The confined environment of a ship promotes the transmission of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) due to close contact among the population on board. The study aims to provide an overview of outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 on board of cruise, navy or cargo ships, to identify relevant outbreak management techniques, related problems and to derive recommendations for prevention. Four databases were searched. The study selection included reports about seroprevalences or clinically/laboratory confirmed infections of SARS-CoV-2 on board ships between the first of January, 2020 and the end of July, 2020. A total of 37 studies were included of whom 33 reported outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 on cruise ships (27 studies referred to the Diamond Princess). Two studies considered outbreaks on the Grand Princess, three studies informed about Nile River cruises and one study about the MS Westerdam (mention of multiple outbreaks possible in one study). Additionally, three studies reported outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 on navy vessels and one study referred to a cargo ship. Problems in handling outbreaks resulted from a high number of asymptomatic infections, transportation issues, challenges in communication or limited access to health care. Responsible operators need to implement infection control measures which should be described in outbreak management plans for ships to prevent transmission risks, including, e.g., education, testing strategies, communication lines, social distancing and hygiene regulations.
Aims To demonstrate the attitudes of general practitioners (GPs), nurses, persons with dementia, and caregiver towards suitable tasks and qualification needs for and the acceptance and impact of advanced nursing roles in German dementia primary care. Design Observational study using a questionnaire survey with 225 GPs, 232 nurses, 211 persons with dementia, and 197 caregivers, conducted between December 2017–August 2018. Methods A questionnaire was generated that includes specific assessment, prescription, and monitoring tasks of advanced nursing roles in dementia primary care as well as qualification requirements for and the acceptance and the impact of advanced nursing roles. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Group differences were assessed using the Fisher's exact test. Results Advanced nursing roles were highly appreciated across all groups. Assessment and monitoring tasks were rated as highly suitable, and prescription authorities as moderately suitable. Nurses felt less confident in assessment and monitoring, but more confident in prescribing as practitioners expected. Patients and caregivers would appreciate a takeover of tasks by nurses; nurses and practitioners preferred a delegation. A dementia‐specific qualification was rated as best suitable for advanced nursing roles, followed by ‘no specific qualification’ if medical tasks that only can be carried out by practitioners were delegated and an academic degree if tasks were substituted. Advanced nursing roles were rated as beneficial, strengthening the confidence in nursing care and improving the cooperation between professionals and the treatment. Practitioners assumed that advanced nursing roles would improve job satisfaction of nurses, which was not confirmed by nurses. Conclusion There is an extended consensus towards the enlargement of advanced nursing roles, represented by high endorsement, acceptance, and willingness to reorganize tasks. Impact Results debunk the common notion that German practitioners would be reluctant towards advanced nursing roles and a takeover of current practitioner tasks, supporting the implementation of advanced nursing roles in Germany.
Aims The aim of this study was to investigate whether clinical and radiological outcomes after intramedullary nailing of displaced fractures of the fifth metacarpal neck using a single thick Kirschner wire (K-wire) are noninferior to those of technically more demanding fixation with two thinner dual wires. Patients and Methods This was a multicentre, parallel group, randomized controlled noninferiority trial conducted at 12 tertiary trauma centres in Germany. A total of 290 patients with acute displaced fractures of the fifth metacarpal neck were randomized to either intramedullary single-wire (n = 146) or dual-wire fixation (n = 144). The primary outcome was the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire six months after surgery, with a third of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) used as the noninferiority threshold. Secondary outcomes were pain, health-related quality of life (EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D)), radiological measures, functional deficits, and complications. Results Overall, 151/290 of patients (52%) completed the six months of follow-up, leaving 83 patients in the single-wire group and 68 patients in the dual-wire group. In the modified intention-to-treat analysis set, mean DASH scores six months after surgery were 3.8 (sd 7.0) and 4.4 (sd 9.4), respectively. With multiple imputation (n = 288), mean DASH scores were estimated at 6.3 (sd 8.7) and 7.0 (sd 10.0). Upper (1 - 2α)) confidence limits consistently remained below the noninferiority margin of 3.0 points in the DASH instrument. While there was a statistically nonsignificant trend towards a higher rate of shortening and rotational malalignment in the single wire group, no statistically significant differences were observed across groups in any secondary outcome measure. Conclusion A single thick K-wire is sufficient for intramedullary fixation of acute displaced subcapital fractures of the fifth metacarpal neck. The less technically demanding single-wire technique produces noninferior clinical and radiological outcomes compared with the dual-wire approach. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1263–1271
Aims To examine whether inactive nurses are willing to return to nursing during the COVID‐19 pandemic, the reasons for or against their decision and further, possibly relevant factors. Design Cross‐sectional online survey. Methods We developed a questionnaire, addressing registration, professional experiences, anticipations, and internal and external factors that might affect the decision of inactive nurses to return to nursing during the pandemic. Between 27 April and 15 June 2020, we recruited participants in Germany via social networks, organizations and institutions and asked them to forward the link to wherever other inactive nurses might be reached. Results Three hundred and thirty‐two participants (73% female) could be included in the analysis. The majority of the participants ( n = 262, 79%) were general nurses. The main reason for registering was ‘want to do my bit to manage the crisis’ ( n = 73, 22.8%). More than two thirds of the participants ( n = 230, 69%) were not or not yet registered. One hundred and twelve (49%) out of 220 participants, who gave reasons why they did not register, selected they ‘could not see a necessity at that time’. The few inactive nurses who were deployed reported a variety of experiences. Conclusions Different factors influence the nurses’ decision to register or not. A critical factor for their decision was previous experiences that had made them leave the job and prevented a return—even for a limited time in a special situation. Impact From the responses of the participants in this study, it can be deduced that: negative experiences made while working in nursing influence the willingness to volunteer for a deployment; only one‐third of the inactive nurses would be willing to return to the nursing profession to help manage the Corona pandemic; policymakers and nursing leaders should not rely on the availability of inactive nurses in a crisis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.