Search

Objective: To investigate the psychosocial effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on nurses and midwives working in acute care settings, specifically psychological distress, self-reported concerns, and perceived impact on their work and personal lives. Background: Little is known about the psychosocial impact of the pandemic on nurses and midwives in Australia, a country with a substantially lower number of COVID-19 cases and deaths than many others. Few studies investigating the prevalence of psychological distress among nurses during the pandemic have been conducted in more than one setting, especially in the Australian context. Study design and methods: Cross-sectional survey design (STROBE checklist). Nurses and midwives (n=1,611) at four metropolitan tertiary health services in Melbourne, Australia completed an anonymous online survey between 15 May and 31 August 2020, which assessed symptoms of depression, anxiety and stress (DASS-21); concerns related to COVID-19; and other effects of COVID-19. Space was provided for free-text comments. Results: Approximately one fifth of respondents reported moderate to extremely severe symptoms of depression, anxiety and stress. Fewer years of clinical experience were significantly associated with higher levels of psychological distress. More than half of the respondents were extremely/very concerned about passing COVID-19 on to family members and about their family's health, and almost half were concerned about caring for a patient who had confirmed or suspected COVID-19. Respondents reported that certain precautionary measures such as personal protective equipment (PPE) interfered with their ability to provide optimal patient care. Positive aspects of the pandemic were also reported including a sense of togetherness and cooperation among staff. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a considerable impact on the psychological wellbeing and work and personal lives of nurses and midwives working in acute care settings in Melbou, Objective: To investigate the psychosocial effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on nurses and midwives working in acute care settings, specifically psychological distress, self-reported concerns, and perceived impact on their work and personal lives. Background: Little is known about the psychosocial impact of the pandemic on nurses and midwives in Australia, a country with a substantially lower number of COVID-19 cases and deaths than many others. Few studies investigating the prevalence of psychological distress among nurses during the pandemic have been conducted in more than one setting, especially in the Australian context. Study design and methods: Cross-sectional survey design (STROBE checklist). Nurses and midwives (n=1,611) at four metropolitan tertiary health services in Melbourne, Australia completed an anonymous online survey between 15 May and 31 August 2020, which assessed symptoms of depression, anxiety and stress (DASS-21); concerns related to COVID-19; and other effects of COVID-19. Space was provided for free-text comments. Results: Approximately one fifth of respondents reported moderate to extremely severe symptoms of depression, anxiety and stress. Fewer years of clinical experience were significantly associated with higher levels of psychological distress. More than half of the respondents were extremely/very concerned about passing COVID-19 on to family members and about their family's health, and almost half were concerned about caring for a patient who had confirmed or suspected COVID-19. Respondents reported that certain precautionary measures such as personal protective equipment (PPE) interfered with their ability to provide optimal patient care. Positive aspects of the pandemic were also reported including a sense of togetherness and cooperation among staff. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a considerable impact on the psychological wellbeing and work and personal lives of nurses and midwives working in acute care settings in Mel

Objectives To compare outpatient attendance rates for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ('Aboriginal') and non-Aboriginal patients at a large metropolitan health service in Melbourne, Australia, and to describe the barriers and enablers experienced by urban-dwelling Aboriginal patients in attending hospital outpatient appointments. Methods This study used a mixed-method approach. Proportions of referred patients who booked and attended outpatient appointments were extracted from a health service database. Aboriginal versus non-Aboriginal cohorts were compared using chi-squared tests. Eleven patients, one parent of a patient and two community nurses were interviewed by telephone to investigate perceived barriers and enablers to attending outpatient appointments among Aboriginal patients. Results Outpatient referrals were greater among Aboriginal than non-Aboriginal people; however, referrals were significantly less likely to result in an outpatient clinic booking and attendance for Aboriginal compared to non-Aboriginal people. Interview participants reported several barriers to attending appointments, related to logistical, quality of care and cultural factors. Suggested facilitators to make appointment attendance easier included: provision of transport support, improving clinic scheduling, utilising a variety of appointment reminder formats, providing food in waiting rooms, flexible appointment timing options, outreach services, access to Aboriginal support workers, improving communication and relationships with Aboriginal people, cultural awareness training for staff and the provision of culturally appropriate spaces. Conclusion Some barriers faced by Aboriginal patients in attending hospital outpatient appointments in urban areas can be addressed through implementation of enablers suggested by participants. Data have informed the development of a tailored, inclusive, culturally and consumer-focused appropriate hospital outpatient service model of care.

Background Hospital clinicians report poor psychosocial well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Few studies have reported data at more than one time point. Aims To compare psychosocial well-being among hospital clinicians at two different time points during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Methods Participants included doctors, nurses, midwives and allied health clinicians at a multi-site, public health service in Melbourne, Australia. Data were collected via two cross-sectional, online surveys: May to June (wave 1; n = 638) and October to December 2020 (wave 2; n = 358). The Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21) assessed psychological well-being in the past week. Investigator-devised questions assessed COVID-19 concerns and perceived work impacts. General linear models were used to assess impact of wave on psychological distress. Results There were no significant demographic differences between the two groups. Both positive (e.g. learning experience) and negative (e.g. risk of getting COVID-19) impacts were reported. In both waves, staff were most concerned about health risks to family members. Wave 2 respondents were significantly more likely than wave 1 respondents to indicate concerns about colleagues having COVID-19, increased workloads, leave cancellation and increased conflict at work (all P < 0.001). Adjusting for sex, age, self-rated health and discipline group, depression, anxiety and stress scores were significantly higher for respondents in the second than the first wave (all P < 0.001). Conclusions Psychological well-being of hospital clinicians was significantly worse during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic than the first. Sustained occupational and psychosocial support is recommended even when immediate COVID-19 concerns and impacts resolve., Background: Hospital clinicians report poor psychosocial well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Few studies have reported data at more than one time point. Aims: To compare psychosocial well-being among hospital clinicians at two different time points during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Methods: Participants included doctors, nurses, midwives and allied health clinicians at a multi-site, public health service in Melbourne, Australia. Data were collected via two cross-sectional, online surveys: May to June (wave 1; n = 638) and October to December 2020 (wave 2; n = 358). The Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21) assessed psychological well-being in the past week. Investigator-devised questions assessed COVID-19 concerns and perceived work impacts. General linear models were used to assess impact of wave on psychological distress. Results: There were no significant demographic differences between the two groups. Both positive (e.g. learning experience) and negative (e.g. risk of getting COVID-19) impacts were reported. In both waves, staff were most concerned about health risks to family members. Wave 2 respondents were significantly more likely than wave 1 respondents to indicate concerns about colleagues having COVID-19, increased workloads, leave cancellation and increased conflict at work (all P < 0.001). Adjusting for sex, age, self-rated health and discipline group, depression, anxiety and stress scores were significantly higher for respondents in the second than the first wave (all P < 0.001). Conclusions: Psychological well-being of hospital clinicians was significantly worse during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic than the first. Sustained occupational and psychosocial support is recommended even when immediate COVID-19 concerns and impacts resolve.

Background In an acute hospital setting, diabetes can require intensive management with medication modification, monitoring and education. Yet little is known about the experiences and perspectives of nursing/midwifery staff and patients. The aim of this study was to investigate diabetes management and care for patients with diabetes in an acute care setting from the perspectives of nursing/midwifery staff and patients. Methods A convergent mixed-methods study design. Patients with diabetes (Type 1, Type 2 or gestational diabetes) recruited from a public health service in Melbourne, Australia completed a survey and nurses and midwives employed at the health service participated in focus groups. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise the survey data. Thematic analysis was used for the free-text survey comments and focus group data. Results Surveys were completed by 151 patients. Although more than half of the patients were satisfied with the diabetes care they had received (n = 96, 67.6%), about a third felt the hospital nursing/midwifery staff had ignored their own knowledge of their diabetes care and management (n = 43, 30.8%). Few reported having discussed their diabetes management with the nursing/midwifery staff whilst in hospital (n = 47, 32.6%) or thought the nurses and midwives had a good understanding of different types of insulin (n = 43, 30.1%) and their administration (n = 47, 33.3%). Patients also reported food related barriers to their diabetes management including difficulties accessing appropriate snacks and drinks (n = 46, 30.5%), restricted food choices and timing of meals (n = 41, 27.2%). Fourteen nurses and midwives participated in two focus groups. Two main themes were identified across both groups: 1. challenges caring for patients with diabetes; and 2. lack of confidence and knowledge about diabetes management. Conclusions Patients and nursing/midwifery staff reported challenges managing patients' diabetes in the hospital setting, ens

Background: Most investigations of nurses’ and midwives’ psychological wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic have been conducted in a single setting. Aim: To assess and compare the psychological wellbeing of nurses and midwives in Australia and Denmark during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Nurses and midwives employed at four metropolitan health services in Australia and one in Denmark completed an anonymous online survey, which assessed depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms (The Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale - 21 Items (DASS-21)), and sociodemographic and employment factors. Findings: Completed surveys were received from 3001 nurses and midwives (1611 Australian and 1390 Danish). Overall, approximately one in seven of the nurses and midwives surveyed reported moderate to extremely severe levels of depression (n = 399, 13.5%), anxiety (n = 381, 12.9%) and stress (n = 394, 13.4%). Australian nurses’ and midwives’ scores on all DASS-21 subscales were significantly higher (representing higher levels of depression, anxiety and stress) than the scores for the Danish nurses and midwives. Fewer years of clinical experience, living in Australia and being employed on a part-time basis were significantly associated with higher levels of psychological distress. Discussion: A considerable proportion of nurses and midwives experienced distress during the COVID-19 pandemic; however, the proportion and severity varied by country. Australian nurses and midwives experienced higher levels of distress than their Danish colleagues. Conclusion: Nurses and midwives working in countries with relatively low numbers of COVID-19 cases and deaths are also likely to experience psychological distress. Nurses and midwives would benefit from targeted country-specific support and wellbeing initiatives.

Objective: The aim of this study was to describe nurses' and midwives' experiences following the first phase of the implementation of an electronic medical record (EMR) system at a large public health service in metropolitan Melbourne, Australia. Methods: Four focus groups were held 8-10 months after implementation of the EMR. Transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis. Results: Of 39 participants, 25 were nurses (64%), 12 were midwives (31%) and two did not provide this information. The mean (±s.d.) duration of clinical experience was 15.6 ± 12.2 years (range 2-40 years). Three main themes were identified: (1) effects on workflow: although some participants reported that EMR facilitated easier access to real-time patient data, others indicated that workflow was disrupted by the EMR being slow and difficult to navigate, system outages and lack of interoperability between the EMR and other systems (2) effects on patient care and communication: some participants reported that the EMR improved their communication with patients and reduced medication errors, whereas others reported a negative effect on patient care and communication and (3) negative effects of the EMR on nurses' and midwives' personal well-being, including frustration, stress and exhaustion. These experiences were often reported in the context of cognitive workload due to having to use multiple systems simultaneously or extra work associated with EMR outages. Conclusion: Nurses' and midwives' experiences of the EMR were complex and mixed. Nurses and midwives require significant training and ongoing technical support in the first 12 months after implementation of an EMR system. Including nurses and midwives in the design and refinement of the EMR will ensure that the EMR aligns with their workflow. What is known about the topic?: Studies reporting nurses' and midwives' experiences of using EMR are scarce and mostly based in countries where whole-of-service implementations are carried out, funde

Objective. This study investigated the short-term psychosocial effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospital clinical staff, specifically their self-reported concerns and perceived impact on their work and personal lives.Methods. Nurses, midwives, doctors and allied health staff at a large metropolitan tertiary health service in Melbourne, Australia, completed an anonymous online cross-sectional survey between 15 May and 10 June 2020. The survey assessed respondents' COVID-19 contact status, concerns related to COVID-19 and other effects of COVID-19. Space was provided for free-text comments.Results. Respondents were mostly concerned about contracting COVID-19, infecting family members and caring for patients with COVID-19. Concerns about accessing and using personal protective equipment, redeployment and their ability to provide high-quality patient care during the pandemic were also reported. Pregnant staff expressed uncertainty about the possible impact of COVID-19 on their pregnancy. Despite their concerns, few staff had considered resigning, and positive aspects of the pandemic were also described.Conclusion. The COVID-19 pandemic has had a considerable impact on the work and personal lives of hospital clinical staff. Staff, particularly those who are pregnant, would benefit from targeted well-being and support initiatives that address their concerns and help them manage their work and personal lives.

Objective. This study assessed the psychological well-being of Australian hospital clinical staff during the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods. An anonymous online cross-sectional survey was conducted in a large metropolitan tertiary health service located in Melbourne, Australia. The survey was completed by nurses, midwives, doctors and allied health (AH) staff between 15 May and 10 June 2020. The Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale - 21 items (DASS-21) assessed the psychological well-being of respondents in the previous week.Results. In all, 668 people responded to the survey (nurses/midwives,n = 391; doctors,n = 138; AH staff,n = 139). Of these, 108 (16.2%) had direct contact with people with a COVID-19 diagnosis. Approximately one-quarter of respondents reported symptoms of psychological distress. Between 11% (AH staff) and 29% (nurses/midwives) had anxiety scores in the mild to extremely severe ranges. Nurses and midwives had significantly higher anxiety scores than doctors (P <0.001) and AH staff (P <0.001). Direct contact with people with a COVID-19 diagnosis (P <0.001) and being a nurse or midwife (P <0.001) were associated with higher anxiety scores. Higher ratings of the health service's pandemic response and staff support strategies were protective against depression (P <0.001), anxiety (P <0.05) and stress (P <0.001).Conclusions. The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant effect on the psychological well-being of hospital clinical staff, particularly nurses and midwives. Staff would benefit from (additional) targeted supportive interventions during the current and future outbreaks of infectious diseases.

Aim: To construct and evaluate psychometric properties of the person-centred care of older people with cognitive impairment in acute care settings (POPAC) scale. Background: Older people with cognitive impairment are admitted frequently to acute care, with needs not always met through standard practice. Best practice models have been suggested, but few assessment scales exist. Methods: Psychometric evaluation using statistical estimates of validity and reliability based on an Australian sample of acute care nursing staff (n = 212). Results: The final 15-item questionnaire consists of three subscales, using cognitive assessments and care interventions, using evidence and cognitive expertise and individualizing care. Estimates of validity and reliability were highly satisfactory. Conclusion: The POPAC scale makes a valuable contribution by providing valid and reliable measures of the extent to which acute nursing staff report using best practice care processes to identify and consider cognitive impairment and to employ nursing interventions to meet the needs associated with old age and cognitive impairment. Implications for nursing management: The POPAC scale is short, easy to administer and not time consuming to complete, but still provides clinically relevant information. It can be used as a conceptual fundament in developing best practice nursing care in the acute clinical setting, as well as for nursing research.