Suppr超能文献

在 COVID-19 之前,对社区医院急诊科临床工作人员的基准幸福感、对关键事件的看法以及对汇报的开放性:一项横断面研究。

Baseline well-being, perceptions of critical incidents, and openness to debriefing in community hospital emergency department clinical staff before COVID-19, a cross-sectional study.

机构信息

Frank H. Netter MD School of Medicine, 370 Bassett Rd, North Haven, CT, 06473, USA.

出版信息

BMC Emerg Med. 2020 Oct 15;20(1):82. doi: 10.1186/s12873-020-00372-5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Emergency department personnel routinely bear witness to traumatic experiences and critical incidents that can affect their own well-being. Peer support through debriefing has demonstrated positive impacts on clinicians' well-being following critical incidents. This study explored community hospital emergency department staff's perceptions of critical incidents, assessed openness to debriefing and measured baseline well-being. Our analysis provides a baseline of provider well-being immediately prior to the local onset of COVID-19. The potential need for additional resources to support frontline providers during the pandemic can be evaluated.

METHOD

We conducted a cross-sectional study for 4-weeks prior to the first COVID-19 case in Connecticut using a survey offered to an interprofessional group of emergency department clinical staff. The main outcome measures were the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and the Professional Quality of Life (ProQOL) scale. Pearson's chi-square test was used to identify significant differences in perceptions of critical incidents and debriefings between professional categories. One-way ANOVA and Tukey's test were used to analyze significant differences in well-being between professional categories.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine clinical personnel from St. Vincent's Emergency Department responded to the survey. Events frequently selected as critical incidents were caring for critically ill children (89.7%), mass casualty events (84.6%), and death of a patient (69.2%). Critical incidents were commonly reported (81.6%) as occurring once per week. Additionally, 76.2% of participants reported wanting to discuss a critical incident with their team. Across all respondents, 45.7% scored borderline or abnormal for anxiety, 55.9% scored moderate for burnout, and 55.8% scored moderate to high for secondary traumatic stress.

CONCLUSIONS

At baseline, providers reported caring for critically ill children, mass casualty events, and death of a patient as critical incidents, which typically occurred once per week. Death of a patient occurs at increased frequency during the protracted mass casualty experience of COVID-19 and threatens provider well-being. Receptiveness to post-event debriefing is high but the method is still underutilized. With nearly half of staff scoring borderline or abnormal for anxiety, burnout, and secondary traumatic stress at baseline, peer support measures should be implemented to protect frontline providers' well-being during and after the pandemic.

摘要

背景

急诊科人员经常目睹可能影响自身健康的创伤性经历和危急事件。通过小组讨论进行同行支持已证明对危急事件后临床医生的健康有积极影响。本研究探讨了社区医院急诊科工作人员对危急事件的看法,评估了他们对小组讨论的开放程度,并衡量了他们的基线健康水平。我们的分析提供了在当地 COVID-19 爆发前,提供者健康状况的基线。可以评估在大流行期间是否需要额外资源来支持一线工作人员。

方法

在康涅狄格州首例 COVID-19 病例发生前的 4 周内,我们使用向急诊科临床工作人员的跨专业小组提供的调查进行了一项横断面研究。主要结局指标是医院焦虑和抑郁量表(HADS)和专业生活质量量表(ProQOL)。使用 Pearson 卡方检验来确定专业类别之间对危急事件和小组讨论看法的差异是否有统计学意义。使用单因素方差分析和 Tukey 检验来分析专业类别之间健康状况的差异。

结果

39 名来自圣文森特急诊部的临床人员对调查做出了回应。经常被选为危急事件的事件是照顾病危儿童(89.7%)、大规模伤亡事件(84.6%)和患者死亡(69.2%)。危急事件通常报告为每周发生一次(81.6%)。此外,76.2%的参与者表示希望与团队讨论危急事件。在所有受访者中,45.7%的人焦虑得分处于边缘或异常,55.9%的人倦怠得分中等,55.8%的人二次创伤后应激得分中等偏高。

结论

在基线时,提供者报告说,照顾病危儿童、大规模伤亡事件和患者死亡是危急事件,这些事件通常每周发生一次。在 COVID-19 期间漫长的大规模伤亡经历中,患者死亡的频率增加,威胁到提供者的健康。对事件后小组讨论的接受程度很高,但该方法仍未得到充分利用。由于近一半的员工在焦虑、倦怠和二次创伤后应激方面的得分处于边缘或异常,因此应在大流行期间和之后实施同伴支持措施,以保护一线工作人员的健康。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98ab/7560074/f082d297c1fc/12873_2020_372_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验