Search

Introduction: Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, primary care nurses were often redeployed to areas outside of primary care to mitigate staffing shortages. Despite this, there is a scarcity of literature describing their perceptions of and experiences with redeployment during the pandemic. Objectives: This paper aims to: 1) describe the perspectives of primary care nurses with respect to redeployment, 2) discuss the opportunities/challenges associated with redeployment of primary care nurses, and 3) examine the nature (e.g., settings, activities) of redeployment by primary care nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: In this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews were conducted with primary care nurses (i.e., Nurse Practitioners, Registered Nurses, and Licensed/Registered Practical Nurses), from four regions in Canada. These include the Interior, Island, and Vancouver Coastal Health regions in British Columbia; Ontario Health West region in Ontario; the province of Nova Scotia; and the province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Data related to redeployment were analyzed thematically. Results: Three overarching themes related to redeployment during the COVID-19 pandemic were identified: (1) Call to redeployment, (2) Redeployment as an opportunity/challenge, and (3) Scope of practice during redeployment. Primary care nurses across all regulatory designations reported variation in the process of redeployment within their jurisdiction (e.g., communication, policies/legislation), different opportunities and challenges that resulted from redeployment (e.g., scheduling flexibility, workload implications), and scope of practice implications (e.g., perceived threat to nursing license). The majority of nurses discussed experiences with redeployment being voluntary in nature, rather than mandated. Conclusions: Redeployment is a useful workforce strategy during public health emergencies; however, it requires a structured process and a decision-making approach that explicitly involves healthcare providers affected by redeployment. Primary care nurses ought only to be redeployed after other options are considered and arrangements made for the care of patients in their original practice area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted global daily life, including the world of elite athletes. This paper examines the multifaceted impact the COVID-19 pandemic had on elite swimmers and water polo athletes, specifically their mental health, their concerns over the virus, their intentions of getting vaccinated, and sleep disturbances that they may have faced. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study on elite swimmers and water polo players, using an anonymous questionnaire. Results: A total of 200 elite athletes participated. The majority of the participants reported a negative impact on their mental health, screened positive for insomnia (n = 107 (53.5%), with females (n = 101; 57.7%), swimmers (n = 100, 66.7%), and university students (n = 71, 71.7%) being more vulnerable (p < 0.001). Concerns about contracting the disease especially during important training or tournament periods and potential career disruption also affected their psychological well-being. While the majority (75%) had the intention of getting vaccinated, an alarming percentage was yet uncertain over its decision. Conclusions: This study highlights the significant psychological distress faced by elite aquatic athletes during the pandemic. It emphasizes the difficulties faced by elite swimmers and water polo athletes and determines not only the importance of addressing the vaccination intentions of athletes, but also how critical it is to confront the challenges they face both for their personal health and for the restoration of world sports to their pre-pandemic state. More large-scale studies are required to inform policies targeted at minimizing disruption to the athletes' career, provision of information on preventive measures and vaccination, and improvement in psychological well-being in case of similar major public health issues in the future. Additionally, this study calls for further research to explore the unique challenges faced by aquatic athletes, such as those related to their training environments and fear of contagion, to better support them in future public health crises. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the first case of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2/Coronavirus Disease 2019 (SARS-COV-2/COVID-19) was discovered in Wuhan, China, it spread to vast limits globally and became a public health disaster, affecting nearly all countries around the globe. Along with mainstream medical treatment, alternative medicine desperately was the need of the hour for youngsters to manage their symptoms while being self-quarantined and ultimately to improve their chances of survival and recovery from COVID-19. Since the beginning of SARS-COV-2, few studies address the clinical-functional presentation of viral infection and management with physiotherapy for children. Major online electronic databases PubMed, PEDro, and Google Scholar were researched to identify, organize and commission the current review. To create a search strategy, Medical Subject Headings and Descriptors of Science and Health were utilized. The authors looked for other studies by screening the references list of the potentially pertinent papers. These computerized searches turned up studies and those studies' bibliographies with pertinent citations were examined. Personal protective equipment was a crucial component for protection and contact precaution. Following hypoxia, effective oxygen therapy is administered right away. When necessary, under the right circumstances, nasal high-flow oxygen therapy, non-invasive ventilation, lung-protective breathing methods, and prone positioning can be used. Children with SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 may benefit from physiotherapy interventions with a focus on ventilatory management, airway clearance procedures, early activities, and mobilization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The rapid spread of the COVID-19 pandemic upended societies across the world, with billions forced into lockdowns. As countries contemplated instating and rolling back lockdown measures, and considered the impact of pandemic fatigue on policy measures, and furthermore to prepare for the improved management of future pandemics, this study examines the effectiveness of policy measures in limiting the spread of infections and fatalities. Design/methodology/approach: The methodological approach in the study centres on a fixed effects panel regression analysis and employs the COVID-19 Government Response Stringency Index, which comprises eight containment measures and three health campaigns, with progressive degrees of stringency, in order to investigate the efficacy of government policies. Findings: Findings suggest that some government policies were effective at reducing implicit mortality rates, infection cases and fatalities during the first four months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Solid stringency measures to reduce mortality rates include public gathering restrictions on more than 100 attendees, and international travel limits for developed countries and islands. Fatalities can further be reduced through the closing of public transport, whereas infection cases also experience benefits from public information campaigns. Comparable results are observed in a robustness test across 12 months. Originality/value: Some non-pharmaceutical policies are shown to be more effective than others at reducing the spread of infections, fatalities and mortality rates, and support policymakers to manage future pandemics more effectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic halted progress in global vaccine coverage and disrupted routine childhood vaccination practices worldwide. While there is ample evidence of the vaccination decline experienced during the pandemic, it is less clear how low-income countries were affected. We executed a systematic review to synthesize the current literature on the impacts of routine childhood vaccinations in low-income countries from 1 January 2020 to 8 February 2023. We collected data using an extraction form on Covidence and assessed the quality of studies included in the review using the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. Effect estimates for changes in vaccination during the pandemic were reported and summarized. Factors that influenced changes were grouped into descriptive themes. Thirteen studies, encompassing 18 low-income countries and evaluating 15 vaccines at varying doses, were included in the final review. We found that routine childhood vaccinations during the COVID-19 pandemic varied considerably by vaccine type, location, and phase of the pandemic. Nine different themes were identified as factors that influenced changes in vaccination. Documenting past experiences and lessons learned is crucial for informing preparedness efforts in anticipation of future public health emergencies. Failure to effectively address these things in the next public health emergency could result in a recurrence of declining routine childhood vaccinations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cannabis use before the COVID-19 pandemic for many involved sharing prepared cannabis for inhalation, practices that were less prevalent during the pandemic. State-level COVID-19 containment policies may have influenced this decrease. This study examined the extent to which the intensity of state-level COVID-19 policies were associated with individual-level cannabis sharing. Findings have the potential to guide harm reduction policies for future respiratory pandemics and seasonal respiratory virus waves. Methods: This study used cross-sectional individual-level data from the COVID-19 Cannabis Study, an anonymous U.S.-based web survey on cannabis use disseminated during the early phase of the pandemic (Full sample N = 1,883). We combined individual-level data with state-level policy data from Kaiser Family Foundation's State COVID-19 Data and Policy Actions for three time-points from June to August 2020 that overlapped with the survey period. Cannabis sharing was dichotomized as any versus no sharing. We adapted a previously published coding framework to score the intensity of COVID-19 policies implemented in each U.S. state and averaged the policy score across the time period. We then used Poisson regression models to quantify the associations of the average state-level COVID-19 policy score with cannabis sharing during the pandemic. Results: Participants (n = 925) reporting using inhalation as a mode for cannabis use were included in this analysis. Most respondents were male (64.1%), non-Hispanic White (54.3%), with a mean age of 33.7 years (SD 8.8). A large proportion (74.9%) reported sharing cannabis during the pandemic. Those who shared cannabis more commonly lived in states with a lower average policy score (16.7, IQR 12.3–21.5) compared to those who did not share (18.6, IQR 15.3–25.3). In adjusted models, the prevalence ratio of any cannabis sharing per every 5-unit increase in the average COVID-19 policy score was 0.97 (95% CI 0.93, 1.01). Conclusions: Fewer individuals shared cannabis in states with more intense COVID-19 containment policies compared to those in states with less intense policies. Individuals who use cannabis may be willing to make changes to their behavior and may further benefit from specific and directed public health messaging to avoid sharing during respiratory infection outbreaks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Annali di Igiene, Medicina Preventiva e di Comunità is the property of Societa Editrice Universo s.r.l. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

COVID-19 has had a devastating impact on people's lives since its initial outbreak and global spread in 2020. While the U.S. government and public health officials have recommended best practices such as social distancing, wearing a mask, and avoiding large public gatherings, these orders have been met with varying levels of acceptance from the public. Given the disparate compliance, this study builds on Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) to explore individual differences and personal motivation factors in order to better understand what may influence one's likelihood to adhere to COVID-19 protective measures. A U.S. national survey (N = 2,049) was conducted April–May 2020, roughly one month after stay-at-home orders were issued in some states. Participants were asked to report their likelihood of taking individual and community protective measures. Multivariate hierarchical linear regressions were run to analyze the extent to which participants' concerns about COVID-19's impact, individual and collective self-efficacy, coping behaviors, and personality traits influenced the dependent variables. Findings showed that COVID-19-related health concerns, collective efficacy, and proactive coping strategies were positively related to participants' likelihood of taking protective measures. Those with greater concerns about their general well-being and the economy, adverse coping strategies like denial and joking, as well as sensation-seeking personalities, were less likely to take protective measures. The discussion considers how individual differences fit into broader global efforts to stem COVID-19. Practical implications for public health messaging are that communication may focus on facilitating efficacy in order to boost compliance with protective measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]