Dataset Information

The experiences of cooperation among healthcare workers who participated in COVID-19 aid mission in China: A qualitative study.

ABSTRACT:

Aims and objectives

To assist future offsite planning for pandemics, we documented lived experiences of cooperation among healthcare workers (HCWs) during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic poses a global health crisis. Most recent studies on the COVID-19 focus on frontline HCWs' physio-psychological experiences, with few studies examining their experiences of cooperation.

Design

A descriptive phenomenological design reported based on COREQ checklist.

Methods

25 HCWs (17 nurses and eight physicians) were interviewed, selected through convenience and purposive sampling, who participated in a medical aid mission in China during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data were collected via semi-structured online video interviews, and the transcripts were analysed using Colaizzi's phenomenological method.

Results

The HCWs experienced stressed and anxious, but rated their overall cooperation experience as positive. We categorised the reported experiences in five themes: (1) a multi-level management structure; (2) nurse managers as internal and external team coordinators; (3) high morale and a mutual supportive context; (4) a continuous streamlined workflow; and (5) the value of multidisciplinary collaboration in care. Reasonable management structure and division of work were the basis for successful aid mission. High morale and a mutual supportive context were foundational for growth and stress mitigation. The HCWs continuously streamlined workflow through communication and met patients' individual need through multidisciplinary collaboration.

Conclusions

Planning for a pandemic aid mission is challenging, given the unpredictable nature of the working circumstances. Our results underline the importance of supportive strategies for COVID-19 aid mission.

Relevance to clinical practice

Recommendations for future pandemic planning: (1) positive morale and supportive working text should be paid prioritised attention; (2) sufficient experienced and ancillary staff should be recruited; (3) multiple communication channels such as regular handover meetings, online chat applications and electronic recording devices are essential, and (4) multidisciplinary cooperation are is necessary in COVID-19 wards.

SUBMITTER: Wang A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8446990 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionPublic health responses were triggered while COVID-19 was spreading. China redeployed healthcare workers to serve the most vulnerable populations and communities in the initial epicentre-Wuhan. However, it is not known how redeployment processes impacted on healthcare workers in a pandemic crisis.AimsTo explore the experiences and needs of frontline healthcare workers who were redeployed to care for COVID-19 patients in Wuhan, China, and understand the long-term impacts of the redeployment experience on their work and life.MethodsA qualitative study was conducted with redeployed healthcare workers using semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis. This study is reported in accordance with the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) guidelines.FindingsA total of 20 redeployed healthcare workers (13 nurses and seven physicians) participated, and four themes were generated: (1) Initial feelings and emotions of redeployment-Participants experienced worries and concerns, a sense of isolation and loneliness on their arrival to the epicentre. (2) 'It is like a war zone'-Healthcare workers faced a range of risks and challenges of caring for COVID-19 patients in Wuhan in the context of resource strain. (3) Uncertainty and coping strategies in patient care-Despite the hardships experienced, participants continued to deliver high-quality patient care including psychological care and palliative care, good communication and building mutual trusting relationships. (4) Reflection and far-reaching impacts of caring for COVID-19 patients-Participants felt motivated and encouraged as efforts were recognised by the government and wider society.ConclusionsRedeployed healthcare workers shared their unique needs and experiences of coping with redeployment and challenges they faced in the context of resource strain, which has significant implications for policy and future practice. The reality of a pandemic may reduce healthcare workers' willingness to work due to various reasons including inadequate preparedness of facilities and workplace safety. It is important to support frontline healthcare workers in order to maintain an adequate healthcare workforce in pandemic crises. Continuously evolving pandemic circumstances and uncertainty highlight the importance of an organized national pandemic response plan for subsequent waves of COVID-19 and future pandemics.

Project description:IntroductionAs the world continues to grapple with the COVID-19 pandemic, emerging evidence suggests that individuals from ethnic minority backgrounds may be disproportionately affected. The United Kingdom Research study into Ethnicity And COVID-19 outcomes in Healthcare workers (UK-REACH) project has been initiated to generate rapid evidence on whether and why ethnicity affects COVID-19 diagnosis and clinical outcomes in healthcare workers (HCWs) in the UK, through five interlinked work packages/work streams, three of which form the basis of this protocol. The ethico-legal work (Work Package 3) aims to understand and address legal, ethical and acceptability issues around big data research; the HCWs' experiences study (Work Package 4) explores their work and personal experiences, perceptions of risk, support and coping mechanisms; the stakeholder engagement work (Work Package 5) aims to provide feedback and support with the formulation and dissemination of the project recommendations.Methods and analysisWork Package 3 has two different research strands: (A) desk-based doctrinal research; and (B) empirical qualitative research with key opinion leaders. For the empirical research, in-depth interviews will be conducted digitally and recorded with participants' permission. Recordings will be transcribed, coded and analysed using thematic analysis. In Work Package 4, online in-depth interviews and focus groups will be conducted with approximately 150 HCWs, from across the UK, and these will be recorded with participants' consent. The recordings will be transcribed and coded and data will be analysed using thematic analysis. Work Package 5 will achieve its objectives through regular group meetings and in-group discussions.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been received from the London-Brighton & Sussex Research Ethics Committee of the Health Research Authority (Ref No 20/HRA/4718). Results of the study will be published in open-access journals, and disseminated through conference presentations, project website, stakeholder organisations, media and scientific advisory groups.Trial registration numberISRCTN11811602.

Project description:ObjectivesThis study aimed to investigate the presence of perceived stressors, psychological safety and teamwork in healthcare professionals. As the timeframe for this study spanned the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, data were captured demonstrating the impact of the pandemic on these factors.DesignQualitative interview study.SettingAll staff working within the emergency and critical care departments of one National Health Service Trust in London, UK.ParticipantsForty-nine participants were recruited using a purposive sampling technique and interviewed when the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic had subsided.Main outcome measuresEvaluation of changes in perceived stressors, psychological safety and teamwork in individuals working during the COVID-19 pandemic.ResultsThe thematic analysis relating to a participant's lived experiences while working during COVID-19 led to the construction of five key themes, including 'psychological effects' and 'changes in team dynamics'. Several psychological effects were described, including the presence of psychological distress and insights into the aetiology of moral injury. There was marked heterogeneity in participants' response to COVID-19, particularly with respect to changes in team dynamics and the perception of a psychologically safe environment. Descriptions of improved team cohesiveness and camaraderie contrasted with stories of new barriers, notably due to the high workload and the impact of personal protective equipment. Building on these themes, a map of key changes arising due to the pandemic was developed, highlighting potential opportunities to provide targeted support.ConclusionsWorking on the front line of a pandemic can have significant implications for healthcare workers, putting them at risk of psychological distress and moral injury, as well as affecting team dynamics. There is striking heterogeneity in the manifestation of these challenges. Team leaders can use the themes and qualitative data from this study to help identify areas for management focus and individual and team support.

Project description:Background: The coronavirus pneumonia is still spreading around the world. Much progress has been made in vaccine development, and vaccination will become an inevitable trend in the fight against this pandemic. However, the public acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination still remains uncertain. Methods: An anonymous questionnaire was used in Wen Juan Xing survey platform. All the respondents were divided into healthcare workers and non-healthcare workers. Multinomial logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the key sociodemographic, cognitive, and attitude associations among the samples of healthcare workers and non-healthcare workers. Results: A total of 2,580 respondents completed the questionnaire, including 1,329 healthcare workers and 1,251 non-healthcare workers. This study showed that 76.98% of healthcare workers accepted the COVID-19 vaccine, 18.28% workers were hesitant, and 4.74% workers were resistant. Among the non-healthcare workers, 56.19% workers received the COVID-19 vaccine, 37.57% workers were hesitant, and 6.24% workers were resistant. Among the healthcare workers, compared with vaccine recipients, vaccine-hesitant individuals were more likely to be female (AOR = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.12-2.07); vaccine-resistant individuals were more likely to live in the suburbs (AOR = 2.81, 95% CI: 1.44-3.99) with an income of 10,000 RMB or greater (AOR = 2.00, 95% CI: 1.03-3.90). Among the non-healthcare workers, vaccine-hesitant individuals were more likely to be female (AOR = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.31-2.11); vaccine-resistant individuals were also more likely to be female (AOR = 1.87, 95% CI: 1.16-3.02) and older than 65 years (AOR = 4.96, 95% CI: 1.40-7.62). There are great differences between healthcare workers and non-healthcare workers in their cognition and attitude toward vaccines. Conclusions: Our study shows that healthcare workers are more willing to be vaccinated than non-healthcare workers. Current vaccine safety issues continue to be a major factor affecting public acceptance, and to expand vaccine coverage in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, appropriate vaccination strategies and immunization programs are essential, especially for non-healthcare workers.

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.