Introduction To avoid exposure to SARS-COV-2, healthcare professionals use personal protective equipment (PPE) while treating COVID-19 patients. Prior studies have revealed the adverse effects (AEs) of PPE on healthcare workers (HCWs); however, no review has focused on the AEs of PPE on HCWs in intensive care units (ICUs). This review aimed to identify the AEs of PPE on HCWs working in ICUs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods A scoping review was conducted. MEDLINE, CINAHL, the World Health Organization (WHO) global literature on COVID-19, and Igaku-chuo-zasshi (a Japanese medical database), Google Scholar, medRxiv, and Health Research Board (HRB) open research were searched from January 25–28, 2021. The extracted data included author(s) name, year of publication, country, language, article title, journal name, publication type, study methodology, population, outcome, and key findings. Results The initial search identified 691 articles and abstracts. Twenty-five articles were included in the analysis. The analysis comprised four key topics: studies focusing on PPE-related headache, voice disorders, skin manifestations, and miscellaneous AEs of PPE. The majority of AEs for HCWs in ICUs were induced by prolonged use of masks. Conclusion The AEs of PPE among HCWs in ICUs included heat, headaches, skin injuries, chest discomfort, and dyspnea. Studies with a focus on specific diseases were on skin injuries. Moreover, many AEs were induced by prolonged use of masks.

This study aimed to estimate the number of nurses who independently care for patients with severe respiratory failure receiving mechanical ventilation (MV) or veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO). Additionally, the study analyzed the actual role of nurses in the treatment of patients with MV and VV-ECMO. We performed a cross-sectional study using postal questionnaire surveys. The study included 725 Japanese intensive care units (ICUs). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Among the 725 ICUs, we obtained 302 responses (41.7%) and analyzed 282 responses. The median number of nurses per bed was 3.25. The median proportion of nurses who independently cared for patients with MV was 60% (IQR: 42.3–77.3). The median proportion of nurses who independently cared for patients with VV-ECMO was 46.9 (35.7–63.3%) in the ICUs that had experience with VV-ECMO use. With regard to task-sharing, 33.8% of ICUs and nurses did not facilitate weaning from MV. Nurses always titrated sedative dosage in 44.5% of ICUs. Nurse staffing might be inadequate in all ICUs, especially for the management of patients with severe respiratory failure. The proportion of competent nurses to care for severe respiratory failure in ICUs should be considered when determining the workforce of nurses.

Aim The aim of this study was to examine whether high social support has a protective effect on mental health for critical care nurses during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic. Methods This cross‐sectional anonymous web‐based survey was conducted from November 5 to December 5, 2020, in Japan and included critical care nurses. The invitation was distributed via mailing lists. Results Of the 334 responses that were obtained, 64.4% were from female respondents, and their mean age was 37.4. Of the total, 269 (80.5%) were taking care of COVID‐19 patients at the time the study was conducted. Participants with post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms were found to be older ( P < 0.05), and those with an education level of a 4‐year college degree or higher had fewer PTSD symptoms ( P < 0.05). Those experiencing anxiety and depressive symptoms had lower social support scores. Having a 4‐year college degree and higher (odds ratio [OR] 0.622, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39–0.99) was significantly associated with a lower probability of PTSD. Social support scores and the female sex were not associated with PTSD. Regarding anxiety symptoms, being female and having lower social support were independently associated with a higher probability. Regarding depression symptoms, lower social support was independently associated with a higher probability (OR 0.953, 95% CI 0.93–0.97). Conclusion It was found that social support was not associated with PTSD; however, it was associated with depression and anxiety symptoms for intensive care nurses during the COVID‐19 pandemic.

The present study clarified the structure of factors that affect grief reactions of families who experienced acute bereavement in critical care settings in Japan. Sixty-four families who experienced acute bereavement answered a questionnaire. The questionnaire included the Miyabayashi Grief Measurement, recognition of bereavement, Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support, and the Tri-Axial Coping Scale. We analyzed the causal structure regarding the relationship of stress recognition, coping, and grief reactions using structural equation modeling. The greatest influence on grief reactions of bereaved families was stress recognition. Factors that influenced stress recognition were subjective degree of sadness, acceptance of bereavement, regret for bereavement, and recognition of a peaceful death. These results show that the quality of end-of-life care in critical care settings is an important factor that affects bereaved families' stress recognition and grief reactions. Nurses and medical staff must provide end-of-life care to help family members accept the death of their loved one and reduce regrets as much as possible.

Optimal energy and protein delivery goals for critically ill patients remain unknown. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the impact of energy and protein delivery during the first 4 to 10 days of an ICU stay on physical impairments. We performed a systematic literature search of MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and ICHUSHI to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared energy delivery at a cut-off of 20 kcal/kg/day or 70% of estimated energy expenditure or protein delivery at 1 g/kg/day achieved within 4 to 10 days after admission to the ICU. The primary outcome was activities of daily living (ADL). Secondary outcomes were physical functions, changes in muscle mass, quality of life, mortality, length of hospital stay, and adverse events. Fifteen RCTs on energy delivery and 14 on protein were included in the analysis. No significant differences were observed in any of the outcomes included for energy delivery. However, regarding protein delivery, there was a slight improvement in ADL (odds ratio 21.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) −1.30 to 44.40, p = 0.06) and significantly attenuated muscle loss (mean difference 0.47, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.71, p < 0.0001). Limited numbers of RCTs were available to analyze the effects of physical impairments. In contrast to energy delivery, protein delivery ≥1 g/kg/day achieved within 4 to 10 days after admission to the ICU significantly attenuated muscle loss and slightly improved ADL in critically ill patients. Further RCTs are needed to investigate their effects on physical impairments.