Various changes have affected health services delivery in response to the repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic, and this may exhibit unprecedented effects on healthcare workers (HCWs). This study aimed to explore the lived experience of physicians and nurses caring for patients with COVID-19 in Jordan. An interpretative phenomenology approach was used, and sampling was purposively performed. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews using an online meeting platform (Zoom®). Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed. The data were obtained from 26 physicians and nurses caring for patients with COVID-19. The mean age of the participants was 29.41 years (SD = 2.72). Six main themes and 17 subthemes were identified: (i) emotional reactions; (ii) preparation; (iii) source of support; (iv) extreme workload; (v) occupational challenges, and (vi) work-related concerns. The results showed that nurses and physicians caring for COVID-19 patients in Jordan were experiencing mental and emotional distress and were practicing under inadequate work conditions. This distress could be multifactorial with personal, organizational, or cultural origins. Our findings may guide policymakers to consider the potential factors that significantly affect working environment in healthcare settings, the physical and mental wellbeing of HCWs, and the required professional training that can help in enhancing resilience and coping strategies amidst crises.

Background The balanced scorecard (BSC) has been implemented to evaluate the performance of health care organizations (HCOs). BSC proved to be effective in improving financial performance and patient satisfaction. Aim This systematic review aims to identify all the perspectives, dimensions, and KPIs that are vital and most frequently used by health care managers in BSC implementations. Methods This systematic review adheres to PRISMA guidelines. The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases and Google search engine were inspected to find all implementations of BSC at HCO. The risk of bias was assessed using the nonrandomized intervention studies (ROBINS-I) tool to evaluate the quality of observational and quasi-experimental studies and the Cochrane (RoB 2) tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Results There were 33 eligible studies, of which we identified 36 BSC implementations. The categorization and regrouping of the 797 KPIs resulted in 45 subdimensions. The reassembly of these subdimensions resulted in 13 major dimensions: financial, efficiency and effectiveness, availability and quality of supplies and services, managerial tasks, health care workers' (HCWs) scientific development error-free and safety, time, HCW-centeredness, patient-centeredness, technology, and information systems, community care and reputation, HCO building, and communication. On the other hand, this review detected that BSC design modification to include external and managerial perspectives was necessary for many BSC implementations. Conclusion This review solves the KPI categorization dilemma. It also guides researchers and health care managers in choosing dimensions for future BSC implementations and performance evaluations in general. Consequently, dimension uniformity will improve the data sharing and comparability among studies. Additionally, despite the pandemic negatively influencing many dimensions, the researchers observed a lack of comprehensive HCO performance evaluations. In the same vein, although some resulting dimensions were assessed separately during the pandemic, other dimensions still lack investigation. Last, BSC dimensions may play an essential role in tackling the COVID-19 pandemic. However, further research is required to investigate the BSC implementation effect in mitigating the pandemic consequences on HCO.

Background Balanced Scorecard (BSC) has been implemented for three decades to evaluate and improve the performance of organizations. To the best of the researchers’ knowledge, no previous systematic review has performed a comprehensive and rigorous methodological approach to figure out the impact of BSC implementation in Health Care Organizations (HCO). Aims The current work was intended to assess the impact of implementing the BSC on Health Care Workers’ (HCW) satisfaction, patient satisfaction, and financial performance. Methods The authors prepared the present systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines. Further, the authors customized the search strategy for PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Google Scholar databases, and Google’s search engine. The obtained studies were screened to isolate those measuring scores related to HCW satisfaction, patient satisfaction, and financial performance. The Risk of Bias (RoB) in the non-Randomized Intervention Studies (ROBINS-I) tool was used to assess the quality of observational and quasi-experimental studies. On the other hand, for the Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs), the Cochrane (RoB 2) tool was used. Results Out of 4031 studies, the researchers included 20 studies that measured the impact of BSC on one or more of the three entities (HCW satisfaction, patient satisfaction, and financial performance). Throughout these 20 studies, it was found that 17 studies measured the impact of the BSC on patient satisfaction, seven studies measured the impact on HCW satisfaction, and 12 studies measured the impact on financial performance. Conclusion This systematic review provides managers and policymakers with evidence to support utilizing BSC in the health care sector. BSC implementation demonstrated positive outcomes for patient satisfaction and the financial performance of HCOs. However, only a mild impact was demonstrated for effects related to HCW satisfaction. However, it is worth noting that many of the studies reflected a high RoB, which may have affected the impacts on the three primary outcomes measured. As such, this systematic review reflects the necessity for further focus on this area in the future. Moreover, future research is encouraged to measure the real and current impact of implementing BSC in HCO during the pandemic since we did not find any.

Background Nurses’ burnout might affect their quality of life, productivity and nursing care services. Aim The aim of this systematic review was to systemically review the relationship between nurses’ burnout and quality of life and to introduce practical recommendations to reduce nurses’ BO and improve their QOL. Methods In April 2021, MeSH terms (("Nurses"[Mesh]) AND "Burnout, Professional"[Mesh]) AND "Quality of Life"[Majr] were used to search five electronic databases: CINAHL, PubMed, Medline, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection and Google Scholar. Results The search produced 21 studies exploring nurses’ burnout and their quality of life within the last ten years (2009–2021). Most of these studies found significant relationships between the burnout dimension(s) and quality of life dimension(s) among the nurses. Conclusion Nurses have moderate to high levels of burnout and were negatively associated with poor quality of life. Interventional programs are needed to decrease nurses’ burnout and improve their quality of life.

Background Huge efforts are being made to control the spread and impacts of the coronavirus pandemic using vaccines. However, willingness to be vaccinated depends on factors beyond the availability of vaccines. The aim of this study was three-folded: to assess children’s rates of COVID-19 Vaccination as reported by parents, to explore parents’ attitudes towards children’s COVID-19 vaccination, and to examine the factors associated with parents’ hesitancy towards children’s vaccination in several countries in the Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR). Methods This study utilized a cross-sectional descriptive design. A sample of 3744 parents from eight countries, namely, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia (KSA), and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), was conveniently approached and surveyed using Google forms from November to December 2021. The participants have responded to a 42-item questionnaire pertaining to socio-demographics, children vaccination status, knowledge about COVID-19 vaccines, and attitudes towards vaccinating children and the vaccine itself. The Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS- IBM, Chicago, IL, USA) was used to analyze the data. A cross-tabulation analysis using the chi-square test was employed to assess significant differences between categorical variables and a backward Wald stepwise binary logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the independent effect of each factor after controlling for potential confounders. Results The prevalence of vaccinated children against COVID-19 was 32% as reported by the parents. Concerning parents’ attitudes towards vaccines safety, about one third of participants (32.5%) believe that all vaccines are not safe. In the regression analysis, children’s vaccination was significantly correlated with parents’ age, education, occupation, parents’ previous COVID-19 infection, and their vaccination status. Participants aged ≥50 years and those aged 40-50 years had an odds ratio of 17.9 (OR = 17.9, CI: 11.16-28.97) and 13.2 (OR = 13.2, CI: 8.42-20.88); respectively, for vaccinating their children compared to those aged 18-29 years. Parents who had COVID-19 vaccine were about five folds more likely to vaccinate their children compared with parents who did not receive the vaccine (OR = 4.9, CI: 3.12-7.70). The prevalence of children’s vaccination in the participating Arab countries is still not promising. Conclusion To encourage parents, vaccinate their children against COVID-19, Arab governments should strategize accordingly. Reassurance of the efficacy and effectiveness of the vaccine should target the general population using educational campaigns, social media, and official TV and radio channels.