Search

SARS-CoV-2 serology may be helpful to retrospectively understand infection dynamics in specific settings including kindergartens. We assessed SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in individuals connected to kindergartens in Berlin, Germany in September 2021. Children, staff, and household members from 12 randomly selected kindergartens were interviewed on COVID-19 history and sociodemographic parameters. Blood samples were collected on filter paper. SARS-CoV-2 anti-S and anti-N antibodies were assessed using Roche Elecsys. We assessed seroprevalence and the proportion of so far unrecognized SARS-CoV-2 infections. We included 277 participants, comprising 48 (17.3%) kindergarten children, 37 (13.4%) staff, and 192 (69.3%) household members. SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were present in 65.0%, and 52.7% of all participants were vaccinated. Evidence of previous infection was observed in 16.7% of kindergarten children, 16.2% of staff, and 10.4% of household members. Undiagnosed infections were observed in 12.5%, 5.4%, and 3.6%, respectively. Preceding infections were associated with facemask neglect. In conclusion, two-thirds of our cohort were SARS-CoV-2 seroreactive in September 2021, largely as a result of vaccination in adults. Kindergarten children showed the highest proportion of non-vaccine-induced seropositivity and an increased proportion of previously unrecognized SARS-CoV-2 infection. Silent infections in pre-school children need to be considered when interpreting SARS-CoV-2 infections in the kindergarten context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The international study PRICOV-19 aims to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the organisation of primary health care. The German part focuses on German general practitioners during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper addresses the following research questions: (1) How were changes in tasks on primary care and patient treatment perceived by GPs?, (2) What was the role of GPs during the pandemic, and how was their wellbeing?, (3) How did GPs perceive health policy measures?, and, (4) What influenced the attitudes of GPs on health policy measures? Methods: This study pursues a multi-country cross-sectional design. Data collection took place throughout Germany from 01.02. to 28.02.2021 with a quantitative online questionnaire consisting of 53 items. The questionnaire was analysed through descriptive and inferential analyses using correlation and multiple regression models. Results: The response rate was 20.4% (n = 349). The respondents were mainly GPs (59.6%) in single practices (62.5%) with a mean work experience of 15 to 20 years. GPs experienced a change in their work and practice organisation (80.3%). They felt a high responsibility (70.6%) and found their work has become more meaningful to them (76%). They also saw a lack of political support (75.2%) and that the measures taken by the government overburdened the daily practice (66.4%). Not many GPs were at risk of being distressed (53.4%) but rated the health policies rather negatively (60%). The multiple regression showed, the more GPs were exposed to risk of distress, the worse they assessed the government's measures. Conclusion: GPs perceived their work as relevant and felt confident they could fulfil their tasks, but noticed that health policy initially hardly supported the outpatient sector. Health policies should increase their competence in relation to primary care, ensure its needs and consider an active inclusion of GPs in preparedness plans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic various ambulatory health care models (SARS-CoV-2 contact points: Subspecialised Primary Care Practices, Fever Clinics, and Special Places for Corona-Testing) were organised in a short period in Baden-Wuerttemberg, a region in Southern Germany. The aim of these SARS-CoV-2 contact points was to ensure medical treatment for patients with (suspected) and without SARS-CoV-2 infection. The present study aimed to assess the beliefs and practices of primary care physicians who either led a Subspecialised Primary Care Practice or a Primary Care Practice providing care as usual in Baden-Wuerttemberg during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This cross-sectional study was based on a paper-based questionnaire in primary care physicians during the first wave of the pandemic. Participants were identified via the web page of the Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians Baden-Wuerttemberg. The questionnaire was distributed in June and July 2020. It measured knowledge, practices, self-efficacy and fears towards SARS-CoV-2, using newly developed questions. Data was descriptively analysed. Results: One hundred fifty-five participants (92 leads of SARS-CoV-2 contact points/ 63 leads of primary care practices) completed the questionnaire. Out of 92 leads of SARS-CoV-2 contact points 74 stated to lead n Subspecialised Primary Care Practices. About half participants of both groups did not fear an own infection with the novel virus (between 50.8% and 62.2%), however about 75% feared financial loss. Knowledge was gained using various sources; main sources were the Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (between 82.5% and 83.8%) and the German Society for Hygiene and Microbiology (RKI) (between 88.9% and 95.9%). Leads of Subspecialised Primary Care Practice felt more confident to perform anamnestic/diagnostic procedures (p < 0.001). The same was found for the confidence level regarding decision-making concerning the further treatment (p < 0.001). Several prevention measures to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2 were adopted. Subspecialised Primary Care Practice had treated on average more patients with (suspected) COVID-19 (mean 408.12) than primary care practices (mean 83.8) (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that the Subspecialised Primary Care Practice that were implemented during the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic contributed containment of the pandemic. Leads of Subspecialised Primary Care Practice indicated that physical separation of patients with potential SARS-CoV-2 infection was easier compared to those who continued working in their own practice. Additionally, leads of Subspecialised Primary Care Practice felt more confident in dealing with patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Trial registration: The study has been prospectively registered at the German Clinical Trial Register (DRKS00022224). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a flood of—often contradictory—evidence. HCWs had to develop strategies to locate information that supported their work. We investigated the information-seeking of different HCW groups in Germany. Methods: In December 2020, we conducted online surveys on COVID-19 information sources, strategies, assigned trustworthiness, and barriers—and in February 2021, on COVID-19 vaccination information sources. Results were analyzed descriptively; group comparisons were performed using χ 2-tests. Results: For general COVID-19-related medical information (413 participants), non-physicians most often selected official websites (57%), TV (57%), and e-mail/newsletters (46%) as preferred information sources—physicians chose official websites (63%), e-mail/newsletters (56%), and professional journals (55%). Non-physician HCWs used Facebook/YouTube more frequently. The main barriers were insufficient time and access issues. Non-physicians chose abstracts (66%), videos (45%), and webinars (40%) as preferred information strategy; physicians: overviews with algorithms (66%), abstracts (62%), webinars (48%). Information seeking on COVID-19 vaccination (2700 participants) was quite similar, however, with newspapers being more often used by non-physicians (63%) vs. physician HCWs (70%). Conclusion: Non-physician HCWs more often consulted public information sources. Employers/institutions should ensure the supply of professional, targeted COVID-19 information for different HCW groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Numerous research results have already pointed towards the negative influence of increased mental stress on educational processes and motivational criteria. It has also been shown that the global public health crisis induced by COVID-19 was related to anxiety symptoms and elevated levels of distress. To holistically elucidate the dynamics of the pandemic-related mental stress of first-year medical students, the associated parameters of three different cohorts were measured at the beginning of the pandemic-related restrictions on university life in Germany (20/21), at the peak of the COVID-19-related restrictions (21/22) and during the easing of the restrictions in the winter term 22/23. In a repeated cross-sectional study design, the constructs of worries, tension, demands and joy were collected from first-year medical students (n = 578) using the Perceived Stress Questionnaire. The results demonstrate significantly increased values of the constructs worries (p < 0.001), tension (p < 0.001) and demands (p < 0.001) at the peak of the pandemic related restrictions compared to the previous and following year as well as significantly decreasing values of general joy of life during the observed period of 3 years (all p-values < 0.001). A confirmatory factor analysis was performed to verify the questionnaire's factor structure regarding the addressed target group during the pandemic (CFI: 0.908, RMSEA: 0.071, SRMR: 0.052). These data, collected over a period of three years, provide information regarding dynamically manifesting mental stress during the COVID-19 pandemic, and refer to new areas of responsibility for the faculties to adequately counteract future crisis situations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study analyzed the conspiracy mentality of informal caregivers for older persons compared to non-caregivers and whether this association was dependent on age. The sample was collected randomly from a population-based online panel (forsa.omninet) and represents individuals aged ≥40 years from Germany. In total, 3022 participants were questioned about conspiracy mentality (Conspiracy Mentality Questionnaire), informal care provision (N = 489 informal caregivers of older adults), and sociodemographic background. Data assessment took place between 4th and 19th March 2021 and the questions referred to the time between December 2020 and March 2021. No significant differences were found between informal caregivers and non-caregivers. A significant interaction effect was found, indicating a decrease of conspiracy mentality among non-caregivers and an increase among informal caregivers with higher age. After stratifying by gender, this effect was found only among female informal caregivers. Middle-aged informal caregivers had a lower, and older-aged a higher, susceptibility to conspiracy theories during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to non-caregivers. The results indicate that providing care could be protective among middle-aged individuals, whereas older informal caregivers may benefit from interventions to reduce susceptibility to conspiracy theories and the associated risks for health and wellbeing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Covid-19 pandemic led to increased work-related strain and psychosocial burden in nurses worldwide, resulting in high prevalences of mental health problems. Nurses in long-term care facilities seem to be especially affected by the pandemic. Nevertheless, there are few findings indicating possible positive changes for health care workers. Therefore, we investigated which psychosocial burdens and potential positive aspects nurses working in long-term care facilities experience during the Covid-19 pandemic. Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods study among nurses and nursing assistants working in nursing homes in Germany. The survey contained the third German version of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ III). Using Welch’s t-tests, we compared the COPSOQ results of our sample against a pre-pandemic reference group of geriatric nurses from Germany. Additionally, we conducted semi-structured interviews with geriatric nurses with a special focus on psychosocial stress, to reach a deeper understanding of their experiences on work-related changes and burdens during the pandemic. Data were analysed using thematic coding (Braun and Clarke). Results: Our survey sample (n = 177) differed significantly from the pre-pandemic reference group in 14 out of 31 COPSOQ scales. Almost all of these differences indicated negative changes. Our sample scored significantly worse regarding the scales ‘quantitative demands’, ‘hiding emotions’, ‘work-privacy conflicts’, ‘role conflicts’, ‘quality of leadership’, ‘support at work’, ‘recognition’, ‘physical demands’, ‘intention to leave profession’, ‘burnout’, ‘presenteeism’ and ‘inability to relax’. The interviews (n = 15) revealed six main themes related to nurses’ psychosocial stress: ‘overall working conditions’, ‘concern for residents’, ‘management of relatives’, ‘inability to provide terminal care‘, ‘tensions between being infected and infecting others’ and ‘technicisation of care’. ‘Enhanced community cohesion’ (interviews), ‘meaning of work’ and ‘quantity of social relations’ (COPSOQ III) were identified as positive effects of the pandemic. Conclusions: Results clearly illustrate an aggravation of geriatric nurses’ situation and psychosocial burden and only few positive changes due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Pre-existing hardships seem to have further deteriorated and new stressors added to nurses’ strain. The perceived erosion of care, due to an overemphasis of the technical in relation to the social and emotional dimensions of care, seems to be especially burdensome to geriatric nurses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The early COVID-19-pandemic was characterized by changes in decision making, decision-relevant value systems and the related perception of decisional uncertainties and conflicts resulting in decisional burden and stress. The vulnerability of clinical care professionals to these decisional dilemmas has not been characterized yet. Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire study (540 patients, 322 physicians and 369 nurses in 11 institutions throughout Germany) was carried out. The inclusion criterion was active involvement in clinical treatment or decision making in oncology or psychiatry during the first year of COVID-19. The questionnaires covered five decision dimensions (conflicts and uncertainty, resources, risk perception, perception of consequences for clinical processes, and the perception of consequences for patients). Data analysis was performed using ANOVA, Pearson rank correlations, and the Chi²-test, and for inferential analysis, nominal logistic regression and tree classification were conducted. Results: Professionals reported changes in clinical management (27.5%) and a higher workload (29.2%), resulting in decisional uncertainty (19.2%) and decisional conflicts (22.7%), with significant differences between professional groups (p < 0.005), including anxiety, depression, loneliness and stress in professional subgroups (p < 0.001). Nominal regression analysis targeting "Decisional Uncertainty" provided a highly significant prediction model (LQ p < 0.001) containing eight variables, and the analysis for "Decisional Conflicts" included six items. The classification rates were 64.4% and 92.7%, respectively. Tree analysis confirmed three levels of determinants. Conclusions: Decisional uncertainty and conflicts during the COVID-19 pandemic were independent of the actual pandemic load. Vulnerable professional groups for the perception of a high number of decisional dilemmas were characterized by individual perception and the psychological framework. Coping and management strategies should target vulnerability, enable the handling of the individual perception of decisional dilemmas and ensure information availability and specific support for younger professionals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of ZFA: Zeitschrift für Allgemeinmedizin is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)