Knowledge and experience of physicians during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A global cross-sectional study

Knowledge, willingness to provide service and preparedness for monkeypox infection among medical practitioners working in Bangladesh: a multicentred cross-sectional study

Background

The resurfaced zoonotic disease, Monkeypox, has become a global public health concern recently. Therefore, the objective of this study was to assess the current knowledge, willingness to provide service during an outbreak and preparedness about human monkeypox among medical practitioners in Bangladesh.

Methods

This cross-sectional study was conducted among registered physicians at the three medical college hospitals in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Knowledge about monkeypox was assessed by 20 questions, collected through a self-answered paper-based structured questionnaire. Good knowledge was defined by 70% of correct responses among the asked questions. Willingness and preparedness to treat during the monkeypox outbreak were also assessed. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the predictors of good knowledge of monkeypox infection. Statistical analysis was done with SPSS V.25.0.

Result

Out of 385 physicians, two-thirds (63%) were male, and between 31 and 50 years of age (58%). A majority (91.4%) knew monkeypox is transmitted human-to-human, followed by sexual (55.1%) and vertical transmission (34.8%), but only 19.5% were aware of vaccine availability. Overall, about half of the respondents (57%) showed a good knowledge of monkeypox and the remainder (43%) had poor knowledge. Older age, higher education and having a higher job designation were found to be associated with good knowledge. However, only 30.1% expressed willingness to provide care, and just 22.3% believed their hospitals were prepared for a potential outbreak.

Conclusion

The present study highlighted that physicians in Bangladesh possess a relatively good level of knowledge, with a lack of practical preparedness and willingness to serve in managing monkeypox cases during an outbreak.

The model of solving ethical challenges with nursing based on faith in God: a new model for nurses to care during epidemics

BACKGROUND

The existence of various ethical challenges, the inability to resolve ethical conflicts, and, as a result, the low quality of care and the occurrence of dissatisfaction in patients and nurses have been discussed for years. By creating new ethical challenges, the Covid-19pandemic has played an important role in making the process of care for these patients more difficult and complicated. This study was conducted with the aim of designing a prescriptive model to help provide ethical-care and resolve ethical conflicts during the Covid-19pandemic.

METHODS

In this two-stage qualitative study, a grounded theory research method was used in the first stage, and data were collected through semi-structured interviews. Sampling started purposefully and continued theoretically. In the second step, the appropriate model was designed using the three-step method proposed by Walker and Avant.

RESULTS

The core concept was "behavior based on faith in God", based on which the grounded theory of "faithful nursing" and then "model of solving ethical challenges with nursing based on faith in God" were presented. The strategies of the model in three parts are strengthening the beliefs of nurse, strengthening environmental facilitators to help nurse, and strengthening situational analysis in duty diagnosis in nurse were presented.

CONCLUSIONS

According to this model, nurses' beliefs play a key role, and the strengthening of environmental factors play a secondary role in ethical-care.

Knowledge sharing among academics from Egyptian medical schools during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Sharing knowledge among scientists during global health emergencies is a critical issue. So, this study investigates knowledge-sharing behavior and attitude among staff members of 19 Medical schools in Egyptian universities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Across-sectional study was conducted using a web-based questionnaire. A total of 386 replies from the 10,318 distributed questionnaires were analyzed. Descriptive statistics were computed using SPSS (version 22) to summarize the demographic data. Inferential statistics such as the independent and chi-square test were used to achieve the study aims.

RESULTS

More than half of the respondents (54.4%) indicated that their levels of knowledge of COVID-19 were good. Most participants (72.5%) reported that scientific publications and international websites were the most reliable source of their knowledge concerning COVID-19. More than 46% stated they sometimes share their knowledge. The lack of time to share and organizational culture were the most important factors that could affect their knowledge sharing. Additionally, about 75% of participants shared knowledge about treatment.

Responses of health professionals to coronavirus, coronavirus variants, and vaccines: Cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 has affected millions of people around the world since its first case in 2019. In this pandemic, health professionals have been among the most vulnerable groups to contracting the virus or spreading it to others; therefore, their appropriate response in line with health and safety is crucial and needs to be addressed.

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated health professionals' behaviors and attitudes toward COVID-19. This includes testing, vaccination, history of infection, and fear of infection.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted among health professionals practicing in Sindh, Pakistan. A sample size of 400 was considered for the present study, including dentists and medical doctors practicing in Sindh's healthcare setups.

RESULTS

According to the results, the response rate was 95.50%. 73.04% of participating health professionals reported a history of COVID-19 infection. The highest levels of fear and anxiety of getting infected with new COVID-19 variants were derived among junior medical professionals (RMOs). 98.69% of health professionals were reported to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 virus. 3% of participating health professionals revealed that they do not believe in testing.

CONCLUSIONS

Although fear and anxiety towards new emerging COVID-19 variants were largely prevalent, negligible reluctance toward vaccination among health professionals of Sindh was reported in the study. More studies are required from other parts of Pakistan to address health professionals' response to the COVID-19 pandemic, to aid health policymakers in establishing precise SOPs for health professionals, and to manage COVID-19-related negative psychological and corporal effects on them.

COVID-19 Mortality Disparities Among Socially Vulnerable Medicare Beneficiaries Associated With the Quality of Nurse Work Environments in U.S. Hospitals

COVID-19 mortality disparities for socially vulnerable patients, including individuals facing higher levels of poverty, housing insecurity, and limited transportation, have been linked to the quality of hospitals where they received care. Few studies have examined the specific aspects of hospitals, such as nursing care quality, that may underlie disparate outcomes. Recent studies suggest that nursing resources in the pre-pandemic period were associated with mortality during the COVID-19 public health emergency. In this study, we examined the association between social vulnerability, the nurse work environment, and inpatient mortality among Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized with COVID-19. A cross-sectional analysis was conducted of linked survey data collected from nurses working in New York and Illinois, Medicare claims, American Hospital Association Annual Survey data, and the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI). Higher mortality rates were observed among patients in the highest quartile of social vulnerability compared to the lowest (6870 [25.8%] vs 5019 [19.1%]; P < .001). Using multivariable regression modeling, a statistically significant interaction was found between the highest SVI quartile and the nurse work environment (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.98; P < .05), implying that the effect of a higher quality nurse work environment on mortality was decidedly greater for patients in the highest quartile (odds ratio = 0.86 × 0.94 = 0.80) compared to patients in the lowest quartile (OR, 0.94). Post-hoc analyses demonstrated that hundreds of COVID-19 related deaths among the most socially vulnerable patients may have been avoided if all hospitals had a high-quality nurse work environment. Strengthening the quality of nurse work environments may help to reduce health disparities and should be considered in public health emergency planning, specifically in hospitals serving socially vulnerable communities.

Assessing Physician Confidence in Counseling Patients on COVID-19 Disease and Vaccination: A Survey of Physicians' Perspectives in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 vaccine has been available and well acceptable among the Saudi population since its introduction in 2020; however, concerns still remain regarding the confidence of doctors in giving such vaccines.

RESEARCH QUESTION

How confident are physicians in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia about giving counseling and advice for patients regarding COVID-19 disease and COVID-19 vaccines?

OBJECTIVE

 To determine how confident Saudi Arabian doctors are in their ability to advise patients on the COVID-19 illness and COVID-19 vaccines.

AIM

To assist the health authorities in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in developing and implementing programs to improve doctors' skills and knowledge in giving advice to patients about the COVID-19 vaccine.

METHOD

The research employed an online cross-sectional study methodology to gather insights from doctors employed at hospitals, healthcare centers, and clinics across the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The inclusion criteria encompassed doctors actively engaged in healthcare settings, while the exclusion criteria were applied to those who had never encountered COVID-19 patients and those who declined participation in the study.

RESULTS

It was found that doctors were confident that there's a potential for adverse effects that are not yet seen in vaccine trials. Further results showed that primary health care doctors are more confident about the common side effects associated with the approved vaccines.

CONCLUSION

Most doctors were confident about the vaccine, yet they also know that there are some hidden side effects that are not yet discovered. Since patients trusted doctors as the main source of information about the vaccine, the study provided evidence to emphasize the rule of doctors as a reliable source of information.