Abstract
Healthcare professionals (HCPs) are facing remarkable challenges in their daily work since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Being well prepared is crucial for dealing with such a pandemic. The aim of our study was to explore HCPs’ subjective perspectives on their professional action and coping strategies in critical care during the preparation and coping phase after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany.
Together with HCPs working in critical care, we collaboratively designed an interview study based on an ethnomethodological approach. We performed semi-structured qualitative interviews via telephone or video call and analysed the data based on grounded theory.
Our research interest was focused on HCPs (qualified nurses, physicians, medical students) working in critical care during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany between April and July 2020.
Our sample consisted of 39 HCPs (19 nurses, 17 physicians, three medical students, 18/39 female) from ten German federal states. All participants were involved in the acute care of COVID-19 infected patients in hospitals and had a mean professional experience of 14.8±10.1 years, 15 participants held a management position (e.g. senior physician or head nurse). We recruited participants via personal contacts and snowballing.
Initial and focused coding resulted in seven categories: Creating structural measures, handling operational changes, dealing with personal protective equipment, building up knowledge and skills, managing information, perceiving peer support and experiencing emotions.
Professional action and subjectively perceived preparedness (professional and emotional) interacted with each other. Their interrelation was not static, but rather dynamic and ambiguous according to the situation. The findings of our study can be beneficial in developing guidelines, policy interventions or personnel and work practice strategies.
Competing Interest Statement
CA is principal investigator of a study which develops and pilot tests an intensive care follow-up clinic. Further, he is spokesperson of the working group "Intensive care and critical illness" of the German Network Health Services Research, and member of the Scientific Advisory Board of the Eric project. All other authors declare no conflict of interest.
Funding Statement
Intramural funding was used to support the study.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
We received ethical approval for our research from the institutional review boards of the University of Magdeburg (51/20) as well as the University of Regensburg (20-1771-101) before we performed the first interview.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Duplicated figures one and two were removed. Headings of table one were updated. Conflict of interest statement was updated (all other authors declare no conflicts).
Data Availability
Data can be obtained from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
