No abstract

The Covid-19 pandemic has placed unprecedented pressure on healthcare systems and workers around the world. Such pressures may impact on working conditions, psychological wellbeing and perception of safety. In spite of this, no study has assessed the relationship between safety attitudes and psychological outcomes. Moreover, only limited studies have examined the relationship between personal characteristics and psychological outcomes during Covid-19. From 22nd March 2020 to 18th June 2020, healthcare workers from the United Kingdom, Poland, and Singapore were invited to participate using a self-administered questionnaire comprising the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ), Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) to evaluate safety culture, burnout and anxiety/depression. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine predictors of burnout, anxiety and depression. Of 3,537 healthcare workers who participated in the study, 2,364 (67%) screened positive for burnout, 701 (20%) for anxiety, and 389 (11%) for depression. Significant predictors of burnout included patient-facing roles: doctor (OR 2.10; 95% CI 1.49–2.95), nurse (OR 1.38; 95% CI 1.04–1.84), and ‘other clinical’ (OR 2.02; 95% CI 1.45–2.82); being redeployed (OR 1.27; 95% CI 1.02–1.58), bottom quartile SAQ score (OR 2.43; 95% CI 1.98–2.99), anxiety (OR 4.87; 95% CI 3.92–6.06) and depression (OR 4.06; 95% CI 3.04–5.42). Significant factors inversely correlated with burnout included being tested for SARS-CoV-2 (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.51–0.82) and top quartile SAQ score (OR 0.30; 95% CI 0.22–0.40). Significant factors associated with anxiety and depression, included burnout, gender, safety attitudes and job role. Our findings demonstrate a significant burden of burnout, anxiety, and depression amongst healthcare workers. A strong association was seen between SARS-CoV-2 testing, safety attitudes, gender, job role, redeployment and psychological state. These findings highlight the importance of targeted support services for at risk groups and proactive SARS-CoV-2 testing of healthcare workers.

Objectives The strain on healthcare systems due to the COVID-19 pandemic has led to increased psychological distress among healthcare workers (HCWs). As this global crisis continues with little signs of abatement, we examine burnout and associated factors among HCWs. Design Cross-sectional survey study. Setting and Participants Doctors, nurses, allied health professionals, administrative and support staff in four public hospitals and one primary care service in Singapore 3 months after COVID-19 was declared a global pandemic. Methods Study questionnaire captured demographic and workplace environment information and comprised three validated instruments, namely the Oldenberg Burnout Inventory (OLBI), Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Multivariate mixed model regression analyses were employed to evaluate independent associations of mean OLBI-Disengagement and -Exhaustion scores. Further subgroup analysis was performed among redeployed HCWs. Results Among 11,286 invited HCWs, 3,075 valid responses were received, giving an overall response rate of 27.2%. Mean OLBI scores were 2.38 and 2.50 for Disengagement and Exhaustion respectively. Burnout thresholds in Disengagement and Exhaustion were met by 79.7% and 75.3% of respondents respectively. On multivariate regression analysis, Chinese or Malay ethnicity, HADS anxiety or depression scores ≥8, shifts lasting ≥8 hours and being redeployed were significantly associated with higher OLBI mean scores, while high SAQ scores were significantly associated with lower scores. Among redeployed HCWs, those redeployed to high-risk areas in a different facility (offsite) had lower burnout scores than those redeployed within their own work facility (onsite). A higher proportion of HCWs redeployed offsite assessed their training to be good or better compared to those redeployed onsite. Conclusions and Implications Every level of the healthcare workforce is susceptible to high levels of burnout during this pandemic. Modifiable workplace factors include adequate training, avoiding prolonged shifts ≥8 hours and promoting safe working environments. Mitigating strategies should target every level of the healthcare workforce including frontline and non-frontline staff. Addressing and ameliorating burnout among HCWs should be a key priority for the sustainment of efforts to care for patients in the face of a prolonged pandemic.

Highlights MMR vaccine uptake rates have dropped between 25.64% - 73.55% during COVID-19. A measles epidemic is a possibility due to reduction in community herd immunity. Urgent public health efforts are needed to maintain efficacious vaccine coverage.

Borderline ovarian tumors account for 15% of epithelial ovarian cancers and are different from invasive malignant carcinoma. Majority are early stage, occurring in women in the reproductive age group, where fertility is important. We reviewed retrospectively 247 such cases treated at the Gynaecological-Oncology Unit, KK Women's and Children's Hospital, between January 1991 and December 2004. The mean age was 38 years (16-89 years). Majority of the cases (92%) were FIGO stage I (Ia, 75%; Ib, 1%; and Ic, 16%). Seven (3.5%) patients were diagnosed as having stage II disease, six (2.5%) as stage IIIa, two (1%) as stage IIIb, and four (2%) as stage IIIc. Histological origin was as follows: mucinous (68%), serous (26%), endometrioid (2.6%), and clear cell (1.2%). Primary surgical procedures undertaken were as follows: hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (52%), unilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (33%), or ovarian cystectomy (15%). Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered in 13 patients (5.2% of cases), of which 4 patients were given chemotherapy only because of synchronous malignancies. There were six recurrences (2.4% of cases). Overall mean time to recurrence was 59 months. Recurrence rate for patients who underwent a primary pelvic clearance was 1.6% compared to fertility-sparing conservative surgery (3.3%; although P= 0.683). No significant difference was noted in recurrence and mortality between staged versus unstaged procedures. The overall survival rate was 98.0%. There were a total of five deaths (2.8%): three (1.5%) from invasive ovarian/peritoneal carcinoma and two from synchronous uterine malignancies. It appears that surgical resection is the mainstay of treatment, with conservative surgery where fertility is desired or pelvic clearance if the family is complete. Surgical staging is important to identify invasive extraovarian implants that portend an adverse prognosis. The role of adjuvant chemotherapy is not established.