Lessons from the frontline: Documenting the pandemic emergency care experience from the Pacific region - Infrastructure and equipment

An Oxygen Supply Is Not Enough: A Qualitative Analysis of a Pressure Swing Adsorption Oxygen Plant Program in Ethiopian Hospitals

BACKGROUND

In response to critical gaps in medical oxygen access, 2 pressure swing adsorption (PSA) oxygen production centers were established using an ecosystem-strengthening strategy in Amhara, Ethiopia, in 2019. A qualitative study was conducted to assess enablers and bottlenecks to oxygen access at the hospital level after installation.

METHODS

A variety of hospital staff (clinicians, biomedical professionals, hospital administrators, and procurement teams) across 13 hospitals procuring oxygen from the plants participated in comprehensive, semistructured focus group discussions. A thematic framework analysis approach was used to identify key themes.

FINDINGS

A total of 101 individuals participated in 26 focus groups in 2021, 2 years after plants were installed. Primary themes were accessibility of supply, affordability, and hospital readiness. Respondents indicated a substantial increase in their hospital's ability to access lower-cost oxygen, with many attributing this to the locality of plants and reduced transportation barriers. However, other challenges persisted, and the emergence of COVID-19 1 year after plant installation and a civil conflict exacerbated supply shortages. Investments in equipment, supplies, and training optimized clinical utilization of oxygen and were highlighted as a need for ongoing investment.

CONCLUSION

To achieve maximum impact, investments in large-scale oxygen systems must be accompanied by strategic plans to transport oxygen, reduce costs to hospitals, and provide support to clinical teams through equipment, supply procurement, and clinical training. These findings support comprehensive ecosystem approaches to strengthening oxygen access for sustainable impact.

One response: Global Outbreak Alert and Response Network supporting the COVID-19 response, Kiribati

Problem

In January 2022, Kiribati experienced widespread community transmission of COVID-19, leading to high rates of infection among health-care workers (HCWs), which reduced essential HCWs during a period of increased hospital admissions.

Context

Kiribati, a Pacific island country made up of a remote group of 33 low-lying atolls in the Pacific Ocean, experienced its first surge of COVID-19 cases beginning on 24 January 2022.

Action

Reports of increasing numbers of COVID-19 cases in South Tarawa prompted the Kiribati Ministry of Health and Medical Services to request assistance from the international community, including the World Health Organization's Global Outbreak Alert and Response Network (GOARN), to support national COVID-19 response operations. Specialists in infection prevention and control (IPC) were deployed to Kiribati in February 2022 to assist the Ministry's National COVID-19 Taskforce in collaboration with national partners. These specialists helped review and strengthen IPC capacities to accommodate a potential patient surge and consequent demands for medical consumables in health-care facilities in South Tarawa.

Outcome

Strengthened knowledge about and processes for IPC among HCWs prevented health care-associated infections and reduced community disease transmission during the first surge of COVID-19 cases in Kiribati.

Discussion

GOARN has the capacity and ability to rapidly deploy experts to support requests for assistance. Outbreak response activities can be enhanced and sustained by using GOARN's resources and collaborating with all partners, as necessary.

Risk of COVID-19 death for people with a pre-existing cancer diagnosis prior to COVID-19-vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis

While previous reviews found a positive association between pre-existing cancer diagnosis and COVID-19-related death, most early studies did not distinguish long-term cancer survivors from those recently diagnosed/treated, nor adjust for important confounders including age. We aimed to consolidate higher-quality evidence on risk of COVID-19-related death for people with recent/active cancer (compared to people without) in the pre-COVID-19-vaccination period. We searched the WHO COVID-19 Global Research Database (20 December 2021), and Medline and Embase (10 May 2023). We included studies adjusting for age and sex, and providing details of cancer status. Risk-of-bias assessment was based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled adjusted odds or risk ratios (aORs, aRRs) or hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using generic inverse-variance random-effects models. Random-effects meta-regressions were used to assess associations between effect estimates and time since cancer diagnosis/treatment. Of 23 773 unique title/abstract records, 39 studies were eligible for inclusion (2 low, 17 moderate, 20 high risk of bias). Risk of COVID-19-related death was higher for people with active or recently diagnosed/treated cancer (general population: aOR = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.36-1.61, I2  = 0; people with COVID-19: aOR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.41-1.77, I2  = 0.58; inpatients with COVID-19: aOR = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.34-2.06, I2  = 0.98). Risks were more elevated for lung (general population: aOR = 3.4, 95% CI: 2.4-4.7) and hematological cancers (general population: aOR = 2.13, 95% CI: 1.68-2.68, I2  = 0.43), and for metastatic cancers. Meta-regression suggested risk of COVID-19-related death decreased with time since diagnosis/treatment, for example, for any/solid cancers, fitted aOR = 1.55 (95% CI: 1.37-1.75) at 1 year and aOR = 0.98 (95% CI: 0.80-1.20) at 5 years post-cancer diagnosis/treatment. In conclusion, before COVID-19-vaccination, risk of COVID-19-related death was higher for people with recent cancer, with risk depending on cancer type and time since diagnosis/treatment.

Experiences of redeployed healthcare workers in the fight against COVID-19 in China: A qualitative study

Introduction

Public 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.

Aims

To 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.

Methods

A 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.

Findings

A 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.

Conclusions

Redeployed 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.

"When all else fails you have to come to the emergency department": Overarching lessons about emergency care resilience from frontline clinicians in Pacific Island countries and territories during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to test health systems resilience worldwide. Low- and middle-income country (LMIC) health care systems have considerable experience in disasters and disease outbreaks. Lessons from the preparedness and responses to COVID-19 in LMICs may be valuable to other countries.This policy paper synthesises findings from a multiphase qualitative research project, conducted during the pandemic to document experiences of Pacific Island Country and Territory (PICT) frontline clinicians and emergency care (EC) stakeholders. Thematic analysis and synthesis of enablers related to each of the Pacific EC systems building blocks identified key factors contributing to strengthened EC systems.Effective health system responses to the COVID-19 pandemic occurred when frontline clinicians and 'decision makers' collaborated with respect and open communication, overcoming healthcare workers' fear and discontent. PICT EC clinicians demonstrated natural leadership and strengthened local EC systems, supporting essential healthcare. Despite resource limitations, PICT cultural strengths of relational connection and innovation ensured health system resilience. COVID-19 significantly disrupted services, with long-tail impacts on non-communicable disease and other health burdens.Lessons learned in responding to COVID-19 can be applied to ongoing health system strengthening initiatives. Optimal systems improvement and sustainability requires EC leaders' involvement in current decision-making as well as future planning.

Search strategy and selection criteria

Search strategy and selection criteria We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, Ovid, WHO resources, Pacific and grey literature using search terms 'emergency care', 'acute/critical care', 'health care workers', 'emergency care systems/health systems', 'health system building blocks', 'COVID-19', 'pandemic/surge event/disease outbreaks' 'Low- and Middle-Income Countries', 'Pacific Islands/region' and related terms. Only English-language articles were included.

Funding

Phases 1 and 2A of this study were part of an Epidemic Ethics/World Health Organization (WHO) initiative, supported by Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office/Wellcome Grant 214711/Z/18/Z. Copyright of the original work on which this publication is based belongs to WHO. The authors have been given permission to publish this manuscript. The authors alone are responsible for the views expressed in this publication and they do not necessarily represent the views, decisions or policies of WHO. Co-funding for this research was received from the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine Foundation via an International Development Fund Grant. RM is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Postgraduate Scholarship and a Monash Graduate Excellence Scholarship. GOR is supported by a NHMRC Early Career Research Fellowship. CEB is supported by a University of Queensland Development Research Fellowship. None of these funders played any role in study design, results analysis or manuscript preparation.