ObjectiveTo investigate how care is shaped through the material practices and spaces of healthcare environments during the COVID-19 pandemic.DesignCritical interpretive synthesis (CIS) of qualitative research.ParticipantsStudies included qualitative research investigating the experiences of healthcare workers involved in the care of individuals during the COVID-19 pandemic.Results134 articles were identified in the initial sampling frame with 38 studies involving 2507 participants included in the final synthesis. Three themes were identified in the analysis: (1) the hospital transformed, (2) virtual care spaces and (3) objects of care. Through the generation of these themes, a synthesising argument was developed to demonstrate how material spaces and practices of healthcare shape care delivery and to provide insights to support healthcare providers in creating enabling and resilient care environments.ConclusionsThe findings of this study demonstrate how healthcare environments enable and constrain modes of care. Practices of care are shaped through the materiality of spaces and objects, including how these change in the face of pandemic disruption. The implication is that the healthcare environment needs to be viewed as a critical adaptive element in the optimisation of care. The study also develops a versatile and coherent approach to CIS methods that can be taken up in future research.

This article investigates how evidence of the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines is enacted in news media via a focus on the temporality of vaccine development. We argue that time constitutes a crucial object of and mechanism for knowledge production in such media and investigate how time comes to matter in vaccine evidence-making communication practices. In science communication on vaccine development, the vaccine object (along with the practices through which it is produced) undergoes a material-discursive shift from an imagined “rushed” product to being many years in the making and uninhibited by unnecessarily lengthy processes. In both these enactments of vaccine development, time itself is constituted as evidence of vaccine efficacy and safety. This article traces how time (performed as both calendar time and as a series of relational events) is materialized as an affective and epistemic object of evidence within public science communication by analyzing the material-discursive techniques through which temporality is enacted within news media focused on the timeline of COVID-19 vaccine development. We contend that time (as evidence) is remade through these techniques as an ontopolitical concern within the COVID-19 vaccine assemblage. We furthermore argue that science communication itself is an important actor in the hinterland of public health practices with performative effects and vital evidence-making capacities.

Objectives Peer‐to‐peer communication approaches have been previously described as the ‘power of personal referral’. Rather than relying on official channels of information, peer‐to‐peer communication may have a role in supporting changes in understanding and possibly behaviours. However, in emergency or pandemic situations, there is currently limited understanding of whether community members feel comfortable speaking about their vaccine experiences or advocating to others. This study explored the perceptions of COVID‐19 vaccinated and unvaccinated Australian adults regarding their preferences and opinions about peer‐peer communication and other vaccine communication strategies. Study Design Qualitative interview research. Methods In‐depth interviews were conducted in September 2021 with 41 members of the Australian community. Thirty‐three participants self‐identified as being vaccinated against COVID‐19, while the remainder were not vaccinated at the time or did not intend on receiving a COVID vaccine. Results Amongst those who were vaccinated, participants spoke about being willing to promote the vaccine and correct misinformation and felt empowered following their vaccination. They highlighted the importance of peer‐to‐peer communication and community messaging, expressing the need for both strategies in an immunisation promotional campaign, with a slight emphasis on the persuasive power of communication between family and friends. However, those who were unvaccinated tended to dismiss the role of community messaging, commenting on a desire not to be like one of the many who listened to the advice of others. Conclusion During emergency situations, governments and other relevant community organisations should consider harnessing peer‐to‐peer communication amongst motivated individuals as a health communication intervention. However further work is needed to understand the support that this constituent‐involving strategy requires. Patient or Public Contribution Participants were invited to participate through a series of online promotional pathways including emails and social media posts. Those who completed the expression of interest and met the study criteria were contacted and sent the full study participant information documentation. A time for a 30 min semi‐structured interview was set and provided with a $50 gift voucher at the conclusion.

No abstract

No abstract