Dataset Information

Infection control measures to prevent outbreaks of COVID-19 in Quebec hemodialysis units: a cross-sectional survey.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Limited space and resources are potential obstacles to infection prevention and control (IPAC) measures in in-centre hemodialysis units. We aimed to assess IPAC measures implemented in Quebec's hemodialysis units during the spring of 2020, describe the characteristics of these units and document the cumulative infection rates during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

For this cross-sectional survey, we invited leaders from 54 hemodialysis units in Quebec to report information on the physical characteristics of the unit and their perceptions of crowdedness, which IPAC measures were implemented from Mar. 1 to June 30, 2020, and adherence to and feasibility of appropriate IPAC measures. Participating units were contacted again in March 2021 to collect information on the number of COVID-19 cases in order to derive the cumulative infection rate of each unit.

Results

Data were obtained from 38 of the 54 units contacted (70% response rate), which provided care to 4485 patients at the time of survey completion. Fourteen units (37%) had implemented appropriate IPAC measures by 3 weeks after Mar. 1, and all 38 units had implemented them by 6 weeks after. One-third of units were perceived as crowded. General measures, masks and screening questionnaires were used in more than 80% of units, and various distancing measures in 55%-71%; reduction in dialysis frequency was rare. Data on cumulative infection rates were obtained from 27 units providing care to 4227 patients. The cumulative infection rate varied from 0% to 50% (median 11.3%, interquartile range 5.2%-20.2%) and was higher than the reported cumulative infection rate in the corresponding region in 23 (85%) of the 27 units.

Interpretation

Rates of COVID-19 infection among hemodialysis recipients in Quebec were elevated compared to the general population during the first year of the pandemic, and although hemodialysis units throughout the province implemented appropriate IPAC measures rapidly in the spring of 2020, many units were crowded and could not maintain physical distancing. Future hemodialysis units should be designed to minimize airborne and droplet transmission of infection.

SUBMITTER: Beaubien-Souligny W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8695531 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundApproximately 1% of low back pain is estimated to be caused by serious systemic diseases, including cancer, infection, or abdominal aortic dissection. This study aimed to determine the frequency of execution of non-MSK physical examination procedures among Quebec chiropractors and to identify the clinical context that prompts them to use these physical examination procedures.MethodsCross-sectional survey containing 44 questions administered to a random sample of Quebec chiropractors using a succession of online, postal and phone questionnaires. The 4-part survey questionnaire contained six demographic questions, 28 single-choice questions to determine the frequency of execution of non-MSK physical examination procedures, seven short clinical vignettes for which the respondents had to select the non-MSK examinations that would be required, and two questions inquiring about the proportion of new patients for which participants' felt non-MSK examinations were necessary and whether appropriate assessments were performed. The questionnaire was pilot tested, and feedback received integrated prior to administration. We conducted descriptive statistics, Pearson correlations, and an ANOVA.ResultsThe survey was completed by 182 chiropractors (response rate: 36.4%). The most commonly non-musculoskeletal examination performed daily were blood pressure (12.1%) and cranial nerves (4.9%). The most common tests never performed were oxygen saturation (68.7%), cardiac auscultation (69.2%), tibio-brachial index (71.4%), breast (86.8%), rectal (96.7%), testicular (95.6%), and vaginal (99.9%) exams. Female chiropractors and Quebec University in Trois-Rivières graduates reported that a significantly higher proportion of their new patients required a non-musculoskeletal physical examination compared to male participants (37.2% vs 28.3%) or Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College graduates (33.9% vs 19.9%). Reason for not performing a physical examination included the belief that another healthcare professional was better positioned to perform and/or interpret the related tests (76.4%).ConclusionsVital signs and cranial nerve examinations were the most frequency performed non-musculoskeletal examinations reported by chiropractors. Apart from the genitourinary exam almost never performed, most participants chose non-musculoskeletal examinations deemed appropriate for the patient's presentation.

Project description:BackgroundHemodialysis patients are at an increased risk of polypharmacy as they have the highest pill burden of all chronically ill patient populations, with an estimated average of 12 medications per day.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate prescribing patterns of outpatient medications in patients receiving in-center hemodialysis. This was done to identify potential candidate medications for future quality improvement initiations to optimize prescribing.DesignWe conducted a descriptive retrospective cross-sectional study in the province of Ontario, Canada, using several linked health care databases housed at the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES).SettingWe considered outpatient medications dispensed to patients eligible for the Ontario Drug Benefit program.PatientsPatients were receiving chronic in-center hemodialysis at one of the 69 facilities in the province of Ontario, Canada as of October 1, 2013.MeasurementsWe assessed whether any of our 28 study medications of interest were recently dispensed (within the prior 120 days), the type of prescribing physician, and the associated medication costs. The 28 included medications of interest (ie, proton pump inhibitors, benzodiazepines) were selected because they may not have a true indication for dialysis patients and/or there are safety concerns with their use in this population. Results are presented as median (25th, 75th percentile).MethodsWe conducted this study at ICES according to a prespecified protocol approved by the Research Ethics Board at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Toronto, Ontario).ResultsA total of 3094 patients on chronic in-center hemodialysis received a study drug of interest (age: 76.5 years [SD: 7.3]), 44% women). Patients were dispensed 11 (8, 14) unique medication products with more than two-thirds of patients dispensed 9 or more different medications. The median number of annual health care visits was 7 (3-15) with more than half the cohort receiving prescriptions from 3 or more specialists. The 10 most commonly dispensed study medications cost more than 3 million dollars in direct costs in 1 year.LimitationsOur study was also subjected to some limitations of health care databases.ConclusionsPolypharmacy is frequent in in-center hemodialysis patients. To decrease polypharmacy and its associated negative outcomes, health care providers need to implement tools to optimize medication use and deprescribe medications that lack evidence for efficacy and safety in hemodialysis patients. Therefore, strategies to improve prescribing and discontinue ineffective medications warrant testing for better patient outcomes and reduced health care costs.

Project description:ObjectivesThis study aims to evaluate the public acceptance of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) control measures during the Omicron-dominant period and its associated factors.MethodsA cross-sectional design was conducted and 1391 study participants were openly recruited to participate in the questionnaire survey. Logistic regression model was performed to assess the association between the public acceptance and potential factors more specifically.ResultsBy August 26, 2022, 58.9% of the study participants were less acceptive of the control measures while 41.1% expressed higher acceptance. Factors associated with lower acceptance included young age, such as < 18 (OR = 8.251, 95% CI: 2.009 to 33.889) and 18-29 (OR = 2.349, 95% CI: 1.564 to 3.529), and household per capita monthly income lower than 5000 yuan (OR = 1.512, 95% CI: 1.085 to 2.105). Furthermore, individuals who perceived that the case fatality rate (CFR) of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) was very low (OR = 6.010, 95% CI: 2.475 to 14.595) and that the restrictions could be eased once the CFR dropped to 2-3 times of the influenza (OR = 2.792, 95% CI: 1.939 to 4.023) showed greater oppositional attitudes. Likewise, respondents who were dissatisfied with control measures (OR = 9.639, 95% CI: 4.425 to 20.998) or preferred fully relaxation as soon as possible (OR = 13.571, 95% CI: 7.751 to 23.758) had even lower acceptability. By contrast, rural residents (OR = 0.683, 95% CI: 0.473 to 0.987), students (OR = 0.510, 95% CI: 0.276 to 0.941), public (OR = 0.417, 95% CI: 0.240 to 0.727) and private (OR = 0.562, 95% CI: 0.320 to 0.986) employees, and vaccinated participants (OR = 0.393, 95% CI: 0.204 to 0.756) were more compliant with control measures.ConclusionMore than half of the Chinese public were less supportive of COVID-19 control measures during Omicron-dominant period, which varied based on their different demographic characteristics, cognition and overall attitude towards SARS-CoV-2 infection. Control measures that struck a balance between public safety and individual freedom would be more acceptable during the pandemic.

Project description:BackgroundDespite clinical and lifestyle advantages of home hemodialysis (HHD) compared with in-center hemodialysis (ICHD), it remains underutilized in our province. The aim of the study was to explore the patients' perception and to identify the barriers to use of HHD in Saskatchewan, Canada.ObjectivesThe primary objective of the study was to evaluate and explore patient perceptions of HHD and to identify the obstacles for adoption of HHD in Saskatchewan. The secondary objective was to examine variations in the patients' perceptions and barriers to HHD by center (main dialysis units vs satellite dialysis units).DesignThis is a cross-sectional observational survey study.SettingTwo major centers (Regina and Saskatoon) and 5 associated satellite units attached to each center across the province of Saskatchewan.PatientsWe approached all prevalent ICHD patients across Saskatchewan, 398 agreed to participate in the study.MeasurementsSelf-reported barriers to HHD were assessed using a questionnaire.MethodsA questionnaire was designed to determine the patients' perceived barriers to HHD. Descriptive statistics was used to present the data. Chi-square and Mann-Whitney U test were used to compare the patients' responses between main and satellite units.ResultsSatisfaction with current dialysis care (91%), increase in utility bills (65%), fear of catastrophic events at home (59%), medicalization of one's home (54%), and knowledge deficits toward treatment modalities (54%) were the main barriers to HHD uptake. Compared with patients dialyzing in our main units, satellite patients chose not to pursue HHD more frequently because they had greater satisfaction with their current dialysis unit care (97% vs 87%, P < .001), felt more comfortable dialyzing under the supervision of medical staff (95% vs 86%, P < .007), could not afford additional utility costs (92% vs 45%, P < .001), were unaware of the risks and benefits of HHD (83% vs 33%, P < .001), had concerns over time commitments for training to HHD (69% vs 32%, P < .001), and had concern for family burnout (60.8% vs 40.6%, P < .001).LimitationsWe used questionnaires to quantify known barriers, and this prevents inclusion of additional barriers that individual patients may consider important. Cross-sectional data can only be used as a snapshot. Only 398 patients agreed to participate, and the results cannot be generalized to 740 prevalent HD patients. We did not capture data on demographics (age, income, and literacy level), comorbidities, and dialysis vintage, which would have been helpful in interpretation of the results.ConclusionsSatisfaction with in-center care, lack of awareness and education, specifically in the satellite population, concerns with family burnout, expenses associated with utilities, and training time will need to be addressed to increase the uptake of HHD.Trial registrationThe study was not registered on a publicly accessible registry as it did not involve any health care intervention on human participants.