Dataset Information

The lived experience of healthcare professionals working frontline during the 2003 SARS epidemic, 2009 H1N1 pandemic, 2012 MERS outbreak, and 2014 EVD epidemic: A qualitative systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To synthesize qualitative literature exploring the lived experience of healthcare workers (HCWs) who cared for patients during the following infectious disease outbreaks (IDOs): the 2003 SARS epidemic, 2009 H1N1 pandemic, 2012 MERS outbreak, and 2014 EVD epidemic. We aim to reveal the collective experience of HCWs during these four IDOs and to create a reference for comparison of current and future IDOs.

Methods

Three electronic databases were searched, yielding 823 results after duplicates were removed. Forty qualitative and mixed-methods studies met the criteria for full file review. Fourteen studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The data from the Results or Findings sections were manually coded and themes were conceptualized using thematic analysis.

Results

Of the 14 studies, 28.6% focused on SARS, 21.4% on H1N1, 21.4% on MERS, and 28.6% on EVD. Studies occurred in six different countries and included physicians, nurses, paramedics, and emergency medical technicians as participants. Five themes were conceptualized: Uncertainty, Adapting to Change, Commitment, Sacrifice, and Resilience.

Conclusion

This review identified the collective experience of HCWs caring for patients during four 21st century IDOs. This qualitative systematic review offers a reference to compare similarities and differences of other IDOs, including the COVID-19 pandemic.

SUBMITTER: Chahley ER

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8645281 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Over the last decade, capacity for influenza surveillance and research in West Africa has strengthened. Data from these surveillance systems showed influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 circulated in West Africa later than in other regions of the continent. METHODS:We contacted 11 West African countries to collect information about their influenza surveillance systems (number of sites, type of surveillance, sampling strategy, populations sampled, case definitions used, number of specimens collected and number of specimens positive for influenza viruses) for the time period January 2010 through December 2012. RESULTS:Of the 11 countries contacted, 8 responded: Burkina Faso, Cote d'Ivoire, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Sierra Leone and Togo. Countries used standard World Health Organization (WHO) case definitions for influenza-like illness (ILI) and severe acute respiratory illness (SARI) or slight variations thereof. There were 70 surveillance sites: 26 SARI and 44 ILI. Seven countries conducted SARI surveillance and collected 3114 specimens of which 209 (7%) were positive for influenza viruses. Among influenza-positive SARI patients, 132 (63%) were influenza A [68 influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, 64 influenza A(H3N2)] and 77 (37%) were influenza B. All eight countries conducted ILI surveillance and collected 20,375 specimens, of which 2278 (11%) were positive for influenza viruses. Among influenza-positive ILI patients, 1431 (63%) were influenza A [820 influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, 611 influenza A(H3N2)] and 847 (37%) were influenza B. A majority of SARI and ILI case-patients who tested positive for influenza (72% SARI and 59% ILI) were children aged 0-4 years, as were a majority of those enrolled in surveillance. The seasonality of influenza and the predominant influenza type or subtype varied by country and year. CONCLUSIONS:Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 continued to circulate in West Africa along with influenza A(H3N2) and influenza B during 2010-2012. Although ILI surveillance systems produced a robust number of samples during the study period, more could be done to strengthen surveillance among hospitalized SARI case-patients. Surveillance systems captured young children but lacked data on adults and the elderly. More data on risk groups for severe influenza in West Africa are needed to help shape influenza prevention and clinical management policies and guidelines.

Project description:BackgroundDuring the 2009 H1N1 immunization campaign, electronic and hybrid (comprising both electronic and paper components) systems were employed to collect client-level vaccination data in clinics across Canada. Because different systems were used across the country, the 2009 immunization campaign offered an opportunity to study the usability of the various data collection methods.MethodsA convenience sample of clinic staff working in public health agencies and hospitals in 9 provinces/territories across Canada completed a questionnaire in which they indicated their level of agreement with seven statements regarding the usability of the data collection system employed at their vaccination clinic. Questions included overall ease of use, effectiveness of the method utilized, efficiency at completing tasks, comfort using the method, ability to recover from mistakes, ease of learning the method and overall satisfaction with the method. A 5-point Likert-type scale was used to measure responses.ResultsMost respondents (96%) were employed in sites run by public health. Respondents included 186 nurses and 114 administrative staff, among whom 90% and 47%, respectively, used a paper-based method for data collection. Approximately half the respondents had a year or less of experience with immunization-related tasks during seasonal influenza campaigns. Over 90% of all frontline staff found their data collection method easy to use, perceived it to be effective in helping them complete their tasks, felt quick and comfortable using the method, and found the method easy to learn, regardless of whether a hybrid or electronic system was used.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates that there may be a greater willingness of frontline immunization staff to adapt to new technologies than previously perceived by decision-makers. The public health community should recognize that usability may not be a barrier to implementing electronic methods for collecting individual-level immunization data.