The AHEPAN Fall 2020 - 20

transmission - including hand hygiene, cleaning of the working environment, patient isolation, grouping of patients and
the use of personal protective measures (PPE), i.e. disposable
face masks, N95 masks, robes, glasses, face shields.
* A practical assessment of workstations and in situ recommendations on how to re-organize space to improve and
maintain good practices in a consistent and reliable manner.
* Ample time for questions and answers. Examples of questions
by healthcare workers that were addressed by CLEO staff
included: "What can we use if PPE has run out?," "How can
we protect our families from our own exposure to COVID19?", "How can we adequately protect scheduled patients
from suspected COVID-19 cases examined in the same room?"
Of note, the training material developed by CLEO strictly
aligned with the guidelines issued by the National Public Health
Organization (NPHO).
Once training was complete, the centers were opened to
the public to receive patients. Two weeks after opening, three
of those centers had already seen 432 suspected cases of which
five were confirmed to be positive for the virus. Luckily, the low
level of COVID-19 transmission in Greece has meant there's been
no further need for opening additional centers. However, should
another epidemic wave hit the country, CLEO has already prepared an audit tool to assess the level of readiness of existing
COVID-19 centers and remains on standby for the needs of training of healthcare workers at new centers, as needed.

New research study on the knowledge, attitudes, and
practices of healthcare workers around COVID- 19 in
Greece.
The rapid spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus has created unprecedented pressure on healthcare systems and healthcare workers
worldwide. Measures known to prevent transmission of the virus
stem from the same, essential practices for the prevention and
control of other hospital infection. While Greece may have one
of the highest rates of hospital acquired infections in Europe
(Suetens et al., 2018) and have shown low adherence to good
infection prevention practice (associated with understaffing,
lack of knowledge or culture), however, it also seems to have
fared surprisingly better in dealing with the pandemic, compared to other southern European countries such as Spain or Italy.
In collaboration with Prof. Sipsas and his team from the
Medical School of the National Kapodistrian University of Athens
(NKUA) and the "Laiko" General Hospital and through the support of AHEPA, CLEO has designed a survey that assesses the

20 | THE AHEPAN · Fall 2020

knowledge, perceptions, and practices of health professionals
regarding transmission, prevention and measures taken to address
the pandemic in Greece. Importantly, the survey will be looking
at healthcare workers' understanding of infection transmission
and their acceptance of measures taken in their work environment during the pandemic.
The survey is to be rolled out to 12-13 public hospital across
the country. Having just received the ethics approval for the study
(granted by the key collaborator of this study, "Laiko" General
Hospital), each public hospital participating in the study is now
being "activated." Investigators assigned at each hospital are
therefore about to start the collection of data, as per their local
hospital regulations.
We anticipate that the results of this study will highlight areas of
improvement for more efficient hospital-acquired infection prevention and for the shielding of the national health system against subsequent COVID-19 waves or other large-scale infection outbreaks.
In addition, the study may be able to highlight potential strengths
of the Greek health system and help us better understand why
Greece seems to have dealt so well with the pandemic.

III. REFERENCES
Suetens C, Latour K, Kärki T, Ricchizzi E, Kinross P, Moro ML, et al. Prevalence
of healthcare- associated infections, estimated incidence and composite
antimicrobial resistance index in acute care hospitals and long-term care
facilities: results from two European point prevalence surveys, 2016 to 2017.
Eurosurveillance [Internet]. 2018 Nov 15 [cited 2020 Apr 30];23(46). Available
from: https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.
ES.2018.23.46.1800516f

IV. BUDGET SPENDING
Approved
budget (€)

Expenses
to date

Creation of a training video and
webinar (3 hours total length)

9300

Trainers' salary for on-site training

3200

Project manager (20% of their time
for 3 months)

2680

Research questionnaire development

2550

Consumables/stationery for research

650

Data collection (including travelling
costs required)

4800

Biostatistician for statistical analysis
and reporting

4300

27480

8430

Cost component

TOTAL

www.ahepa.org

https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2018.23.46.1800516f https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2018.23.46.1800516f http://www.ahepa.org

The AHEPAN Fall 2020

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The AHEPAN Fall 2020