Perceptions and Experiences of Frontline Urban Indian Organization Healthcare Workers With Infection Prevention and Control During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Identifying a competency improvement strategy for infection prevention and control professionals: A rapid systematic review and cluster analysis

Remarkable progress has been made in infection prevention and control (IPC) in many countries, but some gaps emerged in the context of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Core capabilities such as standard clinical precautions and tracing the source of infection were the focus of IPC in medical institutions during the pandemic. Therefore, the core competences of IPC professionals during the pandemic, and how these contributed to successful prevention and control of the epidemic, should be studied. To investigate, using a systematic review and cluster analysis, fundamental improvements in the competences of infection control and prevention professionals that may be emphasized in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang Data, and CBM databases for original articles exploring core competencies of IPC professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic (from January 1, 2020 to February 7, 2023). Weiciyun software was used for data extraction and the Donohue formula was followed to distinguish high-frequency technical terms. Cluster analysis was performed using the within-group linkage method and squared Euclidean distance as the metric to determine the priority competencies for development. We identified 46 studies with 29 high-frequency technical terms. The most common term was "infection prevention and control training" (184 times, 17.3%), followed by "hand hygiene" (172 times, 16.2%). "Infection prevention and control in clinical practice" was the most-reported core competency (367 times, 34.5%), followed by "microbiology and surveillance" (292 times, 27.5%). Cluster analysis showed two key areas of competence: Category 1 (program management and leadership, patient safety and occupational health, education and microbiology and surveillance) and Category 2 (IPC in clinical practice). During the COVID-19 pandemic, IPC program management and leadership, microbiology and surveillance, education, patient safety, and occupational health were the most important focus of development and should be given due consideration by IPC professionals.

Risks and challenges in COVID-19 infection prevention and control in a hospital setting: Perspectives of healthcare workers in Thailand

INTRODUCTION

In hospital settings, awareness of, and responsiveness to, COVID-19 are crucial to reducing the risk of transmission among healthcare workers and protecting them from infection. Healthcare professionals can offer insights into the practicalities of infection prevention and control (IPC) measures and on how the guideline aimed to ensure adherence to IPC, including use of personal protective equipment (PPE), could best be delivered during the pandemic. To inform future development of such guideline, this study examined the perspectives of healthcare professionals working in a large hospital during the pandemic regarding their infection risks, the barriers or facilitators to implementing their tasks and the IPC measures to protect their safety and health and of their patients.

METHOD

In-depth interviews were conducted with 23 hospital staff coming into contact with possible or confirmed cases of COVID-19, or were at potential risk of contracting the disease, including medical doctors, nurses, virology laboratory staff, and non-medical workers. This qualitative study was carried out as part of a knowledge, attitudes and practice survey to prevent COVID-19 transmission at Ramathibodi Hospital in Thailand. We used content analysis to categorize and code transcribed interview data. Existing IPC guideline and evidence synthesis of organisational, environmental, and individual factors to IPC adherence among healthcare workers were used to guide the development of the interview questions and analysis.

FINDING

Factors identified as influencing the use of, and adherence to, prevention measures among healthcare workers included knowledge, perceived risk and concerns about the infection. The extent to which these factors were influential varied based on the medical procedures, among other features, that individuals were assigned to perform in the hospital setting. Beyond availability of PPE and physical safety, ease of and readiness to utilize the equipment and implement IPC measures were crucial to motivate hospital staff to follow the practice guideline. Having a ventilated outdoor space for screening and testing, and interaction through mobile technology, facilitated the performance of healthcare workers while reducing the transmission risk for staff and patients. Adequate training, demonstration of guided practices, and streamlined communications are crucial organisational and management support factors to encourage appropriate use of, and adherence to, implementation of infection prevention and control measures among healthcare workers.

CONCLUSION

This finding could help inform the development of recommendations to optimise compliance with appropriate use of these measures, and to improve guidance to reduce HCW's risk of disease in hospital settings. Further study should explore the perceptions and experiences of health professionals in smaller health facilities and community-based workers during the pandemic, particularly in resource-limited settings.

National Norms for Hospitalizations Due to Ambulatory Care Sensitive Conditions among Adults in the US

BACKGROUND

Ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSCs) are acute or chronic health issues that lead to potentially preventable hospitalizations when not treated in the outpatient primary care setting.

OBJECTIVE

To describe national hospitalization rates due to ACSCs among adult inpatients in the US.

DESIGN

A retrospective cross-sectional analysis of the 2018 US National Inpatient Sample (NIS) dataset from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project at the Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality was completed in the year 2022.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were adult inpatients from community hospitals in 48 states of the US and District of Columbia.

MAIN MEASURES

ACSC admission rates were calculated using ICD-10 codes and the Purdy ACSC definition. The admission rates were weighted to the US inpatient population and stratified by age, sex, and race.

KEY RESULTS

ACSC hospitalization rates varied considerably across age and average number of hospitalizations varied across sex and race. ACSC hospitalization rates increased with age, male sex, and Native American and Black race. The most common ACSCs were pneumonia, diabetes, and congestive heart failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Previous studies have emphasized the importance of preventable hospitalizations, however, the national rates for ACSC hospitalizations across all ages in the US have not been reported. The national rates presented will facilitate comparisons to identify hospitals and health care systems with higher-than-expected rates of ACSC admissions that may suggest a need for improved primary care services.

A qualitative assessment of provider satisfaction and experiences with a COVID-19 community mobile health clinic outreach model in underserved Baltimore neighborhoods

Objective

Although previous studies have assessed provider perceptions about telehealth, no prior studies have qualitatively assessed the experiences and satisfaction of health-care providers with a community mobile health clinic model within underserved urban settings.

Methods

This study draws on the views expressed by community health workers (n = 4), registered nurses (n = 2), Grace Medical Center outreach specialists (n = 2), and physician assistants staffing LifeBridge Health's virtual hospital (n = 3) to understand their satisfaction and experiences with a COVID-19 community mobile health clinic in underserved Baltimore neighborhoods. Thematic analysis of the interviews was used to extract themes and subthemes of our health-care providers' experiences with the community mobile health clinic model.

Results

These individuals shared their experiences addressing social determinants of health, the perceived impact of community mobile health clinic, satisfaction with and limitations of the pilot project, as well as future implications for the community mobile health clinic model. Finally, ideas for how the model can fit into the existing healthcare delivery framework are suggested.

Conclusion

The context surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to critically address healthcare frameworks and models. The LifeBridge community mobile health clinic served as an initiative to truly bridge together community outreach and health access. Among the many themes, health-care providers on the team applauded the model for its potential to bring preventative health care to the patient with the goal of improving patient health outcomes.

Exploring behavioural factors influencing COVID-19-specific infection prevention and control measures in Finland: a mixed-methods study, December 2020 to March 2021

BackgroundCompliance with infection prevention and control (IPC) measures is critical to preventing COVID-19 transmission in healthcare settings.AimTo identify and explain factors influencing compliance with COVID-19-specific IPC measures among healthcare workers (HCWs) in long-term care facilities (LTCF) in Finland.MethodsThe study included a web-based survey and qualitative study based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). The link to the anonymous survey was distributed via email to LTCFs through regional IPC experts in December 2020. Outcome was modelled using ordinary logistic regression and penalised ridge logistic regression using regrouped explanatory variables and an original, more correlated set of explanatory variables, respectively. In-depth interviews were conducted among survey participants who volunteered during January-March 2021. Data were analysed thematically using qualitative data analysis software (NVIVO12).ResultsA total of 422 HCWs from 17/20 regions responded to the survey. Three TDF domains were identified that negatively influenced IPC compliance: environmental context and resources, reinforcement and beliefs about capabilities. Twenty HCWs participated in interviews, which resulted in identification of several themes: changes in professional duties and lack of staff planning for emergencies (domain: environmental context and resources); management culture and physical absence of management (domain: reinforcement), knowledge of applying IPC measures, nature of tasks and infrastructure that supports implementation (domain: beliefs about capabilities), that explained how the domains negatively influenced their IPC behaviour.ConclusionsThis study provides insights into behavioural domains that can be used in developing evidence-based behaviour change interventions to support HCW compliance with pandemic-specific IPC measures in LTCFs.

Infection prevention and control across the continuum of COVID-19 care: A qualitative study of patients', caregivers' and providers' experiences

Introduction

Healthcare facilities adopted restrictive visitor policies as a result of the COVID‐19 (COVID) pandemic. Though these measures were necessary to promote the safety of patients, families and healthcare providers, it led to isolation and loneliness amongst acute care inpatients that can undermine patient rehabilitation and recovery. The study objectives were to (1) explore how infection prevention and control (IP&C) measures impacted stakeholders' perceptions of care quality and interactions with others and (2) investigate how these experiences and perceptions varied across stakeholder groups and care settings.

Methods

A qualitative descriptive study was conducted. Patients and their families from an inpatient COVID rehabilitation hospital and healthcare providers from an acute or rehabilitation COVID hospital were interviewed between August 2020 and February 2021.

Results

A total of 10 patients, 5 family members and 12 healthcare providers were interviewed. Four major themes were identified: (1) IP&C measures challenged the psychosocial health of all stakeholders across care settings; (2): IP&C measures precipitated a need for greater relational care from HCPs; (3) infection prevention tenets perpetuated COVID‐related stigma that stakeholders experienced across care settings; and (4) technology was used to facilitate human connection when IP&C limited physical presence.

Conclusion

IP&C measures challenged psychosocial health and maintenance of vital human connections. Loneliness and isolation were felt by all stakeholders due to physical distancing and COVID‐related stigma. Some isolation was mitigated by the relational care provided by HCPs and technological innovations used. The findings of the study underscore the need to balance safety with psychosocial well‐being across care settings and beyond the patient–provider dyad.

Patient and Public Contribution

This study was informed by the Patient‐Oriented Research Agenda and developed through consultations with patients and family caregivers to identify priority areas for rehabilitation research. Priority areas identified that informed the current study were (1) the need to focus on the psychosocial aspects of recovery from illness and injury and (2) the importance of exploring patients' recovery experiences and needs across the continuum of care. The study protocol, ethics submission, analysis and manuscript preparation were all informed by healthcare providers with lived experience of working in COVID care settings.

Lessons learnt from emergency medicine services during the COVID-19 pandemic: A case study of India and the United States

India and the United States have both witnessed a high burden of COVID-19 infections since the pandemic was declared in early 2020. However, the COVID-19 restrictions have met with mixed responses in India and the US. Despite recommendations to continue social isolation and personal hygiene measures, India has not been able to curb the rise in daily cases. Our findings demonstrate the difference in the manner by which India and the US differ in their emergency handling of patients. We conducted a thorough review of the existing protocols and data concerning emergency responses in India and the US. The triage and care of suspected COVID-19 positive patients is different across India and the US. We find that there is a shortage of oxygenation, vaccination and other essential supplies in India. Further, the US is able to triage patients through telemedicine and EMS before suspected COVID-19 patients arrive, which is less prevalent in India. Our study identifies the importance of the emergency department (ED) as a critical contributor to the prevention and care of suspected and confirmed COVID-19 patients. Hospitals in India have been struggling to accommodate a huge influx of patients during its second wave with the ED playing a key link in their COVID-19 response.