For many years, pulse oximetry has been widely used in the clinical environment for a reliable monitoring of oxygen saturation ( SpO2) and heart rate. But since common sensors are mainly placed to peripheral body parts as finger or earlobe, it is still highly susceptible to reduced peripheral perfusion, e.g., due to centralization. Therefore, a novel in-ear pulse oximetric sensor (placed against the tragus) was presented in a prior work which is deemed to be independent from perfusion fluctuations due to its proximity to the trunk. Having demonstrated the feasibility of in-ear SpO2 measurement with reliable specificity in a laboratory setting, we now report results from a study on in-ear SpO2 in a clinical setting. For this, trials were performed on 29 adult patients undergoing surgery. In-ear SpO2 data are compared with SaO2 data obtained by blood gas analysis, and with three reference pulse oximeters applied to the finger, ear lobe, and forehead. In addition, we derived an SpO2-independent perfusion index by means of the wavelengths used. The feasibility and robustness of in-ear SpO2 measurement is demonstrated under challenging clinical conditions. SpO2 shows good accordance with SaO2, a high level of comparability with the reference pulse oximeters, and was significantly improved by introducing a new algorithm for artifact reduction. The perfusion index also shows a good correlation with the reference data.
BACKGROUND COVID-19 has affected everyday life and working conditions for most European people, particularly health care professionals (HCP). The worsening of mental health, work-related stressors, and helpful coping strategies within HCP have been studied by various quantitative surveys for all waves of infection. Longitudinal comparisons of stressors and coping as well as the themes that are particularly stressful for the HCP on different levels of experience at distinct timepoints of the pandemic are missing. OBJECTIVE Analyzing stressors, coping strategies, and underlying psychosocial stress factors and unmet needs expressed by HCP and non-medical staff at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic and the third wave of infections in different European countries. METHODS A cross-sectional survey was conducted in two study periods during COVID-19 pandemic in different European countries. The first study period was between April 1st and June 20th 2020 and the second between the November 25th 2021 and February 28th 2022. Quantitative descriptive analysis was conducted for questionnaires on stressors and coping strategies. Thematic analysis was used to complement the quantitative data with the results of the qualitative data to explore further levels of experience of the individual. RESULTS The most severe stressors identified at both timepoints were the uncertainty about when the pandemic will be under control and the fear of infecting the family. Commonly used coping strategies were the use of protective measures and the collection of information on COVID-19. A thematic analysis revealed 8 first level themes (pandemic situation, government/politics, social climate, measures, working conditions, infection effects, daily life, coping) which can be seen as levels of experience. During the beginning of the pandemic, comments focused on needs regarding protective equipment and handling the social-distancing situation, while unmet psychosocial needs came up only in the second study period. CONCLUSIONS Over the course of three years of the pandemic, there is still a need in the psychosocial pandemic preparedness of health care professionals that deserves further research and coverage. Despite many government and work-related measures, a deterioration of mental health in HCP, could be observed. It is important for future crises to cover the gaps in psychosocial support needs revealed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, an improvement in pandemic preparedness and a mentally healthier population must be ensured in the future.
BACKGROUND COVID-19 has affected everyday life and working conditions for most European people, particularly health care professionals (HCP). The worsening of mental health, work-related stressors, and helpful coping strategies within HCP have been studied by various quantitative surveys for all waves of infection. However, longitudinal comparisons of stressors and coping as well as the themes that are particularly stressful for the HCP on different levels of experience at distinct timepoints of the pandemic are missing. OBJECTIVE Analyzing stressors, coping strategies, and underlying psychosocial stress factors and unmet needs expressed by HCP and non-medical staff at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic and during the third wave of infections in different European countries. METHODS A cross-sectional survey was conducted in two study periods during the COVID-19 pandemic in different European countries. The first study period was between April 1st and June 20th 2020 and the second between the November 25th 2021 and February 28th 2022. Quantitative descriptive analysis was conducted for questionnaires on stressors and coping strategies. Thematic analysis was used to complement the quantitative data with the results of the qualitative data to explore further levels of experience of the individual. RESULTS The most severe stressors identified at both timepoints were the uncertainty about when the pandemic will be under control and the fear of infecting the family. Commonly used coping strategies were the use of protective measures and the collection of information on COVID-19. A thematic analysis revealed 8 first level themes (pandemic situation, government/politics, social climate, measures, working conditions, infection effects, daily life, coping) which can be seen as levels of experience. During the beginning of the pandemic, comments focused on needs regarding protective equipment and handling the social-distancing situation, while unmet psychosocial needs came up only in the second study period. CONCLUSIONS Over the course of three years of the pandemic, there is still a need in the psychosocial pandemic preparedness of health care professionals that deserves further research and coverage. Despite many government and work-related measures, a deterioration of mental health in HCP, could be observed. It is important for future crises to cover the gaps in psychosocial support needs revealed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, an improvement in pandemic preparedness and a mentally healthier population must be ensured in the future.
Background The COVID-19 pandemic severely affected everyday life and working conditions for most Europeans, particularly health care professionals (HCPs). Over the past 3 years, various policies have been implemented in various European countries. Studies have reported on the worsening of mental health, work-related stress, and helpful coping strategies. However, having a closer look is still necessary to gain more information on the psychosocial stressors and unmet needs of HCPs as well as nonmedical staff. Objective This study aimed to obtain quantitative information on job-related stressors of physicians and nurses and the coping strategies of HCPs and nonmedical staff at 2 periods of the COVID-19 pandemic. By further analyzing qualitative comments, we wanted to gain more information on the psychosocial stressors and unmet needs of HCPs as well as nonmedical staff on different levels of experience. Methods A cross-sectional survey was conducted at 2 time points during the COVID-19 pandemic in several European countries. The first study period (T1) lasted between April 1 and June 20, 2020, and the second study period (T2) lasted between November 25, 2021, and February 28, 2022. On a quantitative level, we used a questionnaire on stressors for physicians and nurses and a questionnaire on coping strategies for HCPs and nonmedical staff. Quantitative data were descriptively analyzed for mean values and differences in stressors and coping strategies. Qualitative data of free-text boxes of HCPs and nonmedical staff were analyzed via thematic analysis to explore the experiences of the individuals. Results T1 comprised 609 participants, and T2 comprised 1398 participants. Overall, 296 participants made 438 qualitative comments. The uncertainty about when the pandemic would be controlled (T1: mean 2.28, SD 0.85; T2: mean 2.08, SD 0.90) and the fear of infecting the family (T1: mean 2.26, SD 0.98; T2: mean 2.02, SD 1.02) were the most severe stressors identified by physicians and nurses in both periods. Overall, the use of protective measures (T1: mean 2.66, SD 0.60; T2: mean 2.66, SD 0.60) and acquiring information about COVID-19 (T1: mean 2.29, SD 0.82; T2: mean 1.99, SD 0.89) were identified as the most common coping strategies for the entire study population. Using thematic analysis, we identified 8 themes of personal experiences on the micro, meso, and macro levels. Measures, working conditions, feelings and emotions, and social climate were frequently mentioned topics of the participants. In T1, feelings of isolation and uncertainty were prominent. In T2, feelings of exhaustion were expressed and vaccination was frequently discussed. Moreover, unmet psychosocial needs were identified. Conclusions There is a need for improvement in pandemic preparedness. Targeted vocational education measures and setting up of web-based mental health support could be useful to bridge gaps in psychosocial support needs in future crises.
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.