Search

Context: The gradual impact of the Covid-19 pandemic had important effects on routines in surgical environments. In order to cope with the impact and re-establish anaesthesiology and surgery procedures, it was imperative to pursue in-depth studies with a view to ensuring safe surgical care, reducing hazards, as well as protecting the health, safety and wellbeing of the health personnel involved. The purpose of this study was to evaluate quantitative and qualitative approaches to domains of safety climate among multi-professional staffs of surgical centres during the Covid-19 pandemic and to identify intersections. Methods: This mixed-method project employed a concomitant triangulation strategy on a quantitative approach in an exploratory, descriptive, cross-sectional study, as well as a qualitative approach by way of a descriptive study. Data were collected using the validated, self-applicable Safety Attitudes Questionnaire/Operating Room (SAQ/OR) questionnaire and a semi-structured interview script. The 144 participants were the surgical, anaesthesiology, nursing and support teams working in the surgical centre during the Covid-19 pandemic. Results: The study found an overall safety climate score of 61.94, the highest-scoring domain being 'Communication in the surgical environment' (77.91) and the lowest, 'Perception of professional performance' (23.60). On integrating the results, a difference was found between the domains 'Communication in the surgical environment' and 'Working conditions'. However, there was intersection by the 'Perception of professional performance' domain, which permeated important categories of the qualitative analysis. Conclusions: For care practice, it is hoped to encourage improved patient safety, educational interventions to strengthen the patient safety climate and promote in-job wellbeing on the job for health personnel working in surgical centres. It is suggested that further studies explore the subject in greater depth among several surgical centres with mixed methods, so as to permit future comparisons and to monitor the evolving maturity of safety climate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: to evaluate distress and pleasure indicators in health care workers on the front line of care for suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases. Method: an exploratory, analytical and crosssectional study with a quantitative approach. The studied sample consisted of 437 health professionals invited by electronic means, who answered the questionnaire on sociodemographic information, occupational aspects and clinical conditions. Distress and pleasure at work were considered as outcomes, which were analyzed with multinomial logistic regression regarding the associated independent variables. Results: Most of the participants were female (71.0%), nurses (55.6%), with a weekly working shift of 40 hours or more (75.8%); 61.6% of the participants suffered from mental distress. The psychosocial characteristics of high-strain work and low social support were reported by 23.8% and 52.9% of the participants, respectively. In the multiple analysis, distress and lack of pleasure at work were associated with high job strain, low support from coworkers and mental distress. The profession is also associated with distress at work. Conclusion: distress and lack of pleasure at work are associated with occupational characteristics and mental strain among health care workers in the COVID-19 scenario. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Rev Rene is the property of Rev Rene 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.)

Objective: To analyze the factor structure of the version of the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire/Operating Room Version that has been translated and culturally adapted to the Brazilian context. Method: This was a methodological study about a questionnaire. The questionnaire was administered to 412 health professionals who worked in operating rooms. The factor structure was tested with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Cronbach's alpha. Results: The total score for Cronbach's alpha was 0.912; and the scores for the domains ranged from 0.56 and 0.85. The domain with the worst performance was communication in the surgical setting. The results of CFA showed that the score for SRMR was 0.052, RMSEA, 0.031, and CFI, 0.95. These scores indicate the reliability and acceptability of the Brazilian adaptation of the questionnaire. Conclusion: The factor structure demonstrated the validity and reliability of the Brazilian version of the questionnaire for measuring the patient safety climate as perceived by healthcare professionals who worked in surgical settings [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Eletrônica de Enfermagem is the property of Revista Eletronica de Enfermagem 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.)