10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
3 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Changes in compliance and knowledge of infection prevention and control practices following the COVID‐19 outbreak: A retrospective study of 197 nonfrontline healthcare workers

      letter

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          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, Since the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic, infection prevention and control (IPC) strategies to minimize nosocomial transmission have taken center‐stage. 1 There are increasing reports documenting the high infection rates in healthcare workers (HCWs). 2 , 3 A recent finding 4 was that hospital administrative personnel showed higher infection rates than frontline HCWs, indicating the inadequacy of IPC trainings for administrative staff. Furthermore, Chu et al 5 revealed that over 70% of nosocomial infections occurred in HCWs not assigned to frontline departments during the epidemic. Shortages in personal protective equipment (PPE) could have led to this, but we wanted to investigate if the lack of awareness regarding IPC practices in nonfrontline HCWs was also a contributing factor. In China, most hospitals routinely conduct IPC trainings for HCWs, but it is difficult to evaluate whether these trainings adequately prepare staff to respond to emergencies. Therefore, we conducted a survey to investigate if HCWs were sufficiently knowledgeable about IPC practices and adequately trained in emergency pandemic response. In April 2020, 236 self‐administered questionnaires (Appendix S1) were distributed to eight hospitals designated for managing COVID‐19 patients in Hubei Province, China. The questionnaire surveyed the knowledge of HCWs, training frequency, and adherence to IPC policies under different settings: preoutbreak, postoutbreak/prefrontline deployment, and postfrontline deployment. Individual scores were recorded on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 indicating superior knowledge and compliance. We also asked participants which setting from among simulations, tests, self‐study, training videos, practical experience, and didactic lectures, provided the most useful training for an emergency pandemic response. Statistical analysis was performed by SPSS using paired t test and Tamhane T2 test (P < .05). 197 HCWs (response rate 83.5%) from different nonfrontline departments (Dermatology‐27.9%; Surgery‐22.8%; Internal Medicine‐20.8%; etc.) completed the questionnaire (Table 1). Between late December 2019, and early April 2020, IPC trainings were organized more than twice as frequently as usual (6.34 ± 5.02 vs 2.67 ± 2.41, P < .001); or every 14.20 days. Compliance with and knowledge of IPC practices improved significantly postoutbreak (total score, 72.06 ± 11.17) compared with preoutbreak (63.72 ± 13.44), and after working at the frontline (77.07 ± 5.36). These trends were observed to varying degrees across all the categories of IPC policies and procedures (Figure 1). Of note, the biggest improvement in scores was in knowledge regarding the correct donning and doffing procedures for PPE (A: 1.86; 95%CI, 1.30‐2.41; P < .001. B: 0.91; 95%CI, 0.58‐1.25; P < .001). In addition, the majority of HCWs (30%) considered field experience to be the most beneficial form of training among the various training settings. However, traditional forms of IPC training, such as didactic lectures (5%) and written tests (14%) were not deemed to be very useful by the HCWs (Figure 2). TABLE 1 Departmental proportion of nonfrontline medical staff Involved departments Participants (N = 197), No. (%) Dermatology 55 (27.9) Surgery 45 (22.8) Internal medicine 41 (20.8) Gynecology and obstetrics 18 (9.1) Pediatrics 8 (4.1) Ophthalmology and Otorhinolaryngology 7 (3.6) Rehabilitation medicine 5 (2.5) Others a 18 (9.1) a Referring to Departments of Stomatology, Geriatrics, Anesthesiology, Traditional Chinese Medicine, Ultrasonics, Oncology, Pharmacy and Laboratory Medicine. FIGURE 1 Knowledge of infection‐control and prevention strategies and compliance in HCWs across three settings FIGURE 2 Percentage of HCWs reporting each setting to be the most beneficial for infection‐control trainings In response to the outbreak, healthcare facilities in China are actively conducting IPC trainings of staff to ensure robust compliance with policies, therefore contributing to the enhancement of postoutbreak IPC awareness. Our study suggested that nonfrontline HCWs' knowledge regarding proper use of PPE and protocols for quarantine and isolation zones need further improvement. In the future, nonfrontline HCWs should be trained adequately in relevant knowledge and skills, 6 such that they may safely engage in clinical duties during current and future pandemics. Though the retrospective and subjective nature of our study are its limitations, we learned some important insights. Practical experience at the frontlines resulted in significant improvements in knowledge regarding prevention strategies, highlighting the benefit of clinical practice in raising awareness. Furthermore, HCWs reported practical experience to be of great benefit in improving compliance; lending support to the role of field training in the preparedness of HCWs' emergency response to pandemic. CONFLICT OF INTEREST The authors declare no conflict of interest. AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS Juan Tao and Yan Li conceptualized the study. Liu Yang and Mahin Alamgir drafted the initial manuscript. Qing Wang, Jingjiang Cao, Jianxiu Wang, and Han Liu collected the data and Xiaoxu Yin conducted the data analysis. All authors contributed to revisions of the initial manuscript. Supporting information APPENDIX S1: Supporting information. Click here for additional data file.

          Related collections

          Most cited references4

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          Clinical characteristics of 54 medical staff with COVID‐19: A retrospective study in a single center in Wuhan, China

          Abstract In December 2019, an outbreak of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐Cov‐2) infection occurred in Wuhan, and rapidly spread to worldwide, which has attracted many people's concerns about the patients. However, studies on the infection status of medical personnel is still lacking. A total of 54 cases of SARS‐Cov‐2 infected medical staff from Tongji Hospital between 7 January and 11 February 2020 were analyzed in this retrospective study. Clinical and epidemiological characteristics were compared between different groups by statistical method. From 7 January to 11 February 2020, 54 medical staff of Tongji Hospital were hospitalized due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). Most of them were from other clinical departments (72.2%) rather than emergency department (3.7%) or medical technology departments (18.5%). Among the 54 patients with COVID‐19, the distribution of age had a significant difference between non‐severe type and severe/critical cases (median age: 47 years vs 38 years; P = .0015). However, there was no statistical difference in terms of gender distribution and the first symptoms between theses two groups. Furthermore, we observed that the lesion regions in SARS‐Cov‐2 infected lungs with severe‐/critical‐type of medical staff were more likely to exhibit lesions in the right upper lobe (31.7% vs 0%; P = .028) and right lung (61% vs 18.2%; P = .012). Based on our findings with medical staff infection data, we suggest training for all hospital staff to prevent infection and preparation of sufficient protection and disinfection materials.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Italian doctors call for protecting healthcare workers and boosting community surveillance during covid-19 outbreak

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

              SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthcare personnel with high-risk occupational exposure: evaluation of seven-day exclusion from work policy

              ABSTRACT Background Starting in late February 2020, Greece is experiencing a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic. Healthcare personnel (HCP) were disproportionately affected, accounting for approximately 10% of notified cases. Exclusion from work for 7 days was recommended for HCP with high-risk occupational exposure. Our aim was to evaluate the 7-day exclusion from work policy for HCP with high-risk exposure. Methods HCP with a history of occupational exposure to COVID-19 were notified to the Hellenic National Public Health Organization, regardless of their exposure risk category. Exposed HCP were followed for 14 days after last exposure. Results We prospectively studied 3398 occupationally exposed HCP; nursing personnel accounted for most exposures (n=1705; 50.2%). Of the 3398 exposed HCP, 1599 (47.1%) were classified as low-risk, 765 (22.5%) as moderate-risk, and 1031 (30.4%) as high-risk exposures. Sixty-six (1.9%) HCP developed COVID-19 at a mean of 3.65 days (range: 0-17 days) post-exposure. Of the 66 HCP with COVID-19, 46, 7, and 13 had a history of high-, moderate- or low-risk exposure (4.5%, 0.9%, and 0.8% of all high-, moderate-, and low-risk exposures, respectively). Hospitalization and absenteeism were more prevalent among HCP with high-risk exposure. A logistic regression analysis showed that the following variables were significantly associated with an increased risk for the onset of COVID-19: male, administrative personnel, underlying disease and high-risk exposure. Conclusion HCP with high-risk occupational exposure to COVID-19 had increased probability of serious morbidity, healthcare seeking, hospitalization and absenteeism. Our findings justify the 7-day exclusion from work policy for HCP with high-risk exposure.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                littleagong@163.com
                Journal
                Dermatol Ther
                Dermatol Ther
                10.1111/(ISSN)1529-8019
                DTH
                Dermatologic Therapy
                John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (Hoboken, USA )
                1396-0296
                1529-8019
                05 January 2021
                Jan-Feb 2021
                : 34
                : 1 ( doiID: 10.1111/dth.v34.1 )
                : e14713
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Department of Dermatology Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology Wuhan China
                [ 2 ] Hubei Engineering Research Center for Skin Repair and Theranostics Wuhan China
                [ 3 ] Department of Dermatology Rutgers‐RWJMS Somerset New Jersey USA
                [ 4 ] Department of Social Medicine and Health Management Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology Wuhan China
                [ 5 ] Department of Dermatology Renhe Hospital, Three Gorges University Yichang China
                [ 6 ] Department of Dermatology Xiangyang Hospital, Hubei University of Chinese Medicine Xiangyang China
                [ 7 ] Department of Dermatology Dongfeng Central Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine Shiyan China
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Yan Li, Department of Dermatology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, No. 1277 Jiefang Ave., Wuhan, 430022, China.

                Email: littleagong@ 123456163.com

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3833-9996
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6571-6649
                Article
                DTH14713
                10.1111/dth.14713
                7883206
                33369001
                0dd8d95e-523f-49eb-97c8-fcc0fa69263e
                © 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.

                This article is being made freely available through PubMed Central as part of the COVID-19 public health emergency response. It can be used for unrestricted research re-use and analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source, for the duration of the public health emergency.

                History
                : 14 October 2020
                : 21 December 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 1, Pages: 3, Words: 1174
                Categories
                Letter
                Letters
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                January/February 2021
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:5.9.7 mode:remove_FC converted:15.02.2021

                Comments

                Comment on this article