Objective This study aimed to assess the post-contact risk of nurses who provide care for patients diagnosed with COVID-19. Methods This investigation employed a quantitative-descriptive design. The study sample was comprised of the frontline nurses in the COVID-19 center hospitals in the northern part of Saudi Arabia. Snowball sampling was used, resulting in 80 frontline nurses. A survey using a self-administered questionnaire in a Google form was employed to collect the data, which was collected from May 20 through June 25, 2020. Results Some of the study participants were reported to have a history of both staying in the same household with each other (35%) and of traveling with a confirmed COVID-19 patient (20%). These participants were considered as community exposed to COVID-19. There were 8.8% who were classified as high risk due to failure in removing and replacing personal protective equipment (PPE); 6.3% were at high risk for not performing hand hygiene before and after touching COVID-19 patients, and 5% did not follow the recommended guidelines in performing hand hygiene after touching the patients' surroundings. In addition, 3.8% of the participants had an accident related to biological material, such as with splashes of biological fluid (in the eyes). These nurses were classified as high risk for COVID-19 virus infection, Conclusion This study identifies practices that need improvement in combatting this virus. Since policies and guidelines may not always be optimal in all settings, a tailor-fitted guideline is appropriate. Nurse leaders, for example, need to establish an infection control system that provides real-time monitoring and facilitates immediate correction for nurses. Doing so will provide the nurses with a continuous awareness of predisposing themselves to acquiring the virus.
Objetivo: El objetivo de este estudio fue examinar el estigma social experimentado por los trabajadores sanitarios que cuidan a las personas diagnosticadas de COVID-19. Métodos: Este estudio utilizó un enfoque cualitativo-fenomenológico, y fue realizado en los centros de COVID de la región de Hail, en el Reino de Arabia Saudí. Se utilizó un muestreo intencional y de bola de nieve, obteniéndose una muestra de 15 participantes. Sin embargo, se identificó saturación en el 11º participante. Las entrevistas se llevaron a cabo utilizando una plataforma Zoom, empleando al menos 50 minutos por participante. Para analizar los datos se empleó un análisis temático. Resultados: Las enfermeras registraron cuatro temas y tres subtemas basados en entrevistas individuales. Dichos temas incluyeron (1) el etiquetado de las enfermeras como “enfermeras COVID”, con un subtema de frustración, (2) el “miedo a lo desconocido”, con un subtema de “incertidumbres”, (3) la necesidad de apoyo de las enfermeras, y (4) el amor por la profesión, con un subtema de “valía de las enfermeras”. Conclusión: Las enfermeras que cuidaron a los pacientes diagnosticados de COVID-19 experimentaron estigma. Fueron etiquetadas como “enfermeras COVID”. Experimentaron miedo a lo desconocido e incertidumbres, sintiendo que necesitaban apoyo. A pesar de estas experiencias, las enfermeras se sintieron satisfechas ya que tienen en alta estima su profesión. Las experiencias de dichas enfermeras solicitan una intervención de ayuda antes, durante y después de la crisis sanitaria. En este contexto, las enfermeras estarán preparadas a nivel mental y emocional para enfrentarse a los retos se su carrera.
Previous studies have revealed various factors related to nurses’ resilience and predictors of resilience. However, there are no studies analysing the association of three variables—mental well-being, coping strategies, and stress—with resilience. This study aims to assess the impact of mental well-being, levels of stress, and coping strategies on resilience using path analysis. This study used a cross-sectional approach that involved 763 nurses from 16 major hospitals in the eastern and northern regions of Saudi Arabia during the COVID-19 pandemic. The data gathering was conducted from August to November 2022. The staff nurses possessed positive mental wellness (3.75 ± 1.08), moderate stress levels (3.06 ± 1.21), adequate coping skills (3.33 ± 1.23), and a low level of resilience (2.90 ± 1.040). Age had a small effect on resilience (β = 0.040; p < 0.001) but work experience (β = −0.019; p > 0.139) and marital status (β = 0.019; p > 0.072) were not significant. Conversely, mental well-being (β = 0.043; p < 0.001) and stress (β = −0.089; p < 0.001) had a small effect on resilience, but coping strategies (β = 0.561; p < 0.001) had a large effect on resilience. Therefore, coping strategies must be reinforced at all times to assist nurses and other healthcare professionals in identifying contributing elements that maintain these workers’ resilience in the face of unforeseen and protracted pandemics and other life events.
Although numerous scholars have studied resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic, research exploring its relationship with emotional intelligence is scarce. The aim of this study was to determine the relationship between the resilience and emotional intelligence (EI) of staff nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data for this quantitative correlational study were gathered from the staff nurses of hospitals in the city of Hail, Saudi Arabia. The researchers employed simple random sampling, which yielded 261 staff nurses. Nationality (t = 6.422; p < 0.001) was found to have a significant relationship with resilience. Sex (t = 5.22; p < 0.001), ward assignment (t = 5.22; p < 0.001), age (F = 6.67; p < 0.001), and years of experience (F = 6.67; p < 0.001) revealed significant relationships with emotional intelligence. Resilience had a moderate positive relationship with EI (r = 0.55; p < 0.023), a weak positive relationship with self-emotion (r = 0.21; p < 0.003), and a very strong relationship with emotional appraisal (r = 0.85; p < 0.001). Improving emotional-intelligence skills is critical for assisting nurses during pandemic outbreaks. This can increase their individual and social resilience, while also improving their professional and life outcomes. These research findings suggest that emotional intelligence should be integrated into clinical practice and that EI data should be integrated into decision-making.
Introduction this study aimed to determine the prevalence of leaving against medical advice (LAMA) in the local context and the associated predictors to help develop effective strategies to reduce its likelihood. Methods this study employed a retrospective approach using medical records of the 16233 patients between 2016 and 2020 at various government-subsidized hospitals in the Hail region of Saudi Arabia. Results the prevalence of LAMA was the highest in 2019 (91.9%) and 2017 (21.45%) among insured and non-insured patients, respectively. Furthermore, it was the highest among patients aged 20-25 years and the lowest among patients aged 46 years and above. The incidence of LAMA was the highest (15.48% for males and 29.53% for females) in 2016. In 2016-2019, the most common reason for LAMA was “wanted medication only,” while in 2020, the “fear of infection with COVID-19” was the main reason. High blood sugar was the most common diagnosis among the patients under consideration during the study period. Significant association was found between LAMA and patient's insurance status (t = 4.3123; p < 0.002); however, no association was found between LAMA and age (t = -0.8748; p > 0.658) and gender of patients (t = 1.9008; p > 0.302). Conclusion strategies such as developing a suitable environment for patients and taking due care of their needs, providing individual consulting services, enhancing staff relations, and providing support to patients in need are vital. The likelihood of LAMA can be minimized by informing hospitalized patients and their relatives about the adverse effects of LAMA.
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.