Staff costs of hospital-based outpatient care of patients with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND: This study identified per patient resource use and staff costs at a cystic fibrosis (CF) outpatient unit from the health care provider's perspective. METHODS: Personnel cost data were prospectively collected for all CF outpatients (n = 126) under routine conditions at the Charité Medical School Berlin in Germany over a six month study period. Patients were grouped according to age, sex and two severity categories. Ordinary least squares regression analysis was performed to determine the impact of various independent variables on personnel costs. RESULTS: The mean staff costs were €142.3 per patient over six months of outpatient service. Services provided by physicians were the biggest contributor to staff costs. Patient age correlated significantly and negatively with mean total costs per patient. CONCLUSIONS: Age of patient is a significant determinant of staff costs for CF outpatient care. For a cost-covering remuneration of outpatient treatment it seems plausible to create separate reimbursement rates for two or three age groups and to consider additional costs due to tasks carried out by physicians without direct patient contact. The relatively low staff costs identified by our study reflect a staffing level not sufficient for specialist CF outpatient care

Influenza in long-term care facilities

Long-term care facility environments and the vulnerability of their residents provide a setting conducive to the rapid spread of influenza virus and other respiratory pathogens. Infections may be introduced by staff, visitors or new or transferred residents, and outbreaks of influenza in such settings can have devastating consequences for individuals, as well as placing extra strain on health services. As the population ages over the coming decades, increased provision of such facilities seems likely. The need for robust infection prevention and control practices will therefore remain of paramount importance if the impact of outbreaks is to be minimised. In this review, we discuss the nature of the problem of influenza in long-term care facilities, and approaches to preventive and control measures, including vaccination of residents and staff, and the use of antiviral drugs for treatment and prophylaxis, based on currently available evidence. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

Study of Healthcare Personnel with Influenza and other Respiratory Viruses in Israel (SHIRI): study protocol

Abstract Background The Study of Healthcare Personnel with Influenza and other Respiratory Viruses in Israel (SHIRI) prospectively follows a cohort of healthcare personnel (HCP) in two hospitals in Israel. SHIRI will describe the frequency of influenza virus infections among HCP, identify predictors of vaccine acceptance, examine how repeated influenza vaccination may modify immunogenicity, and evaluate influenza vaccine effectiveness in preventing influenza illness and missed work. Methods Cohort enrollment began in October, 2016; a second year of the study and a second wave of cohort enrollment began in June 2017. The study will run for at least 3 years and will follow approximately 2000 HCP (who are both employees and members of Clalit Health Services [CHS]) with routine direct patient contact. Eligible HCP are recruited using a stratified sampling strategy. After informed consent, participants complete a brief enrollment survey with questions about occupational responsibilities and knowledge, attitudes, and practices about influenza vaccines. Blood samples are collected at enrollment and at the end of influenza season; HCP who choose to be vaccinated contribute additional blood one month after vaccination. During the influenza season, participants receive twice-weekly short message service (SMS) messages asking them if they have acute respiratory illness or febrile illness (ARFI) symptoms. Ill participants receive follow-up SMS messages to confirm illness symptoms and duration and are asked to self-collect a nasal swab. Information on socio-economic characteristics, current and past medical conditions, medical care utilization and vaccination history is extracted from the CHS database. Information about missed work due to illness is obtained by self-report and from employee records. Respiratory specimens from self-collected nasal swabs are tested for influenza A and B viruses, respiratory syncytial virus, human metapneumovirus, and coronaviruses using validated multiplex quantitative real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction assays. The hemagglutination inhibition assay will be used to detect the presence of neutralizing influenza antibodies in serum. Discussion SHIRI will expand our knowledge of the burden of respiratory viral infections among HCP and the effectiveness of current and repeated annual influenza vaccination in preventing influenza illness, medical utilization, and missed workdays among HCP who are in direct contact with patients. Trial registration NCT03331991 . Registered on November 6, 2017.https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/146186/1/12879_2018_Article_3444.pd

Fighting Misconceptions to Improve Compliance with Influenza Vaccination among Health Care Workers: An Educational Project

The compliance with influenza vaccination is poor among health care workers (HCWs) due to misconceptions about safety and effectiveness of influenza vaccine. We proposed an educational prospective study to demonstrate to HCWs that influenza vaccine is safe and that other respiratory viruses (RV) are the cause of respiratory symptoms in the months following influenza vaccination. 398 HCWs were surveyed for adverse events (AE) occurring within 48 h of vaccination. AE were reported by 30% of the HCWs. No severe AE was observed. A subset of 337 HCWs was followed up during four months, twice a week, for the detection of respiratory symptoms. RV was diagnosed by direct immunofluorescent assay (DFA) and real time PCR in symptomatic HCWs. Influenza A was detected in five episodes of respiratory symptoms (5.3%) and other RV in 26 (27.9%) episodes. The incidence density of influenza and other RV was 4.3 and 10.8 episodes per 100 HCW-month, respectively. The educational nature of the present study may persuade HCWs to develop a more positive attitude to influenza vaccination

How to improve influenza vaccine coverage of healthcare personnel

Abstract Influenza causes substantial morbidity and mortality worldwide each year. Healthcare-associated influenza is a frequent event. Health care personnel (HCP) may be the source for infecting patients and may propagate nosocomial outbreaks. All HCP should receive a dose of influenza vaccine each year to protect themselves and others. This commentary will discuss the study recently published in the IJHPR by Nutman and Yoeli which assessed the beliefs and attitudes of HCP in an Israel hospital regarding influenza and the influenza vaccine. Unfortunately, as noted by Nutman and Yoeli in this issue many HCP in Israel choose not to receive influenza immunization and many harbor misconceptions regarding their risk for influenza as well as the benefits of influenza vaccine. We also discuss proven methods to increase acceptance by HCP for receiving an annual influenza vaccine

"I wouldn't really believe statistics" - Challenges with influenza vaccine acceptance among healthcare workers in Singapore.

BACKGROUND: Influenza vaccine acceptance among healthcare workers (HCWs) is a worldwide problem, but relatively little research has focussed on Asia, including Singapore. Despite widespread access and recommendations from public health authorities, influenza vaccine uptake remains suboptimal among HCWs. METHODS: Our qualitative study used focus group discussions to identify and explain factors limiting influenza vaccine acceptance among HCWs in Singapore. A total of 73 doctors, nurses, allied health and ancillary staff across three public hospitals were included. RESULTS: Challenges identified include a fear of contracting influenza from vaccination exacerbated by negative anecdotes regarding vaccine safety and efficacy, distrust of published efficacy data, uncertainty regarding relevance of existing data for Singapore, reluctance to introduce chemicals or overmedicate, pain from injection, low risk attributed to influenza and limited awareness of influenza transmission with a preference for alternatives in patient protection. Differences in attitudes were observed across vocational groups. Lack of overt promotion by hospital leadership in some institutions, perceived vaccine hesitancy among doctors, access, and work culture that implicitly encourages working through illness were further barriers. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight a combination of misperceptions about influenza vaccination and cognitive biases at the individual level, and challenges at the institutional level limiting uptake. Findings indicate an urgent need to provide targeted education and communication. Rather than providing more data, we recommend a widely-disseminated, locally-compiled synthesis addressing specific concerns of hesitant HCWs. Tailoring interventions to specific vocational groups should be considered. Institutional norms and culture may have a powerful influence in setting default behaviours: more effort is needed in improving influenza vaccine promotion and priority at some institutions, integrating vaccine-related communication with other infection control communication and addressing influenza vaccine hesitancy among doctors as a priority. Finally, further study of strategies to address cognitive biases affecting influenza vaccine acceptance in Singapore is desirable

A Rapid Evidence Appraisal of influenza vaccination in health workers: an important policy in an area of imperfect evidence

IntroductionThe World Health Organization recommends vaccination of health workers (HWs) against influenza, but low uptake is intransigent.We conducted a Rapid Evidence Appraisal on: the risk of influenza in HWs, transmission risk from HWs to patients, the benefit of HW vaccination, and strategies for improving uptake. We aimed to capture a ‘whole-of-system’ perspective to consider possible benefits for HWs, employers and patients.MethodsWe executed a comprehensive search of the available literature published from 2006 to 2018 in the English language. We developed search terms for seven separate questions following the PICO framework (population, intervention, comparators, outcomes) and queried nine databases.ResultsOf 3784 publications identified, 52 met inclusion criteria. Seven addressed HW influenza risk, of which four found increased risk; 15 addressed influenza vaccine benefit to HWs or their employers, of which 10 found benefit; 11 addressed influenza transmission from HWs to patients, of which 6 found evidence for transmission; 12 unique studies addressed whether vaccinating HWs produced patient benefit, of which 9 concluded benefits accrued. Regarding the number of HWs needed to vaccinate (NNV) to deliver patient benefit, NNV estimates ranged from 3 to 36,000 but were in significant disagreement. Fourteen studies provided insights on strategies to improve uptake; the strongest evidence was for mandatory vaccination.ConclusionsThe evidence on most questions related to influenza vaccination in HWs is mixed and often of low-quality. Substantial heterogeneity exists in terms of study designs and settings, making comparison between studies difficult. Notwithstanding these limitations, a majority of studies suggests that influenza vaccination benefit HWs and their employers; and HWs are implicated in transmission events. The effects of vaccinating HWs on patient morbidity and mortality may include reductions in all-cause mortality and influenza-like illness (ILI). Taken together, the evidence suggests that HW vaccination is an important policy for HWs themselves, their employers, and their patients