Search

BackgroundPatient-reported outcome (PRO) measures may be used at a group level for research and quality improvement and at the individual patient level to support clinical decision making and ensure efficient use of resources. The challenges involved in implementing PRO measures are mostly the same regardless of aims and diagnostic groups and include logistic feasibility, high response rates, robustness, and ability to adapt to the needs of patient groups and settings. If generic PRO systems can adapt to specific needs, advanced technology can be shared between medical specialties and for different aims. ObjectiveWe describe methodological, organizational, and practical experiences with a generic PRO system, WestChronic, which is in use among a range of diagnostic groups and for a range of purposes. MethodsThe WestChronic system supports PRO data collection, with integration of Web and paper PRO questionnaires (mixed-mode) and automated procedures that enable adherence to implementation-specific schedules for the collection of PRO. For analysis, we divided functionalities into four elements: basic PRO data collection and logistics, PRO-based clinical decision support, PRO-based automated decision algorithms, and other forms of communication. While the first element is ubiquitous, the others are optional and only applicable at a patient level. Methodological and organizational experiences were described according to each element. ResultsWestChronic has, to date, been implemented in 22 PRO projects within 18 diagnostic groups, including cardiology, neurology, rheumatology, nephrology, orthopedic surgery, gynecology, oncology, and psychiatry. The aims of the individual projects included epidemiological research, quality improvement, hospital evaluation, clinical decision support, efficient use of outpatient clinic resources, and screening for side effects and comorbidity. In total 30,174 patients have been included, and 59,232 PRO assessments have been collected using 92 different PRO questionnaires. Response rates of up to 93% were achieved for first-round questionnaires and up to 99% during follow-up. For 6 diagnostic groups, PRO data were displayed graphically to the clinician to facilitate flagging of important symptoms and decision support, and in 5 diagnostic groups PRO data were used for automatic algorithm-based decisions. ConclusionsWestChronic has allowed the implementation of all proposed protocol for data collection and processing. The system has achieved high response rates, and longitudinal attrition is limited. The relevance of the questions, the mixed-mode principle, and automated procedures has contributed to the high response rates. Furthermore, development and implementation of a number of approaches and methods for clinical use of PRO has been possible without challenging the generic property. Generic multipurpose PRO systems may enable sharing of automated and efficient logistics, optimal response rates, and other advanced options for PRO data collection and processing, while still allowing adaptation to specific aims and patient groups.

Aim The aim was to evaluate the role of insufficient use of personal protective equipment (PPE) in SARS-CoV-2 transmission risk for healthcare workers (HCW) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods Prospective study within the COBRA cohort, including 15,127 HCW. Daily assessment of insufficient use of PPE, defined as self-reported PPE failure or noncompliance, in relation to SARS-CoV-2 infection ascertained by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. Statistical analysis involved calculating incidence rate ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results The included HCW contributed to 780,515 risk days including 67,723 d (8.7%) with insufficient PPE use and 133 events (positive PCR test). Self-reported insufficient use of PPE was slightly associated with infection with COVID-19 in HCW, but the data were statistically consistent with parameter values ranging from a protective effect to a to a doubling in risk (IRR 1.3, 95% CI 0.8; 2.3). Sensitivity analyses restricted to high-risk departments and to a period with a sufficient supply of PPE and a fully developed testing system, respectively, confirmed these findings. Conclusion Insufficient use of PPE among HCW during the pandemic in Denmark was uncommon but associated with a slightly increased risk of COVID-19 among HCW. However, the findings are uncertain due to the limited number of cases and the potential for misclassification bias stemming from the self-reported nature of the exposure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Over the years, many cases of electric cataract related to severe electrical injuries have been reported. Most have been cases where the entrance or exit point of the current was on the skull or near the eyes. Still, cases of cataract have been reported where an electric current has passed through the body between two contact points remote from the eyes. This study investigates whether persons exposed to an electric current develop cataracts in the subsequent years. Methods: We identified 14 112 persons who had received electrical injuries in two Danish registries. We matched these with patients partly with dislocation/sprain injuries and partly with persons from the workforce from the same occupation using year of accident, sex and age as matching variables in a prospective, matched‐cohort design. We identified cataract as outcome (DH25, DH26 and DH28) in the Danish National Patient Registry. The associations were analysed using conditional Cox and logistic regression. Results: We did not identify an increased risk of cataract following electrical injury compared to matched controls. Conclusion: A review of the literature clearly substantiates the occurrence of electric cataract as a consequence of electric current coming in contact with a point on the skull or near the eye. However, our results indicate that electric cataract is not a delayed‐onset effect of electrical injury, in general, and do not suggest a need for cataract screening in all cases of electrical injury. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction To treat and properly care for COVID-19 patients it is vital to have healthy healthcare workers to ensure the continued function of the healthcare system and to prevent transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) to patients, co-workers, and the community. Personal protective equipment (PPE) can prevent healthcare workers from being infected with and transmitting SARS-CoV-2. Experience and training are pivotal to ensure optimal protection. This study aims to examine the use and failure of PPE and compliance with PPE guidelines during the first and the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic among Danish healthcare workers. Methods Healthcare workers from the Central Denmark Region and the Capital Region of Denmark were invited to participate April–June 2020 during the first wave and November 2020–April 2021 during the second wave. Day-by-day, participants reported work procedures, use and failure of PPE, and compliance with PPE guidelines. Register-based information on sex, age, department, and profession was available for all participants. Results In total, 21 684 and 10 097 healthcare workers participated during the first and the second wave, respectively. During the first wave, 1.7% used filtering face piece-2 or -3 (FFP2 or FFP3) respirators and 8.2% used face masks [fluid resistant (type IIR) masks, masks with visor (typically type IIR), and other unspecified face masks] during physical contact with patients. During the second wave, the corresponding figures increased to 17.8% and 80.7%. During respiratory procedures, the use of FFP2 or FFP3 respirators increased from 5.6 to 24.3%, and the use of face masks from 14.7 to 77.8%. The no PPE use decreased from 21.3% during the first wave to 0.4% in the second wave, during respiratory procedures. Total PPE failures decreased from 0.7 to 0.4% from the first to second wave. The proportion not complying with PPE guidelines declined from 3.6 to 2.2% during physical contact with patients and from 6.5 to 4.6% during respiratory procedures. PPE failure and non-compliance varied by age, sex and type of department. Frequent reasons for non-compliance were forgetfulness and lack of time , and during the first but not during the second wave, limited availability of PPE. Conclusion We found a substantial increase in the use of PPE and a substantial decrease in PPE failures from the first to the second wave of COVID-19 in Denmark. However, there is still a need for continuous focus on compliance in use of PPE among healthcare workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background There is strong observational evidence that respirators are highly effective in protecting the users from being infected with Middle East respiratory syndrome and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV), but the evidence for SARS-CoV-2 during daily work is limited. This study utilized a subset of healthcare workers' temporary use of a new brand respirator with frequent defects when caring for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients to assess the protective effect of regular respirators against SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods We retrospectively followed 463 participants wearing a regular respirator and 168 wearing the new brand respirator day-by-day when caring for COVID-19 patients until testing polymerase chain reaction positive for SARS-CoV-2 between 27th December 2020 and 14th January 2021. Results We observed seven and eight incident SARS-CoV-2-infected cases. This corresponded with daily infection rates of 0.2 and 0.5%, an incidence rate ratio of 0.4 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.1; 1.0], and an incidence rate difference of 0.3% (95% CI −0.1; 0.8) when comparing a regular with the new brand respirator. Discussion We regard the new brand respirator a sham intervention, and this study thus provides further evidence for the protective effect of respirators when exposed to SARS-CoV-2 virus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]