39
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      COVID-19 is having a destructive impact on health-care workers’ mental well-being

      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.

          Abstract

          Background

          The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may aggravate workplace conditions that impact health-care workers’ mental health. However, it can also place other stresses on workers outside of their work. This study determines the effect of COVID-19 on symptoms of negative and positive mental health and the workforce’s experience with various sources of support. Effect modification by demographic variables was also studied.

          Methods

          A cross-sectional survey study, conducted between 2 April and 4 May 2020 (two waves), led to a convenience sample of 4509 health-care workers in Flanders (Belgium), including paramedics (40.6%), nurses (33.4%), doctors (13.4%) and management staff (12.2%). About three in four were employed in university and acute hospitals (29.6%), primary care practices (25.7%), residential care centers (21.3%) or care sites for disabled and mental health care. In each of the two waves, participants were asked how frequently (on a scale of 0–10) they experienced positive and negative mental health symptoms during normal circumstances and during last week, referred to as before and during COVID-19, respectively. These symptoms were stress, hypervigilance, fatigue, difficulty sleeping, unable to relax, fear, irregular lifestyle, flashback, difficulty concentrating, feeling unhappy and dejected, failing to recognize their own emotional response, doubting knowledge and skills and feeling uncomfortable within the team. Associations between COVID-19 and mental health symptoms were estimated by cumulative logit models and reported as odds ratios. The needed support was our secondary outcome and was reported as the degree to which health-care workers relied on sources of support and how they experienced them.

          Results

          All symptoms were significantly more pronounced during versus before COVID-19. For hypervigilance, there was a 12-fold odds (odds ratio 12.24, 95% confidence interval 11.11–13.49) during versus before COVID-19. Positive professional symptoms such as the feeling that one can make a difference were less frequently experienced. The association between COVID-19 and mental health was generally strongest for the age group 30–49 years, females, nurses and residential care centers. Health-care workers reported to rely on support from relatives and peers. A considerable proportion, respectively, 18 and 27%, reported the need for professional guidance from psychologists and more support from their leadership.

          Conclusions

          The toll of the crisis has been heavy on health-care workers. Those who carry leadership positions at an organizational or system level should take this opportunity to develop targeted strategies to mitigate key stressors of health-care workers’ mental well-being.

          Related collections

          Most cited references36

          • 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: not found
            • Article: not found

            Mental Health and the Covid-19 Pandemic

              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

                Contributors
                Journal
                Int J Qual Health Care
                Int J Qual Health Care
                intqhc
                International Journal for Quality in Health Care
                Oxford University Press (UK )
                1353-4505
                1464-3677
                03 December 2020
                : mzaa158
                Affiliations
                departmentLeuven Institute for Healthcare Policy, KU Leuven—University of Leuven , Kapucijnenvoer 35, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
                departmentLeuven Institute for Healthcare Policy, KU Leuven—University of Leuven , Kapucijnenvoer 35, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
                departmentLeuven Institute for Healthcare Policy, KU Leuven—University of Leuven , Kapucijnenvoer 35, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
                departmentLeuven Institute for Healthcare Policy, KU Leuven—University of Leuven , Kapucijnenvoer 35, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
                Zorgnet Icuro , Brussels, Belgium
                Zorgnet Icuro , Brussels, Belgium
                departmentDepartment of Primary Care, University of Antwerp , Doornstraat 331, 2610 Antwerp, Belgium
                KARUS vzw , Melle, Belgium
                Doctors4Doctors, GZA Hospitals , Antwerp, Belgium
                Flemish Association for Clinical Psychologists , Brussels, Belgium
                departmentFaculty of Medicine and Life Sciences, Hasselt University , Martelarenlaan 42, BE3500 Hasselt, Belgium
                departmentMental Health and Wellbeing Research Group, VUB , Laarbeeklaan 103, 1050 Brussels, Belgium
                departmentFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University , De Pintelaan 185, 9000 Ghent, Belgium
                departmentDepartment of Adult Psychiatry, KU Leuven—University of Leuven , Herestraat 49, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
                Author notes
                Address reprint requests to: Kris Vanhaecht, Leuven Institute for Healthcare Policy, KU Leuven—University of Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 35, 3000 Leuven, Belgium. Tel: +32-16-37-77-60; E-mail: Kris.vanhaecht@ 123456kuleuven.be
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4966-3879
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1209-692X
                Article
                mzaa158
                10.1093/intqhc/mzaa158
                7799030
                33270881
                e95f6999-8a58-49b2-8d15-842600e677ff
                © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Quality in Health Care. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com

                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.

                This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model ( https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model)

                History
                : 23 July 2020
                : 13 November 2020
                : 30 November 2020
                : 22 November 2020
                Page count
                Pages: 6
                Categories
                Original Research Article
                AcademicSubjects/MED00860
                Custom metadata
                corrected-proof
                PAP

                Medicine
                professions,workforce and workload,covid-19,mental health,corona,pandemic
                Medicine
                professions, workforce and workload, covid-19, mental health, corona, pandemic

                Comments

                Comment on this article