Search

Background: Regulatory and professional nursing associations have an important role in ensuring that nurses provide safe, competent, and ethical care and are capable of adapting to emerging phenomena that influence society and population health needs. Telehealth and more recently virtual care are 2 digital health modalities that have gained momentum during the COVID-19 pandemic. Telehealth refers to telecommunications and digital communication technologies used to deliver health care, support health care provider and patient education, and facilitate self-care. Virtual care facilitates the delivery of health care services via any remote communication between patients and health care providers and among health care providers, either synchronously or asynchronously, through information and communication technologies. Despite nurses' adaptability to delivering virtual care, many have also reported challenges., Objective: This study aims to describe resources about virtual care, digital health, and nursing informatics (ie, practice guidelines and fact sheets) available to Canadian nurses through their regulatory and professional associations., Methods: An environmental scan was conducted between March and July 2023. The websites of nursing regulatory bodies across 13 Canadian provinces and territories and relevant nursing and a few nonnursing professional associations were searched. Data were extracted from the websites of these organizations to map out educational materials, training opportunities, and guidelines made available for nurses to learn and adapt to the ongoing digitalization of the health care system. Information from each source was summarized and analyzed using an inductive content analysis approach to identify categories and themes. The Virtual Health Competency Framework was applied to support the analysis process., Results: Seven themes were identified: (1) types of resources available about virtual care, (2) terminologies used in virtual care resources, (3) currency of virtual care resources identified, (4) requirements for providing virtual care between provinces, (5) resources through professional nursing associations and other relevant organizations, (6) regulatory guidance versus competency in virtual care, and (7) resources about digital health and nursing informatics. Results also revealed that practice guidance for delivering telehealth existed before the COVID-19 pandemic, but it was further expanded during the pandemic. Differences were noted across available resources with respect to terms used (eg, telenursing, telehealth, or virtual care), types of documents (eg, guideline vs fact sheet), and the depth of information shared. Only 2 associations provided comprehensive telenursing practice guidelines. Resources relative to digital health and nursing informatics exist, but variations between provinces were also noted., Conclusions: The use of telehealth and virtual care services is becoming mainstream in Canadian health care. Despite variations across jurisdictions, the existing nursing practice guidance resources for delivering telehealth and virtual care are substantial and can serve as a beginning step for developing a standardized set of practice requirements or competencies to inform nursing practice and the education of future nurses., (©Manal Kleib, Antonia Arnaert, Lynn M Nagle, Elizabeth Mirekuwaa Darko, Sobia Idrees, Daniel da Costa, Shamsa Ali. Originally published in JMIR Medical Education (https://mededu.jmir.org), 13.08.2024.)

Background: Family physicians (FPs) fill an essential role in public health emergencies yet have frequently been neglected in pandemic response plans. This exclusion harms FPs in their clinical roles and has unintended consequences in the management of concurrent personal responsibilities, many of which were amplified by the pandemic. The objective of our study was to explore the experiences of FPs during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic to better understand how they managed their competing professional and personal priorities., Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with FPs from four Canadian regions between October 2020 and June 2021. Employing a maximum variation sampling approach, we recruited participants until we achieved saturation. Interviews explored FPs' personal and professional roles and responsibilities during the pandemic, the facilitators and barriers that they encountered, and any gender-related experiences. Transcribed interviews were thematically analysed., Results: We interviewed 68 FPs during the pandemic and identified four overarching themes in participants' discussion of their personal experiences: personal caregiving responsibilities, COVID-19 risk navigation to protect family members, personal health concerns, and available and desired personal supports for FPs to manage their competing responsibilities. While FPs expressed a variety of ways in which their personal experiences made their professional responsibilities more complicated, rarely did that affect the extent to which they participated in the pandemic response., Conclusions: For FPs to contribute fully to a pandemic response, they must be factored into pandemic plans. Failure to appreciate their unique role and circumstances often leaves FPs feeling unsupported in both their professional and personal lives. Comprehensive planning in anticipation of future pandemics must consider FPs' varied responsibilities, health concerns, and necessary precautions. Having adequate personal and practice supports in place will facilitate the essential role of FPs in responding to a pandemic crisis while continuing to support their patients' primary care needs., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Medical professionals experienced high rates of burnout and moral distress during the COVID-19 pandemic. In Canada, burnout has been linked to a growing number of family physicians (FPs) leaving the workforce, increasing the number of patients without access to a regular doctor. This study explores the different factors that impacted FPs' experience with burnout and moral distress during the pandemic, with the goal of identifying system-based interventions aimed at supporting FP well-being and improving retention., Methods: We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with FPs across four health regions in Canada. Participants were asked about the roles they assumed during different stages of the pandemic, and they were also encouraged to describe their well-being, including relevant supports and barriers. We used thematic analysis to examine themes relating to FP mental health and well-being., Results: We interviewed 68 FPs across the four health regions. We identified two overarching themes related to moral distress and burnout: (1) inability to provide appropriate care, and (2) system-related stressors and buffers of burnout. FPs expressed concern about the quality of care their patients were able to receive during the pandemic, citing instances where pandemic restrictions limited their ability to access critical preventative and diagnostic services. Participants also described four factors that alleviated or exacerbated feelings of burnout, including: (1) workload, (2) payment model, (3) locum coverage, and (4) team and peer support., Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic limited FPs' ability to provide quality care to patients, and contributed to increased moral distress and burnout. These findings highlight the importance of implementing system-wide interventions to improve FP well-being during public health emergencies. These could include the expansion of interprofessional team-based models of care, alternate remuneration models for primary care (ie, non-fee-for-service), organized locum programs, and the availability of short-term insurance programs to cover fixed practice operating costs., (© 2024 The Author(s); Published by Kerman University of Medical Sciences This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.)

Background: The response to the vaccine may vary among individuals. Hence, it is important to know how often individuals experience side effects after immunization against COVID-19., Objective: This study aimed to assess the incidence of side effects following COVID-19 vaccination across different vaccine recipients in Southern Pakistan and identify the potential factors associated with these side effects in the population., Methods: The survey was conducted across Pakistan through Google-forms Links from August to October 2021. The questionnaire included demographic information and COVID-19 vaccine information. Chi-square (x2) was performed for comparative analysis to check the significance level with P <0.05. The final analysis included 507 participants who had received COVID-19 vaccines., Results: Of the total 507 COVID-19 vaccines recipients, 24.9% received CoronaVac, 36.5% received BBIBP-CorV, 14.2% received BNT162b2, 13.8% received AZD1222, and 10.7% received mRNA-1273. The most prominent side effects after the first dose were fever, weakness, lethargy, and pain at the site of injection. Moreover, the most commonly reported side effects after the second dose were pain at the injection site, headache, body ache, lethargy, fever, chills, flu-like symptoms, and diarrhea., Conclusion: Our results suggested that the side effects due to COVID-19 vaccination can vary between the first and second doses and type of COVID-19 vaccine. Our findings suggest continuing monitoring of vaccine safety and the importance of individualized risk-benefit assessment for COVID-19 immunization., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Qureshi et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Rationale: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) develop more severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19); however, it is unclear whether they are more susceptible to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and what mechanisms are responsible for severe disease. Objectives: To determine whether SARS-CoV-2 inoculated primary bronchial epithelial cells (pBECs) from patients with COPD support greater infection and elucidate the effects and mechanisms involved. Methods: We performed single-cell RNA sequencing analysis on differentiated pBECs from healthy subjects and patients with COPD 7 days after SARS-CoV-2 inoculation. We correlated changes with viral titers, proinflammatory responses, and IFN production. Measurements and Main Results: Single-cell RNA sequencing revealed that COPD pBECs had 24-fold greater infection than healthy cells, which was supported by plaque assays. Club/goblet and basal cells were the predominant populations infected and expressed mRNAs involved in viral replication. Proteases involved in SARS-CoV-2 entry/infection ( TMPRSS2 and CTSB ) were increased, and protease inhibitors ( serpins ) were downregulated more so in COPD. Inflammatory cytokines linked to COPD exacerbations and severe COVID-19 were increased, whereas IFN responses were blunted. Coexpression analysis revealed a prominent population of club/goblet cells with high type 1/2 IFN responses that were important drivers of immune responses to infection in both healthy and COPD pBECs. Therapeutic inhibition of proteases and inflammatory imbalances reduced viral titers and cytokine responses, particularly in COPD pBECs. Conclusions: COPD pBECs are more susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection because of increases in coreceptor expression and protease imbalances and have greater inflammatory responses. A prominent cluster of IFN-responsive club/goblet cells emerges during infection, which may be important drivers of immunity. Therapeutic interventions suppress SARS-CoV-2 replication and consequent inflammation.