The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has exposed nurses to conditions that threaten their health, well-being, and ability to work. It is therefore critical to study nurses’ experiences and well-being during the current crisis in order to identify risk groups for ill health and potential sources of organizational intervention. The aim of this study was to explore perceptions of the most salient sources of stress in the early stages of the coronavirus pandemic in a sample of U.S. nurses. A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among a sample of 695 U.S. nurses in May 2020. Content analysis was conducted on nurses’ responses (n = 455) to an open-ended question on the most stressful situations they had experienced during the pandemic. Six distinct themes emerged from the analysis: exposure/infection-self; illness/death-others; workplace; personal protective equipment/supplies; unknowns; opinions/politics. Two sub-themes concerned restrictions associated with the pandemic and feelings of inadequacy/helplessness regarding patients and their treatment. More than half of all comments concerned stress related to problems in workplace response to the pandemic. Healthcare institutions should provide opportunities for nurses to discuss the stress they are experiencing, support one another, and make suggestions for workplace adaptations during this pandemic.

Objective: Healthcare is battling a conflict between the Quadruple Aims—reducing costs; improving population health, patient experience, and team well-being—and productivity. This quasi-experimental pilot study tested a 2 week intervention aimed to address the Quadruple Aims while improving productivity. Participants were 25 employees and their patients in a primary care clinic. One provider and their team implemented an efficiency-focused intervention that modified work roles and processes focused on utilizing all team members’ skills as allowable by applicable licensure restrictions. The five remaining providers and their teams comprised the reference group, who continued patient care as usual. Study outcomes were measured via provider/staff and patient surveys and administrative data. Results: In total, 46 team surveys and 156 patient surveys were collected. Clinic output data were retrieved for 467 visits. Compared to the reference team, the intervention team performed better in all Quadruple Aims and productivity measures. The intervention group offered 48% more patient slots than the average reference team. These preliminary results support the feasibility of introducing substantial process changes that show promising improvement in both the Quadruple Aims and productivity. A larger-scale study over a longer time period is needed to confirm findings and examine feasibility and cost-effectiveness.

Background: There has been a substantial decline in in-person care in inpatient and outpatient settings during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Avoidance of needed in-person care may contribute to an avoidable decline in patient health and an increase in mortality. While several systems and behavioral theories have been put forward to explain the decline, there is a lack of studies informed by patients’ own experiences. The current study applied a socio-ecological model encompassing patient, environmental, and institutional-related variables to examine patient-reported factors associated with avoidance of in-person care. Methods: Between October and December 2020, a total of 3840 persons responded to a nationwide online questionnaire that was administered using ResearchMatch and Facebook. Self-reported avoidance of in-person care among those who needed it was the main outcome. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with avoidance of needed care. Findings: Out of a total of 3372 respondents who reported that they needed in-person care during the early phase of the pandemic, 257 (7.6%) avoided it. Patient-related variables associated with avoiding needed care included younger age (odds ratio (OR), 1.46, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.94, p<0.01; <45 y/o vs 45+), inability to afford care (OR = 1.65, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.34, p<0.01), and greater COVID-related stress (OR = 1.36, CI 1.01 to 1.83, p<0.05). More frequent discussions about COVID with family and friends was the only significant environment-related avoidance of care variable (OR = 1.39, 95% CI 1.01–1.91, p < .05). Institution-related care avoidance variables included a negative patient healthcare experience rating (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.38 to 2.42, p<0.001), poor awareness of the institution’s safety protocol (OR = 1.79, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.51, p<0.01), and low ratings of the institution’s effectiveness in communicating their safety protocol (OR = 3.45, 95% CI 1.94 to 6.12, p<0.001). The final model predicted 11.9% of the variance in care avoidance. Conclusions: These results suggest that care avoidance of in-person care during the initial phase of the pandemic was influenced by a patient’s demographics as well as environmental and healthcare institutional factors. Patients’ previous experiences and their awareness of healthcare systems’ safety protocols are important factors in care avoidance.

(1) Background: There is increasing scholarly support for the notion that properly implemented and used, technology can be of substantial benefit for older adults. Use of technology has been associated with improved self-rating of health and fewer chronic conditions. Use of technology such as handheld devices by older adults has the potential to improve engagement and promote cognitive and physical health. However, although, literature suggests some willingness by older adults to use technology, simultaneously there are reports of a more cautious attitude to its adoption. Our objective was to determine the opinions towards information technologies, with special reference to brain health, in healthy older adults either fully retired or still working in some capacity including older adult workers and retired adults living in an independent elderly living community. We were especially interested in further our understanding of factors that may play a role in technology adoption and its relevance to addressing health related issues in this population; (2) Methods: Two focus groups were conducted in an inner-city community. Participants were older adults with an interest in their general health and prevention of cognitive decline. They were asked to discuss their perceptions of and preferences for the use of technology. Transcripts were coded for thematic analysis; (3) Results: Seven common themes emerged from the focus group interviews: physical health, cognitive health, social engagement, organizing information, desire to learn new technology, advancing technology, and privacy/security; and (4) Conclusions: This study suggests that in order to promote the use of technology in older adults, one needs to consider wider contextual issues, not only device design per se, but the older adult’s rationale for using technology and their socio-ecological context.

There is growing evidence that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a severe impact on the nursing profession worldwide. Occupational strain has disrupted nurses’ emotional wellbeing and may have led to negative coping behaviors, such as increased substance use, which could impair cognitive functioning. The aim of this study was to examine whether increased substance use in a sample of U.S. nurses during the pandemic was related to greater workplace cognitive failure. An online questionnaire was administered in May 2020 to Michigan nurses statewide via three nursing organizations (n = 695 respondents). A path model was used to test the direct effects of reported increased substance use on workplace cognitive failure and via parallel psychological mediators. The model had excellent fit to the observed data, with statistically significant, unique mediating effects of greater symptoms of anxiety (b = 0.236, z = 2.22, p = 0.027), posttraumatic stress disorder (b = 0.507, z = 4.62, p < 0.001) and secondary trauma (b = 1.10, z = 2.82, p = 0.005). Importantly, the direct effect of increased substance use on workplace cognitive failure was not statistically significant independent of the mediators (b = 0.133, z = 0.56, p = 0.576; 95% confidence interval: −0.33, 0.60). These results point to the importance of further delineating the mechanistic pathways linking adverse stress to workplace cognitive failure. As we emerge from the pandemic, healthcare systems should focus resources on supporting cognitive health by addressing the psychological and emotional welfare of nurses, many of whom may be struggling with residual trauma and increased substance use.

Numerous studies provide evidence of the physical and emotional strain experienced by nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, little is known regarding the impact of this occupational strain on nurses’ cognitive function at work. The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with workplace cognitive failure in a sample of U.S. nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic. An online questionnaire was administered in May 2020 to Michigan nurses statewide via three nursing organizations (n = 695 respondents). Path analysis was conducted to test the parallel effects of frequency of contact with COVID patients and personal protective equipment (PPE) supply on workplace cognitive failure scores. Mediation effects of stress, sleep quality, secondary trauma, and work-related exhaustion were examined for each exposure. Results revealed significant indirect effects of all mediators except sleep quality of contact with COVID patients (cumulative indirect effect = 1.30, z = 6.33, p < 0.001) and PPE (cumulative indirect effect = −2.10, z = −5.22, p < 0.001) on cognitive failure. However, 58% of the PPE effect was direct. To reduce the risk of cognitive failure, healthcare organizations need to provide nurses with protective equipment and work environments that allow nurses to strengthen their resilience to extreme working conditions.