Article in PDF
How to Cite
Citation Manager
Readers' Comments (0)
Audio Visual Article Statistics
Link
to PUBMED
Print this Article
Send to a Friend
Advertisers
Access Statistics Resources
Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."
Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011
Dr. Shankar P.R.
"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."
Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011 Anuradha
Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.
Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020
Original article / research
Full Version
Effect of COVID-19 Pandemic on Awareness on Prevention of Spread of Infective Respiratory Secretions among Resident Doctors
Correspondence Address :
Dr. Sridevi A Naaraayan,
16A, Landons Towers, 32, Landons Road, Kilpauk, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
E-mail: sridevianaaraayan@gmail.com
Introduction: Respiratory infections including Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) infection spread through droplet infections. Hence standard precautionary measures like handwashing and use of masks are essential to prevent transmission of these infections in healthcare setting.
Aim: To determine the effect of COVID-19 pandemic on awareness level of resident doctors on prevention of spread of infective respiratory secretions.
Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted among two subsequent batches (year 2019-20 and 2020-21) of resident doctors at a medical college hospital, from February 2020 to September 2020. The 2019-2020 batch of resident doctors worked as residents from March 2019 to March 2020 and were considered as pre COVID-19 batch. The 2020-2021 batch of resident doctors had their training period from April 2020 to April 2021 and were considered the COVID-19 batch. A pretested semi-structured questionnaire consisting of 14 questions to evaluate the awareness on prevention of spread of infective respiratory secretions was administered. The responses were evaluated, marks awarded and summated.
Results: There were 121 respondents in the pre COVID-19 batch making the response rate 85%. There were 112 respondents in the COVID19 batch, with a response rate of 86%. The mean (standard deviation) score obtained by the COVID-19 batch was 9.91±3.42 which was significant higher than that obtained by the pre COVID-19 batch which was 7.1±1.83. The score obtained by COVID-19 batch for 11/14 questions was significantly higher compared to the pre COVID-19 batch.
Conclusion: A significant improvement was seen in the knowledge level in prevention of spread of infective respiratory secretions among resident doctors after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Coronavirus disease 2019, Handwashing, Mask, Personal protective equipment
Respiratory infections are common reasons for seeking medical care. They can spread through droplet infections. Standard precautions like handwashing and use of gloves and masks are the primary strategies for minimising transmission of healthcare related infections (1),(2),(3). These measures are to be adopted while providing care to all individuals in hospitals regardless of their complaints. Lack of standard precautions among healthcare personnel in hospitals has become a major concern in the spread of respiratory infections. In addition, healthcare personnel are at increased risk of infection during pandemics like COVID-19. A basic tool to reduce their infection rates, thus reducing the spread of pandemic, is the proper use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) (4). Appropriate use of PPE by healthcare personnel has been shown to reduce transmission of COVID-19 among them.
When the COVID-19 pandemic struck India in March 2020, a variety of preplanned pandemic control strategies were implemented, including infection control practices in hospitals across the country. Resident doctors were actively involved in the treatment of COVID-19 patients and suspects. Contact and droplet precautions should be followed by nurses and resident doctors caring for patients with COVID-19 at all times (5),(6),(7). Given the pandemic situation, any patient presenting to the hospital for any complaint is a suspect and should be approached with utmost care and precaution.
Adequate knowledge is a prerequisite for ideal practice and hence it is important to assess the knowledge level of resident doctors who constitute the basic workforce of the hospital. This study was conducted with the objective of determining the effect of COVID-19 pandemic on awareness level of resident doctors on prevention of spread of infective respiratory secretions.
A cross-sectional study was conducted among two subsequent batches of resident doctors (year 2019-20 and 2020-21) of a Medical College Hospital, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India from February 2020 to September 2020. The study was commenced after obtaining approval from the Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC) (Letter numbered 324/2020). The 2019-2020 batch of resident doctors worked as residents from March 2019 to March 2020 and were considered as pre COVID-19 batch. The 2020-2021 batch of resident doctors had their training period from April 2020 to April 2021 and were considered the COVID-19 batch. All the 142 residents of 2019-2020 batch and 130 residents of 2020-2021 batch were approached for the study.
Study Procedure
Resident doctors were briefly explained about this study. Those who consented participated in the study. A pretested, semi-structured, self-administered questionnaire in English with open-ended questions (on hand hygiene, cough etiquette, patient placement, use of PPE, and quarantine) was distributed to the resident doctors as Google forms and they were asked to fill the questionnaire. The Google forms were sent to all the participants by the principal investigator. The pre COVID-19 batch of residents filled up the forms in March 2020 and COVID-19 batch in May 2020. Residents were given 2-week time to return the filled forms. The questions used in the study and their answers are given in the [Appendix-1].
The responses obtained from the resident doctors were evaluated like answer sheet with the practical guidelines for infection control in healthcare facilities by World Health Organisation (WHO) as key (8). Each question was allotted one mark and if the answer had more than one point, each point was awarded a fraction of mark depending on the number of points. The resident was awarded one full mark for a question, if the answer was correct and complete; there was no negative marking. The marks obtained for all 14 questions were summated and each participant awarded a score.
Statistical Analysis
Data was analysed using statistical software Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 24.0. Categorical variables were expressed in proportions, while numerical variables were expressed as mean (standard deviation). The means were compared between both groups with Student’s t-test and level of significance was fixed at 5%.
There were 121 respondents in the pre COVID-19 batch making the response rate 85%. There were 112 respondents in the COVID-19 batch, with a response rate of 86%. The pre COVID-19 batch comprised 51.9% and COVID-19 batch 48.1% of total respondents. Among them 118 were females and 115 males, the male female ratio being 1:1.03. The mean score obtained by the COVID-19 batch was higher than that obtained by the pre COVID-19 batch (Table/Fig 1).
When the marks obtained for individual question by the residents of both groups was compared, it was apparent that score obtained by COVID-19 batch was significantly higher compared to pre COVID-19 batch for 11/14 questions. These results are depicted in (Table/Fig 2). The questions whose responses significantly improved include the most common route of spread of respiratory infections, WHO’s five moments of hand washing, procedures capable of generating aerosols transmitting respiratory pathogens, how far should an acute respiratory symptomatic patient placed from others, ways to educate patients and caregivers about respiratory hygiene and cough etiquette, ideal patient placement, precautions to be used while using a mask, proper disposal of mask, the recommendations for airborne infection isolation room, quarantine and alternative to hand washing (Table/Fig 2).
The present batch, 2020-21 namely the COVID-19 batch of resident doctors were more aware of methods of prevention of spread of infective respiratory secretions when compared to the previous, 2019-20 namely pre COVID-19 batch of resident doctors. The pandemic has clearly resulted in a significant increase in knowledge level of resident doctors in these aspects.
Awareness that respiratory infections spread through droplet infection, standard infection control precaution being hand hygiene, WHO’s five moments of hand washing, the procedures capable of generating aerosols capable of transmitting respiratory pathogens and respiratory hygiene and cough etiquette were improved in the COVID-19 batch. Majority had identified intubation, Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP), Bronchoscopy, suctioning, Ryle’s tube insertion, nebulisation as the procedure producing aerosols. COVID-19 batch were aware that the acute respiratory infection patient should be placed 1-2 metre away from others and single room occupancy is ideal than the pre COVID-19 batch of resident doctors. There was a positive impact of COVID-19 on the awareness of different personnel protective equipment to be used. The COVID-19 batch of resident doctors posted to care for COVID-19 patients has adequate knowledge about the precautions to be used while wearing a mask and about its proper disposal compared to the pre COVID-19 batch of resident doctors. Both pre COVID-19 and COVID-19 batch of resident doctors have identified sanitiser as the alternative to hand washing. The knowledge of pre COVID-19 batch of resident doctors about the airborne infection isolation room was comparatively less compared to that of present batch of resident doctors. The COVID-19 pandemic has also improved the knowledge level of resident doctors about quarantine.
Though training on mode of spread of respiratory infections, infection control practices and personal protective equipment constitute an essential component of medical training curriculum, the awareness of resident doctors on these aspects remain suboptimal (9). The silver lining of the pandemic is the importance of these standard precautions are re-emphasised and disseminated across the healthcare personnel, which is an encouraging development.
The reasons for improvement in awareness level include the fact that training on infection control practices were reinforced after the outbreak and there was a greater perceived threat to the healthcare personnel and their family from a serious disease, namely COVID-19 [10,11]. In addition, mass media and social media were flooded with information on prevention of spread of infective respiratory secretions which could have made additional impact on the knowledge level of the resident doctors.
A similar study done in Hong Kong following Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) epidemic showed an improvement in number of undergraduate medical students practicing handwashing and wearing masks following the epidemic (12). On the contrary, a Singapore study did not show any impact on knowledge and perception of hand hygiene and infection control practices of final year medical students following H1N1 pandemic (13). The probable reason for this indifference was the fact that H1N1 results in a milder disease when compared to SARS or COVID-19.
Limitation(s)
The limitation of this study was that it was designed to evaluate the knowledge level of resident doctors and did not evaluate the practice. It needs to be borne in mind that improvement in knowledge level does not always culminate in better practices which is the prerequisite for prevention of spread of infection and containment of pandemic. Better practices require an ideal role model and better peer behaviour, in addition to improvement in knowledge level (14).
A significant improvement was seen in the knowledge level on prevention of spread of infective respiratory secretions among resident doctors after the onset of COVID-19 pandemic. This could be considered as positive impact of COVID-19 infection on the knowledge of healthcare providers. This pandemic has taught everyone many lessons exemplified by the knowledge of spread of respiratory infection and its preventive practices to be adopted. This can have far reaching positive consequences beyond the pandemic.
DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2023/62168.17900
Date of Submission: Dec 09, 2022
Date of Peer Review: Dec 30, 2022
Date of Acceptance: Jan 28, 2023
Date of Publishing: Apr 01, 2023
AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA
PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Dec 13, 2022
• Manual Googling: Dec 14, 2022
• iThenticate Software: Jan 20, 2023 (7%)
ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin
- Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
- Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
- Academic Search Complete Database
- Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
- Embase
- EBSCOhost
- Google Scholar
- HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
- Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
- Journal seek Database
- Popline (reproductive health literature)
- www.omnimedicalsearch.com