29
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      COVID-19-Pandemie: Belastungen des medizinischen Personals : Ein kurzer aktueller Review Translated title: COVID-19 Pandemic: Stress Experience of Healthcare Workers : A Short Current Review

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Zusammenfassung

          Ziel Darstellung von Studien zur psychischen Belastung von medizinischem Personal unter Bedingungen der COVID-19-Pandemie.

          Methodik PubMed-gestützte Suche mit den Stichworten COVID 19“, „stress“, „mental health“, „healthcare worker“, „staff“, „psychiatry“. Eingeschlossen wurden quantitative Studien, (inkl. „Letter to the editor“) zur Belastung des medizinischen Personals im Zeitraum von Januar bis März 2020.

          Ergebnisse Es wurden 14 Studien mit Klinikpersonal aus Infektionsabteilungen, Abteilungen für Fieberkranke, Abteilungen der Inneren Medizin inklusive Intensivstationen sowie der Chirurgie und Psychiatrie identifiziert. Am häufigsten wurden der Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), die Self-rating-Anxiety Scale (SAS) und die Impact of Event Scale (IES-R) verwendet. Die Stichprobengröße schwankte zwischen 37 und 1257 Personen des überwiegend pflegerischen und ärztlichen Personals. Der Anteil an COVID-19-nahen Tätigkeiten schwankte zwischen 7,5 % und 100 %. Es wurde eine erhebliche Belastung durch Stresserleben, depressive und ängstliche Symptome berichtet. Schwere Ausprägungsgrade fanden sich bei 2,2–14,5 % der Befragten. Die Ausprägung der psychischen Symptomatik wurde beeinflusst durch Alter, Geschlecht, Berufsgruppe, Fachrichtung, Art der Tätigkeit und die Nähe zu COVID-19-Patienten. Als Mediatorvariablen wurden das Personalmanagement, die präventive Intervention, die Resilienz und vorhandene soziale Unterstützung angesehen.

          Schlussfolgerung Angesichts der Häufigkeit psychischer Symptome bei medizinischem Personal erscheinen begleitende psychiatrisch-psychotherapeutisch informierte Interventionen notwendig, um eine Bewältigung zu unterstützen. Eine schnell einsetzende Forschung ist in diesem Bereich wünschenswert.

          Abstract

          Aim Review of studies on the psychological stress of healthcare workers caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

          Methods A literature search of PubMed was performed using the terms “COVID-19”, “stress”, “mental health”, “healthcare worker”, “staff”, “psychiatry”. Quantitative studies (including letters to the editor) published from January to March 2020 were included.

          Results 14 studies on healthcare workers in departments of infectiology, internal medicine, and fever wards including intensive care wards as well as surgery and psychiatry, were included. The Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ9), Self-rating-Anxiety Scale (SAS) and Impact of Event Scale (IES-R) were the most often used test instruments. The sample size ranged between 37 and 1257 participants consisting of mostly nursing and medical personnel. The fraction of COVID-19-associated activities varied from 7.5 % to 100 %. An extensive strain was reported due to stress experience as well as depression and anxiety symptoms. Severe degrees of those symptoms were found in 2.2 % to 14.5 % of all participants. The severity of mental symptoms was influenced by age, gender, occupation, specialization, type of activities performed and proximity to COVID-19 patients. As mediator variables selection of personnel, preventive interventions, resilience, and social support were reported.

          Conclusion Considering the frequency of mental symptoms occurring in healthcare workers, accompanying mental health informed interventions to facilitate coping are necessary. Further research in this field is needed.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Immediate Psychological Responses and Associated Factors during the Initial Stage of the 2019 Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Epidemic among the General Population in China

          Background: The 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic is a public health emergency of international concern and poses a challenge to psychological resilience. Research data are needed to develop evidence-driven strategies to reduce adverse psychological impacts and psychiatric symptoms during the epidemic. The aim of this study was to survey the general public in China to better understand their levels of psychological impact, anxiety, depression, and stress during the initial stage of the COVID-19 outbreak. The data will be used for future reference. Methods: From 31 January to 2 February 2020, we conducted an online survey using snowball sampling techniques. The online survey collected information on demographic data, physical symptoms in the past 14 days, contact history with COVID-19, knowledge and concerns about COVID-19, precautionary measures against COVID-19, and additional information required with respect to COVID-19. Psychological impact was assessed by the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), and mental health status was assessed by the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21). Results: This study included 1210 respondents from 194 cities in China. In total, 53.8% of respondents rated the psychological impact of the outbreak as moderate or severe; 16.5% reported moderate to severe depressive symptoms; 28.8% reported moderate to severe anxiety symptoms; and 8.1% reported moderate to severe stress levels. Most respondents spent 20–24 h per day at home (84.7%); were worried about their family members contracting COVID-19 (75.2%); and were satisfied with the amount of health information available (75.1%). Female gender, student status, specific physical symptoms (e.g., myalgia, dizziness, coryza), and poor self-rated health status were significantly associated with a greater psychological impact of the outbreak and higher levels of stress, anxiety, and depression (p < 0.05). Specific up-to-date and accurate health information (e.g., treatment, local outbreak situation) and particular precautionary measures (e.g., hand hygiene, wearing a mask) were associated with a lower psychological impact of the outbreak and lower levels of stress, anxiety, and depression (p < 0.05). Conclusions: During the initial phase of the COVID-19 outbreak in China, more than half of the respondents rated the psychological impact as moderate-to-severe, and about one-third reported moderate-to-severe anxiety. Our findings identify factors associated with a lower level of psychological impact and better mental health status that can be used to formulate psychological interventions to improve the mental health of vulnerable groups during the COVID-19 epidemic.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Factors Associated With Mental Health Outcomes Among Health Care Workers Exposed to Coronavirus Disease 2019

            Key Points Question What factors are associated with mental health outcomes among health care workers in China who are treating patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)? Findings In this cross-sectional study of 1257 health care workers in 34 hospitals equipped with fever clinics or wards for patients with COVID-19 in multiple regions of China, a considerable proportion of health care workers reported experiencing symptoms of depression, anxiety, insomnia, and distress, especially women, nurses, those in Wuhan, and front-line health care workers directly engaged in diagnosing, treating, or providing nursing care to patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19. Meaning These findings suggest that, among Chinese health care workers exposed to COVID-19, women, nurses, those in Wuhan, and front-line health care workers have a high risk of developing unfavorable mental health outcomes and may need psychological support or interventions.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Mental health care for medical staff in China during the COVID-19 outbreak

              In December, 2019, an outbreak of a novel coronavirus pneumonia occurred in Wuhan (Hubei, China), and subsequently attracted worldwide attention. 1 By Feb 9, 2020, there were 37 294 confirmed and 28 942 suspected cases of 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in China. 2 Facing this large-scale infectious public health event, medical staff are under both physical and psychological pressure. 3 To better fight the COVID-19 outbreak, as the largest top-class tertiary hospital in Hunan Province, the Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University undertakes a considerable part of the investigation of suspected patients. The hospital has set up a 24-h fever clinic, two mild suspected infection patient screening wards, and one severe suspected infection patient screening ward. In addition to the original medical staff at the infectious disease department, volunteer medical staff have been recruited from multiple other departments. The Second Xiangya Hospital—workplace of the chairman of the Psychological Rescue Branch of the Chinese Medical Rescue Association—and the Institute of Mental Health, the Medical Psychology Research Center of the Second Xiangya Hospital, and the Chinese Medical and Psychological Disease Clinical Medicine Research Center responded rapidly to the psychological pressures on staff. A detailed psychological intervention plan was developed, which mainly covered the following three areas: building a psychological intervention medical team, which provided online courses to guide medical staff to deal with common psychological problems; a psychological assistance hotline team, which provided guidance and supervision to solve psychological problems; and psychological interventions, which provided various group activities to release stress. However, the implementation of psychological intervention services encountered obstacles, as medical staff were reluctant to participate in the group or individual psychology interventions provided to them. Moreover, individual nurses showed excitability, irritability, unwillingness to rest, and signs of psychological distress, but refused any psychological help and stated that they did not have any problems. In a 30-min interview survey with 13 medical staff at The Second Xiangya Hospital, several reasons were discovered for this refusal of help. First, getting infected was not an immediate worry to staff—they did not worry about this once they began work. Second, they did not want their families to worry about them and were afraid of bringing the virus to their home. Third, staff did not know how to deal with patients when they were unwilling to be quarantined at the hospital or did not cooperate with medical measures because of panic or a lack of knowledge about the disease. Additionally, staff worried about the shortage of protective equipment and feelings of incapability when faced with critically ill patients. Many staff mentioned that they did not need a psychologist, but needed more rest without interruption and enough protective supplies. Finally, they suggested training on psychological skills to deal with patients' anxiety, panic, and other emotional problems and, if possible, for mental health staff to be on hand to directly help these patients. Accordingly, the measures of psychological intervention were adjusted. First, the hospital provided a place for rest where staff could temporarily isolate themselves from their family. The hospital also guaranteed food and daily living supplies, and helped staff to video record their routines in the hospital to share with their families and alleviate family members' concerns. Second, in addition to disease knowledge and protective measures, pre-job training was arranged to address identification of and responses to psychological problems in patients with COVID-19, and hospital security staff were available to be sent to help deal with uncooperative patients. Third, the hospital developed detailed rules on the use and management of protective equipment to reduce worry. Fourth, leisure activities and training on how to relax were properly arranged to help staff reduce stress. Finally, psychological counsellors regularly visited the rest area to listen to difficulties or stories encountered by staff at work, and provide support accordingly. More than 100 frontline medical staff can rest in the provided rest place, and most of them report feeling at home in this accomodation. Maintaining staff mental health is essential to better control infectious diseases, although the best approach to this during the epidemic season remains unclear.4, 5 The learning from these psychological interventions is expected to help the Chinese government and other parts of the world to better respond to future unexpected infectious disease outbreaks.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Psychiatr Prax
                Psychiatr Prax
                10.1055/s-00000062
                Psychiatrische Praxis
                © Georg Thieme Verlag KG (Stuttgart · New York )
                0303-4259
                1439-0876
                May 2020
                27 April 2020
                : 47
                : 4
                : 190-197
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Institut für Sozialmedizin, Arbeitsmedizin und Public Health (ISAP) der Medizinischen Fakultät der Universität Leipzig
                [2 ]Centrum für Muskuloskeletale Chirurgie (CMSC), Klinik für Orthopädie, Klinik für Unfall- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie, Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charité – Campus Berlin Mitte
                [3 ]Heinrich Sengelmann Kliniken, Ev. Stiftung Alsterdorf, Hamburg
                Author notes
                Korrespondenzadresse Dr. med. Dr. phil. Jens Bohlken Institut für Sozialmedizin, Arbeitsmedizin und Public Health (ISAP), Universität Leipzig, Medizinische Fakultät Philipp-Rosenthal-Straße 5504103 Leipzig dr.j.bohlken@ 123456gmx.net
                Article
                10.1055/a-1159-5551
                7295275
                32340048
                c7546e1f-1dfe-4bc2-9b90-9ee55f2719fb
                Copyright @ 2020

                This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic or until permissions are revoked in writing. Upon expiration of these permissions, PMC is granted a perpetual license to make this article available via PMC and Europe PMC, consistent with existing copyright protections.

                History
                Categories
                Übersicht

                covid-19,stress,depression,angst,medizinisches personal,ärzte,pflege,review,mental health,staff,healthcare worker,physician,nurse

                Comments

                Comment on this article