The success of telemedicine depends on awareness among doctors on how to implement it. We aimed to assess knowledge about national telemedicine guidelines in pediatricians during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. A cross-sectional study of pediatricians across India was conducted through a structured online questionnaire containing 16 marks. The mean knowledge score (KS) was calculated. Participants were divided into two groups: poor KS (KS <8) and good KS (KS ≥8). The association between factors and KS was assessed using univariate analysis. A total of 503 pediatricians participated (private sector: 80.7% and public sector: 19.3%). Most (61%) belonged to the age group of 31-50 years and were males (75%). The minimum educational qualification was a Doctor of Medicine (MD) in 57% of cases. Despite work experience of more than 5 years in most (70%) of the cases, very few had provided teleconsultation before the pandemic (13.9%). The mean KS was 10.60 ± 2.8, that is, 66.25%. The minimum KS was 1 (6.25%), and the maximum was 16 (100%). Assam, Chandigarh, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Odisha, Sikkim, and Tamil Nadu showed higher knowledge than other states, although no significant difference was found. The majority (89.1%) had good KS, which is significantly higher among private practitioners as compared to public practitioners. There was no association between KS and age, gender, qualification, and work experience. Pediatricians have good information regarding telemedicine guidelines in India; however, training programs will further empower doctors working in the public sector.

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Medical faculties have the responsibility to train tomorrow\'s doctors and in a crisis face the challenge of delivering students into the workforce promptly and safely. Worldwide, medical faculties have faced unprecedented disruptions from viral outbreaks and pandemics including SARS, Ebola, H1N1 and COVID-19 which bring unique challenges. Currently there is worldwide disruption to medical faculties and medical education due to COVID-19. Despite close links with clinical medicine and the known risks of pandemics, many medical faculties have been caught off guard without pandemic planning in place, to deal with an exponential rise in infections and deaths, overwhelmed health services and widespread community risk of transmission. Assessing transmission risk of COVID-19 in teaching, clinical and community attachments and continuing medical education is paramount as medical faculties face subsequent pandemics waves. Consensus statements based on best available evidence and international expertise from medical faculties in Asia, Australia and Europe were developed to help guide the protection of staff and students, priorities on teaching activities and further educational development. Infection prevention, infection control, contact tracing and medical surveillance are detailed to minimise transmission and to enhance safety. Recommendations on teaching activities planning can enhance responsiveness of medical faculties to tackle subsequent waves of COVID-19 infection. A global approach and dialogue are encouraged.

UNASSIGNED: We explored the influence of the \"Ten new guidelines\" on healthcare workers\' preparedness, work impact, personal life impact, concerns, and support in Taizhou, China.
UNASSIGNED: A hospital-based self-administered online survey was conducted to investigate the levels of COVID-19 related experience among healthcare workers in December 2022. In total, 472 out of 2080 healthcare workers (22.7 % response rate) completed the questionnaires with valid responses. Stepwise linear regression was used to investigate the independence of factors associated with preparedness, work impact, personal life impact, concerns, and support.
UNASSIGNED: The results revealed that working position (p < 0.001), pressure (p = 0.005), and negative affect (p < 0.001) were significantly associated with preparedness. Working position (p = 0.015), number of children (p = 0.040), working years (p = 0.019), COVID-19 risk perception (p < 0.001), work overload (p < 0.001), and negative affect (p < 0.001) were significantly associated with work impact. In addition, COVID-19 risk perception (p < 0.001), work overload (p < 0.001), pressure (p = 0.002), history of COVID-19 infection (p = 0.008), and awareness of possible infectious time (p = 0.031) were significantly associated with personal life impact. COVID-19 risk perception (p < 0.001), negative affect (p < 0.001), and work overload (p = 0.020) were significantly associated with concerns. Sex (p = 0.020) and negative affect (p = 0.016) were significantly associated with support.
UNASSIGNED: Negative affect was the most significant factor associated with COVID-19 related questions among healthcare workers under \"Ten new guidelines\" during COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic required a rapid and effective response. This included ethical and legally appropriate sharing of data. The European Commission (EC) called upon the Research Data Alliance (RDA) to recruit experts worldwide to quickly develop recommendations and guidelines for COVID-related data sharing. Purpose: The purpose of the present work was to explore how the RDA succeeded in engaging the participation of its community of scientists in a rapid response to the EC request. Methods: A survey questionnaire was developed and distributed among RDA COVID-19 work group members. A mixed-methods approach was used for analysis of the survey data. Results: The three constructs of radical collaboration (inclusiveness, distributed digital practices, productive and sustainable collaboration) were found to be well supported in both the quantitative and qualitative analyses of the survey data. Other social factors, such as motivation and group identity were also found to be important to the success of this extreme collaborative effort. Conclusions: Recommendations and suggestions for future work were formulated for consideration by the RDA to strengthen effective expert collaboration and interdisciplinary efforts.

Perceived severity and susceptibility of disease are predictors of individual behaviour during health crises. Little is known about how individual beliefs influence intentions to adhere to public health guidelines during periods of health crises, and how access to and consumption of information influence these intentions. This study investigated behavioural beliefs, normative beliefs, and control beliefs, and their influence on behavioural intentions to adhere to public health guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Participants were recruited from a related COVID-19 study conducted by our team, and through snowball sampling in subsequent. Using a maximum variation sampling technique, we recruited a diverse group of participants representing six major regions in Canada. Participants took part in one-on-one semi-structured interviews from February 2021 to May 2021. Data were analyzed independently in duplicate by thematic analysis. The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) was the conceptual framework used to organize dominant themes.
We conducted a total of 60 individual interviews (137 eligible individuals contacted, 43.8% response rate) and identified six themes organized according to the three constructs of behavioural, normative and control beliefs as described in the TPB: (1) Behavioural: My \"New Normal,\" Individual Rights and Perceived Pandemic Severity, Fatigue with COVID-19, (2) Normative: COVID-19 Collective, (3) Control: Practicality of Public Health Guidelines, and (6) Conflicting Public Health Messages. Most (n = 43, 71.7%) participants perceived individuals in their geographic community to be following public health guidelines adequately. Several participants (n = 15, 25.0%) commented on the unequal impact of restrictions based on socioeconomic factors (i.e., class, race, age).
Individual perceptions of risk, loss of control, access to resources (i.e., childcare), and societal expectations, shaped intentions to engage in disease preventative behaviours (i.e., social distancing) during the COVID-19 pandemic.

To investigate how quickly evidence was incorporated into the Australian living guidelines for COVID-19 during the first 12 months of the pandemic.
For each study concerning drug therapies included in the guideline from April 3, 2020 to April 1, 2021, we extracted the publication date of the study, and the guideline version the study was included in. We analyzed two subgroups of studies as follows: those published in high impact factor journals and those with 100 or more participants.
In the first year, we published 37 major versions of the guidelines, incorporating 129 studies that investigated 48 drug therapies informing 115 recommendations. The median time from first publication of a study to incorporation in the guideline was 27 days (interquartile range [IQR], 16 to 44), ranging from 9 to 234 days. For the 53 studies in the highest impact factor journals, the median was 20 days (IQR 15 to 30), and for the 71 studies with 100 or more participants the median was 22 days (IQR 15 to 36).
Developing and sustaining living guidelines where evidence is rapidly incorporated is a resource- and time-intensive undertaking; however, this study demonstrates that it is feasible, even over a long period.

The COVID-19 pandemic led ADHD services to modify the clinical practice to reduce in-person contact as much as possible to minimise viral spread. This had far-reaching effects on day-to-day clinical practice as remote assessments were widely adopted. Despite the attenuation of the acute threat from COVID, many clinical services are retaining some remote practices. The lack of clear evidence-based guidance about the most appropriate way to conduct remote assessments meant that these changes were typically implemented in a localised, ad hoc, and un-coordinated way. Here, the European ADHD Guidelines Group (EAGG) discusses the strengths and weaknesses of remote assessment methods of children and adolescents with ADHD in a narrative review based on available data and expert opinions to highlight key recommendations for future studies and clinical practice. We conclude that going forward, despite remote working in clinical services functioning adequately during the pandemic, all required components of ADHD assessment should still be completed following national/international guidelines; however, the process may need adaptation. Social restrictions, including changes in education provision, can either mask or exacerbate features associated with ADHD and therefore assessment should carefully chart symptom profile and impairment prior to, as well as during an ongoing pandemic. While remote assessments are valuable in allowing clinical services to continue despite restrictions and may have benefits for routine care in the post-pandemic world, particular attention must be paid to those who may be at high risk but not be able to use/access remote technologies and prioritize these groups for conventional face-to-face assessments.

People often feel urges to engage in activities that violate pandemic public health guidelines. Research on these urges has been reliant on measures of typical behaviour, which fail to capture these urges as they unfold. Guideline adherence could be improved through interventions, but few methods allow for ecologically valid observation of the range of behaviours that pandemic guidelines prescribe.
In this preregistered parallel randomised trial, 95 participants aged 18-65 from the UK were assigned to three groups using blinded block randomisation, and engaged in episodic future thinking (n = 33), compassion exercises (n = 31), or a control procedure (n = 31). Following an ecological momentary assessment procedure, participants report on the intensity of their occurrent urges (min. 1, max. 10) and their ability to control them. The study further investigates whether, and through which mechanism, state impulsivity and vaccine attitudes affect guideline adherence.
Episodic future thinking (b = -1.80) and compassion exercises (b = -1.45) reduced the intensity of urges. State impulsivity is associated with stronger urges, but we found no evidence that vaccine hesitancy predicts lesser self-control.
We conclude that episodic future thinking exercises and compassion training may be used to decrease non-compliance urges of individuals who are an acute public health risk for the community, such as those in voluntary isolation.

The present study evaluated the implementation of the European Resuscitation Council Corona-Virus-Disease 2019 (COVID-19) resuscitation guidelines in Germany 1 year after publication.
To evaluate the practical implementation of the COVID-19 resuscitation guidelines in Germany one year after their publication.
In an online survey between April and May 2021 participants were asked about awareness of COVID-19 resuscitation guidelines, corresponding training, the resuscitation algorithm used and COVID-19 infections of emergency medicine personnel associated with COVID-19 resuscitation.
A total of 961 (8%) of the 11,000 members took part in the survey and 85% (818/961) of questionnaires were fully completed. While 577 (70%) of the respondents were aware of the COVID-19 guidelines, only 103 (13%) had received respective training. A specific COVID-19 resuscitation algorithm was used by 265 respondents (32%). Adaptations included personal protective equipment (99%), reduction of staff caring for the patient, or routine use of video laryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation (each 37%), securing the airway before rhythm analysis (32%), and pausing chest compressions during endotracheal intubation (30%). Respondents without a specific COVID-19 resuscitation algorithm were more likely to use mouth-nose protection (47% vs. 31%; p < 0.001), extraglottic airway devices (66% vs. 55%; p = 0.004) and have more than 4 team members close to the patient (45% vs. 38%; p = 0.04). Use of an Filtering-Face-Piece(FFP)-2 or FFP3 mask (89% vs. 77%; p < 0.001; 58% vs. 70%; p ≤ 0.001) or performing primary endotracheal intubation (17% vs. 31%; p < 0.001) were found less frequently and 9% reported that a team member was infected with COVID-19 during resuscitation.
The COVID-19 resuscitation guidelines are still insufficiently implemented 1 year after publication. Future publication strategies must ensure that respective guideline adaptations are implemented in a timely manner.
HINTERGRUND: Angesichts der sich Anfang 2020 ausbreitenden COVID-19-Pandemie wurden die Reanimationsleitlinien zur Verbesserung des Helferschutzes angepasst.
Evaluation der praktischen Umsetzung der COVID-19-Reanimationsleitlinien in Deutschland ein Jahr nach ihrer Veröffentlichung.
Von April bis Mai 2021 wurde eine onlinebasierte Umfrage durchgeführt. Die Teilnehmenden wurden befragt nach Kenntnis, Art der Umsetzung und Training der COVID-19-Reanimationsleitlinien sowie Infektionen nach einer COVID-19-Reanimation.
Insgesamt nahmen 961 (8 %) der 11.000 Mitglieder an der Umfrage teil. Vollständig beantwortet wurden 85 % (818/961) der Fragebögen. Kenntnis über die COVID-19-Leitlinien hatten 577 (70 %) der Teilnehmenden, 103 (13 %) ein entsprechendes Training absolviert und 265 (32 %) verwendeten einen spezifischen COVID-19-Algorithmus. Adaptationen betrafen die Schutzausrüstung (99 %), Reduktion der Einsatzkräfte in Patientennähe, videolaryngoskopische Intubation (jeweils 37 %), Atemwegssicherung vor der Rhythmusanalyse (32 %) und Unterbrechung der Thoraxkompressionen während der Intubation (30 %). Teilnehmende ohne COVID-19-Adaptationen nutzten signifikant häufiger Mund-Nasen-Schutz (47 % vs. 31 %; p < 0,001), mehr als 4 Einsatzkräfte in Patientennähe (45 % vs. 38 %; p = 0,04) und extraglottische Atemwegsdevices (66 % vs. 55 %; p = 0,004). FFP2-/FFP3-Masken (89 % vs. 77 %; p < 0,001; 58 % vs. 70 %; p ≤ 0,001) sowie die primäre Intubation (17 % vs. 31 %; p < 0,001) werden seltener genutzt. Über Infektionen der Einsatzkräfte während einer COVID-19-Reanimation berichteten 9 % der Befragten.
Ein Jahr nach ihrer Veröffentlichung sind die COVID-19-Leitlinien weiterhin unzureichend umgesetzt. Publikationsstrategien müssen optimiert werden, um Leitlinienanpassungen zeitnah in die Praxis umzusetzen.

We evaluated antibiotic prescriptions issued for Finnish children with acute sinusitis by a nationwide private outpatient clinic network from 2014-2020. Data were compared before and after updated guidelines in 2018.
The study comprised data on 45 296 children aged 2-17 years with acute sinusitis, namely diagnoses, ages, dates, the doctor\'s specialty and any antibiotics. We measured compliance with the updated 2018 Finnish guidelines, which recommended amoxicillin or amoxicillin-clavulanic acid for children under 12 years old, with doxycycline as an alternative for 12 years plus.
There were 6621-7585 visits per year for acute sinusitis in 2014-2019 and 2954 in 2020. Antibiotics were prescribed for 37.9%-41.6% of patients during the study years. Amoxicillin, including penicillin, accounted for 35.9% of prescriptions, followed by amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (26.9%). Macrolides accounted for 20.6% and, encouragingly, decreased by 38% from 2014-2019. Doxycycline accounted for 5.3%. Paediatricians, general practitioners (GPs) and ear, nose and throat specialists followed the guidelines in 75.1%, 73.8% and 66.7% of cases, respectively. GPs prescribed antibiotics more often than other physicians.
Antibiotics were prescribed for about 40% of acute sinusitis visits by Finnish children from 2014-2019. Specialities differed with regard to prescribing rates and whether they followed the guidelines.