In-depth profiling of COVID-19 risk factors and preventive measures in healthcare workers

PURPOSE To determine risk factors for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in healthcare workers (HCWs), characterize symptoms, and evaluate preventive measures against SARS-CoV-2 spread in hospitals. METHODS In a cross-sectional study conducted between May 27 and August 12, 2020, after the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, we obtained serological, epidemiological, occupational as well as COVID-19-related data at a~quaternary care, multicenter hospital~in Munich, Germany. RESULTS 7554 HCWs participated, 2.2% of whom tested positive for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Multivariate analysis revealed increased COVID-19 risk for nurses (3.1% seropositivity, 95% CI 2.5-3.9%, p = 0.012), staff working on COVID-19 units (4.6% seropositivity, 95% CI 3.2-6.5%, p = 0.032), males (2.4% seropositivity, 95% CI 1.8-3.2%, p = 0.019), and HCWs reporting high-risk exposures to infected patients (5.5% seropositivity, 95% CI 4.0-7.5%, p = 0.0022) or outside of work (12.0% seropositivity, 95% CI 8.0-17.4%, p < 0.0001). Smoking was a protective factor (1.1% seropositivity, 95% CI 0.7-1.8% p = 0.00018) and the symptom taste disorder was strongly associated with COVID-19 (29.8% seropositivity, 95% CI 24.3-35.8%, p < 0.0001). An unbiased decision tree identified subgroups with different risk profiles. Working from home as a preventive measure did not protect against SARS-CoV-2 infection. A PCR-testing strategy focused on symptoms and high-risk exposures detected all larger COVID-19 outbreaks. CONCLUSION Awareness of the identified COVID-19 risk factors and successful surveillance strategies are key to protecting HCWs against SARS-CoV-2, especially in settings with limited vaccination capacities or reduced vaccine efficacy

Safety management in times of crisis: Lessons learned from a nationwide status-analysis on German intensive care units during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background: The status of Safety Management is highly relevant to evaluate an organization’s ability to deal with unexpected events or errors, especially in times of crisis. However, it remains unclear to what extent Safety Management was developed and suffciently implemented within the healthcare system during the COVID-19 pandemic. Providing insights of potential for improvement is expected to be directional for ongoing Safety Management efforts, in times of crisis and beyond. Method: A nationwide survey study was conducted among healthcare professionals and auxiliary staff on German Intensive Care Units (ICUs) evaluating their experiences during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Error Management and Patient Safety Culture (PSC) measures served to operationalize Safety Management. Data were analyzed descriptively and by using quantitative content analysis (QCA). Results: Results for n = 588 participants from 53 hospitals show that there is a gap between errors occurred, reported, documented, and addressed. QCA revealed that low quality of safety culture (27.8%) was the most mentioned reason for errors not being addressed. Overall, ratings of PSC ranged from 26.7 to 57.9% positive response with Staffng being the worst and Teamwork Within Units being the best rated dimension. While assessments showed a similar pattern, medical staff rated PSC on ICUs more positively in comparison to nursing staff. Conclusion: The status-analysis of Safety Management in times of crisis revealed relevant potential for improvement. Human Factor plays a crucial role in the occurrence and the way errors are dealt with on ICUs, but systemic factors should not be underestimated. Further intensified efforts specifically in the fields of staffng and error reporting, documentation and communication are needed to improve Safety Management on ICUs. These findingsmight also be applicable across nations and sectors beyond the medical field

Safety management in times of crisis: Lessons learned from a nationwide status-analysis on German intensive care units during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background: The status of Safety Management is highly relevant to evaluate an organization’s ability to deal with unexpected events or errors, especially in times of crisis. However, it remains unclear to what extent Safety Management was developed and suffciently implemented within the healthcare system during the COVID-19 pandemic. Providing insights of potential for improvement is expected to be directional for ongoing Safety Management efforts, in times of crisis and beyond. Method: A nationwide survey study was conducted among healthcare professionals and auxiliary staff on German Intensive Care Units (ICUs) evaluating their experiences during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Error Management and Patient Safety Culture (PSC) measures served to operationalize Safety Management. Data were analyzed descriptively and by using quantitative content analysis (QCA). Results: Results for n = 588 participants from 53 hospitals show that there is a gap between errors occurred, reported, documented, and addressed. QCA revealed that low quality of safety culture (27.8%) was the most mentioned reason for errors not being addressed. Overall, ratings of PSC ranged from 26.7 to 57.9% positive response with Staffng being the worst and Teamwork Within Units being the best rated dimension. While assessments showed a similar pattern, medical staff rated PSC on ICUs more positively in comparison to nursing staff. Conclusion: The status-analysis of Safety Management in times of crisis revealed relevant potential for improvement. Human Factor plays a crucial role in the occurrence and the way errors are dealt with on ICUs, but systemic factors should not be underestimated. Further intensified efforts specifically in the fields of staffng and error reporting, documentation and communication are needed to improve Safety Management on ICUs. These findingsmight also be applicable across nations and sectors beyond the medical field

Safety management in times of crisis: Lessons learned from a nationwide status-analysis on German intensive care units during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background: The status of Safety Management is highly relevant to evaluate an organization’s ability to deal with unexpected events or errors, especially in times of crisis. However, it remains unclear to what extent Safety Management was developed and suffciently implemented within the healthcare system during the COVID-19 pandemic. Providing insights of potential for improvement is expected to be directional for ongoing Safety Management efforts, in times of crisis and beyond. Method: A nationwide survey study was conducted among healthcare professionals and auxiliary staff on German Intensive Care Units (ICUs) evaluating their experiences during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Error Management and Patient Safety Culture (PSC) measures served to operationalize Safety Management. Data were analyzed descriptively and by using quantitative content analysis (QCA). Results: Results for n = 588 participants from 53 hospitals show that there is a gap between errors occurred, reported, documented, and addressed. QCA revealed that low quality of safety culture (27.8%) was the most mentioned reason for errors not being addressed. Overall, ratings of PSC ranged from 26.7 to 57.9% positive response with Staffng being the worst and Teamwork Within Units being the best rated dimension. While assessments showed a similar pattern, medical staff rated PSC on ICUs more positively in comparison to nursing staff. Conclusion: The status-analysis of Safety Management in times of crisis revealed relevant potential for improvement. Human Factor plays a crucial role in the occurrence and the way errors are dealt with on ICUs, but systemic factors should not be underestimated. Further intensified efforts specifically in the fields of staffng and error reporting, documentation and communication are needed to improve Safety Management on ICUs. These findingsmight also be applicable across nations and sectors beyond the medical field

Recommendations of the Netzwerk Kindersimulation for the Implementation of Simulation-Based Pediatric Team Trainings: A Delphi Process

Background: Serious or life-threatening pediatric emergencies are rare. Patient outcomes largely depend on excellent teamwork and require regular simulation-based team training. Recommendations for pediatric simulation-based education are scarce. We aimed to develop evidence-based guidelines to inform simulation educators and healthcare stakeholders. Methods: A modified three-round Delphi technique was used. The first guideline draft was formed through expert discussion and based on consensus (n = 10 Netzwerk Kindersimulation panelists). Delphi round 1 consisted of an individual and team revision of this version by the expert panelists. Delphi round 2 comprised an in-depth review by 12 external international expert reviewers and revision by the expert panel. Delphi round 3 involved a revisit of the guidelines by the external experts. Consensus was reached after three rounds. Results: The final 23-page document was translated into English and adopted as international guidelines by the Swiss Society of Pediatrics (SGP/SSP), the German Society for Neonatology and Pediatric Intensive Care (GNPI), and the Austrian Society of Pediatrics. Conclusions: Our work constitutes comprehensive up-to-date guidelines for simulation-based team trainings and debriefings. High-quality simulation training provides standardized learning conditions for trainees. These guidelines will have a sustainable impact on standardized high-quality simulation-based education

Table_2_Safety management in times of crisis: Lessons learned from a nationwide status-analysis on German intensive care units during the COVID-19 pandemic.pdf

BackgroundThe status of Safety Management is highly relevant to evaluate an organization's ability to deal with unexpected events or errors, especially in times of crisis. However, it remains unclear to what extent Safety Management was developed and sufficiently implemented within the healthcare system during the COVID-19 pandemic. Providing insights of potential for improvement is expected to be directional for ongoing Safety Management efforts, in times of crisis and beyond.MethodA nationwide survey study was conducted among healthcare professionals and auxiliary staff on German Intensive Care Units (ICUs) evaluating their experiences during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Error Management and Patient Safety Culture (PSC) measures served to operationalize Safety Management. Data were analyzed descriptively and by using quantitative content analysis (QCA).ResultsResults for n = 588 participants from 53 hospitals show that there is a gap between errors occurred, reported, documented, and addressed. QCA revealed that low quality of safety culture (27.8%) was the most mentioned reason for errors not being addressed. Overall, ratings of PSC ranged from 26.7 to 57.9% positive response with Staffing being the worst and Teamwork Within Units being the best rated dimension. While assessments showed a similar pattern, medical staff rated PSC on ICUs more positively in comparison to nursing staff.ConclusionThe status-analysis of Safety Management in times of crisis revealed relevant potential for improvement. Human Factor plays a crucial role in the occurrence and the way errors are dealt with on ICUs, but systemic factors should not be underestimated. Further intensified efforts specifically in the fields of staffing and error reporting, documentation and communication are needed to improve Safety Management on ICUs. These findings might also be applicable across nations and sectors beyond the medical field.</p

Table_1_Safety management in times of crisis: Lessons learned from a nationwide status-analysis on German intensive care units during the COVID-19 pandemic.pdf

BackgroundThe status of Safety Management is highly relevant to evaluate an organization's ability to deal with unexpected events or errors, especially in times of crisis. However, it remains unclear to what extent Safety Management was developed and sufficiently implemented within the healthcare system during the COVID-19 pandemic. Providing insights of potential for improvement is expected to be directional for ongoing Safety Management efforts, in times of crisis and beyond.MethodA nationwide survey study was conducted among healthcare professionals and auxiliary staff on German Intensive Care Units (ICUs) evaluating their experiences during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Error Management and Patient Safety Culture (PSC) measures served to operationalize Safety Management. Data were analyzed descriptively and by using quantitative content analysis (QCA).ResultsResults for n = 588 participants from 53 hospitals show that there is a gap between errors occurred, reported, documented, and addressed. QCA revealed that low quality of safety culture (27.8%) was the most mentioned reason for errors not being addressed. Overall, ratings of PSC ranged from 26.7 to 57.9% positive response with Staffing being the worst and Teamwork Within Units being the best rated dimension. While assessments showed a similar pattern, medical staff rated PSC on ICUs more positively in comparison to nursing staff.ConclusionThe status-analysis of Safety Management in times of crisis revealed relevant potential for improvement. Human Factor plays a crucial role in the occurrence and the way errors are dealt with on ICUs, but systemic factors should not be underestimated. Further intensified efforts specifically in the fields of staffing and error reporting, documentation and communication are needed to improve Safety Management on ICUs. These findings might also be applicable across nations and sectors beyond the medical field.</p