Research Question (RQ): Are there statistically significant differences in work motivation, satisfaction and engagement among older employees before the COVID-19 pandemic and during the COVID-19 ...pandemic? Purpose: The aim of the paper is to examine if there are statistically significant differences in work motivation, satisfaction and engagement among older employees before the COVID-19 pandemic and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of the paper is also to identify which factors contribute to increasing work motivation, satisfaction and engagement during the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: The differences in work motivation, satisfaction and engagement among older employees before the COVID-19 pandemic and during the COVID-19 pandemic were tested with the nonparametric test for two related samples. To analyze the differences between individual statements, we used the non-parametric Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results: The results show that there are statistically significant differences in work motivation, satisfaction and engagement among older employees before the COVID-19 pandemic as compared to the during COVID-19 pandemic. Organisation: The results have a significant impact on a more detailed review of the creation of new working conditions for employees during the Covid-19 pandemic and especially in the period after the Covid-19 pandemic. Society: During the COVID-19 pandemic, companies and society can focus on how to constructively manage the new challenges that the COVID-19 pandemic brings to companies and what they can learn from it. For companies and leaders or HRM in particular, the pandemic can be used as a starting point for positive and future-oriented developments. Originality: With our findings we contribute to the discussion on a constructive and future oriented approach to the COVID-19 pandemic, both for practices around the management of employees as well as for future research. Also, our research highlights which factors increase work motivation, work satisfaction and work engagement during COVID-19 and how to create appropriate working conditions during the COVID-19 and after the COVID-19 pandemic to keep employees motivated, satisfied and engaged. Limitations/further research: Our sample was limited to Slovenian companies and older employees. Also, in our research we limited on work motivation, work satisfaction and work engagement. Therefore, for further research we propose the examination of differences in others constructs before the COVID-19 pandemic and employees during the COVID-19 pandemic in Slovenian companies and also, the examination of differences in constructs between Slovenia and other countries.
Anosmia is common in Coronavirus disease 2019, but its impact on prognosis is unknown. We analysed whether anosmia predicts in-hospital mortality; and if patients with anosmia have a different ...clinical presentation, inflammatory response, or disease severity.
Retrospective cohort study including all consecutive hospitalized patients with confirmed Covid-19 from March 8th to April 11th, 2020. We determined all-cause mortality and need of intensive care unit (ICU) admission. We registered the first and worst laboratory parameters. Statistical analysis was done by multivariate logistic and linear regression.
We included 576 patients, 43.3% female, and aged 67.2 years in mean. Anosmia was present in 146 (25.3%) patients. Patients with anosmia were more frequently females, younger and less disabled and had less frequently hypertension, diabetes, smoking habit, cardiac and neurological comorbidities. Anosmia was independently associated with lower mortality (OR: 0.180, 95% CI: 0.069–0.472) and ICU admission (OR: 0.438, 95% CI: 0.229–0.838, p = 0.013). In the multivariate analysis, patients with anosmia had a higher frequency of cough (OR: 1.96, 95%CI: 1.18–3.28), headache (OR: 2.58, 95% CI: 1.66–4.03), and myalgia (OR: 1.74, 95% CI: 1.12–2.71). They had higher adjusted values of hemoglobin (+0.87, 95% CI: 0.40–1.34), lymphocytes (+849.24, 95% CI: 157.45–1541.04), glomerular filtration rate (+6.42, 95% CI: 2.14–10.71), and lower D-dimer (−4886.52, 95% CI: −8655.29-(−1117.75)), and C-reactive protein (−24.92, 95% CI: −47.35-(−2.48)).
Hospitalized Covid-19 patients with anosmia had a lower adjusted mortality rate and less severe course of the disease. This could be related to a distinct clinical presentation and a different inflammatory response.
•Anosmia is associated with lower in-hospital mortality on Covid-19 patients.•Patients with anosmia are less likely to be admitted to the ICU•The clinical presentation of Covid-19 patients with anosmia is associated with cough, myalgia and headache.•Patients with anosmia seem to have a higher lymphocyte and erythrocyte count and lower D-dimer and CRP.
•Novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is a global issue nowadays.•COVID-19 is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).•The current knowledge about the treatment ...protocol is still limited.•Preventing the virus can be the best way of controlling the pandemic.
The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), remains a global challenge. Despite intense research efforts worldwide, an effective vaccine and viable treatment options have eluded investigators. Therefore, infection prevention, early viral detection and identification of successful treatment protocols provide the best approach in controlling disease spread. In this review, current therapeutic options, preventive methods and transmission routes of COVID-19 are discussed.
Older adults (aged ≥70 years) are at increased risk of severe disease and death if they develop COVID-19 and are therefore a priority for immunisation should an efficacious vaccine be developed. ...Immunogenicity of vaccines is often worse in older adults as a result of immunosenescence. We have reported the immunogenicity of a novel chimpanzee adenovirus-vectored vaccine, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222), in young adults, and now describe the safety and immunogenicity of this vaccine in a wider range of participants, including adults aged 70 years and older.
In this report of the phase 2 component of a single-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 2/3 trial (COV002), healthy adults aged 18 years and older were enrolled at two UK clinical research facilities, in an age-escalation manner, into 18–55 years, 56–69 years, and 70 years and older immunogenicity subgroups. Participants were eligible if they did not have severe or uncontrolled medical comorbidities or a high frailty score (if aged ≥65 years). First, participants were recruited to a low-dose cohort, and within each age group, participants were randomly assigned to receive either intramuscular ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (2·2 × 1010 virus particles) or a control vaccine, MenACWY, using block randomisation and stratified by age and dose group and study site, using the following ratios: in the 18–55 years group, 1:1 to either two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or two doses of MenACWY; in the 56–69 years group, 3:1:3:1 to one dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, one dose of MenACWY, two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, or two doses of MenACWY; and in the 70 years and older, 5:1:5:1 to one dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, one dose of MenACWY, two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, or two doses of MenACWY. Prime-booster regimens were given 28 days apart. Participants were then recruited to the standard-dose cohort (3·5–6·5 × 1010 virus particles of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) and the same randomisation procedures were followed, except the 18–55 years group was assigned in a 5:1 ratio to two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or two doses of MenACWY. Participants and investigators, but not staff administering the vaccine, were masked to vaccine allocation. The specific objectives of this report were to assess the safety and humoral and cellular immunogenicity of a single-dose and two-dose schedule in adults older than 55 years. Humoral responses at baseline and after each vaccination until 1 year after the booster were assessed using an in-house standardised ELISA, a multiplex immunoassay, and a live severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) microneutralisation assay (MNA80). Cellular responses were assessed using an ex-vivo IFN-γ enzyme-linked immunospot assay. The coprimary outcomes of the trial were efficacy, as measured by the number of cases of symptomatic, virologically confirmed COVID-19, and safety, as measured by the occurrence of serious adverse events. Analyses were by group allocation in participants who received the vaccine. Here, we report the preliminary findings on safety, reactogenicity, and cellular and humoral immune responses. This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04400838, and ISRCTN, 15281137.
Between May 30 and Aug 8, 2020, 560 participants were enrolled: 160 aged 18–55 years (100 assigned to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, 60 assigned to MenACWY), 160 aged 56–69 years (120 assigned to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19: 40 assigned to MenACWY), and 240 aged 70 years and older (200 assigned to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19: 40 assigned to MenACWY). Seven participants did not receive the boost dose of their assigned two-dose regimen, one participant received the incorrect vaccine, and three were excluded from immunogenicity analyses due to incorrectly labelled samples. 280 (50%) of 552 analysable participants were female. Local and systemic reactions were more common in participants given ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 than in those given the control vaccine, and similar in nature to those previously reported (injection-site pain, feeling feverish, muscle ache, headache), but were less common in older adults (aged ≥56 years) than younger adults. In those receiving two standard doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, after the prime vaccination local reactions were reported in 43 (88%) of 49 participants in the 18–55 years group, 22 (73%) of 30 in the 56–69 years group, and 30 (61%) of 49 in the 70 years and older group, and systemic reactions in 42 (86%) participants in the 18–55 years group, 23 (77%) in the 56–69 years group, and 32 (65%) in the 70 years and older group. As of Oct 26, 2020, 13 serious adverse events occurred during the study period, none of which were considered to be related to either study vaccine. In participants who received two doses of vaccine, median anti-spike SARS-CoV-2 IgG responses 28 days after the boost dose were similar across the three age cohorts (standard-dose groups: 18–55 years, 20 713 arbitrary units AU/mL IQR 13 898–33 550, n=39; 56–69 years, 16 170 AU/mL 10 233–40 353, n=26; and ≥70 years 17 561 AU/mL 9705–37 796, n=47; p=0·68). Neutralising antibody titres after a boost dose were similar across all age groups (median MNA80 at day 42 in the standard-dose groups: 18–55 years, 193 IQR 113–238, n=39; 56–69 years, 144 119–347, n=20; and ≥70 years, 161 73–323, n=47; p=0·40). By 14 days after the boost dose, 208 (>99%) of 209 boosted participants had neutralising antibody responses. T-cell responses peaked at day 14 after a single standard dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (18–55 years: median 1187 spot-forming cells SFCs per million peripheral blood mononuclear cells IQR 841–2428, n=24; 56–69 years: 797 SFCs 383–1817, n=29; and ≥70 years: 977 SFCs 458–1914, n=48).
ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 appears to be better tolerated in older adults than in younger adults and has similar immunogenicity across all age groups after a boost dose. Further assessment of the efficacy of this vaccine is warranted in all age groups and individuals with comorbidities.
UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midlands NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca.
La crisis social y económica ocasionada por la pandemia del Covid-19 abrió una ventana de oportunidad para que el tema de la renta básica monetaria entrara con fuerza a discusión en la esfera pública ...colombiana, al punto de que en el Congreso de la República se presentaron cuatro proyectos de ley para hacerla realidad. Este artículo analiza, a partir del marco analítico de flujos múltiples, la evolución de la discusión en Colombia, identificando sus principales tendencias, sus vacíos con relación a la teoría de renta básica y hace una propuesta para la ampliación de la discusión.
Lo que se evidencia es que la renta básica tiene un amplio consenso social, pero que la ventana de oportunidad haya sido una situación crítica limitó de forma severa la discusión. Esta se dio, principalmente, alrededor del programa Ingreso Solidario del gobierno y se centró en sus alcances, montos y costos fiscales; dejando a un lado dimensiones del tema que son considerados relevantes en la teoría de renta básica como lo son sus implicaciones en la justicia social y en combatir la desigualdad.
The global effort to develop a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine is on track to produce one or more authorized vaccines. We examine how different definitions and thresholds of vaccine ...efficacy, coupled with different levels of implementation effectiveness and background epidemic severity, translate into outcomes including cumulative infections, hospitalizations, and deaths. Using a mathematical simulation of vaccination, we find that factors related to implementation will contribute more to the success of vaccination programs than a vaccine's efficacy as determined in clinical trials. The benefits of a vaccine will decline substantially in the event of manufacturing or deployment delays, significant vaccine hesitancy, or greater epidemic severity. Our findings demonstrate the urgent need for health officials to invest greater financial resources and attention to vaccine production and distribution programs, to redouble efforts to promote public confidence in COVID-19 vaccines, and to encourage continued adherence to other mitigation approaches, even after a vaccine becomes available.
O planeta passa, atualmente, por uma grave pandemia de Covid-19, que vem impactando drasticamente os serviços de saúde e já ceifou milhões de vidas mundo afora. Em países subdesenvolvidos como o ...Brasil, ocorre uma miríade de iniquidades sociais, levando à existência de diferentes grupos populacionais vulnerados, como os indígenas, os quilombolas, e as pessoas mais empobrecidas, especialmente as residentes nas favelas. O impacto da pandemia sobre esses grupos vulnerados é muito mais intenso quando comparado ao restante da população e eles têm sérias dificuldades de se prevenirem da enfermidade e, mesmo, de subsistência econômica. O papel do Estado na proteção desses grupos é fundamental para a manutenção da dignidade e, mesmo, da vida. Nesse contexto, a Bioética da Proteção se mostra como norteadora ideal para uma implementação mais justa e reparadora das políticas públicas para esses grupos mais vulnerados.
PDF
