The aims of the study were to investigate the burden for health care workers (HCWs) who suffer from occupational-related adverse events (ORAEs) while working in contaminated areas in a specialized hospital for novel coronavirus pneumonia, to explore related risk factors, to evaluate the effectiveness of bundled interventions, as well as to provide scientific evidence regarding the reduction of risks concerning ORAEs and occupational exposure events.

The study was completed using a special team of 138 HCWs assembled for a specialized hospital for novel coronavirus pneumonia in Wuhan, dated from February 16 to March 26, 2020. The incidence of occupational exposure was determined by data reported from the hospital, while the prevalence of ORAEs was derived from questionnaire results. The relation coefficients of ORAEs and the variable potential risk factors are analyzed by logistic regression. After the risk factors were identified, targeted organized intervention was implemented and chi-square tests were performed to compare the incidence of occupational exposure and the prevalence of ORAEs in contaminated areas before and after the interventions.

Ninety one out of 138 (65.94%) had reported ORAEs with 300 (27.96%) cases of ORAEs being recorded in a total of 1073 entries into contaminated areas. The prevalence of different ORAEs include 205 tenderness (24.73%), 182 headache/dizziness (21.95%), 138 dyspnea (16.65%), 130 blurred vision (15.68%), and 95 nausea/vomiting (11.46%). Personal protective equipment (PPE) is significantly associated with ORAEs in contaminated areas (P < 0.05). Among non-PPE-related factors, insomnia is associated with the majority of ORAEs in contaminated areas. Significant differences were achieved after organized interventions in the incidence of occupational exposure of HCWs (χ2 = 39.07, P < 0.001) and the prevalence of ORAEs in contaminated areas (χ2 = 22.95, P < 0.001).

During the epidemic period of novel severe respiratory infectious disease, the burden of the ORAEs in contaminated areas and the risk of occupational exposure of HCWs were relatively high. In time, comprehensive and multi-level bundled interventions may help decrease the risk of both ORAEs and occupational exposure.

Prior to coronavirus disease (COVID-19), many Australians experienced extreme bushfires, droughts, and floods. A history of experiencing these events might be a risk factor for increased psychological distress during COVID-19. This study aimed to provide insight into the mental health of Australian workers during the initial COVID-19 outbreak, with an additional focus on whether previous disaster exposure and impact from that disaster is a risk factor for increased psychological distress.

A snowball recruitment strategy was used. Participants (n = 596) completed an online survey, which included the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales-21, and questions related to mental health and disaster exposure.

Overall, 19.2%, 13.4%, and 16.8% of participants were experiencing moderate to extremely severe depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms, respectively. Multiple regression found that higher depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms were associated with a pre-existing mental health diagnosis; only higher stress symptoms were associated with having experienced a disaster, with impact, in addition to COVID-19.

People who have experienced impact from an additional disaster might need additional support to protect their mental health during COVID-19. A focus on the cumulative mental health impacts of multiple disasters and the implications for organizational communities where recovery work is undertaken, such as schools and workplaces, is needed.

Lack of mask use during large public events might spread COVID-19. It is now possible to measure this and similar public health information using publicly available webcams. We demonstrate a rapid assessment approach for measuring mask usage at a public event.

We monitored crowds at public areas in Sturgis, SD using a live, high-definition, town-sponsored video stream to analyze the prevalence of mask wearing. We developed a rapid coding procedure for mask wearing and analyzed brief (5 to 25 min) video segments to assess mask-wearing compliance in outdoor public areas. We calculated compliance estimates and compared reliability among the human coders.

We were able to observe and quantify public behavior on the public streets. This approach rapidly estimated public health information (e.g., 512 people observed over 25 minutes with 2.3% mask usage) available on the same day. Coders produced reliable estimates across a sample of videos for counting masked users and mask-wearing proportion. Our video data is stored in Databrary.org.

This approach has implications for disaster responses and public health. The approach is easy to use, can provide same day results, and can provide public health stakeholders with key information on public behavior.

Evidence syntheses perform rigorous investigations of the primary literature and they have played a vital role in generating evidence-based recommendations for governments worldwide during the Covid-19 pandemic. However, there has not yet been an attempt to organize them by topic and other characteristics. This study performed a systematic mapping exercise of non-clinical evidence syntheses pertaining to Covid-19.

This study conducted a systematic search on December 5, 2020 across 10 databases and servers: CINAHL (EBSCO Information Services, Ipswich, Massachusetts, United States), Embase (Elsevier, Aalborg, Denmark), Global Health (EBSCO Information Services, Ipswich, Massachusetts, United States), Healthstar (NICHSR and AHA, Bethesda, United States), MEDLINE (NLM, Bethesda, United States), PsychINFO (APA, Washington, DC, United States), Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics, London, UK), Research Square (Research Square, Durham, North Carolina), MEDRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, New York, United States), and PROSPERO (NIHR, York, United Kingdom). Only full evidence syntheses published in a peer-reviewed journal or preprint server were included.

This study classified all evidence syntheses in the following topics: health service delivery (n = 280), prevention and behavior (n = 201), mental health (n = 140), social epidemiology (n = 31), economy (n = 22), and environment (n = 19). This study provides a comprehensive resource of all evidence syntheses categorized according to topic.

This study proposes the following research priorities: governance, the impact of Covid-19 on different populations, the effectiveness of prevention and control methods across contexts, mental health, and vaccine hesitancy.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine may hold the key to ending the pandemic, but vaccine hesitancy is hindering the vaccination of healthcare personnel (HCP). We examined their perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine and implemented an intervention to increase vaccination uptake.

Before-and-after trial.

Healthcare personnel at a 790-bed tertiary-care center in Tokyo, Japan.

A prevaccination questionnaire was administered to HCP to examine their perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine. A multifaceted intervention was then implemented involving (1) distribution of informational leaflets to all HCP, (2) hospital-wide announcements encouraging vaccination, (3) a mandatory lecture, (4) an educational session about the vaccine for pregnant or breastfeeding HCP, and (5) allergy testing for HCP at risk of allergic reactions to the vaccine. A postvaccination survey was also performed.

Of 1,575 HCP eligible for enrollment, 1,224 (77.7%) responded to the questionnaire, 533 (43.5%) expressed willingness to be vaccinated, 593 (48.4%) were uncertain, and 98 (8.0%) expressed unwillingness to be vaccinated. The latter 2 groups were concerned about the vaccine’s safety rather than its efficacy. After the intervention, the overall vaccination rate reached 89.7% (1,413 of 1,575), and 88.9% (614 of 691) of the prevaccination survey respondents answered “unwilling” to or “unsure” about eventually receiving a vaccination. In the postvaccination questionnaire, factors contributing to increased COVID-19 vaccination included information and endorsement of vaccination at the medical center (274 of 1,037, 26.4%).

This multifaceted intervention increased COVID-19 vaccinations among HCP at a Japanese hospital. Frequent support and provision of information were crucial for increasing the vaccination rate and may be applicable to the general population as well.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination effectiveness in healthcare personnel (HCP) has been established. However, questions remain regarding its performance in high-risk healthcare occupations and work locations. We describe the effect of a COVID-19 HCP vaccination campaign on SARS-CoV-2 infection by timing of vaccination, job type, and work location.

We conducted a retrospective review of COVID-19 vaccination acceptance, incidence of postvaccination COVID-19, hospitalization, and mortality among 16,156 faculty, students, and staff at a large academic medical center. Data were collected 8 weeks prior to the start of phase 1a vaccination of frontline employees and ended 11 weeks after campaign onset.

The COVID-19 incidence rate among HCP at our institution decreased from 3.2% during the 8 weeks prior to the start of vaccinations to 0.38% by 4 weeks after campaign initiation. COVID-19 risk was reduced among individuals who received a single vaccination (hazard ratio [HR], 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40–0.68; P < .0001) and was further reduced with 2 doses of vaccine (HR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.09–0.32; P < .0001). By 2 weeks after the second dose, the observed case positivity rate was 0.04%. Among phase 1a HCP, we observed a lower risk of COVID-19 among physicians and a trend toward higher risk for respiratory therapists independent of vaccination status. Rates of infection were similar in a subgroup of nurses when examined by work location.

Our findings show the real-world effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in HCP. Despite these encouraging results, unvaccinated HCP remain at an elevated risk of infection, highlighting the need for targeted outreach to combat vaccine hesitancy.

The recent Covid-19 pandemic has burdened the healthcare facilities, especially in the presence of limited infrastructure. We aimed at applying a queuing model to the Covid-19 screening area so as to optimize the screening services and ensuring that no patient is refused the service.

The mean arrival time of patients, number of physicians, mean screening time and queue characteristics were observed and entered in the M/M/c/K queuing model using R programming to optimize the number of physicians required in the screening area.

Considering the mean arrival of 7 patients in 10 minutes and screening of 3 patients in 10 minutes by 1 physician, 2 physicians were assigned. At this capacity, the probability of saturation of the system was 15% with patient loss rate of 1.05 per 10 minutes. Queuing simulation with 3 physicians reduced the patient loss rate to 0.013 per 10 minutes and a saturation probability of 0.2%. However, an increase of arrival rate from 10 to 20 led to an early saturation of the system.

Queuing models offer an opportunity for the healthcare providers and hospital administrators to optimize patient care services, especially in critical areas with an ever-changing situation such as the current pandemic.