"One minute it's an airborne virus, then it's a droplet virus, and then it's like nobody really knows…": Experiences of pandemic PPE amongst Australian healthcare workers.
Australia
COVID-19
Emotions
Infection prevention and control
Personal protective equipment
Journal
Infection, disease & health
ISSN: 2468-0869
Titre abrégé: Infect Dis Health
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101689703
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 2022
05 2022
Historique:
received:
15
07
2021
revised:
05
10
2021
accepted:
31
10
2021
pubmed:
28
11
2021
medline:
6
4
2022
entrez:
27
11
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has challenged health systems globally. A key controversy has been how to protect healthcare workers (HCWs) using personal protective equipment (PPE). Interviews were performed with 63 HCWs across two states in Australia to explore their experiences of PPE during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Thematic analysis was performed. Four themes were identified with respect to HCWs' experience of pandemic PPE: 1. Risk, fear and uncertainty: HCWs experienced considerable fear and heightened personal and professional risk, reporting anxiety about the adequacy of PPE and the resultant risk to themselves and their families. 2. Evidence and the ambiguities of evolving guidelines: forms of evidence, its interpretation, and the perception of rapidly changing guidelines heightened distress amongst HCWs. 3. Trust and care: Access to PPE signified organisational support and care, and restrictions on PPE use were considered a breach of trust. 4. Non-compliant practice in the context of social upheaval: despite communication of evidence-based guidelines, an environment of mistrust, personal risk, and organisational uncertainty resulted in variable compliance. PPE preferences and usage offer a material signifier of the broader, evolving pandemic context, reflecting HCWs' fear, mistrust, sense of inequity and social solidarity (or breakdown). PPE therefore represents the affective (emotional) demands of professional care, as well as a technical challenge of infection prevention and control. If rationing of PPE is necessary, policymakers need to take account of how HCWs will perceive restrictions or conflicting recommendations and build trust through effective communication (including of uncertainty).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has challenged health systems globally. A key controversy has been how to protect healthcare workers (HCWs) using personal protective equipment (PPE).
METHODS
Interviews were performed with 63 HCWs across two states in Australia to explore their experiences of PPE during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Thematic analysis was performed.
RESULTS
Four themes were identified with respect to HCWs' experience of pandemic PPE: 1. Risk, fear and uncertainty: HCWs experienced considerable fear and heightened personal and professional risk, reporting anxiety about the adequacy of PPE and the resultant risk to themselves and their families. 2. Evidence and the ambiguities of evolving guidelines: forms of evidence, its interpretation, and the perception of rapidly changing guidelines heightened distress amongst HCWs. 3. Trust and care: Access to PPE signified organisational support and care, and restrictions on PPE use were considered a breach of trust. 4. Non-compliant practice in the context of social upheaval: despite communication of evidence-based guidelines, an environment of mistrust, personal risk, and organisational uncertainty resulted in variable compliance.
CONCLUSION
PPE preferences and usage offer a material signifier of the broader, evolving pandemic context, reflecting HCWs' fear, mistrust, sense of inequity and social solidarity (or breakdown). PPE therefore represents the affective (emotional) demands of professional care, as well as a technical challenge of infection prevention and control. If rationing of PPE is necessary, policymakers need to take account of how HCWs will perceive restrictions or conflicting recommendations and build trust through effective communication (including of uncertainty).
Identifiants
pubmed: 34836839
pii: S2468-0451(21)00099-7
doi: 10.1016/j.idh.2021.10.005
pmc: PMC8610373
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
71-80Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Australasian College for Infection Prevention and Control. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Références
J Gen Intern Med. 2020 Jul;35(7):2240-2242
pubmed: 32410125
BMJ Open. 2020 Nov 5;10(11):e040503
pubmed: 33154060
Curr Opin Colloid Interface Sci. 2021 Oct;55:101471
pubmed: 34093064
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2021 Aug;27(8):1174.e1-1174.e4
pubmed: 33984489
J Hosp Infect. 2020 Aug;105(4):717-725
pubmed: 32497651
J Hosp Infect. 2020 Dec;106(4):678-697
pubmed: 32956786
J Crit Care. 2020 Oct;59:70-75
pubmed: 32570052
Ann Intern Med. 2020 Jul 21;173(2):120-136
pubmed: 32369541
Adv Colloid Interface Sci. 2021 Jun;292:102435
pubmed: 33971389
Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2021 Jun 08;:1-4
pubmed: 34099072
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Apr 21;4:CD013582
pubmed: 32315451
BMJ. 2000 Jan 8;320(7227):114-6
pubmed: 10625273
Int J Qual Health Care. 2021 Apr 28;33(2):
pubmed: 33864362
Pulmonology. 2020 Jul - Aug;26(4):204-212
pubmed: 32362505
Clin Microbiol Rev. 2021 Jan 27;34(2):
pubmed: 33504505
Environ Res. 2021 Jul;198:111153
pubmed: 33857461
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2021 Sep;42(9):1046-1052
pubmed: 32618530
PLoS One. 2021 May 18;16(5):e0251393
pubmed: 34003836
PLoS One. 2021 Apr 23;16(4):e0249792
pubmed: 33891614