Isolation of COVID-19 patients in cohorted wards or single-patient rooms? Advantages and disadvantages to take into consideration

Understanding uptake of information about innovations among emergency department clinicians during the COVID-19 pandemic

Objectives

Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, little was known about managing sick patients, but emergency department (ED) clinicians had to decide which treatments and care processes to adopt. Our objective was to describe how ED clinicians learned about innovations and how they assessed them for credibility during the pandemic.

Methods

We purposively sampled clinicians from hospital-based EDs to conduct focus groups with ED clinicians and staff. We used both inductive and deductive approaches to conduct thematic analysis of transcripts.

Results

We conducted focus groups with clinicians from eight EDs across the United States. We found that ED clinicians in our sample relied on friends and colleagues or departmental and institutional leadership for information on innovations. They used social media sources when they came from credible accounts but did not directly seek information from professional societies. Clinicians reported a range of challenges to obtain credible information during the pandemic, including a fractured and changing information environment, policies misaligned across clinical sites or that conflicted with clinical knowledge, high patient volume, fear of harming patients, and untimely information. Facilitators included access to experienced and trusted colleagues and leaders and practicing at multiple EDs.

Conclusion

Participants cited anecdotal evidence, institutional practice, and word-of-mouth-rather than peer-reviewed evidence and professional society communications-as their primary sources of information about care innovations during the early phases of the pandemic. These results underscore the importance of developing trusted local mechanisms and wider networks to identify and vet information for frontline clinicians during rapidly emerging public health emergencies.

Perspectives on Assessing the Flexibility of Hospitals for Crisis Mode Operations: Lessons From the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic placed healthcare design at the heart of the crisis. Hospitals faced challenges such as rapidly increasing their intensive care unit capacity, enabling physical distancing measures, quickly converting to telehealth and telework practices, and above all, keeping patients and staff safe. Improving flexibility in hospital facility design and adaptability of hospital operations to function in "crisis mode" can be seen as ways of future-proofing for pandemics. In a design brief, flexibility is typically mentioned as an important target. Meanwhile, robustness of technical infrastructure is called for, and standardization at unit level with single-occupancy inpatient accommodation may be considered a way to enhance flexibility and adaptability in dealing with a surge in infectious patients.

AIM

To future-proof facility design with pandemic preparedness and resilience in mind, this study evaluated what kinds of interventions were taken in Dutch hospital facilities and what perspectives need to be considered when hospitals operate in crisis mode.

METHODS

We have collected data from facility and estate professionals from 30 Dutch hospitals. Using a practice-based approach, in-depth interviewing helped uncover and compare successful operational strategies and design elements that provided the flexibility needed in the early stages of the recent crisis.

RESULTS

As we looked at existing facilities and alterations made to allow hospitals to operate during the COVID-19 pandemic, we discovered that staff availability and adaptability were deemed crucial.

CONCLUSION

We add the perspective of staff as an essential factor to be considered when future-proofing hospital facility desigr crisis mode operation.

Modelling the impacts of COVID-19 on nurse workload and quality of care using process simulation

Higher acuity levels in COVID-19 patients and increased infection prevention and control routines have increased the work demands on nurses. To understand and quantify these changes, discrete event simulation (DES) was used to quantify the effects of varying the number of COVID-19 patient assignments on nurse workload and quality of care. Model testing was based on the usual nurse-patient ratio of 1:5 while varying the number of COVID-19 positive patients from 0 to 5. The model was validated by comparing outcomes to a step counter field study test with eight nurses. The DES model showed that nurse workload increased, and the quality of care deteriorated as nurses were assigned more COVID-19 positive patients. With five COVID-19 positive patients, the most demanding condition, the simulant-nurse donned and doffed personal protective equipment (PPE) 106 times a shift, totaling 6.1 hours. Direct care time was reduced to 3.4 hours (-64% change from baseline pre-pandemic case). In addition, nurses walked 10.5km (+46% increase from base pre-pandemic conditions) per shift while 75 care tasks (+242%), on average, were in the task queue. This contributed to 143 missed care tasks (+353% increase from base pre-pandemic conditions), equivalent to 9.6 hours (+311%) of missed care time and care task waiting time increased to 1.2 hours (+70%), in comparison to baseline (pre-pandemic) conditions. This process simulation approach may be used as potential decision support tools in the design and management of hospitals in-patient care settings, including pandemic planning scenarios.