Search

Introduction Long COVID (LC) occurs when people experience symptoms for weeks, months or even years after a COVID-19 infection. This review looks at research exploring the LC definitions, prevalence, symptoms, risk factors, and associated impacts in research on healthcare workers (HCWs). Data sources We systematically searched five electronic databases (CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline, PsycInfo and PubMed) and compiled a narrative literature review based on 56 relevant studies. Areas of agreement LC is prevalent among HCWs who become infected by COVID-19. Many of the most frequent symptoms associated with LC in the general population are also reported among HCWs. Some risk factors for LC are also similar to those in the general population, such as female sex, older age, and having a pre-existing respiratory illness. Areas of controversy The mechanism(s) responsible for LC remains unknown. A variety of terms, timeframes and symptoms are used to define LC, creating difficulties in comparing results across studies. Much of the research is cross-sectional and fails to explore the impacts that prolonged symptoms have on HCWs' personal and professional lives. Growing points The need to support HCWs with LC is clear. Identifying the mechanism(s) responsible for LC is a key priority, as this will inform treatments. Areas for developing research Future research should move towards a standard definition for LC. Greater attention should be paid to longitudinal and qualitative studies, which could give insights into prognosis, lived experience and work participation. Finally, studies evaluating treatments suitable for people with LC are timely. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract\nPlain language summaryA crisis in early pregnancy can be due to an unplanned pregnancy or a suspected abnormality. Pregnant people have the right to unbiased and comprehensive advice of all options from healthcare providers. Using story completion models (SCM), the aim of this qualitative study was to explore the attitudes of medical students and doctors in training towards crisis pregnancy, specifically two scenarios: early unplanned pregnancy and fatal fetal abnormality (anencephaly). Participants were invited from medical students attending University College Dublin (UCD) and trainees in Obstetrics and Gynaecology in the Royal College of Physicians of Ireland (RCPI) from July to December 2022. SCM involve giving the consenting participant an introduction to a hypothetical situation that acts as the beginning of a story and asking them to complete it. Stories were compiled and analysed using thematic analysis. Research Ethics Committee approval was given by both UCD and the RCPI. The standards for reporting of qualitative research guidelines were followed. Eight doctors in training and six medical students consented to participate in the study; all but two medical students completed both stories to the required word count, giving 25 stories for analysis. For both situations, stories described a variety of approaches, all of which were based on the person, or couples wishes, from continuing in pregnancy to deciding to end the pregnancy. SCM allowed detailed analysis of potentially sensitive subjects such as pregnancy options. This study showed that participating medical students and doctors in training recognise that pregnant people have the right to all choices in crisis pregnancy.There are several reasons that a person may have a crisis in early pregnancy. Some people may not have planned to become pregnant and need counselling on their options. Others may suspect that there is a problem with the pregnancy. People who are in a crisis deserve kindness, compassion, and information. This is a very emotional area and can be difficult to research. People may give different answers from what they think. A story completion study is a way of overcoming this. People read a couple of sentences and are asked to decide how they would finish off the story. This can suggest what they really think, rather than what they think people want them to say. For this study we gave two stories. One story described a pregnant person with an unexpected pregnancy, and the other described a person who discovers that their baby has anencephaly. This is a problem where the baby’s head does not develop. Six medical students and eight doctors training to work with pregnant people took part in this study. Almost everyone completed both stories, giving 25 stories for us to study. For both situations, the students and doctors based their story on the patient’s emotions and thoughts about their pregnancy and their wishes. This could be anything from continuing in pregnancy to deciding to end the pregnancy. This study suggests that the participants recognised all choices in crisis pregnancy and that the most important factor was what the person wanted to do. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities are subjected to a specific form of racism fuelled by deep-seated prejudice and stereotypes. These groups have historically been the victims of school segregation, forced assimilation policies, hate speech and hate crimes.Persecution and displacement have resulted in high rates of unemployment, reduced access to education and poorer health in general, which places these groups at significantly increased risk of poverty. In pregnancy, they are at increased risk of adverse obstetric outcomes. There is a gap in the literature surrounding the experiences and outcomes of pregnant women within this group. A scoping review was chosen as the appropriate methodology to identify what is known about the experiences and outcomes of pregnant women in these communities., Methods and Analysis: The Levac et al guideline on conducting a scoping review will be followed. This six-step approach includes identification of the research question, identification of relevant studies, selection of studies, charting of data, summary of results and consultation with experiential experts. A comprehensive search of the following electronic databases from 1980 to 2021 will be conducted: CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science. Relevant grey literature and reference lists will also be searched. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) tool will be used., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval was not required for this protocol as all literature within this scoping review are publicly available. To facilitate dissemination of findings, the research team will present the findings to key stakeholders working with Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)