Communication during the COVID-19 pandemic: evaluation study on self-perceived competences and views of health care professionals

Effective communication between nursing professionals and patients after the implementation of mask-wearing requirements in the clinical setting: A cross-sectional study

This study aimed to evaluate staff nurses' perspectives on the use of face masks in effective communication and relationship management skills with patients in the hospital setting. The study surveyed registered nurses (RNs) who work with adult patients in different hospital units. An online survey was completed by RNs who were selected by convenience sampling. RNs' communication with patients was perceived as moderately affected by the use of face masks. Statistically significant differences were found when comparing communication with years of professional experience. Participants who had over 10 years of experience reported having greater difficulty in their communication with patients when using face masks. The effect of provider-patient relationship on effective nurse-patient face-mask communication was statistically significant and negative. This study shows that some participants found face masks used in the clinical setting may affect nurse-patient communication, as well as the nurses' ability to manage their relationships with patients. The findings of this study support the need for targeted research into effective communication strategies when face mask use is needed in the healthcare setting.

The impact of facemasks on blood donation process: The professionals' perspective

Facemasks represent an essential measure of prevention against the spread of COVID-19; however, they lessen the ability to convey and understand emotions through facial expressions. In blood donation settings, facemasks may interfere with professionals' tasks. This qualitative study aims to describe healthcare staff's experiences, beliefs, and attitudes toward facemask wearing and strategies used to overcome communication and relational barriers along the blood donation process. Semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with 25 healthcare professionals (14 physicians and 11 nurses) working in Italian blood donation centers. The framework analysis method was used to organize the data and identify emerging themes. More than 70% of participants reported discomfort and a negative impact on communicating effectively with donors and building empathic relationships. The difficulty to detect early signs of adverse reactions was reported by almost all nurses, and physicians were concerned that facemasks limited the identification of donors and the detection of deferral criteria. Facemasks have changed the blood donation process, reducing the healthcare professionals' ability to build empathic relationships and communicate with donors effectively. New strategies should be developed to overcome these limitations.

Health Literacy and Difficulty Accessing Information About the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Parents Who Are Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing

People who are deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) struggle with information marginalization and limited health literacy, challenging their ability to access information on preventing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study assessed the relationship between language preference, health literacy, and COVID-19 information barriers among parents who are DHH in the United States. Data were drawn from a larger study focused on individuals who are DHH who had given birth in the past 10 years. Respondents completed a web-based survey between March 2020 and July 2021. We segmented respondents by language preference [i.e., American Sign Language (ASL), English, or bilingual ASL/English] and used logistic regression models to test the hypothesis that language preference and health literacy were both associated with COVID-19 information marginalization. Of the total sample (N = 417), approximately 17% had limited health literacy, and 22% reported experiencing difficulty accessing information about COVID-19. In adjusted analyses, respondents with limited health literacy ([adjusted odds ratio] aOR = 2.245) and Hispanic ethnicity (aOR = 2.149) had higher risk of reporting information access barriers. There was no association between language preference and reporting COVID-19 information barriers. However, individuals who are DHH with limited health literacy were at higher risk of experiencing information marginalization during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, highlighting the need for tailored information based on access needs. [HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2022;6(4):e310-e315.].

The contribution of respiratory and hearing protection use to psychological distress in the workplace: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

Workers from various industries use personal protective equipment (PPE) including masks, respirators, and hearing protection to reduce their exposures to workplace hazards. Many studies have evaluated the physiological impacts of PPE use, but few have assessed the psychological impacts. The aim of the present study was to carry out a scoping review to compile existing evidence and determine the extent of knowledge on workplace mask, respirator or hearing protection use as a psychosocial hazard (stressor) that could result in a stress response and potentially lead to psychological injury.

METHODS

The scoping review followed recognized methods and was conducted using Ovid Emcare, PubMed, Sage Journals, ScienceDirect, Scopus, SpringerLink, Google Scholar and preprint databases (OSF Preprints and medRxiv). Articles on the stressors associated with the use of masks, respirators, and hearing protection were included. The extracted data included author(s) name, year of publication, title of article, study design, population data, stressors assessed, and key findings.

RESULTS

We retrieved 650 articles after removal of duplicates, of which 26 were deemed eligible for inclusion for review. Identified factors associated with PPE use that could potentially create a stress response were identified: communication impacts, physical impacts, psychological illness symptoms, cognitive impacts, and perceived PPE-related impacts. Evidence for respirators suggest that there may be psychological injury associated with their use. However, hearing protection appears to have a protective effect in reducing psychological symptoms such as anxiety, depression, and aggression.

CONCLUSIONS

Mask or respirator use may lead to an increase in work-related stress. Whereas hearing protection may have protective effects against psychological symptoms and improves speech intelligibility. More research is needed to better understand potential psychosocial impacts of mask, respirator and/or hearing protection use.