ArticleSingapore medical journal2022
Perceptions of healthcare workers in high-risk areas of a Singapore hospital during COVID-19: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Singapore medical journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety attitudes, burnout and well-being among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: an Indo-Pacific regional cross-sectional study.Singapore medical journal · 2023Article
- Healthcare workers as a sentinel surveillance population in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic.Singapore medical journal · 2022Article
- Success criteria and challenges of mobile radiography in the era of COVID-19 pandemic: A Singapore perspective.Journal of medical imaging and radiation sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: There is worldwide concern over the psycho-emotional impact of COVID-19 on healthcare workers (HCWs). This study aimed to elicit HCWs' perceptions of the adequacy of protective measures in high-risk clinical areas and the factors associated with these perceptions. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study conducted in April 2020. An anonymous electronic survey was sent via email to operating theatre (OT) and intensive care unit (ICU) staff of Sengkang General Hospital, Singapore. Results: Of the 358 eligible participants, 292 (81.6%) responded to the survey. 93.2% of the participants felt that precautionary measures at work were sufficient and 94.9% acknowledged that adequate training was provided. More than 60% of the participants opined that their chances of contracting COVID-19 were moderate to high. Female gender, nursing occupation and duration of service <10 years were significantly associated with increased fear of contracting COVID-19, less control over occupational exposure and lower perceived need to care for COVID-19 patients. Having young children at home did not significantly affect these perceptions. The most important ICU precautions were availability of personal protective equipment outside the rooms of COVID-19 positive patients (95.3%) and having visitor restrictions (95.3%). The most important OT measures were having a dedicated OT for COVID-19 positive patients (91.2%) and having simulation as part of protocol familiarisation (91.7%). Conclusion: Overall, there was high confidence in the adequacy of COVID-19 protective measures to prevent healthcare transmission in Singapore. The pandemic had a lower degree of psycho-emotional impact on HCWs here as compared to other countries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.