在英国,卫生保健工作者对侧流装置检测和流感样疾病病假的态度:一个假设的基于场景的研究。

IF 3.9 3区 医学 Q1 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Katie Munro, Quisha Bustamante, Lucy Findlater, Dominic Sparkes, G James Rubin, Ana Atti, Sarah Foulkes, Susan Hopkins, Victoria Hall, Jasmin Islam
{"title":"在英国,卫生保健工作者对侧流装置检测和流感样疾病病假的态度:一个假设的基于场景的研究。","authors":"Katie Munro, Quisha Bustamante, Lucy Findlater, Dominic Sparkes, G James Rubin, Ana Atti, Sarah Foulkes, Susan Hopkins, Victoria Hall, Jasmin Islam","doi":"10.1016/j.jhin.2025.04.018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Widespread use of lateral flow device (LFD) testing of healthcare workers (HCW) during the COVID-19 pandemic allowed for rapid diagnosis, informing sickness absence.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>In winter 2023-24, we investigated HCW attitudes towards sickness absence based on LFD availability and results.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Within the SIREN (SARS-CoV-2 Immunity and Reinfection Evaluation) HCW cohort, participants were randomised into one of four hypothetical scenarios: waking-up with fever, cough, runny nose and: a) LFD unavailable b) LFD negative c) LFD positive for COVID-19 or d) LFD positive for influenza. For each scenario, participants were then asked if they would attend work, their rationale, when they would return to work, and their attitudes toward LFD use. Proportions were calculated to compare scenarios.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>5,357 participants were included, with similar demographics across scenarios. >80% would stay at home if COVID-19 or influenza LFD positive, 54% if testing was unavailable and 39% if LFD negative. The main reason for not taking leave was concern about increasing their colleagues' workload. For each scenario, most participants reported they would return to work only when feeling well enough. However, in the COVID-19 positive scenario, a higher proportion of participants reported they would wait 5 days before returning to work. 84% reported they would use an LFD before work if they had influenza-like illness symptoms, regardless of hospital policy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We demonstrate LFD results are useful in helping HCWs make decisions on whether to attend work if symptomatic. LFDs remain an important consideration in managing HCW infections and may reduce transmission of respiratory infections during winter.</p>","PeriodicalId":54806,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hospital Infection","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Healthcare worker attitudes to lateral flow device testing and sick leave for influenza-like illness in the UK: A hypothetical scenario-based study.\",\"authors\":\"Katie Munro, Quisha Bustamante, Lucy Findlater, Dominic Sparkes, G James Rubin, Ana Atti, Sarah Foulkes, Susan Hopkins, Victoria Hall, Jasmin Islam\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jhin.2025.04.018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Widespread use of lateral flow device (LFD) testing of healthcare workers (HCW) during the COVID-19 pandemic allowed for rapid diagnosis, informing sickness absence.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>In winter 2023-24, we investigated HCW attitudes towards sickness absence based on LFD availability and results.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Within the SIREN (SARS-CoV-2 Immunity and Reinfection Evaluation) HCW cohort, participants were randomised into one of four hypothetical scenarios: waking-up with fever, cough, runny nose and: a) LFD unavailable b) LFD negative c) LFD positive for COVID-19 or d) LFD positive for influenza. For each scenario, participants were then asked if they would attend work, their rationale, when they would return to work, and their attitudes toward LFD use. Proportions were calculated to compare scenarios.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>5,357 participants were included, with similar demographics across scenarios. >80% would stay at home if COVID-19 or influenza LFD positive, 54% if testing was unavailable and 39% if LFD negative. The main reason for not taking leave was concern about increasing their colleagues' workload. For each scenario, most participants reported they would return to work only when feeling well enough. However, in the COVID-19 positive scenario, a higher proportion of participants reported they would wait 5 days before returning to work. 84% reported they would use an LFD before work if they had influenza-like illness symptoms, regardless of hospital policy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We demonstrate LFD results are useful in helping HCWs make decisions on whether to attend work if symptomatic. LFDs remain an important consideration in managing HCW infections and may reduce transmission of respiratory infections during winter.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54806,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Hospital Infection\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Hospital Infection\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2025.04.018\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hospital Infection","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2025.04.018","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间,对卫生保健工作者(HCW)广泛使用侧流装置(LFD)检测可以快速诊断,通知病假。目的:在2023- 2024年冬季,我们调查了基于LFD可用性和结果的HCW对病假缺勤的态度。方法:在SIREN (SARS-CoV-2免疫和再感染评估)HCW队列中,参与者被随机分为四种假设情景之一:醒来时发烧、咳嗽、流鼻涕和:a) LFD不可用b) LFD阴性c) LFD COVID-19阳性或d) LFD流感阳性。对于每个场景,参与者随后被问及他们是否会上班,他们的理由,他们何时会返回工作岗位,以及他们对LFD使用的态度。计算比例是为了比较不同的情况。研究结果:5357名参与者参与其中,不同情况下的人口统计数据相似。如果COVID-19或流感LFD阳性,80%的人会呆在家里,如果无法检测,54%的人会呆在家里,如果LFD阴性,39%的人会呆在家里。不休假的主要原因是担心增加同事的工作量。对于每一种情况,大多数参与者都表示,他们只有在感觉足够好时才会回去工作。然而,在COVID-19阳性情景中,更高比例的参与者表示他们将等待5天才能重返工作岗位。84%的人报告说,如果他们有流感样疾病症状,不管医院的政策如何,他们都会在上班前使用LFD。结论:我们证明LFD结果有助于卫生保健工作者在出现症状时决定是否参加工作。lfd仍然是管理HCW感染的重要考虑因素,并可能减少冬季呼吸道感染的传播。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Healthcare worker attitudes to lateral flow device testing and sick leave for influenza-like illness in the UK: A hypothetical scenario-based study.

Background: Widespread use of lateral flow device (LFD) testing of healthcare workers (HCW) during the COVID-19 pandemic allowed for rapid diagnosis, informing sickness absence.

Aims: In winter 2023-24, we investigated HCW attitudes towards sickness absence based on LFD availability and results.

Methods: Within the SIREN (SARS-CoV-2 Immunity and Reinfection Evaluation) HCW cohort, participants were randomised into one of four hypothetical scenarios: waking-up with fever, cough, runny nose and: a) LFD unavailable b) LFD negative c) LFD positive for COVID-19 or d) LFD positive for influenza. For each scenario, participants were then asked if they would attend work, their rationale, when they would return to work, and their attitudes toward LFD use. Proportions were calculated to compare scenarios.

Findings: 5,357 participants were included, with similar demographics across scenarios. >80% would stay at home if COVID-19 or influenza LFD positive, 54% if testing was unavailable and 39% if LFD negative. The main reason for not taking leave was concern about increasing their colleagues' workload. For each scenario, most participants reported they would return to work only when feeling well enough. However, in the COVID-19 positive scenario, a higher proportion of participants reported they would wait 5 days before returning to work. 84% reported they would use an LFD before work if they had influenza-like illness symptoms, regardless of hospital policy.

Conclusion: We demonstrate LFD results are useful in helping HCWs make decisions on whether to attend work if symptomatic. LFDs remain an important consideration in managing HCW infections and may reduce transmission of respiratory infections during winter.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Hospital Infection
Journal of Hospital Infection 医学-传染病学
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
5.80%
发文量
271
审稿时长
19 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Hospital Infection is the editorially independent scientific publication of the Healthcare Infection Society. The aim of the Journal is to publish high quality research and information relating to infection prevention and control that is relevant to an international audience. The Journal welcomes submissions that relate to all aspects of infection prevention and control in healthcare settings. This includes submissions that: provide new insight into the epidemiology, surveillance, or prevention and control of healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial resistance in healthcare settings; provide new insight into cleaning, disinfection and decontamination; provide new insight into the design of healthcare premises; describe novel aspects of outbreaks of infection; throw light on techniques for effective antimicrobial stewardship; describe novel techniques (laboratory-based or point of care) for the detection of infection or antimicrobial resistance in the healthcare setting, particularly if these can be used to facilitate infection prevention and control; improve understanding of the motivations of safe healthcare behaviour, or describe techniques for achieving behavioural and cultural change; improve understanding of the use of IT systems in infection surveillance and prevention and control.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信