Beurteilung des Infektionsrisikos durch SARS-CoV-2 für medizinisches Personal – Erkenntnisse aus der Praxis

Pfenninger, E; Christ, Pascal; Neumüller, Martin; Dinse-Lambracht, Alexander

doi:10.1007/s00103-021-03277-1

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Healthcare workers (HCW) are at the forefront of dealing with the pandemic; they share in the burdens borne by everyone (e.g., curfews, restrictions in activities), but in addition, face specific stressors due to their profession (e.g., increased risk of infection, increased workload). Even though some researchers did not find evidence that more exposure to COVID-19 patients conferred a higher risk of infection in this group [1][2][3][4][5], there is strong evidence for markedly increased rates of COVID-19 in HCW compared to the general public [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The German Translation of the Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemics-9 (SAVE-9) Scale: Results from Healthcare Workers during the Second Wave of COVID-19

König

Chung

Ertl

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Healthcare workers (HCW) are among those most directly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Most research with this group has used ad hoc measures, which limits comparability across samples. The Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemics-9 scale (SAVE-9) is a nine-item scale first developed in Korea, and has since been translated into several languages. We report on data collected from 484 German HCW between November 2020 and March 2021, during the “second wave” of coronavirus infections. We conducted item analysis, confirmatory factor analysis on the previously found factor solutions of the SAVE-9, examined correlations with established measures of depression, generalized anxiety, and insomnia, and compared scores between different groups of HCW. The psychometric properties of the German SAVE-9 were satisfactory and comparable to previous findings from Korea and Russia (Mosolova et al., 2020). Correlations with mental health measures were positive, as expected. We found some significant differences between groups of HCW on the SAVE-9 which were consistent with the literature but did not appear on the other mental health measures. This suggests that the SAVE-9 taps into specifically work-related stress, which may make it a helpful instrument in this research area.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The German Translation of the Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemics-9 (SAVE-9) Scale: Results from Healthcare Workers during the Second Wave of COVID-19

König

Chung

Ertl

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, our optimal-case scenario shows low levels of infection compared to other countries ( 3 , 16 , 18 , 24 , 26 , 68 ), as well as within Germany ( 17 , 47 , 57 , 69 ). As highlighted in the introduction, this scenario is linked to health system characteristics and resources and the optimal conditions may not easily be translated to other contexts.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

Healthcare Workers' Perceptions and Medically Approved COVID-19 Infection Risk: Understanding the Mental Health Dimension of the Pandemic. A German Hospital Case Study

Kuhlmann

Behrens

Cossmann

et al. 2022

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThis study analyses how healthcare workers (HCWs) perceived risks, protection and preventive measures during the COVID-19 pandemic in relation to medically approved risks and organizational measures. The aim is to explore “blind spots” of pandemic protection and make mental health needs of HCWs visible.MethodsWe have chosen an “optimal-case” scenario of a high-income country with a well-resourced hospital sector and low HCW infection rate at the organizational level to explore governance gaps in HCW protection. A German multi-method hospital study at Hannover Medical School served as empirical case; document analysis, expert information and survey data (n = 1,163) were collected as part of a clinical study into SARS-CoV-2 serology testing during the second wave of the pandemic (November 2020-February 2021). Selected survey items included perceptions of risks, protection and preventive measures. Descriptive statistical analysis and regression were undertaken for gender, profession and COVID-19 patient care.ResultsThe results reveal a low risk of 1% medically approved infections among participants, but a much higher mean personal risk estimate of 15%. The majority (68.4%) expressed “some” to “very strong” fear of acquiring infection at the workplace. Individual protective behavior and compliance with protective workplace measures were estimated as very high. Yet only about half of the respondents felt strongly protected by the employer; 12% even perceived “no” or “little” protection. Gender and contact with COVID-19 patients had no significant effect on the estimations of infection risks and protective workplace behavior, but nursing was correlated with higher levels of personal risk estimations and fear of infection.ConclusionsA strong mismatch between low medically approved risk and personal risk perceptions of HCWs brings stressors and threats into view, that may be preventable through better information, training/education and risk communication and through investment in mental health and inclusion in pandemic preparedness plans.

show abstract

“…Finally, our optimal-case scenario shows low levels of infection compared to other countries [3,16,18,24,26,68], as well as within Germany [17,47,57,69]. These optimal conditions may not easily be translated to other contexts, yet there are some important lessons emerging from our case study in relation to health workforce governance and new approaches to organisational protection measures.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Healthcare workers’ perceptions and medically approved COVID-19 infection risk: understanding the mental health dimension of the pandemic. A German hospital case study

Kuhlmann

Behrens

Cossmann

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction. This study analyses how healthcare workers (HCWs) perceived risks, protection and preventive measures during the COVID-19 pandemic in relation to medically approved risks and organisational measures. The aim is to explore blind spots of pandemic protection and make mental health needs of HCWs visible. Methods. We have chosen an optimal-case scenario of a high-income country with a well-resourced hospital sector and low HCW infection rate at the organisational level to explore governance gaps in HCW protection. A German multi-method hospital study at Hannover Medical School served as empirical case; document analysis, expert information and survey data (n=1163) were collected as part of a clinical study into SARS-CoV-2 serology testing during the second wave of the pandemic (November 2020-February 2021). Selected survey items included perceptions of risks, protection and preventive measures. Descriptive statistical analysis and regression were undertaken for gender, profession and COVID-19 patient care. Results. The results reveal a low risk of 1% medically approved infections among participants, but a much higher mean personal risk estimate of 15%. The majority (68.4%) expressed some to very strong fear of acquiring infection at the workplace. Individual protective behaviour and compliance with protective workplace measures were estimated as very high. Yet only about half of the respondents felt strongly protected by the employer; 12% even perceived no or little protection. Gender and contact with COVID-19 patients had no significant effect on the estimations of infection risks and protective workplace behaviour, but nursing was correlated with higher levels of personal risk estimations and fear of infection. Conclusions. A strong mismatch between low medically approved risk and personal risk perceptions of HCWs brings stressors and threats into view, that may be preventable through better information and risk communication and through investment in mental health and inclusion in pandemic preparedness plans.

show abstract

Beurteilung des Infektionsrisikos durch SARS-CoV-2 für medizinisches Personal – Erkenntnisse aus der Praxis

Cited by 5 publications

References 23 publications

The German Translation of the Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemics-9 (SAVE-9) Scale: Results from Healthcare Workers during the Second Wave of COVID-19

The German Translation of the Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemics-9 (SAVE-9) Scale: Results from Healthcare Workers during the Second Wave of COVID-19

Healthcare Workers' Perceptions and Medically Approved COVID-19 Infection Risk: Understanding the Mental Health Dimension of the Pandemic. A German Hospital Case Study

Healthcare workers’ perceptions and medically approved COVID-19 infection risk: understanding the mental health dimension of the pandemic. A German hospital case study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About