As US hospitals make the necessary shuffle to accommodate the current wave, I would like to remind leadership about the study done on the psychological status of frontline hospital workers during NYC's spring Covid surge (thread).

As expected, many participants reported stress, anxiety, and depression. But the study also looked into *what* exactly made participants feel distressed. https://t.co/ZHCbh10pBG
This graph is showing % of participants who found these factors "highly distressing." Note in the work environment section (blue) the number of things that rank higher than patient deaths.
These include:
- Perceptions of a lack of control and/or uncertainty
- Performing clinical work that is outside of your specialty
- The need/expectation for healthcare providers to provide social support to patients in lieu of their families (due to visitation restrictions)
- Difficult triage decisions or rationing of care (potential or actual) due to resource scarcity
- And also fears related to getting/transmitting Covid within the work environment - in particular, the uncertain Covid status of other healthcare providers
I bring this up because I think there are some good lessons here from Wave 1 for hospital leaders facing Wave 3.
First, if the #1 source of distress is loss of control and uncertainty, than people need as much control and certainty as possible. Transparency, minimal bullshit, problems stated clearly and promptly. More information is better.
Whenever possible, decisions should be made after engagement of multiple stakeholders, and with opportunity for feedback and changing course. We didn't always have time for that in Wave 1. But we had intervening months to learn better approaches in the period since.
Examples of pediatricians seeing adults, radiologists deployed to the ICU have been thrown out there as a signal for hospital system overload. I don't think we have really stopped to acknowledge how distressing it is to be asked to practice outside of your usual scope of work.
Hospital leadership needs to treat this like the very big deal it is, and provide concrete support for rapid skill development and psychological distress beyond "please watch these YouTube videos, phone a friend, you'll be fine."
HCWs at this point should know the range of resources they have to support patients who are isolated from their loved ones and also the processes and bodies that support triage / ethical decision-making in the setting of scarce resources.
But if they do not exist, if they are not sufficient, or if they are not sufficiently communicated, this needs to happen ASAP.
There are two other things I'd point out from the study. First, note how low the clinical hours worked was on the "highly distressed" chart. It's a concern, for sure, but not the main thing. I suspect it's more of an issue at this point in the pandemic...
...when people are exhausted in every sense. But I also think that this is something we amply talk about, because it's familiar and we know how to talk about it. I've gotten my share of "we know this sucks but it's what we gotta do for x reasons, here comes second back-up" ...
And I wonder if there's less severe distress because leadership tends to talk about it clearly and plainly and without the vagueness, avoidance, or insincerity that seems to be used around other topics (like PPE use, or practicing out of specialty, or triage decisions).
The other thing from the study is >60% of participants reported feeling a high level of purpose and meaning. I think of this a lot. Because that's something HCWs bring to the table, an asset that is in some ways hospitals' to keep or lose.
And I think the way you eff that up is actually related to all of the above. When employees are treated like children rather than trusted and respected partners in the work, when they are subjected to unsafe situations without a good faith effort to fix them...
Cheery declarations of "remember, we're all in this together" or wellness Zooms or downloadable apps have no hope to sustain morale.
Once again, I have spoken.

More from Health

I applaud the #EUCancerPlan *BUT* caution: putting #meat 🥩 (a nourishing, evolutionary food) in the same box as 🚬 to solve a contemporary health challenge, would be basing policy on assumptions rather than robust data.

#FollowTheScience yes, but not just part of it!
THREAD👇


1/ Granted, some studies have pointed to ASSOCIATIONS of HIGH intake of red & processed meats with (slightly!) increased colorectal cancer incidence. Also, @WHO/IARC is often mentioned in support (usually hyperbolically so).

But, let’s have a closer look at all this! 🔍


2/ First, meat being “associated” with cancer is very different from stating that meat CAUSES cancer.

Unwarranted use of causal language is widespread in nutritional sciences, posing a systemic problem & undermining credibility.

3/ That’s because observational data are CONFOUNDED (even after statistical adjustment).

Healthy user bias is a major problem. Healthy middle classes are TOLD to eat less red meat (due to historical rather than rational reasons, cf link). So, they

4/ What’s captured here is sociology, not physiology.

Health-focused Westerners eat less red meat, whereas those who don’t adhere to dietary advice tend to have unhealthier lifestyles.

That tells us very little about meat AS SUCH being responsible for disease.

You May Also Like

These 10 threads will teach you more than reading 100 books

Five billionaires share their top lessons on startups, life and entrepreneurship (1/10)


10 competitive advantages that will trump talent (2/10)


Some harsh truths you probably don’t want to hear (3/10)


10 significant lies you’re told about the world (4/10)
🌿𝑻𝒉𝒆 𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒓𝒚 𝒐𝒇 𝒂 𝑺𝒕𝒂𝒓 : 𝑫𝒉𝒓𝒖𝒗𝒂 & 𝑽𝒊𝒔𝒉𝒏𝒖

Once upon a time there was a Raja named Uttānapāda born of Svayambhuva Manu,1st man on earth.He had 2 beautiful wives - Suniti & Suruchi & two sons were born of them Dhruva & Uttama respectively.
#talesofkrishna https://t.co/E85MTPkF9W


Now Suniti was the daughter of a tribal chief while Suruchi was the daughter of a rich king. Hence Suruchi was always favored the most by Raja while Suniti was ignored. But while Suniti was gentle & kind hearted by nature Suruchi was venomous inside.
#KrishnaLeela


The story is of a time when ideally the eldest son of the king becomes the heir to the throne. Hence the sinhasan of the Raja belonged to Dhruva.This is why Suruchi who was the 2nd wife nourished poison in her heart for Dhruva as she knew her son will never get the throne.


One day when Dhruva was just 5 years old he went on to sit on his father's lap. Suruchi, the jealous queen, got enraged and shoved him away from Raja as she never wanted Raja to shower Dhruva with his fatherly affection.


Dhruva protested questioning his step mother "why can't i sit on my own father's lap?" A furious Suruchi berated him saying "only God can allow him that privilege. Go ask him"