Health-care workers (HCWs) are often seen as the most reliable source of vaccine-related information for their patients; nevertheless, various studies show that HCWs experience vaccine hesitation. In this study, the aim was to determine the reasons for vaccine hesitation among HCWs working in a large public hospital and its affiliated units in Istanbul.

A descriptive method for collecting qualitative data was designed for this study. The data of the HCWs were analyzed in line with the vaccine hesitancy factors put forward by the World Health Organization (WHO).

The most important vaccine hesitancy theme that emerged was the fear and lack of confidence in the vaccines, which was expressed at a higher rate than any other theme in all HCWs. The most cited reason for fear/lack of confidence in the vaccine was the fear of its side effects. It was observed that the HCWs who reported hesitation about vaccination due to pregnancy and breastfeeding consisted of women. The second most common theme for vaccine hesitation was reported as an inconvenience in accessing the vaccines. Although HCWs have priority, they stated that their reason for vaccine hesitancy was due to heavy personal issues or workloads. The final theme was about complacency, or thinking they do not need the vaccine.

Vaccine hesitation is a challenge that can be overcome with detailed monitoring and policy-making. Although the vaccine seems to be more significant, we do not want to see vaccine hesitancy grow more than the vaccine itself.

The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term outcome of quality of life (QOL) in the lower-limb amputees 10 years after the 2008 Sichuan earthquake.

In the cross-sectional study, 66 lower-limb amputees were recruited. The prosthetics-related QOL was assessed using the Prosthetic Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ) in terms of the scales of utility, appearance, sounds, residual limb health, perceived response, frustration, social burden, ambulation, and well-being. The score of each PEQ subscale was calculated and compared among the cohorts with different demographic characteristics.

The PEQ scores showed that the scales of sounds, residual limb health, and frustration were still low in the lower-limb amputees 10 years after the 2008 Sichuan earthquake. The comparison of PEQ scales among cohorts with different demographic characteristics indicated that the potential demographic risk factors, namely, age, marital status, educational level, living independence, and comorbidity, were associated with prosthesis-related QOL.

The prosthesis-related QOL of the lower-limb amputees 10 years after the 2008 Sichuan earthquake has been partly documented in this study. The potential demographic risk factors associated with QOL of amputees were also identified. These findings could enhance the understanding of prosthesis-related QOL of lower-limb amputees sustained in an earthquake and facilitate the optimization of post-disaster rehabilitation strategies.

The rejection of or non-compliance with treatment arises for different reasons by patients who receive treatment recommendations for various diseases. These states are described by various concepts, such as discharge against medical advice (DAMA) and medication nonadherence (MNA). The basis of the study is to determine how these states have arisen during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.

The data of this study were collected through standardized interviews with 103 volunteer participants who were diagnosed with COVID-19 at different times and who did not use their prescribed medicine during the pandemic in Turkey. The data obtained in the research were analyzed through the MAXQDA qualitative analysis program.

As a result of the analysis of the data, 4 main themes and sub-codes have been reached: (1) prescribed medicine, (2) an information source for the COVID-19 period/treatment, (3) the reason for medication nonadherence, and (4) treatment of choice. When the approach toward treatment of patients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 and had started treatment by a physician was evaluated, it was revealed that the nonadherence state emerged as a cycle. In the initial period, nonadherence due to the medication itself was observed. The second period is when the patients recognize their disease and collect information from their environment. Although this period begins before the disease, the search for informative sources intensifies, especially once the diagnosis has been received. In the third period, with their diagnosis and the information they had obtained, patients consider the reasons to use the medication and then decide whether or not to use it. In the fourth period, the patients who will not use antivirals consider other medications, such as anti-flu, anticoagulant, supplements, and nutrition.

Since a specific treatment protocol has not yet been revealed for COVID-19, a new conceptual framework is required. In the current condition, the state of “hesitation for medical advice” arises for non-hospitalized patients.

Health system preparedness for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) includes projecting the number and timing of cases requiring various types of treatment. Several tools were developed to assist in this planning process. This review highlights models that project both caseload and hospital capacity requirements over time.

We systematically reviewed the medical and engineering literature according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We completed searches using PubMed, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science, Google Scholar, and the Google search engine.

The search strategy identified 690 articles. For a detailed review, we selected 6 models that met our predefined criteria. Half of the models did not include age-stratified parameters, and only 1 included the option to represent a second wave. Hospital patient flow was simplified in all models; however, some considered more complex patient pathways. One model included fatality ratios with length of stay (LOS) adjustments for survivors versus those who die, and accommodated different LOS for critical care patients with or without a ventilator.

The results of our study provide information to physicians, hospital administrators, emergency response personnel, and governmental agencies on available models for preparing scenario-based plans for responding to the COVID-19 or similar type of outbreak.

Health-care workers (HCWs) are vulnerable to the risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infections, and the safety of HCWs is important in situations where a prolonged COVID-19 is expected.

HCWs were recently put in great danger around the globe; as of December 21, there were 306 confirmed cases in HCWs in South Korea, representing 0.60% of the total 50,591 confirmed cases nationally.

After experiencing Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), South Korea has put a range of infection prevention and control (IPC) measures with long-term perspectives in place, including the use of personal protective equipment (PPE), HCW’s infection status tracing, visitor control, and a variety of supports from both national and local public health authorities.

This article introduces the infection status of HCWs and IPC measures currently taken in South Korea, emphasizing the collaborative and long-term IPC efforts for ensuring the safety of HCWs.

The Saudi Red Crescent Authority (SRCA) plays a major role in the event of disasters and crisis, as it is the main pre-hospital health-care provider. This study reports on the attitude and perceptions of SRCA medical staff concerning their knowledge of disaster management and response.

This is a descriptive cross-sectional study performed in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. An Arabic version of the Disaster Preparedness Evaluation Tool (DPET), a self-administered Likert-scale survey, was used to obtain data from SRCA medical staff to evaluate the current status of disaster preparedness.

The population surveyed consisted of 302 participants; 20.9% had participated in a drill exercise or practical application of a regular disaster or emergency plan in their workplaces. Most of participants (85.3%) had incentives to extend their education regarding their role, scope of practice, and skills as medical staff in disaster situations.

Results indicate a lack of regular disaster drills available to prehospital care providers, although most of them are willing to participate in more training and education programs regarding preparedness for disaster management, especially concerning their role in a disaster situation.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has posed formidable challenges, including overwhelming biomedical waste management. Guidelines have been rapidly changing along with the mounting pressure of waste generation.

These challenges were managed by smart re-engineering of structure and processes for the desired outcomes. Dedicated staff, in personal protective equipment with appropriate training, were deployed to collect waste using dedicated trolleys. A dedicated route plan was drawn with a dedicated elevator meant for COVID-19. A new temporary holding area was created. Dedicated trucks with requisite labels were deployed to transport COVID-19 waste to a common biomedical waste treatment facility. Communication challenges were addressed through timely circulars, which were further reinforced and reiterated during various on-going training programs.

Before the onset of COVID-19 pandemic, the amount of biomedical waste generated was 1.93 kg/bed/day; currently, the quantity of COVID-19 biomedical waste generated is 7.76 kg/COVID bed/day. Daily COVID-19 waste generation data are maintained and uploaded in an android application monitored by Central Pollution Control Board, Government of India. To date, none of the workers handling COVID-19 waste has acquired health-care associated COVID-19 infection, which reflects on the soundness of the new system and the infection control practices in the institute.

A responsive leadership harmonizing with a robust communication and training system has augmented timely re-engineering of structure and processes for better outcomes in the war on waste.

Emergency medicine being a young specialty in India, we aimed to assess the level of disaster preparedness and planning strategies among various academic emergency departments (EDs) across India during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

A cross-sectional multicentric survey was developed and disseminated online to various academic EDs in India and followed up over a period of 8 wk. All results were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

Twenty-eight academic emergency medicine departments responded to the study. Compared with pre-COVID period, COVID-19 pandemic has led to 90% of centers developing separate triage system with dedicated care areas for COVID suspected/infected in 78.6% centers with nearly 70% using separate transportation pathways. Strategizing and executing the Institutional COVID-19 treatment protocol in 80% institutes were done by emergency physicians. Training exercises for airway management and personal protective equipment (PPE) use were seen in 93% and 80% centers, respectively. Marked variation in recommended PPE use was observed across EDs in India.

Our study highlights the high variance in the level of preparedness response among various EDs across India during the pandemic. Preparedness for different EDs across India needs to be individually assessed and planned according to the needs and resources available.

Volunteers need considerable resiliency to cope with formidable challenges during their operations in disaster scenes. The present study was conducted to identify factors affecting the different aspects of resiliency among volunteers in disasters.

The databases of Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, ProQuest, Google Scholar, World Health Organization Library, International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Library, PsycArticles, and SafetyLit were searched until September 29, 2018. The main search terms were resiliency, disaster, humanitarian aid worker, and volunteer.

A total of 548 documents were obtained and screened based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. A number of 8 documents was selected for the final analysis. The main factors contributing to the resilience of volunteers at the 3 stages of pre-, during, and post-disasters were classified into 3 groups of individual, environmental, and organizational. Important factors affecting resilience of volunteers in disasters included previous disaster response experience and disaster-related training.

Resiliency should be deemed integral to relief operations. Considering the main factors affecting volunteers’ resiliency, it is highly suggested that organizations active in humanitarian endeavors explore the factors impacting on resilience among their volunteers via various research methods and seek to select those with higher degrees of resilience in order to avert untoward consequences in their missions.

The aim of this study was to determine the extent that appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE), per Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance, was used during the coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic by health-care personnel (HCP) in Louisiana in 5 clinical settings.

An online questionnaire was distributed to the LA Nursery registry. Appropriate use of PPE in each of the 5 clinical scenarios was defined by the authors based on CDC guidelines. The scenarios ranged from communal hospital space to carrying out aerosol generating procedures (AGPs). A total of 1760 HCP participated between June and July 2020.

The average adherence in LA was lowest for the scenario of carrying out AGPs at 39.5% compliance and highest for the scenario of patient contact when COVID-19 not suspected at 82.8% compliance. Adherence among parishes varied widely. Commentary to suggest a shortage of PPE supply and the practice of re-using PPE was strong.

Use of appropriate PPE varied by setting. It was higher in scenarios where only face masks (or respirators) were the standard (ie, community hospital or when COVID-19 not suspected) and lower in scenarios where additional PPE (eg, gloves, eye protection, and isolation gown) was required.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the perceptions of residents who are knowledgeable about the schools used as shelters.

The target group was comprised of teachers and guardians of children enrolled in 4 schools, which were selected in the vicinity of District B, which was severely damaged by heavy rain in 2014. A qualitative descriptive study design was used.

The number of surveys collected was 1702 (collection rate 62.2%). A total of 1017 clauses were entered, and 85 codes were generated for 7 categories. The guardians and teachers believed that there was a discrepancy between shelter capacity and the real situation; citing a lack of information, and ill preparedness of the schools for disasters as some of the problems. Based on the knowledge and experiences from previous disasters, they responded that there was inadequate management, and evacuees faced difficulty living comfortably in the shelters.

In order to use school facilities during any disaster, it is important for residents to recognize the need to solve problems, and to work with local governments to support improvements. This realization reveals a sense of ownership of emergency shelters and prevents confusion among residents. Also, this will help people to prepare for disasters and prevent disruption during evacuation.

The purpose of this study is to identify key risk factors that could negatively affect public health emergency responders’ health and wellbeing. We seek to use this information to provide recommendations and strategies to mitigate such risks.

A narrative review of the peer-reviewed literature on wellbeing of military personnel and other responders was conducted. Data was grouped and categorized according to overarching domains.

Factors associated with wellbeing were categorized into 5 domains: (1) demographics; (2) mental health concerns; (3) social networks; (4) work environment; and (5) postdeployment life. The strategies identified to promote wellbeing included mental health assessments, preparedness trainings, debriefs in the field, postdeployment debriefs, resources in the field, and further postdeployment decompression strategies.

This study provides a unique understanding of the risk factors associated with poor health and wellbeing outcomes in public health emergency response work by extending the body of knowledge that focuses on other types of emergency and military response.

The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical characteristics and outcomes in 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients and to help clinicians perform correct treatment and evaluate prognosis and guide the treatment.

Patients totaling 239 were diagnosed with COVID-19 and were included in this study. Patients were divided into the improvement group and the death group according to their outcome (improvement or death). Clinical characteristics and laboratory parameters were collected from medical records. Continuous variables were tested by an independent sample T test, and categorical variables were analyzed by the chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test. The Cox proportional hazard regression model was used for survival analysis in death patients. The time-dependent area under curves (AUC) based on white blood cell count, lymphocyte count, neutrophil count by age, blood urea nitrogen, and C-reactive protein were plotted.

Efficacy evaluation indicated that 99 (41.4%) patients had deteriorated, and 140 (58.6%) patients had improved. Oxygen saturation, hemoglobin levels, infection-related indicators, lymphocyte and platelet counts, C-reactive protein, serum albumin, liver and kidney function, and lactate dehydrogenase in improvement group were statistically significant between the improvement and death groups. A survival analysis revealed that comorbidities, lymphocyte counts, platelet count, serum albumin, C-reactive protein level, and renal dysfunction may be risk factors in patients with COVID-19.

Patients with comorbidities, lower lymphocyte counts in hemogram, platelet count and serum albumin, high C-reactive protein level, and renal dysfunction may have higher risk for death. More attention should be given to risk management in the progression of COVID-19.