Objectives We aimed to evaluate the personal, professional, and psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospital workers and their perceptions about mitigating strategies. Design Cross-sectional web-based survey consisting of (1) a survey of the personal and professional impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and potential mitigation strategies, and (2) two validated psychological instruments (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale [K10] and Impact of Events Scale Revised [IES-R]). Regression analyses were conducted to identify the predictors of workplace stress, psychological distress, and post-traumatic stress. Setting and participants Hospital workers employed at 4 teaching and 8 non-teaching hospitals in Ontario, Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results Among 1875 respondents (84% female, 49% frontline workers), 72% feared falling ill, 64% felt their job placed them at great risk of COVID-19 exposure, and 48% felt little control over the risk of infection. Respondents perceived that others avoided them (61%), reported increased workplace stress (80%), workload (66%) and responsibilities (59%), and 44% considered leaving their job. The psychological questionnaires revealed that 25% had at least some psychological distress on the K10, 50% had IES-R scores suggesting clinical concern for post-traumatic stress, and 38% fulfilled criteria for at least one psychological diagnosis. Female gender and feeling at increased risk due to PPE predicted all adverse psychological outcomes. Respondents favoured clear hospital communication (59%), knowing their voice is heard (55%), expressions of appreciation from leadership (55%), having COVID-19 protocols (52%), and food and beverages provided by the hospital (50%). Conclusions Hospital work during the COVID-19 pandemic has had important personal, professional, and psychological impacts. Respondents identified opportunities to better address information, training, and support needs.

As a part of the resettlement programme, three young men with learning disabilities and behaviour disorder moved to a flat in the community providing one‐to‐one staffing. A fourth man received respite care. A multi‐professional team evaluated various aspects of their care and found that they showed an increase in engaged behaviour, a decrease in disturbed behaviour reflected by increase in MRC‐HBS scores and a decrease in violent incidents. They also needed less psychotropic medication. Following resettlement, their relatives were more satisfied with the care they received and found visiting easier. The young men's quality of life had improved and staff morale was high.

Introduction The redeployment of the surgical workforce to support other frontline specialties was an integral part of the nationwide response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The R number is gradually increasing in different parts of the UK suggesting a second wave is imminent. Aimed to analyze the surgical emergency workload and provide recommendations for future redeployments. Method Three separate cohorts of adult emergency admissions; emergency admissions prior to lockdown (23rd of February to 22nd of March), 1 month after (23rd of March to 22nd of April) and 2 months after (23rd of April to 22nd of May). Data was collected regarding patient characteristics, duration of symptoms prior to presentation, clinical outcomes and compared between these groups. Results Notable initial decrease in admission per day (4.3 to 2.5) and interventional management (30%) during the 1st month of lockdown. A marked increase in 24-hour discharge rate (50%). These parameters begun to normalize by the 2nd month. The rate of overall conservative management gradually increased from 36.7% pre-lockdown to 60.9% at the 2nd month. Conclusions Providing elective work is cancelled, surgical teams could safely tolerate working with 30%-40% of original staffing level, which will need to be gradually increased to 50%-70% after 1 month.