Background COVID-19 became a major public health concern in March 2020. Due to the high rate of hospitalizations for COVID-19 in a short time, health care workers and other involved staff are subjected to a large workload and high emotional distress. Objective The objective of this study is to develop a digital tool to provide support resources that might prevent and consider acute stress reactions in health care workers and other support staff due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods The contents of the digital platform were created through an evidence-based review and consensus conference. The website was built using the Google Blogger tool. The Android version of the app was developed in the Java and XML languages using Android Studio version 3.6, and the iOS version was developed in the Swift language using Xcode version 11.5. The app was evaluated externally by the Andalusian Agency for Healthcare Quality. Results We detected the needs and pressing situations of frontline health care workers, and then, we proposed a serial of recommendations and support resources to address them. These resources were redesigned using the feedback received. A website in three different languages (Spanish, English, and Portuguese) and a mobile app were developed with these contents, and the AppSaludable Quality Seal was granted to the app. A specific self-report scale to measure acute stress and additional tools were included to support the health care workforce. This instrument has been used in several Latin American countries and has been adapted considering cultural differences. The resources section of the website was the most visited with 18,516 out of 68,913 (26.9%) visits, and the “Self-Report Acute Stress Scale” was the most visited resource with 6468 out of 18,516 (34.9%) visits. Conclusions The Be + against COVID platform (website and app) was developed and launched to offer a pool of recommendations and support resources, which were specifically designed to protect the psychological well-being and the work morale of health care workers. This is an original initiative different from the usual psychological assistance hotlines.

There is limited evidence and a lack of standard operating procedures to address the impact of serious adverse events (SAE) on healthcare workers. We aimed to share two years’ experience of a second victim support intervention integrated into the SAE management program conducted in a 500-bed University Hospital in Granada, Spain. The intervention strategy, based on the “forYOU” model, was structured into three levels of support according to the degree of affliction and the emotional needs of the professionals. A semi-structured survey of all workers involved in an SAE was used to identify potential second victims. Between 2020 and 2021, the SAE operating procedure was activated 23 times. All healthcare workers involved in an SAE (n = 135) received second-level support. The majority were physicians (51.2%), followed by nurses (26.7%). Only 58 (43.0%) received first-level emotional support and 47 (34.8%) met “second victim” criteria. Seven workers (14.9%) required third-level support. A progressive increase in the notification rates was observed. Acceptance of the procedure by professionals and managers was high. This novel approach improved the number of workers reached by the trained staff; promoted the visibility of actions taken during SAE management and helped foster patient safety culture in our setting.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the response capacity of the health care workforce, and health care professionals have been experiencing acute stress reactions since the beginning of the pandemic. In Spain, the first wave was particularly severe among the population and health care professionals, many of whom were infected. These professionals required initial psychological supports that were gradual and in line with their conditions. Objective In the early days of the pandemic in Spain (March 2020), this study aimed to design and validate a scale to measure acute stress experienced by the health care workforce during the care of patients with COVID-19: the Self-applied Acute Stress Scale (EASE). Methods Item development, scale development, and scale evaluation were considered. Qualitative research was conducted to produce the initial pool of items, assure their legibility, and assess the validity of the content. Internal consistency was calculated using Cronbach α and McDonald ω. Confirmatory factor analysis and the Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test were used to assess construct validity. Linear regression was applied to assess criterion validity. Back-translation methodology was used to translate the scale into Portuguese and English. Results A total of 228 health professionals from the Spanish public health system responded to the 10 items of the EASE scale. Internal consistency was .87 (McDonald ω). Goodness-of-fit indices confirmed a two-factor structure, explaining 55% of the variance. As expected, the highest level of stress was found among professionals working in health services where a higher number of deaths from COVID-19 occurred (P<.05). Conclusions The EASE scale was shown to have adequate metric properties regarding consistency and construct validity. The EASE scale could be used to determine the levels of acute stress among the health care workforce in order to give them proportional support according to their needs during emergency conditions, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: The measurement of blood glucose in critically ill patients is still performed in many ICUs with glucose meters and capillary samples. Several prevalent factors in these patients affect the accuracy of the results and should be interpreted with caution. A weak recommendation from the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) suggests the use of arterial blood rather than capillary blood for point of care testing using glucose meters. Aims and objectives: To analyse the agreement between arterial, central venous, and capillary blood samples of glucose values measured by glucose meter in critically ill patients and study potential confounding factors. Design: Prospective cross-sectional study in a general intensive care unit (ICU). Patients needing insulin treatment (subcutaneous or intravenous) and blood glucose control were included. Methods: Standardized collection of blood samples and measurement of glucose values with a glucometer. Agreement was studied by the Bland-Altman method and stratified analysis of disagreement-survival plots was used to study the influence of haematocrit, pH range, SOFA score, capillary refilling time, intravenous insulin infusion, and lactic acid.Results: A total of 297 measurements from 54 patients were included. The mean arterial blood glucose was 150.42 (range 31-345 mg/dL). In the graphical analysis, there is a poor agreement both in capillary and venous central to arterial samples, but in opposite direction (underestimation of capillary and overestimation of central venous). Factors associated with a reduction in the agreement between arterial and capillary samples were elevated lactate, poor capillary refilling, and hemodynamic failure. Patients without hemodynamic compromise have an acceptable agreement with values for absolute differences of 16 mg/dL for a disagreement of 10%. Conclusions:In critically ill patients, the measurement of blood glucose with a glucose meter should be performed with arterial samples whenever possible. Capillary samples do not accurately estimate arterial blood glucose values in patients with

Following the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, an unprecedented burden has been placed on health care systems, with health care workers (HCWs) being most at risk of COVID-19 infection. The effect of the probiotic Loigolactobacillus coryniformis K8 CECT 5711 on frontline HCWs exposed to the virus was studied in a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trial. Parameters related to the incidence and severity of COVID-19 as well as the immune response and the side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine were evaluated. For 2 months, a group of 250 front-line HCWs over the age of 20 was randomly allocated to receive either L. coryniformis K8 or a placebo daily. SARS-CoV-2 infection incidence was verified via PCR or antigen test. In those volunteers who were vaccinated during the intervention, serum levels of specific IgG were analyzed at the end of the study. The incidence of COVID-19 infection was very low [IR (SD) = 0.016 (0.011)], and no significant difference was found between the groups [IRR (95% CI): 1.008 (0.140–7.268), p = 0.994]. For immune response analysis, the total sample was divided according to the days between the first dose and the antibody analysis (cutoff points were set at ≤ 56, 57–80 and ≥ 81 days). The specific IgG level decreased over time (p &gt; 0.001). However, in the subgroup of subjects for whom more than 81 days had passed since they received the first dose, the specific IgG levels were significantly higher in the those that took the L. coryniformis K8 [7.12 (0.21)] than in the control group [6.48 (0.19)] (P = 0.040). Interestingly, the subjects who started probiotic consumption before the first dose reported significantly fewer side effects (of any kind) at the 1st dose of the vaccine (OR: 0.524, p = 0.043), specifically less arm pain (OR: 0.467, p = 0.017). In conclusion, the administration of L. coryniformis K8 CECT 5711 to HCWs helps to extend the immune protection generated by the COVID-19 vaccine over time.