During an epidemic, almost all healthcare facilities restrict the visiting of patients to prevent disease transmission. For hospices with terminally ill patients, the trade-off between compassion and infection control becomes a difficult decision. This study aimed to survey the changes in visiting policy for all 76 hospice wards in Taiwan during the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020. The altered visiting policies were assessed by the number of visitors per patient allowed at one time, the daily number of visiting slots, the number of hours open daily, and requisites for hospice ward entry. The differences in visiting policies between hospice wards and ordinary wards were also investigated. Data were collected by reviewing the official website of each hospital and were supplemented by phone calls in cases where no information was posted on the website. One quarter (n = 20) of hospice wards had different visiting policies to those of ordinary wards in the same hospital. Only one hospice ward operated an open policy, and in contrast, nine (11.8%) stopped visits entirely. Among the 67 hospice wards that allowed visiting, at most, two visitors at one time per patient were allowed in 46 (68.6%), one visiting time daily was allowed in 32 (47.8%), one hour of visiting per day was allowed in 29 (43.3%), and checking of identity and travel history was carried out in 12 wards (17.9%). During the COVID-19 pandemic, nearly all hospice wards in Taiwan changed their visiting policies, but the degree of restriction varied. Further studies could measure the impacts of visiting policy changes on patients and healthcare professionals.
Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a novel infectious coronavirus disease, has become a worldwide pandemic. Infection control precautions for hospital visitors are needed to avoid cluster outbreaks, so this study investigated the visiting policies of all the hospitals in Taiwan in the time of COVID-19. Methods: From March 15, 2020, to March 18, 2020, we searched the official websites of all 472 National Health Insurancecontracted hospitals to determine their visiting policies. For those hospitals that had posted new visiting policies and still allowed visits to ordinary wards, we recorded the relevant details shown on their websites, including the number of visitors allowed at one time, the number of visiting slots per day, the total visiting hours per day, and the rules provided to visitors before visiting. Results: During the study period, 276 (58.5%) hospitals had posted new visiting policies on their websites, with higher proportions of academic medical centers (92.0%, 23/25) and metropolitan hospitals (91.5%, 75/82) than local community hospitals (48.8%, 178/365) doing so. Visits to ordinary wards were forbidden in 83 hospitals among those. Among the 193 hospitals that had new visiting policies and still allowed visits to ordinary wards, 73.1% (n = 141) restricted visitors to two at a time and 54.9% (n = 106) restricted visits to two visiting slots per day. Furthermore, history taking regarding travel, occupation, contacts, and cluster information was mentioned by 82.4% (n = 159) of these 193 hospitals, body temperature monitoring by 78.2% (n = 151), hand hygiene by 63.2% (n = 122), and identity checks by 51.8% (n = 100). Conclusion: In the time of COVID-19 covered by this study, about three-fifths of the hospitals in Taiwan had posted their visiting policies for ordinary wards on their websites. Furthermore, the thoroughness with which such visiting policies have been enforced also requires investigation.
Background: The Patient Autonomy Act was implemented in Taiwan on 6 January 2019. It is the first patient-oriented act in Taiwan, and also the first special act to completely protect patient autonomy in Asia. Our study aimed to investigate the web resources citizens were able to access on the eve of the implementation of the Patient Autonomy Act in Taiwan. Methods: Patient Autonomy Act-related web resources were searched for by entering 10 related terms individually into the Google search engine in January 2019 and again in April 2019. Search activity data were analyzed using Google Trends. Results: “Advance care planning” and “advance decision” were the most relevant keywords for finding information about the Patient Autonomy Act on the eve of the act’s implementation in Taiwan. The main online information sources were non-governmental websites including news sites and online magazines. The related search volume only increased on the eve of implementation. Conclusions: Even though the Patient Autonomy Act was first published three years before its implementation, the related search volume only increased on the eve of its implementation. Therefore, whether the three-year buffer between its publication and implementation was necessary requires further investigation.
Local health centers (LHCs) play a key role in public health. Because it has now become popular to seek health information on the Internet, an effective website is indispensable to an LHC. Our study aimed to survey the official websites of LHCs in Taiwan with an evaluation framework. All 369 LHCs in Taiwan were surveyed in March 2018. The evaluation indicators included health information, online interactive services, technical features, institutional information, links to external resources, website management, the last updated time, and number of visitors. The indicators were stratified by the urbanization levels of the LHCs. In total, 98.0% (n = 360) of the LHCs had official websites. The majority (n = 241) of the websites were updated within the past 30 days, and most of the websites (n = 353) provided health information. However, the information provided varied considerably. Few LHCs (n = 31) provided online interactive services in terms of an online appointment function. In terms of providing online consultation services, rural LHCs outperformed suburban and urban LHCs (16.4% versus 14.5% and 6.0%, respectively). Most LHCs in Taiwan do not seem to take full advantage of the Internet, with their websites typically serving as static bulletin boards instead of new channels of communication. Further studies could focus on the effectiveness of these websites.
Summary Background Charitable donations play a major role in the provision of hospice and palliative care (HPC) services, most of which are not reimbursed by health insurance programs. A good understanding of the constitution and use of donations is thus conducive to maintaining a high‐quality HPC unit. Methods The data sources were the publicly available balance sheet, work report, and donor lists of a foundation exclusively supporting one of the best HPC units in Taiwan in the fiscal year of 2017. The analysis included the donation amounts and frequencies by donor type (individual, corporate, and group) and the categories of expenses. Results The foundation received 3033 donations worth a total of 7.8 million New Taiwan dollars (NTD) (approximately 258 thousand US dollars) in 2017. Two‐thirds of the donations were allocated to the provision of direct care services. Of the 3033 donations, only 11 (0.4%) were worth 100 000 NTD or more, while 108 (3.6%) were valued between 10 000 and 99 999 NTD, 1268 (41.8%) were valued between 1000 and 9999 NTD, and 1646 (54.2%) were worth less than 1000 NTD. Of 1051 donors, 974 (92.7%) were individuals, 378 (36.0%) donated more than once, and 106 (10.1%) donated 12 or more times in one year. Conclusion HPC services in Taiwan are sponsored by lots of individuals and small donations. For sustainability of standards‐based and quality HPC services, the benevolence of the public should be thus cherished and adequately responded to.
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.