Impact on staff of providing non-invasive advanced respiratory support during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study in an acute hospital

The Evolving Roles and Expectations of Inpatient Palliative Care Through COVID-19: a Systematic Review and Meta-synthesis

BACKGROUND

Palliative care performed a central role in responding to the systemic suffering incurred by the COVID-19 pandemic. Yet, few studies have elucidated the inpatient palliative care specialists' experiences and perceptions.

OBJECTIVE

Systematically review and synthesize the evolving roles and expectations of inpatient palliative care specialists in response to COVID-19.

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-synthesis informed by Thomas and Harden's framework and Pozzar et al.'s approach was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PubMed were systematically searched for articles published between December 2019 and March 2023. We included all peer-reviewed qualitative and mixed-method literature studying the roles and expectations of inpatient palliative care specialists. A mixed-method appraisal tool was used for quality assessment.

RESULTS

Of 3869 unique articles, 52 were included. Studies represented North American (n = 23), European (n = 16), South American (n = 4), Oceanic (n = 2), Asian (n = 2), West African (n = 1), Middle Eastern (n = 1), and inter-continental settings (n = 3). Most were reported in English (n = 50), conducted in 2020 (n = 28), and focused on the perspectives of inpatient palliative care clinicians (n = 28). Three descriptive themes captured the roles and expectations of inpatient palliative care specialists: shifting foundations, reorienting to relationships, and evolving identity. Two analytical themes were synthesized: palliative care propagates compassion through a healing presence, and palliative care enhances the systemic response to suffering through nimble leadership.

CONCLUSION

Inpatient palliative care specialists responded to the COVID-19 pandemic by establishing their healing presence and leading with their adaptability. To develop institutionally tailored and collaborative responses to future pandemics, future studies are needed to understand how inpatient palliative care clinicians are recognized and valued within their institutions.

Non-invasive advanced respiratory support in end-of-life care and symptom management: systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To narrate the canon of knowledge around symptom control at end of life for patients using, or having recently used, non-invasive advanced respiratory support (NARS) at end of life for respiratory failure.

METHODS

A systematic review forming a narrative synthesis from a wide range of sample papers from Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Emcare, Cochrane and OpenGrey databases. A secondary search of grey literature was also performed with hand searching reference lists and author citations. The review was undertaken using the ENTREQ checklist for quality.

RESULTS

In total, 22 studies were included in the synthesis and four themes were generated: NARS as a buoy (NARS can represent hope and relief from the symptoms of respiratory failure), NARS as an anchor (NARS brings significant treatment burden), Impact on Staff (uncertainty over the balance of benefit and burden as well as complex patient care drives distress among staff providing care) and the Process of Withdrawal (withdrawal of therapy felt to be futile exists as discrete event in patient care but is otherwise poorly defined).

CONCLUSION

NARS represents a complex interplay of hope, symptom control, unnaturally prolonged death and treatment burden. The literature captures the breadth of these issues, but further, detailed, research is required in almost every aspect of practice around end-of-life care and NARS-especially how to manage symptoms at the end of life.

In-between duty and hope for recognition, the experience of physiotherapists working in a university hospital during the COVID-19 first wave in Switzerland: a qualitative study based on focus groups

BACKGROUND

Learning more about the physiotherapists' experience, perceived role and perception of events during the COVID-19 crisis, as well as their recovery and projection into the post-crisis future, may be useful to inform stakeholders about the impact of the crisis. The objective of this study was to investigate the experience of physiotherapists working in a university hospital in Switzerland during the 1st wave of the COVID-19 crisis, more specifically their subjective experience, professional involvement, perception of management and perceived implications for the future.

METHODS

This interpretative qualitative study investigated the subjective experience of a purposeful sample of 12 physiotherapists using two 2 h semi-directive focus group interviews conducted by a physiotherapist in June 2020. Data were recorded, transcribed, and analysed using a thematic analysis approach. The report was approved by participants and the study was audited by a health anthropologist.

RESULTS

The most impressive points were the unprecedented nature of the crisis, the health threat, the hospital's capacity to reorganise on a large scale and the solidarity between colleagues. Participants expressed a high level of commitment to their role despite the potentially serious repercussions at an individual level. Pride and stress coexisted for those directly involved in the crisis, while those working in a reduced activity department felt anxious and idle. The need for immediacy in decision-making and action led to a flattening of hierarchies and an increase of uncertainties. Communication management was seen as the main area for improvement. Physiotherapists hoped that their involvement would improve recognition of the profession but feared that working conditions would deteriorate after the crisis.

CONCLUSIONS

The physiotherapists expressed high dedication to their profession and pride to be part of the "war effort" during the crisis. The stress level was partly tempered by the solidarity amongst health professionals and distraction by engaging in action. Despite the mental load, this situation was also seen as an opportunity to grow at a personal and professional level. The healthcare system capacity having not been exceeded in Switzerland, less distress related to death and powerlessness were expressed than in other studies investigating healthcare professionals' experience of the COVID-19 crisis.

Repurposed drug studies on the primary prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection during the pandemic: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Current evidence on the effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 prophylaxis is inconclusive. We aimed to systematically evaluate published studies on repurposed drugs for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or COVID-19 among healthy adults.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

ELIGIBILITY

Quantitative experimental and observational intervention studies that evaluated the effectiveness of repurposed drugs for the primary prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or COVID-19 disease.

DATA SOURCE

PubMed and Embase (1 January 2020-28 September 2022).

RISK OF BIAS

Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 and Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions tools were applied to assess the quality of studies.

DATA ANALYSIS

Meta-analyses for each eligible drug were performed if ≥2 similar study designs were available.

RESULTS

In all, 65 (25 trials, 40 observational) and 29 publications were eligible for review and meta-analyses, respectively. Most studies pertained to hydroxychloroquine (32), ACE inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) (11), statin (8), and ivermectin (8). In trials, hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis reduced laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (risk ratio: 0.82 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.90), I2=48%), a result largely driven by one clinical trial (weight: 60.5%). Such beneficial effects were not observed in observational studies, nor for prognostic clinical outcomes. Ivermectin did not significantly reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (RR: 0.35 (95% CI 0.10 to 1.26), I2=96%) and findings for clinical outcomes were inconsistent. Neither ACEi or ARB were beneficial in reducing SARS-CoV-2 infection. Most of the evidence from clinical trials was of moderate quality and of lower quality in observational studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from our analysis are insufficient to support an evidence-based repurposed drug policy for SARS-CoV-2 prophylaxis because of inconsistency. In the view of scarce supportive evidence on repurposing drugs for COVID-19, alternative strategies such as immunisation of vulnerable people are warranted to prevent the future waves of infection.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021292797.