Gender and Race on the Frontline: Experiences of Health Workers in Brazil during the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Wenham C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8522389 | biostudies-literature | 2022
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Gender and Race on the Frontline: Experiences of Health Workers in Brazil during the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Wenham Clare C Fernandez Michelle M Corrêa Marcela Garcia MG Lotta Gabriela G Schall Brunah B Rocha Mariela Campos MC Pimenta Denise Nacif DN
Social politics 20210913 4
Studies on the differential effects of health emergencies have largely overlooked women health workers. Whilst the literature has shown the impact of Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) on women and on healthcare workers, little research has considered the gendered effects of the health workforce. This article analyses the impact of COVID-19 on healthcare workers and working conditions in Brazil's public healthcare system, through consideration of gendered and racialized understandings of care and ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7232925 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Upper respiratory viral infections can decrease the sense of smell either by inflammatory restriction of nasal airflow that carries the odorant molecules or through interference in olfactory sensory neuron function. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, triggered by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), worldwide reports of severe smell loss (anosmia/hyposmia) revealed a different type of olfactory dysfunction associated with respiratory virus infection. Since self-reported perception of smell is subjective and SARS-CoV-2 exposure is variable in the general population, we aimed to study a population that would be more homogeneously exposed to the virus. Here, we investigated the prevalence of olfactory loss in frontline health professionals diagnosed with COVID-19 in Brazil, one of the major epicenters of the disease. We also analyzed the rate of olfactory function recovery and the particular characteristics of olfactory deficit in this population. A widely disclosed cross-sectional online survey directed to health care workers was developed by a group of researchers to collect data concerning demographic information, general symptoms, otolaryngological symptoms, comorbidities, and COVID-19 test results. Of the 1,376 health professionals who completed the questionnaire, 795 (57.8%) were working directly with COVID-19 patients, either in intensive care units, emergency rooms, wards, outpatient clinics, or other areas. Five-hundred forty-one (39.3%) participants tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, and 509 (37%) were not tested. Prevalence of olfactory dysfunction in COVID-19-positive subjects was 83.9% (454 of 541) compared to 12.9% (42 of 326) of those who tested negative and to 14.9% (76 of 509) of those not tested. Olfactory dysfunction incidence was higher in those working in wards, emergency rooms, and intensive care units compared to professionals in outpatient clinics. In general, remission from olfactory symptoms was frequent by the time of responses. Taste disturbances were present in 74.1% of infected participants and were significantly associated with hyposmia. In conclusion, olfactory dysfunction is highly correlated with exposure to SARS-CoV-2 in health care professionals, and remission rates up to 2 weeks are high.
| S-EPMC7985267 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe unprecedented pressure of working on the frontline during the Covid-19 pandemic had a demonstrable impact on the mental health and wellbeing of health and social care workers in the early stages of the pandemic, however, less research has focused on workers' experiences over the longer course of the pandemic.AimsWe set out to develop an explanatory model of the processes that helped and hindered the coping of HSCWs working over the course of the Covid-19 pandemic.MethodTwenty HSCWs based in the UK took part in the study. They completed semi-structured interviews 12-18 months after the peak of the first wave in the UK. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using grounded theory methodology.ResultsThe analysis identified eleven theoretical codes: personal context, organisational resources, organisational response, management, colleagues, decision-making and responsibilities, internal impacts, external impactors, safety, barriers to accessing support and temporal factors. The findings suggest that factors related to the individual themselves, their personal context, the organisation they work in, their managers, the support structures around them and their sense of safety impacted on HSCWs; ability to cope. Some factors changed over time throughout the first year of the pandemic, such as workload and staff illness, which further impacted HSCWs' coping. There were many barriers to accessing support that also impacted coping, including availability, awareness and time. The relationship between the factors that impacted coping are represented in an explanatory model.ConclusionsThe findings extend previous studies on the mental health impact on frontline HSCWs working during Covid-19, providing novel insight by developing an explanatory model illustrating the underlying factors that impacted their coping experiences over the course of the pandemic in the UK. The findings from this study may assist in the development of improved and more effective support for HSCWs going forwards.
| S-EPMC10096225 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Healthcare workers (HCWs) were at increased risk for mental health problems during the COVID-19 pandemic, with prior data suggesting women may be particularly vulnerable. Our global mental health study aimed to examine factors associated with gender differences in psychological distress and depressive symptoms among HCWs during COVID-19. Across 22 countries in South America, Europe, Asia and Africa, 32,410 HCWs participated in the COVID-19 HEalth caRe wOrkErS (HEROES) study between March 2020 and February 2021. They completed the General Health Questionnaire-12, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and questions about pandemic-relevant exposures. Consistently across countries, women reported elevated mental health problems compared to men. Women also reported increased COVID-19-relevant stressors, including insufficient personal protective equipment and less support from colleagues, while men reported increased contact with COVID-19 patients. At the country level, HCWs in countries with higher gender inequality reported less mental health problems. Higher COVID-19 mortality rates were associated with increased psychological distress merely among women. Our findings suggest that among HCWs, women may have been disproportionately exposed to COVID-19-relevant stressors at the individual and country level. This highlights the importance of considering gender in emergency response efforts to safeguard women's well-being and ensure healthcare system preparedness during future public health crises.
| S-EPMC10988139 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 has challenged health systems worldwide, especially the health workforce, a pillar crucial for health systems resilience. Therefore, strengthening health system resilience can be informed by analyzing health care workers' (HCWs) experiences and needs during pandemics. This review synthesizes qualitative studies published during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic to identify factors affecting HCWs' experiences and their support needs during the pandemic. This review was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews. A systematic search on PubMed was applied using controlled vocabularies. Only original studies presenting primary qualitative data were included.Results161 papers that were published from the beginning of COVID-19 pandemic up until 28th March 2021 were included in the review. Findings were presented using the socio-ecological model as an analytical framework. At the individual level, the impact of the pandemic manifested on HCWs' well-being, daily routine, professional and personal identity. At the interpersonal level, HCWs' personal and professional relationships were identified as crucial. At the institutional level, decision-making processes, organizational aspects and availability of support emerged as important factors affecting HCWs' experiences. At community level, community morale, norms, and public knowledge were of importance. Finally, at policy level, governmental support and response measures shaped HCWs' experiences. The review identified a lack of studies which investigate other HCWs than doctors and nurses, HCWs in non-hospital settings, and HCWs in low- and lower middle income countries.DiscussionThis review shows that the COVID-19 pandemic has challenged HCWs, with multiple contextual factors impacting their experiences and needs. To better understand HCWs' experiences, comparative investigations are needed which analyze differences across as well as within countries, including differences at institutional, community, interpersonal and individual levels. Similarly, interventions aimed at supporting HCWs prior to, during and after pandemics need to consider HCWs' circumstances.ConclusionsFollowing a context-sensitive approach to empowering HCWs that accounts for the multitude of aspects which influence their experiences could contribute to building a sustainable health workforce and strengthening health systems for future pandemics.
| S-EPMC8943506 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has placed a significant burden on the mental health and wellbeing of frontline health and social care workers. The need to support frontline staff has been recognised. However, there is to date little research specifically on how best to support the mental health needs of frontline workers, and none on their own experiences and views about what might be most helpful.AimsWe set out to redress this research gap by qualitatively exploring UK frontline health and social care workers' own experiences and views of psychosocial support during the pandemic.MethodFrontline health and social care workers were recruited purposively through social media and by snowball sampling via healthcare colleagues. Workers who volunteered to take part in the study were interviewed remotely following a semi-structured interview guide. Transcripts of the interviews were analysed by the research team following the principles of Reflexive Thematic Analysis.ResultsWe conducted 25 interviews with frontline workers from a variety of professional groups working in health and social care settings across the UK. Themes derived from our analysis showed that workers' experiences and views about psychosocial support were complex. Peer support was many workers' first line of support but could also be experienced as a burden. Workers were ambivalent about support shown by organisations, media and the public. Whilst workers valued psychological support services, there were many disparities in provision and barriers to access.ConclusionsThe results of this study show that frontline health and social care workers are likely to need a flexible system of support including peer, organisational and professional support. More research is needed to fully unpack the structural, systemic and individual barriers to accessing psychosocial support. Greater collaboration, consultation and co-production of support services and their evaluation is warranted.
| S-EPMC8412294 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe Australian COVID-19 Frontline Healthcare Workers Study investigated coping strategies and help-seeking behaviours, and their relationship to mental health symptoms experienced by Australian healthcare workers (HCWs) during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsAustralian HCWs were invited to participate a nationwide, voluntary, anonymous, single time-point, online survey between 27th August and 23rd October 2020. Complete responses on demographics, home and work situation, and measures of health and psychological wellbeing were received from 7846 participants.ResultsThe most commonly reported adaptive coping strategies were maintaining exercise (44.9%) and social connections (31.7%). Over a quarter of HCWs (26.3%) reported increased alcohol use which was associated with a history of poor mental health and worse personal relationships. Few used psychological wellbeing apps or sought professional help; those who did were more likely to be suffering from moderate to severe symptoms of mental illness. People living in Victoria, in regional areas, and those with children at home were significantly less likely to report adaptive coping strategies.ConclusionsPersonal, social, and workplace predictors of coping strategies and help-seeking behaviour during the pandemic were identified. Use of maladaptive coping strategies and low rates of professional help-seeking indicate an urgent need to understand the effectiveness of, and the barriers and enablers of accessing, different coping strategies.
| S-EPMC8437691 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction We examined the contribution of community health workers as frontline responders for the community-based surveillance in Somalia during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic for detection of COVID-19 cases and identification of contacts. Methods We retrieved COVID-19 surveillance data from 16 March 2020 to 31 March 2021 from the health ministry’s central database. These data were collected through community health workers, health facilities or at the points of entry. We compared the number of suspected COVID-19 cases detected by the three surveillance systems and the proportion that tested positive using the chi-squared test. We used logistic regression analysis to assess association between COVID-19 infection and selected variables. Results During the study period, 154,004 suspected cases of COVID-19 were detected and tested, of which 10,182 (6.6%) were positive. Of the notified cases, 32.7% were identified through the community-based surveillance system, 54.0% through the facility-based surveillance system, and 13.2% at points of entry. The positivity rate of cases detected by the community health workers was higher than that among those detected at health facilities (8.6% versus 6.4%; p < 0.001). The community health workers also identified more contacts than those identified through the facility-based surveillance (13,279 versus 1,937; p < 0.001). The odds of COVID-19 detection generally increased by age. Community-based surveillance and health facility-based surveillance had similar odds of detecting COVID-19 cases compared with the points-of-entry surveillance (aOR: 7.0 (95% CI: 6.4, 7.8) and aOR: 7.5 (95% CI: 6.8, 8.3), respectively). Conclusion The community health workers proved their value as first responders to COVID-19. They can be effective in countries with weak health systems for targeted community surveillance in rural and remote areas which are not covered by the facility-based surveillance system.
| S-EPMC10469613 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDemographic, work environmental, and psychosocial features are associated with mental health of healthcare professionals at pandemic frontline. The current study aimed to find predictors of mental health for public health doctors from working experiences at frontline of COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWith first-come and first-served manner, 350 public health doctors with experiences of work at COVID-19 frontline participated online survey on August 2020. Mental health was defined using the total scores of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, the Perceived Stress Scale, and the Stanford Presenteeism Scale-6. Multivariate logistic regression models of mental health with lowest Akaike Information Criterion were determined among all combinations of working environments, perceived threats and satisfaction at frontline, and demographics that were significant (P < 0.05) in the univariate logistic regression.ResultsPerceived distress, lowered self-efficacy at work, anxiety, and depressive mood were reported by 45.7, 34.6, 11.4, and 15.1% of respondents, respectively. Predictors of poor mental health found in the multivariate logistic regression analyses were environmental (insufficient personal protective equipment, workplace of screening center, prolonged workhours) and psychosocial (fear of infection and death, social stigma and rejection) aspects of working experiences at frontline. Satisfaction of monetary compensation and proactive coping (acceptance and willingness to volunteer at frontline) were predictive of better mental health.ConclusionsSufficient supply of personal protective equipment and training on infection prevention at frontline, proper workhours and satisfactory monetary compensation, and psychological supports are required for better mental health of public health doctors at frontline of COVID-19 pandemic.
| S-EPMC8188159 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC7818840 | biostudies-literature