SARS-CoV-2 rapid serological tests for field-based healthcare workers in homeless communities: A mixed-methods exploratory analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objectives
The high risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in homeless communities requires adapted prevention strategies for field-based healthcare workers (HCWs). Rapid serological tests (RSTs) could be an invaluable tool for HCWs to control COVID-19 transmission. This study assesses the benefits of RSTs for HCWs in Marseille, France.Study design
Mixed-methods exploratory analysis.Methods
A mixed-methods approach was used, combining quantitative and qualitative data, to prospectively analyse acceptability of RSTs, prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and prevention behaviours in 106 HCWs from 18 non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and health or social institutions in Marseille from June 1 to July 31, 2020. For the qualitative dimension, semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with 21 HCWs from 7 of 18 NGOs and institutions.Results
Most of the 106 HCWs in the quantitative study reported better prevention measures at work than in their homes. Despite this, the majority reported that they felt unsafe at work in terms of COVID-19 infection risk. SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence among the study population was 6.1%. Only four HCWs refused to have an RST.The 21 qualitative interviews highlighted that HCWs were not afraid of RSTs or of any possible stigma associated with a positive serological status, although they were sometimes suspicious about RST validity. Downplaying their risk of infection was a coping strategy to keep both a sense of control and remain motivated at work.Conclusions
RSTs should be adopted as an additional tool in the strategy to protect both HCWs and healthcare service users. Additional follow-up of these observational findings is needed, especially with the increasing prevalence of vaccination in HCWs.
SUBMITTER: Mosnier E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8220274 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundPrimary health care (PHC) was a keystone toward achieving universal health coverage and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). China has made efforts to strengthen its PHC institutions. As part of such efforts, regular in-service training is crucial for primary healthcare workers (PHWs) to strengthen their knowledge and keep their skills up to date.ObjectiveTo investigate if and how the existing training arrangements influenced the competence and job satisfaction of PHWs in township hospitals (THs).MethodsA mixed method approach was employed. We analyzed the associations between in-service training and competence, as well as between in-service training and job satisfaction of PHWs using logistic regression. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using NVivo12 to better understand the trainings and the impacts on PHWs.ResultsThe study found that training was associated with competence for all the types of PHWs except nurses. The odds of higher competence for physicians who received long-term training were 3.60 (p < 0.01) and that of those who received both types of training was 2.40 (p < 0.01). PHWs who received short-term training had odds of higher competence significantly (OR = 1.710, p < 0.05). PHWs who received training were more satisfied than their untrained colleagues in general (OR = 1.638, p < 0.01). Specifically, physicians who received short-term training (OR = 1.916, p < 0.01) and who received both types of training (OR = 1.941, p < 0.05) had greater odds of general job satisfaction. The odds ratios (ORs) of general job satisfaction for nurses who received short-term training was 2.697 (p < 0.01), but this association was not significant for public health workers. The interview data supported these results, and revealed how training influenced competence and satisfaction.ConclusionsConsidering existing evidence that competence and satisfaction serve as two major determinants of health workers' performance, to further improve PHWs' performance, it is necessary to provide sufficient training opportunities and improve the quality of training.
| S-EPMC7713157 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Household spraying is a commonly implemented, yet an under-researched, cholera response intervention where a response team sprays surfaces in cholera patients' houses with chlorine. We conducted mixed-methods evaluations of three household spraying programs in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Haiti, including 18 key informant interviews, 14 household surveys and observations, and 418 surface samples collected before spraying, 30 minutes and 24 hours after spraying. The surfaces consistently most contaminated with Vibrio cholerae were food preparation areas, near the patient's bed and the latrine. Effectiveness varied between programs, with statistically significant reductions in V. cholerae concentrations 30 minutes after spraying in two programs. Surface contamination after 24 hours was variable between households and programs. Program challenges included difficulty locating households, transportation and funding limitations, and reaching households quickly after case presentation (disinfection occurred 2-6 days after reported cholera onset). Program advantages included the concurrent deployment of hygiene promotion activities. Further research is indicated on perception, recontamination, cost-effectiveness, viable but nonculturable V. cholerae, and epidemiological coverage. We recommend that, if spraying is implemented, spraying agents should: disinfect surfaces systematically until wet using 0.2/2.0% chlorine solution, including kitchen spaces, patients' beds, and latrines; arrive at households quickly; and, concurrently deploy hygiene promotion activities.
| S-EPMC7485970 | biostudies-literature
Project description:With COVID-19 no longer categorized as a public health emergency of international concern, vaccination strategies and priority groups for vaccination have evolved. Africa Centres for Diseases Prevention and Control proposed the '100-100-70%' strategy which aims to vaccinate all healthcare workers, all vulnerable groups, and 70% of the general population. Understanding whether healthcare workers were reached during previous vaccination campaigns and what can be done to address concerns, anxieties, and other influences on vaccine uptake, will be important to optimally plan how to achieve these ambitious targets. In this mixed-methods study, between June 2021 and July 2022 a quantitative survey was conducted with healthcare workers accessing a comprehensive health check in Zimbabwe to determine whether and, if so, when they had received a COVID-19 vaccine. Healthcare workers were categorized as those who had received the vaccine 'early' (before 30.06.2021) and those who had received it 'late' (after 30.06.2021). In addition, 17 in-depth interviews were conducted to understand perceptions and beliefs about COVID-19 vaccines. Of the 3,086 healthcare workers employed at 43 facilities who participated in the study, 2,986 (97%, 95% CI [92%-100%]) reported that they had received at least one vaccine dose. Geographical location, older age, higher educational attainment and having a chronic condition was associated with receiving the vaccine early. Qualitatively, (mis)information, infection risk perception, quasi-mandatory vaccination requirements, and legitimate concerns such as safety and efficacy influenced vaccine uptake. Meeting the proposed 100-100-70 target entails continued emphasis on strong communication while engaging meaningfully with healthcare workers' concerns. Mandatory vaccination may undermine trust and should not be a substitute for sustained engagement.
| S-EPMC10734954 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThere is a paucity of research examining models of maternal and child health (MCH) care for refugees in high-income countries. Attention has focused on tailoring existing healthcare services to meet the needs of this population and ensure accessible high-quality patient-centred care. This protocol reports the methodology of a study designed to identify models of care for African refugees in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, to determine the evidence for these models and the improvements necessary to best meet service needs that can be delivered in line with available resources, organisational readiness and capacity to implement.Methods and analysisThis multiphased, participatory research project will employ an exploratory, mixed-methods design. Preparatory activities involve a situational analysis of current MCH services for African refugees and associated policies and guidelines in NSW. We will consult key health service providers and analyse Australian census and settlement data to identify refugee communities and their relation to healthcare services. Phase 1 will ascertain the MCH care needs of African refugees and appropriate service models using: a Delphi survey with health service managers and providers, a nominal group process with African women refugees and; key informant interviews with senior health service managers. This data will be synthesised to provide insight into appropriate models-of-care that could be implemented. These will be discussed in a stakeholder workshop. Phase 2 will comprise a readiness-to-change survey with a selection of providers to explore the willingness, commitment and efficacy of staff members to adopt such models-of-care.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was granted by NSW Health. Findings will be disseminated to all stakeholders at a knowledge exchange forum to inform the development of a high-quality MCH service delivery model that can be feasibly implemented specifically for African refugee communities.Prospero registration numberCRD42018095564.
| S-EPMC7299034 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Healthcare workers (HCWs) were a priority group for COVID-19 vaccination. Adopting the World Health Organization's 3C and the expanded 5C vaccine hesitancy models, we assessed the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptability among HCWs in Kenya. In a mixed methods study, respondents were from eight selected counties across the country. An online survey (n = 746), key informant interviews (n = 18) and focus group discussions (n = 3) were conducted. The data were analyzed concurrently. Quantitative data showed that all the 3C antecedents were strong predictors of vaccine acceptability. The association of vaccine acceptability was strongest with convenience (aOR 20.13, 95% CI 9.01-44.96), then complacency (aOR 10.15, 95% CI 4.63-22.21) and confidence (aOR 6.37, 95% CI 2.90-14.02). Marital status was a significant independent factor associated with vaccine acceptability (aOR 2.70, 95% CI 1.20-6.08). Qualitatively, convenience presented as the no-cost availability of vaccines at the health facilities, whereas non-complacency manifested from the first-hand observed experience of COVID cases, and the need to protect oneself and family members. Confidence was mainly attributed to increased knowledge, resulting from multiple training sessions and trust in regulatory authorities. Other social factors including workplace pressure, religion and misinformation had a role in influencing HCW vaccination decisions. In the background of a pandemic, the 3C model is a strong predictor of vaccine acceptability, and making the vaccines easily available and convenient to HCWs significantly impacts their uptake.
| S-EPMC10459762 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOffice workers typically sit for most of the workday, which has been linked to physical and mental ill-health and premature death. This mixed-methods study sought to identify barriers and facilitators to reducing sitting and increasing standing among office workers who received an intervention prototype (the 'ReSiT [Reducing Sitting Time] Study'). The intervention comprised a sit-stand workstation and tailored advice to enhance motivation, capability and opportunity to displace sitting with standing.MethodsTwenty-nine UK university office workers (aged ≥18y, working ≥3 days per week, most time spent at a seated desk) participated in a 13-week uncontrolled study. They were initially monitored for one-week. In a subsequent face-to-face consultation, participants received sitting time feedback from a prior one-week monitoring period, and selected from a set of tailored sitting-reduction techniques. Quantitative data comprising sitting, standing and stepping time, which were objectively monitored for 7 consecutive days across three post-intervention timepoints, were descriptively analysed. Qualitative data, from semi-structured interviews conducted at 1, 6 and 12-weeks post-intervention, were thematically analysed.ResultsCompared to baseline, mean sitting time decreased at weeks 1, 6 and 12 by 49.7mins, 118.2mins, and 109.7mins respectively. Despite prior concerns about colleagues' reactions to standing, many reported encouragement from others, and standing could be equally conducive to social interaction or creating private, personal space. Some perceived less cognitively-demanding tasks to be more conducive to standing, though some found standing offered a valued break from challenging tasks. Participants prioritised workload over sitting reduction and were more likely to stand after rather than during work task completion. Temporary context changes, such as holidays, threatened to derail newfound routines.ConclusionsOur findings emphasise the importance of understanding workers' mental representations of their work, and the social functions of sitting and standing in the workplace. Workplace intervention developers should incorporate a pre-intervention sitting time monitoring period, encourage workers to identify personally meaningful tasks and cues for standing, and build organisational support for sitting-reduction. We will use these insights to refine our intervention for self-administered delivery.Trial registrationISRCTN29395780 (registered 21 November 2016).
| S-EPMC6593587 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Early detection of leprosy is key to reduce the ongoing transmission. Antibodies directed against M. leprae PGL-I represent a useful biomarker for detecting multibacillary (MB) patients. Since efficient leprosy diagnosis requires field-friendly test conditions, we evaluated two rapid lateral flow assays (LFA) for detection of Mycobacterium leprae-specific antibodies: the visual immunogold OnSite Leprosy Ab Rapid test [Gold-LFA] and the quantitative, luminescent up-converting phosphor anti-PGL-I test [UCP-LFA]. Test performance was assessed in independent cohorts originating from three endemic areas. In the Philippine cohort comprising patients with high bacillary indices (BI; average:4,9), 94%(n?=?161) of MB patients were identified by UCP-LFA and 78%(n?=?133) by Gold-LFA. In the Bangladeshi cohort, including mainly MB patients with low BI (average:1), 41%(n?=?14) and 44%(n?=?15) were detected by UCP-LFA and Gold-LFA, respectively. In the third cohort of schoolchildren from a leprosy hyperendemic region in Brazil, both tests detected 28%(n?=?17) seropositivity. Both rapid tests corresponded well with BI(p?<?0.0001), with a fairly higher sensitivity obtained with the UCP-LFA assay. However, due to the spectral character of leprosy, additional, cellular biomarkers are required to detect patients with low BIs. Therefore, the UCP-LFA platform, which allows multiplexing with differential biomarkers, offers more cutting-edge potential for diagnosis across the whole leprosy spectrum.
| S-EPMC5566372 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A growing body of evidence demonstrates that asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is a major contributor to the COVID-19 pandemic. Frontline healthcare workers in COVID-19 hotspots have faced numerous challenges, including shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) and difficulties acquiring clinical testing. The magnitude of the exposure of healthcare workers and the potential for asymptomatic transmission makes it critical to understand the incidence of infection in this population. To determine the prevalence of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection amongst healthcare workers, we studied frontline staff working in the Montefiore Health System in New York City. All participants were asymptomatic at the time of testing and were tested by RT-qPCR and for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. The medical, occupational, and COVID-19 exposure histories of participants were recorded via questionnaires. Of the 98 asymptomatic healthcare workers tested, 19 (19.4%) tested positive by RT-qPCR and/or ELISA. Within this group, four (4.1%) were RT-qPCR positive, and four (4.1%) were PCR and IgG positive. Notably, an additional 11 (11.2%) individuals were IgG positive without a positive PCR. Two PCR positive individuals subsequently developed COVID-19 symptoms, while all others remained asymptomatic at 2-week follow-up. These results indicate that there is considerable asymptomatic infection with SARS-CoV-2 within the healthcare workforce, despite current mitigation policies. Furthermore, presuming that asymptomatic staff are not carrying SARS-CoV-2 is inconsistent with our results, and this could result in amplified transmission within healthcare settings. Consequently, aggressive testing regiments, such as testing frontline healthcare workers on a regular, multi-modal basis, may be required to prevent further spread within the workforce and to patients.
| S-EPMC7472984 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Healthcare organizations must continue to improve services to meet the rising demand and patient expectations. For this to occur, the health workforce needs to have knowledge and skills to design, implement, and evaluate service improvement interventions. Studies have shown that effective training in health service improvement and redesign combines didactic education with experiential project-based learning and on-the-ground coaching. Project-based learning requires organizational support and oversight, generally through executive sponsorship. A mixed-methods approach, comprising online surveys and semi-structured interviews, was used to explore the experiences of expert coaches and executive sponsors as key facilitators of workplace-based projects undertaken during an Australian postgraduate healthcare redesign course. Fifteen (54%) expert coaches and 37 (20%) executive sponsors completed the online survey. Ten expert coaches and six executive sponsors participated in interviews. The survey data revealed overall positive experiences for coaches and mixed experiences for sponsors. Interview participants expressed a sense of fulfillment that came from working with project teams to deliver a successful project and educational outcomes. However, concerns were raised about adequate resourcing, organizational recognition, competing priorities, and the skills required to effectively coach and sponsor. Expert coaches and executive sponsors sometimes felt under-valued and may benefit from cohort-tailored and evidence-based professional development.
| S-EPMC7432300 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGender discrimination among women healthcare workers (HCWs) negatively impacts job satisfaction, mental health, and career development; however, few studies have explored how experiences of gender discrimination change during times of health system strain. Thus, we conducted a survey study to characterize gender discrimination during a time of significant health system strain, i.e., the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe used a convenience sampling approach by inviting department chairs of academic medical centers in the United States to forward our online survey to their staff in January 2021. The survey included one item assessing frequency of gender discrimination, and an open-ended question asking respondents to detail experiences of discrimination. The survey also included questions about social and work stressors, such as needing additional childcare support. We used ordinal logistic regression models to identify predictors of gender discrimination, and grounded theory to characterize themes that emerged from open-ended responses.ResultsAmong our sample of 716 women (mean age = 37.63 years, SD = 10.97), 521 (72.80%) were White, 102 (14.20%) Asian, 69 (9.60%) Black, 53 (7.4%) Latina, and 11 (1.50%) identified as another race. In an adjusted model that included demographic characteristics and social and work stressors as covariates, significant predictors of higher gender discrimination included younger age (OR = 0.98, 95%CI = 0.96, 0.99); greater support needs (OR = 1.26, 95%CI = 1.09,1.47); lower team cohesion (OR = 0.94, 95%CI = 0.91, 0.97); greater racial discrimination (OR = 1.07, 95%CI = 1.05,1.09); identifying as a physician (OR = 6.59, 95%CI = 3.95, 11.01), physician-in-training (i.e., residents and fellows; OR = 3.85, 95%CI = 2.27,6.52), or non-clinical worker (e.g., administrative assistants; OR = 3.08, 95%CI = 1.60,5.90), compared with nurses; and reporting the need for a lot more childcare support (OR = 1.84, 95%CI = 1.15, 2.97), compared with reporting no childcare support need. In their open-ended responses, women HCWs described seven themes: 1) belittlement by colleagues, 2) gendered workload distributions, 3) unequal opportunities for professional advancement, 4) expectations for communication, 5) objectification, 6) expectations of motherhood, and 7) mistreatment by patients.ConclusionsOur study underscores the severity of gender discrimination among women HCWs. Hospital systems should prioritize gender equity programs that improve workplace climate during and outside of times of health system strain.
| S-EPMC9901797 | biostudies-literature