Background The delivery of healthcare during the COVID pandemic has had a significant impact on front line staff. Nurses who work with respiratory patients, have been at the forefront of the pandemic response. Lessons can be learnt from these nurses’ experiences in order to support these nurses during the existing pandemic and retain and mobilise this skilled workforce for future pandemics. Methods This study explores UK nurses’ experiences of working in a respiratory environment during the COVID-19 pandemic. An e-survey was distributed via professional respiratory societies the survey included a resilience scale, the GAD7 (anxiety) and the PHQ9 (depression) tools. Demographic data was collected on age, gender, ethnicity, nursing experience and background, clinical role in the pandemic, and home-life and work balance. Results Two hundred and fifty-five responses were received for the survey, predominately women (89%, 226/255), aged over 35 (79%, 202/255). Nearly 21% (40/191) experiencing moderate to severe or severe symptoms of anxiety. Similar levels are seen for depression (15.7%, 30/191). 18.9% (34/180) had a low or very low resilience score. Regression analysis showed that for both depression and anxiety variables, age and years of qualification provided the best model fit.  Younger nurses with less experience have higher levels of anxiety and depression and had lower resilience. Conclusion This cohort experienced significant levels of anxiety and depression, with moderate to high levels of resilience. Support mechanisms and interventions need to be put in place to support all nurses during pandemic outbreaks, particularly younger or less experienced staff.

BackgroundNurses have been at the forefront of the pandemic response, involved in extensive coordination of services, screening, vaccination and front-line work in respiratory, emergency and intensive care environments. The nature of this work is often intense and stress-provoking with an inevitable psychological impact on nurses and all healthcare workers. This study focused on nurses working in respiratory areas with the aim of identifying and characterising the self-reported issues that exacerbated or alleviated their concerns during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsAn online survey was developed consisting of 90 questions using a mixture of open-ended and closed questions. Participant demographic data were also collected (age, gender, ethnicity, number of years qualified, details of long-term health conditions, geographical location, nursing background/role and home life). The online survey was disseminated via social media and professional respiratory societies (British Thoracic Society, Primary Care Respiratory Society, Association of Respiratory Nurse Specialists) over a 3-week period in May 2020 and the survey closed on 1 June 2020.ResultsThe study highlights the experiences of nurses caring for respiratory patients during the first wave of the pandemic in early 2020. Concerns were expressed over the working environment, the supply and availability of adequate protective personal equipment, the quality of care individuals were able to deliver, and the impact on mental health to nurses and their families. A high number provided free-text comments around their worries and concerns about the impact on their household; these included bringing the virus home, the effect on family members worrying about them, mental health and the impact of changing working patterns, and managing with children. Although both formal and informal support were available, there were inconsistencies in provision, highlighting the importance of nursing leadership and management in ensuring equity of access to services.ConclusionsSupport for staff is essential both throughout the pandemic and afterwards, and it is important that preparation of individuals regarding building resilience is recognised. It is also clear that psychological support and services for nurses and the wider healthcare team need to be available and quickly convened in the event of similar major incidents, either global or local.

COPD remains largely undiagnosed or is diagnosed late in the course of disease. We report findings of a specialist outreach programme to identify undiagnosed COPD in primary care. An electronic case-finding algorithm identified 1602 at-risk patients from 12 practices who were invited to attend the clinic. Three hundred and eighty-three (23.9%) responded and 288 were enrolled into the study. Forty-eight (16.6%) had undiagnosed mild and 28 (9.7%) had moderate airway obstruction, meeting spirometric diagnostic criteria for COPD. However, at 12 months only 8 suspected COPD patients (10.6%) had received a diagnostic label in their primary care record. This constituted 0.38% of the total patient population, as compared with 0.31% of control practices, p = 0.306. However, if all patients with airway obstruction received a coding of COPD, then the diagnosis rate in the intervention group would have risen by 0.84%. Despite the low take-up and diagnostic yield, this programme suggests that integrated case-finding strategies could improve COPD recognition.