METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted in a tertiary teaching hospital and recruited all emergency personnel. A validated questionnaire on knowledge and attitude towards identification and management of SIRS/sepsis was distributed among 120 emergency personnel. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.
RESULTS: Overall finding founds emergency nurses and assistant medical officer appeared to have moderate knowledge in several important areas of SIRS/sepsis identification and management. Majority of the emergency personnel have neutral attitudes, as they do not give enough importance towards identification of patients with SIRS and sepsis. The present study finding found that knowledge of clinical criteria and management of SIRS/sepsis was highest among assistant medical officers (p=0.02) and bachelor's degree holders (p=0.02) with emergency experience more than 5 years (p=0.03). A trend toward an increase in knowledge of SIRS and sepsis is significantly correlated with positive attitudes.
CONCLUSION: The emergency personnel demonstrated a moderate knowledge and neutral attitude toward identification and management of SIRS and sepsis. Therefore, the awareness and knowledge of SIRS and sepsis should be enhanced among emergency personnel in order to improve outcome.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional online study using a validated questionnaire was distributed to doctors (MD), assistant medical officers (AMO), and staff nurses (SN) at an urban tertiary Emergency Department. It comprised of 40 knowledge and 10 confidence-level questions related to resuscitation and airway management steps.
RESULTS: A total of 135 from 167 eligible EHCW were enrolled. 68.9% (n = 93) had high knowledge while 53.3% (n = 72) possessed high confidence level. Overall knowledge mean score was 32.96/40 (SD = 3.63) between MD (33.88±3.09), AMO (32.28±4.03), and SN (32.00±3.60), P= 0.025. EHCWs with a length of service (LOS) between 4-10 years had the highest knowledge compared to those with LOS <4-year (33.71±3.39 versus 31.21±3.19 P = 0.002). Airway-related knowledge was significantly different between the designations and LOS (P = 0.002 and P = 0.003, respectively). Overall, EHCW confidence level against LOS showed significant difference [F (2, 132) = 5.46, P = 0.005] with longer LOS showing better confidence. MD showed the highest confidence compared to AMO and SN (3.67±0.69, 3.53±0.68, 3.26±0.64) P = 0.049. The majority EHCW were confident in performing high-quality chest-compression, and handling of Personal Protective Equipment but less than half were confident in resuscitating, leading the resuscitation, managing the airway or being successful in first intubation attempt.
CONCLUSIONS: EHCW possessed good knowledge in airway and resuscitation of COVID-19 patients, but differed between designations and LOS. A longer LOS was associated with better confidence, but there were some aspects in airway management and resuscitation that needed improvement.