23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      A Study of Basic Needs and Psychological Wellbeing of Medical Workers in the Fever Clinic of a Tertiary General Hospital in Beijing during the COVID-19 Outbreak

      letter

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Dear Editor, The 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has become a global threat. A fever clinic for triaging patients is a primary strategy against COVID-19 [1]. On January 20, 2020, the novel coronavirus was put on highest alert throughout China. On the same day, a special 24-h fever clinic was set up in the Emergency Department, Peking Union Medical College Hospital (PUMCH). Doctors and nurses for this fever clinic were handpicked by the Emergency Department based on their experience and their adaptability and tenacity under pressure shown in their past works. Psychological support for these medical workers was deemed as essential [2]. Thus, a hotline service was set up by the Department of Psychological Medicine, from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. every day, to talk with medical workers about their feelings, provide support and understanding, and help them find emotional resources. Furthermore, we continuously monitored these medical workers with qualitative and quantitative evaluations, regularly feeding back findings to the Emergency Department to allow for adjustments. The qualitative interview involved topics as shown below. Quantitative questionnaires (Table 1) included the Patient Health Questionaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Maslach Burn-out Inventory (MBI). PHQ-9 and MBI were administered at the end of their duty before a 2-week rest leave. Interviews were conducted whenever the medical workers were free, initiated either by us or them, during the 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. hotline service. Each medical worker was interviewed several times during their 2- to 3-week work time rotation. Each interview lasted 40-90 min. A total of 37 medical workers were selected as the first batch for the fever clinic. They all agreed to participate in our interviews and provided oral consent (response rate 100%). The participants comprised 16 doctors, 19 nurses, and 2 clinical technicians; 8 of the workers were male, and 17 were married. The overall mean age was 32.8 ± 9.6 years. Mean working experience was 6 years (range 2-20). They had all made contact with COVID-19 patients or specimens of COVID-19 patients in their work. Findings Living conditions. In order to minimize the transmission risk to others, the medical staff had to stay and work in the hospital continuously for 2-3 weeks, then took a rest for 2 weeks in an isolated vocational resort before going home for further rest. There was a separate apartment building with an individual dormitory for each of them. They were satisfied with the living conditions. Work time. The work time schedule was continuously adjusted. For doctors, the schedule changed from one consecutive 12-h shift/day to one consecutive 8-h shift /day then to two 4-h shifts/day with a 4-h break in-between. For nurses, the schedule changed from one consecutive 12-h shift/day to two 4-h shifts/day with a 4-h break in-between. For technicians, it was one 5-h shift plus one 7-h shift/day, with one 5-h and one 7-h break after each shift. After 2-3 weeks of continuous work, these medical staff were replaced by a new group. Doctors and nurses gave the same feedback on ideal work time: 4-6 h/shift, 1 or 2 shifts/day, for 2 or 3 weeks. Their concentration would decrease after working long hours. Some participants said they “felt tired and can't have a full sleep” later in the 2- or 3-week period. Many physical and mental challenges of working continuously should be noted, such as the intensity of focus for long periods of time and wearing bulky layers of clothing. The National Health Commission has acknowledged this and issued a notice that all medical workers should work suitable shifts and get sufficient rest [3]. Workload. (1) Doctors had a heavy workload, up to 10 patients/h. They hoped there could be additional doctors in extreme situations. (2) Nurses had various duties and sometimes, at maximum, had to deal with 200 patients/day. They hoped there could be a more specified task division, as well as more nurses. (3) Technicians thought their workload was moderate and the schedule was balanced. Medical security. The staff generally felt safe as there were designated personnel supervising the virus protection procedures for each medical staff member. But sometimes there was a shortage of protective clothing. On a larger scale, the Chinese government has mobilized all the production and logistic powers to ensure medical material supplies [3]. Diet and sleep. The participants were satisfied with the food and the sleeping environment. Dietary habits and needs were individually considered. Overall, 21.6% (8/37) of participants had low appetite, and 29.7% (11/37) had sleeping problems and occasionally needed sleeping pills. Emotions. (1) Doctors: 6.3% (1/16) felt nervous after hearing news on television that some doctors were infected. (2) Nurses: 52.6% (10/19) reported negative emotions including worrying about and missing family members, worrying about infection, and feeling stressed about heavy workload. (3) Technicians felt emotionally stable. In response, the logistics departments took on the responsibility of taking care of the participants' family members. Coping strategies. Video-chat or telephone with family members was the most frequently reported coping strategy. Talking with colleagues was also useful for most participants. Two participants reported that they would rather cope with stress on their own, but they welcomed talks with psychologists through hotline. Other coping strategies included sport, singing, writing diaries, watching videos, etc. Bodily discomfort. Of the 37 participants, 6 doctors and 11 nurses reported mild bodily discomfort including tiredness, throat pain, cough, neck and shoulder pain, back pain, headache and nausea, frequent urination, and skin rash. No medical worker was infected with COVID-19. The above-described bodily discomforts may likely have psychosomatic origins. PHQ-9 and MBI (see Table 1). The higher rate of “Personal Accomplishment” burnout may be related to the fact there is still no definitely effective medication against COVID-19. Consistent with other similar situations, medical workers in our study were under high stress [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]. However, overall, the emotional distress and burnout levels were not highly elevated. Our psychological support and adjustments may help buffer the negative impact of stress. In addition, we have to acknowledge that in such an emergency situation with a shortage of medical staff and resources, many doctors and nurses are overworking extensively. It is a new situation for medical workers [10]. We suggest monitoring the physical and psychological needs and wellbeing of medical workers in similar situations, and then adjusting their working schedules and formulating psychosocial interventions accordingly. Statement of Ethics The trial protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee for Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (S-K1045). All participants gave their oral consent. Disclosure Statement The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. Funding Sources J.C. and J.W. received funding support from PUMCH (pumch-2016-3.3 and ZC201902261, respectively). Author Contributions J.W. and H.Z. contributed equally to the conception of the study design and coordination. Data collection was carried out by Y.D., X.Z., W.G., and J.J. Data analysis and interpretation was done by J.C., W.G., Y.D., and H.X. J.C. and Y.D. wrote the first draft of the paper. J.W., H.Z., and B.Z. provided a critical revision of this draft. All authors gave their final approval of the version to be published.

          Related collections

          Most cited references5

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Mental health care for medical staff in China during the COVID-19 outbreak

          In December, 2019, an outbreak of a novel coronavirus pneumonia occurred in Wuhan (Hubei, China), and subsequently attracted worldwide attention. 1 By Feb 9, 2020, there were 37 294 confirmed and 28 942 suspected cases of 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in China. 2 Facing this large-scale infectious public health event, medical staff are under both physical and psychological pressure. 3 To better fight the COVID-19 outbreak, as the largest top-class tertiary hospital in Hunan Province, the Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University undertakes a considerable part of the investigation of suspected patients. The hospital has set up a 24-h fever clinic, two mild suspected infection patient screening wards, and one severe suspected infection patient screening ward. In addition to the original medical staff at the infectious disease department, volunteer medical staff have been recruited from multiple other departments. The Second Xiangya Hospital—workplace of the chairman of the Psychological Rescue Branch of the Chinese Medical Rescue Association—and the Institute of Mental Health, the Medical Psychology Research Center of the Second Xiangya Hospital, and the Chinese Medical and Psychological Disease Clinical Medicine Research Center responded rapidly to the psychological pressures on staff. A detailed psychological intervention plan was developed, which mainly covered the following three areas: building a psychological intervention medical team, which provided online courses to guide medical staff to deal with common psychological problems; a psychological assistance hotline team, which provided guidance and supervision to solve psychological problems; and psychological interventions, which provided various group activities to release stress. However, the implementation of psychological intervention services encountered obstacles, as medical staff were reluctant to participate in the group or individual psychology interventions provided to them. Moreover, individual nurses showed excitability, irritability, unwillingness to rest, and signs of psychological distress, but refused any psychological help and stated that they did not have any problems. In a 30-min interview survey with 13 medical staff at The Second Xiangya Hospital, several reasons were discovered for this refusal of help. First, getting infected was not an immediate worry to staff—they did not worry about this once they began work. Second, they did not want their families to worry about them and were afraid of bringing the virus to their home. Third, staff did not know how to deal with patients when they were unwilling to be quarantined at the hospital or did not cooperate with medical measures because of panic or a lack of knowledge about the disease. Additionally, staff worried about the shortage of protective equipment and feelings of incapability when faced with critically ill patients. Many staff mentioned that they did not need a psychologist, but needed more rest without interruption and enough protective supplies. Finally, they suggested training on psychological skills to deal with patients' anxiety, panic, and other emotional problems and, if possible, for mental health staff to be on hand to directly help these patients. Accordingly, the measures of psychological intervention were adjusted. First, the hospital provided a place for rest where staff could temporarily isolate themselves from their family. The hospital also guaranteed food and daily living supplies, and helped staff to video record their routines in the hospital to share with their families and alleviate family members' concerns. Second, in addition to disease knowledge and protective measures, pre-job training was arranged to address identification of and responses to psychological problems in patients with COVID-19, and hospital security staff were available to be sent to help deal with uncooperative patients. Third, the hospital developed detailed rules on the use and management of protective equipment to reduce worry. Fourth, leisure activities and training on how to relax were properly arranged to help staff reduce stress. Finally, psychological counsellors regularly visited the rest area to listen to difficulties or stories encountered by staff at work, and provide support accordingly. More than 100 frontline medical staff can rest in the provided rest place, and most of them report feeling at home in this accomodation. Maintaining staff mental health is essential to better control infectious diseases, although the best approach to this during the epidemic season remains unclear.4, 5 The learning from these psychological interventions is expected to help the Chinese government and other parts of the world to better respond to future unexpected infectious disease outbreaks.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Therapeutic and triage strategies for 2019 novel coronavirus disease in fever clinics

            In December, 2019, numerous unexplained pneumonia cases occurred in Wuhan, China. This outbreak was confirmed to be caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), belonging to the same family of viruses responsible for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS). 1 The SARS epidemic in 2003 was controlled through numerous measures in China. One effective strategy was the establishment of fever clinics for triaging patients. Based on our first-hand experience in dealing with the present outbreak in Wuhan, we have established the following clinical strategies in adult fever clinics (figure ). Figure Flow chart for treatment of 2019 novel coronavirus disease in fever clinics in Wuhan China CRP=C-reactive protein. CAP=Community-acquired pneumonia. SARS-CoV-2=severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2. Patients can be afebrile in the early stages of infection, with only chills and respiratory symptoms. High temperature is not a general presentation. Elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) is an important factor of 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19; formally known as 2019-nCoV) and impaired immunity, characterised by lymphopenia, is an essential characteristic. Therefore, in afebrile patients (temperature 65 years) and immunocompromised patients should be treated as moderate or severe cases in the initial assessment. Infections in pregnant women might progress rapidly and timely clinical decisions are crucial to provide pregnant women with options, such as induction, anaesthesia, and surgery. Consultation with an obstetric specialist is recommended and depending on the condition of the mother, termination of the pregnancy is a consideration. Home care and isolation can relieve the burden on health-care providers of fever clinics. We used this strategy in Wuhan in response to the large volume of patients arriving at health care centres but do not recommend it for other regions where each suspected case can be appropriately isolated and monitored in a health setting. Inappropriate home care can be life threatening for patients and be a detriment to public health. 5 Many factors contributed to developing our clinical algorithm in Wuhan during the early outbreak period. During this time, the influx of patients to fever clinics substantially outweighed the number of physicians. Inpatient care was unsafe due to potential cross-infection and supplementary resources were not ready. Applying and waiting for results of an SARS-CoV-2 test was time consuming just after the outbreak and did not aid clinical decision making. We made trade-offs between infection control and standard medical principles and adapted the protocol as more information and resources became available. We hope our experience will serve as guidance for other fever clinics and future cases.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Psychological effects of the SARS outbreak in Hong Kong on high-risk health care workers.

              To quantify stress and the psychological impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) on high-risk health care workers (HCWs). We evaluated 271 HCWs from SARS units and 342 healthy control subjects, using the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) to assess stress levels and a structured list of putative psychological effects of SARS to assess its psychological effects. Healthy control subjects were balanced for age, sex, education, parenthood, living circumstances, and lack of health care experience. Stress levels were raised in both groups (PSS = 18) but were not relatively increased in the HCWs. HCWs reported significantly more positive (94%, n = 256) and more negative psychological effects (89%, n = 241) from SARS than did control subjects. HCWs declared confidence in infection-control measures. In HCWs, adaptive responses to stress and the positive effects of infection control training may be protective in future outbreaks. Elevated stress in the population may be an important indicator of future psychiatric morbidity.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                PPS
                Psychother Psychosom
                10.1159/issn.0033-3190
                Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics
                S. Karger AG
                0033-3190
                1423-0348
                30 March 2020
                :
                :
                : 1-3
                Affiliations
                [_a] aDepartment of Psychological Medicine, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
                [_b] bDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
                [_c] cDepartment of Psychology, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
                Author notes
                *Jing Wei, Department of Psychological Medicine, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Dongdan Shuaifuyuan No.1, Beijing 100730 (China), weijing@pumch.cn, , Huadong Zhu, Department of Emergency Medicine, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Dongdan Shuaifuyuan No.1, Beijing 100730 (China), zhuhuadong1970@126.com
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4318-2380
                Article
                507453 Psychother Psychosom
                10.1159/000507453
                32224612
                908ee680-cf39-4d7d-8eb5-6443501da88a
                © 2020 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                History
                : 26 February 2020
                : 23 March 2020
                Page count
                Tables: 1, Pages: 3
                Categories
                Letter to the Editor

                Internal medicine,Respiratory medicine,Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry,Microbiology & Virology,Infectious disease & Microbiology

                Comments

                Comment on this article