4.3 Article

Experiences of front-line nurses combating coronavirus disease-2019 in China: A qualitative analysis

Journal

PUBLIC HEALTH NURSING
Volume 37, Issue 5, Pages 757-763

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/phn.12768

Keywords

Coronavirus disease-2019; nurses; pneumonia; public health; qualitative study

Funding

  1. Program of Emergency science and technology for new coronavirus pneumonia of Huazhong University of Science and Technology [2020kfyXGYJ001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective To explore the experiences of front-line nurses combating the coronavirus disease-2019 epidemic. Design and Sample Fifteen front-line nurses caring for COVID-19 patients were recruited from two hospitals in Wuhan, China from January 26 to February 5, 2020. Data were collected through semi-structured individual interviews and analyzed using standard qualitative methods. Results Four theme categories emerged from the data analysis: (a) Facing tremendous new challenges and danger; (b) Strong pressure because of fear of infection, exhaustion by heavy workloads and stress of nursing seriously ill COVID-19 patients; (c) Strong sense of duty and identity as a healthcare provider; (d) Rational understanding of the epidemic-the nurses believed that the epidemic would soon be overcome and would like to receive disaster rescue training. Conclusions Although the intensive rescue work drained front-line nurses, both physically and emotionally, they showed a spirit of dedication and felt a responsibility to overcome this epidemic. Their experiences provide useful insights into implementing a safer public health emergency rescue system in preparation for future outbreaks of infectious diseases. Specifically, psychological support and humanistic care should be provided to front-line nurses to maintain their well-being, and nationwide emergency rescue training and disaster education should be implemented.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available