Background: The study aimed to compare psychopathological expressions during the COVID-19 (novel coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic, as declared on March 11th 2020 by the World Health Organization, with respect to which institutional variables might distinguish the impact of COVID-19 in medical and non-medical professionals. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed nationwide between 16th March and the 26th April 2020 in Poland. A total of 2039 respondents representing all healthcare providers (59.8%) as well as other professionals filled in the sociodemographic section, the General Health Questionnaire-28 and the author’s questionnaire with questions related to exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, the availability of protective measures, quarantine, change of working hours and place of employment during the pandemic, as well as feelings associated with the state of the pandemic. Results: Medical professionals more often presented with relevant psychopathological symptoms (GHQ-28 (General Health Questionnaire-28) total score >24) than the non-medical group (60.8% vs. 48.0%, respectively) such as anxiety, insomnia and somatic symptoms even after adjustment for potential confounding factors. Male sex, older age and appropriate protective equipment were associated with significantly lower GHQ-28 total scores in medical professionals, whereas among non-medical professionals, male sex was associated with significantly lower GHQ-28 total scores. Conclusions: Somatic and anxiety symptoms as well as insomnia are more prevalent among medical staff than workers in other professions. Targeting the determinants of these differences should be included in interventions aimed at restoring psychological well-being in this specific population. Apparently, there are present gender differences in psychological responses that are independent of profession.

Context:Management of the airway of a trauma victim is considered challenging. Various approaches have been described to achieve airway control in this setup; many of them include video-assited viewing of the larynx during intubation. ETView Single Lumen (SL) is a novice single-use endotracheal tube equiped with a video camera and a light source at its distal tip. Its use was previously described in seeral clinical and training setups.Objective:The aim was to evaluate the efficacy of the VivaSight SL compared with classic direct laryngoscopy performed with a Macintosh blade in a manikin-simulated trauma setup presenting various degrees of airway challenge when performed by inexperienced physicians.Design, Setting, Participants:This was prospective, randomized, crossover, manikin trial. After short training on the ETView system, 67 novice paramedics attempted to perform oral intubation using both standard direct laryngoscopy (MAC group) and the VivaSight SL endotracheal tube (ETView group) in a randomized order on manikins in 3 increasingly more difficult scenarios (simple intubation, cervical spine manual stabilization, and with cervical collar in place).Outcome Measure:Overall success rate, time to intubation, number of intubation attempts, laryngeal view grade, dental compression, and overall participant satisfaction were monitored.Results:Duration of intubation and number of attempts were significantly superior in the ETView group in the latter 2 more challenging scenarios. All other parameters showed superiority to the ETView group in all 3 scenarios.Conclusion:The VivaSight SL system performed better in a complex scenario of airway management of a trauma victim in need for cervical spine stabilization performed by novice caregivers compared to standard direct laryngoscopy and should be considered in this clinical setup.

Background: A 2017 update of the resuscitation guideline indicated the use of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) feedback devices as a resuscitation teaching method. The aim of the study was to compare the influence of two techniques of CPR teaching on the quality of resuscitation performed by medical students. Methods: The study was designed as a prospective, randomized, simulation study and involved 115 first year students of medicine. The participants underwent a basic life support (BLS) course based on the American Heart Association guidelines, with the first group (experimental group) performing chest compressions to observe, in real-time, chest compression parameters indicated by software included in the simulator, and the second group (control group) performing compressions without this possibility. After a 10-minute resuscitation, the participants had a 30-minute break and then a 2-minute cycle of CPR. One month after the training, study participants performed CPR, without the possibility of observing real-time measurements regarding quality of chest compression. Results: One month after the training, depth of chest compressions in the experimental and control group was 50 mm (IQR 46-54) vs. 39 mm (IQR 35-42; p = 0.001), compression rate 116 CPM (IQR 102-125) vs. 124 CPM (IQR 116-134; p = 0.034), chest relaxation 86% (IQR 68-89) vs. 74% (IQR 47-80; p = 0.031) respectively. Conclusions: Observing real-time chest compression quality parameters during BLS training may improve the quality of chest compression one month after the training including correct hand positioning, compressions depth and rate compliance.

No abstract

The victim at the scene of the incident very often requires evacuation from the danger area to the safe area or from the incident area to the hospital. The choice of technique depends on the number of rescuers available and the condition of the victim, with particular emphasis on serious and life-threatening injuries. Evacuation can take place without the use of equipment when the rescuer or rescuers carry the victim on their own hands. The optimal solution, especially for trauma patients, is to evacuate them using equipment that allows stabilization of the whole body and safe handling of the injured in vertical and horizontal planes.