ABSTRACT
Objectives This study was conducted to explore the perspectives and opinions of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) nurses and doctors at a COVID-19 designated pandemic hospital concerning the preparedness and response to COVID-19 and to consolidate the lessons learnt for crisis/disaster management in the future.
Design A qualitative study using in-depth interviews (IDIs) and focus group discussions (FGDs). Purposeful sampling was conducted to identify participants. A semi-structured guide was utilised to facilitate in-depth interviews with individual participants. Two focus group discussions were conducted, one with the ICU doctors and another with the ICU nurses. Thematic analysis identified themes and subthemes informing about the level of preparedness, response measures, processes, and factors that were either facilitators or those that triggered challenges.
Setting ICU in a quaternary referral centre affiliated to a university teaching COVID-19 designated pandemic hospital, in Adelaide, South Australia.
Participants The participants included eight ICU doctors and eight ICU nurses for the in-depth interviews. Another sixteen clinicians participated in focus group discussions.
Results The study identified six themes relevant to preparedness for, and responses to, COVID-19. The themes included: (1) Staff competence and planning, (2) Information transfer and communication, (3) Education and skills for the safe use of PPE, (4) Team dynamics and clinical practice, (5) leadership, and (6) Managing End-of life situations and expectations of caregivers.
Conclusion Findings highlight that preparedness and response to the COVID-19 crisis were proportionate to the situation’s gravity. More enablers than barriers were identified. However, opportunities for improvement were recognised in the domains of planning, logistics, self-sufficiency with equipment, operational and strategic oversight, communication, and managing end-of-life care.
Strengths and limitations of this study
This is the first study that provided insights about clinicians’ perspectives and viewpoints to preparing and responding to COVID-19 in Australia.
The study used qualitative methodological framework allowing participants to provide in-depth accounts of processes and enabling factors and barriers.
Our study provides information on issues that needs to be addressed from a critical care viewpoint and interventions that were effective and efficient
This is a single-center study in a developed country where experience is vastly different from other centers with higher demand and fewer resources
We acknowledge the potential for selection bias because of the qualitative design
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Not applicable
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:
Central Adelaide Local Health Network, Human Research Ethics Committee (Reference number 13363).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
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
Funding source(s): None
Conflict of interest statement: None
Declarations: None
Patient or substitute decision maker’s consent for publication: Not applicable
Data sharing statement: Data has been stored with the University of Adelaide repository and will be provided on request
Data Availability
https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.rbnzs7hch.
