsibilities at work and home, losing control of their schedules, grief from witnessing patients suffer in isolation and witnessing healthcare disparities exacerbated by this pandemic. Clinicians feel supported by their colleagues, families, and community and were driven by a sense of moral duty. Healthcare system should adopt strategies to minimise distress faced by interdisciplinary clinicians on the frontline of COVID-19.

Project description:Aims and objectiveTo explore the experiences of frontline nurses through analyzing nurse online diaries during the pandemic.BackgroundOver 42,600 healthcare professionals took care of patients with COVID-19 in Wuhan in the initial months between 23 January 2020 and 8 April 2020. Many used to write online diaries on Sina Microblog and still wrote about their experiences in the front line on this site. However, there has been little research on frontline nurses' experiences in the initial months of the pandemic through analyzing their narratives.DesignA qualitative descriptive design.MethodsA qualitative content analysis was used to analyze online diaries written by frontline nurses in Wuhan. A total of 205 entries in online diaries were collected from 12 frontline nurses, as accessible to those who subscribed to Sina Microblog social media site, between 23 January 2020 and 8 April 2020. NVivo12 was used to help analyze the data, and COREQ reporting guidelines were also used in this study.ResultsTwo themes were identified: constructing a better self and constructing a strong support network. A better self was constructed in describing positive emotions, commitment to care, pride and achievements, and whole-person growth. A strong support network was constructed through social support via different sources and gaining self-support via narrating their personal experiences in diaries.ConclusionsFrontline nurses demonstrated personal growth, psychological well-being, and professionalism in the process of constructing a better self and a strong support network.Relevance to clinical practiceThe findings indicate that frontline nurses can use narratives as debriefing opportunities and a way of gaining self-support. We suggest that online communities of professional support be used as an essential platform for sharing narratives and gaining a more comprehensive understanding of frontline nurses in the COVID-19 pandemic and other global public health events.

Project description:BackgroundThe World Health Organisation (WHO) publishes a large number of clinical practice and public health guidelines to promote evidence-based practice across the world. Due to the variety of health system capacities and contextual issues in different regions and countries, adapting the recommendations in the guidelines to the local situation is vital for the success of their implementation. We aim to understand the range of experiences with guideline adaptation from the perspectives of those working in WHO regional and country offices. Our findings will inform development of guidance on how to improve adaptability of WHO guidelines.MethodsA grounded theory-informed, qualitative study was carried out between March 2018 and December 2018. Seventeen semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants who included WHO guideline developers and staff in the headquarters, regional and country offices recruited from a sample of published WHO guidelines. Participants were eligible for recruitment if they had recent experience in clinical practice or public health guideline implementation. Deidentified transcripts of these interview were analysed through three cycles of coding.ResultsWe categorised the adaptation processes described by the participants into two dominant models along a spectrum of guideline adaptation processes. First, the Copy or Customise Model is a pragmatic approach of either copying or customising WHO guidelines to suit local needs. This is done by local health authorities and/or clinicians directly through consultations with WHO staff. Selections and adjustments of guideline recommendations are made according to what the implementers deemed important, feasible and applicable through the consensus discussions. Second, the Capacity Building Model focuses on WHO building local capacity in evidence synthesis methods and adaptation frameworks to support local development of a national guideline informed by international guidelines.ConclusionsIn comparing and contrasting these two models of guideline adaptation, we outline the different kinds of support from WHO that may be necessary to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the respective models. We also suggest clarifications in the descriptions of the process of guideline adaptation in WHO and academic literature, to help guideline adaptors and implementers decide on the appropriate course of action according to their specific circumstances.EthicsThis project was conducted with ethics approval from The University of Sydney (Project number: 2017/723) and WHO (Protocol ID: 00001).

Project description:ObjectivesTo report frontline healthcare workers' (HCWs) experiences with personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. To understand HCWs' fears and concerns surrounding PPE, their experiences following its guidance and how these affected their perceived ability to deliver care during the COVID-19 pandemic.DesignA rapid qualitative appraisal study combining three sources of data: semistructured in-depth telephone interviews with frontline HCWs (n=46), media reports (n=39 newspaper articles and 145 000 social media posts) and government PPE policies (n=25).ParticipantsInterview participants were HCWs purposively sampled from critical care, emergency and respiratory departments as well as redeployed HCWs from primary, secondary and tertiary care centres across the UK.ResultsA major concern was running out of PPE, putting HCWs and patients at risk of infection. Following national level guidance was often not feasible when there were shortages, leading to reuse and improvisation of PPE. Frequently changing guidelines generated confusion and distrust. PPE was reserved for high-risk secondary care settings and this translated into HCWs outside these settings feeling inadequately protected. Participants were concerned about differential access to adequate PPE, particularly for women and Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic HCWs. Participants continued delivering care despite the physical discomfort, practical problems and communication barriers associated with PPE use.ConclusionThis study found that frontline HCWs persisted in caring for their patients despite multiple challenges including inappropriate provision of PPE, inadequate training and inconsistent guidance. In order to effectively care for patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, frontline HCWs need appropriate provision of PPE, training in its use as well as comprehensive and consistent guidance. These needs must be addressed in order to protect the health and well-being of the most valuable healthcare resource in the COVID-19 pandemic: our HCWs.

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has had a well-documented negative impact on the mental health and wellbeing of frontline healthcare workers (HCWs). Whilst no research has to date been carried out to explore the challenges experienced by the families of HCWs, some previous research has been conducted with military families, demonstrating that family members of deployed military personnel may also be affected seriously and negatively.ObjectivesThis study aimed to explore the experiences, views, and mental health impact on frontline HCWs' families during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK and what support the families of frontline HCWs may need.MethodClose family members and friends of HCWs were interviewed. Transcripts were analysed in line with the principles of reflexive thematic analysis.ResultsWe completed fourteen interviews with three siblings, one mother, one friend, and nine spouses of HCWs. Family members were highly motivated to support healthcare workers and felt an intense sense of pride in their work. However, they also experienced increased domestic responsibilities and emotional burden due to anxiety about their loved ones' work. The fact that sacrifices made by family members were not noticed by society, the anxiety they felt about their family's physical health, the impact of hearing about traumatic experiences, and the failure of healthcare organisations to meet the needs of the HCWs all negatively affected the family members.ConclusionsWe have an ethical responsibility to attend to the experiences and needs of the families of healthcare professionals. This study emphasises the experiences and needs of family members of healthcare professionals, which have hitherto been missing from the literature. Further research is needed to hear from more parents, siblings and friends, partners in same sex relationships, as well as children of HCWs, to explore the variety of family members and supporters' experiences more fully.Highlights• COVID19 has impacted families of HCWs as well as workers themselves. They have experienced more anxiety, increased practical burden, significant physical health risks and been exposed vicariously to workers' traumatic experiences. We must ensure HCW families are better supported.