Experiences of the physicians in the largest COVID-19 dedicated hospital of Bangladesh about COVID-19 and its aftermath

  1. Reaz Mahmud
  2. Sultana Shahana Banu
  3. Nusrat Sultana
  4. Farhana Binte Monayem
  5. Ponkaj Kanti Datta
  6. Mohammad Mahfuzul Hoque
  7. S.M. Habibur Rahman Habib
  8. Joynal Abedin
  9. Md. Fakhrul Islam
  10. Md. Arifuzzaman
  11. Md Khairul Islam
  12. Sudip Ranjan Deb
  13. Ahmed Hossain Chowdhury
  14. Kazi Gias Uddin Ahmed
  15. Md. Titu Miah
  16. Md. Mujibur Rahman

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background

The doctors and the other health care workers are the first-line fighters against COVID-19. This study aims to identify the prevalence, risk factors, clinical severity of COVID-19 infection among the doctors working in the COVID unit. We also analyzed the hospital data for admission and RT-PCR positivity among the physicians.

Methods

It was a cross-sectional survey and review of the hospital database. We surveyed from September 2021 to October 2021 and explored the hospital data from march 2020 to September 2021.We included 342 physicians for analysis in the survey. We reviewed hospital data of 1578 total admitted patients and 336 RT-PCR test positive physicians for analyzing the hospital admission rate, the positivity rate for COVID-19 among the physicians and the other patients in the different COVID-19 surges.

Findings

In this study, we demonstrated the physicians’ sufferings during the pandemic era. We have observed four surges in the hospital admission and RT-PCR for COVID-19 positivity rate among the physicians and the general population. The physicians experienced a similar surge in the hospital admission and positivity rate to the general population. The hospital admission was lower in the fourth surge among the physicians than the general population. The positivity rate was higher in the first, second and third surge among the physicians. In the survey, a total of 146(42%) respondents had COVID-19 infection, and among them, 50(34.2%) had re-detectable positive SARS-CoV-2 infection. Most of them experienced mild (77[52.7%]) to moderate (41[28.1%]) symptoms. Increasing age (OR, 95%CI, p-value; 1.15, 1.05-1.25, 0.002), male sex (OR, 95%CI, p-value; 5.8, 3.2-9.8, <0.001), and diabetes (OR, 95%CI, p-value; 25.6, 2-327.2, 0.01) were the risk factor of having COVID-19. Female sex and diabetes were the risk factors for re-detectable positive SARS-CoV-2 infection. (OR, 95%CI, p-value; 0.24, 0.09-0.67, 0.006; 44, 8.9-218.7, <0.001 respectively). Most respondents suffered for 7-14 days. Total 98(67%) suffered from post-COVID fatigue.

Conclusions

The physicians observed four surges in hospital admission and COVID-19 positivity rate. A significant number of the COVID-warrior became positive for SARS-CoV-2, had r e-detectable positive SARS-CoV-2 infection, and suffered in the post-COVID-19 state.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2022.02.14.22270965: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsConsent: We obtained informed written consent from the survey participants and ethical clearance from the ethical review committee of the Dhaka Medical College. (ERC.DMC-ECC/2021/399) Participants: We recruited physicians of all ranks and both gender who had worked or are working in the Dhaka Medical College Hospital, COVID-19 unit.
    IRB: We obtained informed written consent from the survey participants and ethical clearance from the ethical review committee of the Dhaka Medical College. (ERC.DMC-ECC/2021/399) Participants: We recruited physicians of all ranks and both gender who had worked or are working in the Dhaka Medical College Hospital, COVID-19 unit.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical analysis: We analyzed the data using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 20.0.
    SPSS
    suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)
    We analyzed hospital admission trends and positivity rates in the Excel datasheet.
    Excel
    suggested: None

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    This study had several limitations. It was done in a single-center, so it is not representative of the scenario of the whole country. It was a retrograde study, so there might have been some recall bias. The hospital admission and the test capacity are bed or slot limited. So, the hospital admission rate and the number of tests in different surges might not be the actual representation of the nation’s scenario. A multi-center study is required to get a representative picture.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2022.02.14.22270965v1 on medRxiv