Search

Study Aims: During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was increasing pressure to be vaccinated to prevent further spread of the virus and improve outcomes. At the same time, part of the population expressed reluctance to vaccination, for various reasons. Only a few studies have compared the perceptions of vaccinated and non-vaccinated patients being treated in hospitals for COVID-19. Our aim was to investigate the association between vaccination status and perceived healthcare-associated discrimination in patients with COVID-19 receiving hospital treatment., Methods: Adult patients presenting to the emergency department or hospitalised for inpatient care due to or with COVID-19 from 1 June to 31 December 2021 in two Swiss hospitals were eligible. The primary endpoint was patients' perceived healthcare-associated discrimination, measured with the Discrimination in Medical Settings (DMS) scale. Secondary endpoints included different aspects of perceived quality of care and symptoms of psychological distress measured with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale., Results: Non-vaccinated patients (n = 113) had significantly higher DMS scores compared to vaccinated patients (n = 80) (mean: 9.54 points [SD: 4.84] vs 7.79 points [SD: 1.85]; adjusted difference: 1.18 [95% CI: 0.04-2.33 points]) and 21 of 80 vaccinated patients felt discriminated against vs 54 of 113 non-vaccinated patients (adjusted OR: 2.09 [95% CI: 1.10-3.99 ]). Non-vaccinated patients reported lower scores regarding respectful treatment by the nursing team (mean: 8.39 points [SD: 2.39] vs 9.30 points [SD: 1.09]; adjusted difference: -0.6 [95% CI: -1.18 - -0.02 points])., Conclusion: We found an association between vaccination status and perceived healthcare-associated discrimination. Healthcare workers should act in a professional manner regardless of a patient's vaccination status; in doing so, they might prevent the creation of negative perceptions in patients.

Aims: Several diseases are linked to increased risk of Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19). Our aim was to investigate whether depressive and anxiety symptoms predict subsequent risk of COVID-19, as has been shown for other respiratory infections., Methods: We based our analysis on UK Biobank participants providing prospective data to estimate temporal association between depressive and anxiety symptoms and COVID-19. We estimated whether the magnitude of these symptoms predicts subsequent diagnosis of COVID-19 in this sample. Further, we evaluated whether depressive and anxiety symptoms predicted (i) being tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and (ii) COVID-19 in those tested., Results: Based on data from N = 135 102 participants, depressive symptoms (odds ratio (OR) = 1.052; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.017-1.086; absolute case risk: (moderately) severe depression: 493 per 100 000 v. minimal depression: 231 per 100 000) but not anxiety (OR = 1.009; 95% CI 0.97-1.047) predicted COVID-19. While depressive symptoms but not anxiety predicted (i) being tested for SARS-CoV-2 (OR = 1.039; 95% CI 1.029-1.05 and OR = 0.99; 95% CI 0.978-1.002), (ii) neither predicted COVID-19 in those tested (OR = 1.015; 95% CI 0.981-1.05 and OR = 1.021; 95% CI 0.981-1.061). Results remained stable after adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics, multimorbidity and behavioural factors., Conclusions: Depressive symptoms were associated with a higher risk of COVID-19 diagnosis, irrespective of multimorbidities. Potential underlying mechanisms to be elucidated include risk behaviour, symptom perception, healthcare use, testing likelihood, viral exposure, immune function and disease progress. Our findings highlight the relevance of mental processes in the context of COVID-19.

AIMS OF THE STUDY: There is increasing interest in better understanding of long COVID, a condition characterised by long-term sequelae — appearing or persisting after the typical convalescence period — of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Herein, we describe long-term outcomes regarding residual symptoms and psychological distress in hospitalised patients 1 year after COVID-19. METHODS: This prospective cohort study included consecutive adult patients hospitalised for confirmed COVID-19 in two Swiss tertiary-care hospitals between March and June 2020. The primary endpoint was evidence of long COVID 1 year after discharge, defined as ≥1 persisting or new symptom related to COVID-19, from a predefined list of symptoms. Secondary endpoints included psychological distress and symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). RESULTS: Among 90 patients included in the study, 63 (70%) had symptoms of long COVID 1 year after hospitalisation, particularly fatigue (46%), concentration difficulties (31%), shortness of breath (21%) and post-exertion malaise (20%). Three predictors, namely duration of hospitalisation (odds ratio [OR] 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00–1.22; p = 0.041), severity of illness (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.04–1.37; p = 0.013), and self-perceived overall health status 30 days after hospitalisation (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.94–1.00; p = 0.027) were associated with long COVID. Regarding secondary endpoints, 16 (18%) experienced psychological distress and 3 (3.3%) patients had symptoms of PTSD. CONCLUSION: A high proportion of COVID-19 patients report symptoms of long COVID 1 year after hospitalisation, which negatively affects their quality of life. The most important risk factors were severe initial presentation of COVID-19 with long hospital stays.

Objective: COVID-19 causes psychological distress for patients and their relatives at short term. However, little research addressed the longer-term psychological outcomes in this population. Therefore, we aimed to prospectively assess clinically relevant psychological distress in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and their relatives 90 days after hospital discharge., Methods: This exploratory, prospective, observational cohort study included consecutive adult patients hospitalized in two Swiss tertiary-care hospitals between March and June 2020 for confirmed COVID-19 and their relatives. The primary outcome was psychological distress defined as clinically relevant symptoms of anxiety and/or depression measured with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) 90 days after discharge., Results: Clinically relevant psychological distress 90 days after hospital discharge was present in 23/108 patients (21.3%) and 22/120 relatives (18.3%). For patients, risk and protective factors associated with clinically relevant psychological distress included sociodemographic, illness-related, psychosocial, and hospital-related factors. A model including these factors showed good discrimination, with an area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.84. For relatives, relevant risk factors were illness-related, psychosocial, and hospital-related factors. Resilience was negatively associated with anxiety and depression in both patients and relatives and regarding PTSD in relatives only., Conclusion: COVID-19 is linked to clinically relevant psychological distress in a subgroup of patients and their relatives 90 days after hospitalization. If confirmed in an independent and larger patient cohort, knowledge about these potential risk and protective factors might help to develop preventive strategies., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Due to the dramatic measures accompanying isolation and the general uncertainty and fear associated with COVID-19, patients and relatives may be at high risk for adverse psychological outcomes. Until now there has been limited research focusing on the prevalence of psychological distress and associated factors in COVID-19 patients and their relatives. The objective of our study was to assess psychological distress in COVID-19 patients and their relatives 30 days after hospital discharge., Methods: In this prospective observational cohort study at two Swiss tertiary-care hospitals we included consecutive adult patients hospitalized between March and June 2020 for a proven COVID-19 and their relatives. Psychological distress was defined as symptoms of anxiety and/or depression measured with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), i.e., a score of ≥8 on the depression and/or anxiety subscale. We further evaluated symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), defined as a score of ≥1.5 on the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R)., Results: Among 126 included patients, 24 (19.1%) had psychological distress and 10 (8.7%) had symptoms of PTSD 30 days after hospital discharge. In multivariate logistic regression analyses three factors were independently associated with psychological distress in patients: resilience (OR 0.82; 95%CI 0.71 to 0.94; p = 0.005), high levels of perceived stress (OR 1.21; 95%CI 1.06 to 1.38; p = 0.006) and low frequency of contact with relatives (OR 7.67; 95%CI 1.42 to 41.58; p = 0.018). The model showed good discrimination, with an area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.92. Among 153 relatives, 35 (22.9%) showed symptoms of psychological distress, and 3 (2%) of PTSD. For relatives, resilience was negatively associated (OR 0.85; 95%CI 0.75 to 0.96; p = 0.007), whereas perceived overall burden caused by COVID-19 was positively associated with psychological distress (OR 1.72; 95%CI 1.31 to 2.25; p<0.001). The overall model also had good discrimination, with an AUC of 0.87., Conclusion: A relevant number of COVID-19 patients as well as their relatives exhibited psychological distress 30 days after hospital discharge. These results might aid in development of strategies to prevent psychological distress in COVID-19 patients and their relatives., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: Due to the pandemic-related restrictions in classroom teaching at the medical faculties of the LMU Munich and the University of Basel, teaching methods with standardized patients (SPs), were shifted to a digital, web-based format at short notice as of April 2020. We report on our experiences with the WebEncounter program, which was used for the first time in German-speaking countries. The program enables one-to-one encounters between SPs and students. Students receive an invitational email with brief instructions and background information on the case. SPs use case-specific criteria that are compliant with the learning objectives for digital evaluation during the encounter. A feedback session takes place immediately following the encounter. The SPs address the didactically relevant sections and can illustrate them with the corresponding video sequences. Finally, the students receive the links to the video recordings of the encounter and the feedback unit by email. Project description: The aim of this pilot study was to analyze the practicability of the program and its acceptance by students and SPs. In addition, we examined whether the operationalization of the learning objectives in the form of assessment items has an impact on the content and thematic development of courses in the area of doctor-patient communication. Methods: To implement the program, patient cases previously tested in communication seminars in Munich and Basel were rewritten and case-specific evaluation criteria were developed. SPs were trained to use the program, to present their patient figure online and to give feedback. The experience of those involved (faculty, SPs and SP trainers, students) in implementing the program was documented at various levels. The frequency and causes of technical problems were described. Student results on the patient cases and on the feedback items were collected quantitatively and, where possible, supplemented by free-text statements. Results: Data from 218/220 students in Basel and 120/127 students in Munich were collected and evaluated. Students were very satisfied with the patient cases, the encounter with the SPs and their feedback: 3.81±0.42. SPs experienced the training as an increase in their competence and the structured feedback as particularly positive. The training effort per SP was between 2.5 and 4 hours. The results show predominantly normally-distributed, case-specific sum scores of the evaluation criteria. The analysis of the individual assessment items refers to learning objectives that students find difficult to achieve (e.g. explicitly structuring the conversation). Problems in the technical implementation (<10 percent of the encounters) were due mainly to the use of insufficient hardware or internet connection problems. The need to define case-specific evaluation criteria triggered a discussion in the group of study directors about learning objectives and their operationalization. Summary: Web-based encounters can be built into the ongoing communication curriculum with reasonable effort. Training the SPs and heeding the technical requirements are of central importance. Practicing the virtual consultation was evaluated very positively by the students - in particular, the immediate feedback in the protected dialogue was appreciated by all involved., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Langewitz et al.)