Dataset Information

Mental health impacts among health workers during COVID-19 in a low resource setting: a cross-sectional survey from Nepal.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Health care workers exposed to COVID-19 might be at increased risk of developing mental health problems. The study aimed to identify factors associated with anxiety, depression and insomnia among health workers involved in COVID-19 response in Nepal.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional web-based survey conducted between April 26 and May 12, 2020. A total of 475 health workers participated in the study. Anxiety and depression were measured using a 14-item Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS: 0-21) and insomnia was measured by using a 7-item Insomnia Severity Index (ISI: 0-28). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was done to determine the risk factors of mental health outcomes.

Results

Overall, 41.9% of health workers had symptoms of anxiety, 37.5% had depression symptoms and 33.9% had symptoms of insomnia. Stigma faced by health workers was significantly associated with higher odds of experiencing symptoms of anxiety (AOR: 2.47; 95% CI: 1.62-3.76), depression (AOR: 2.05; 95% CI: 1.34-3.11) and insomnia (AOR: 2.37; 95% CI: 1.46-3.84). History of medication for mental health problems was significantly associated with a higher likelihood of experiencing symptoms of anxiety (AOR: 3.40; 95% CI:1.31-8.81), depression (AOR: 3.83; 95% CI: 1.45-10.14) and insomnia (AOR: 3.82; 95% CI: 1.52-9.62) while inadequate precautionary measures in the workplace was significantly associated with higher odds of exhibiting symptoms of anxiety (AOR: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.12-3.19) and depression (AOR: 1.97; 95% CI: 1.16-3.37). Nurses (AOR: 2.33; 95% CI: 1.21-4.47) were significantly more likely to experience anxiety symptoms than other health workers.

Conclusion

The study findings revealed a considerate proportion of anxiety, depression and insomnia symptoms among health workers during the early phase of the pandemic in Nepal. Health workers facing stigma, those with history of medication for mental health problems, and those reporting inadequate precautionary measures in their workplace were more at risk of developing mental health outcomes. A focus on improving mental wellbeing of health workers should be immediately initiated with attention to reduction of stigma, ensuring an adequate support system such as personal protective equipments, and family support for those with history of mental health problems.

SUBMITTER: Khanal P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7517059 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeLesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) individuals experience high rates of adverse mental health outcomes due to the stressors they experience in families, communities, and society more broadly. Work and workplaces have the potential to influence these outcomes given their ability to amplify minority stress, and their ability to influence social and economic wellbeing in this already marginalized population. This study aims to identify how sociodemographic characteristics and characteristics of work, including degree of precarity, industry and perceived workplace support for LGBTQ people, influence self-reported mental health among LGBTQ people in two Canadian cities.MethodsSelf-identified LGBTQ workers ≥16 years of age (n = 531) in Sudbury and Windsor, Ontario, Canada were given an online survey between July 6 and December 2, 2018. Multivariate ordinal logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios (OR) to evaluate differences in gender identity, age, income, industry, social precarity, work environment, and substance use among workers who self-reported very poor, poor, or neutral mental health, compared with a referent group that self-reported good or very good mental health on a five-point Likert scale about general mental health.ResultsLGBTQ workers with poor or neutral mental health had greater odds of: being cisgender women or trans compared with being cisgender men; being aged <35 years compared with ≥35 years; working in low-wage service sectors compared with blue collar jobs; earning <$20,000/year compared with ≥$20,000/year; working in a non-standard work situation or being unemployed compared with working in full-time permanent employment; feeling often or always unable to schedule time with friends due to work; feeling unsure or negative about their work environment; and using substances to cope with work.ConclusionsBoth precarious work and unsupportive work environments contribute to poor mental health among LGBTQ people. These factors are compounded for trans workers who face poorer mental health than cis-LGBQ workers in similar environments.

Project description:BackgroundIn low-income countries, care for people with mental, neurological, and substance use (MNS) disorders is largely absent, especially in rural settings. To increase treatment coverage, integration of mental health services into community and primary healthcare settings is recommended. While this strategy is being rolled out globally, rigorous evaluation of outcomes at each stage of the service delivery pathway from detection to treatment initiation to individual outcomes of care has been missing.Methods and findingsA combination of methods were employed to evaluate the impact of a district mental healthcare plan for depression, psychosis, alcohol use disorder (AUD), and epilepsy as part of the Programme for Improving Mental Health Care (PRIME) in Chitwan District, Nepal. We evaluated 4 components of the service delivery pathway: (1) contact coverage of primary care mental health services, evaluated through a community study (N = 3,482 combined for all waves of community surveys) and through service utilisation data (N = 727); (2) detection of mental illness among participants presenting in primary care facilities, evaluated through a facility study (N = 3,627 combined for all waves of facility surveys); (3) initiation of minimally adequate treatment after diagnosis, evaluated through the same facility study; and (4) treatment outcomes of patients receiving primary-care-based mental health services, evaluated through cohort studies (total N = 449 depression, N = 137; AUD, N = 175; psychosis, N = 95; epilepsy, N = 42). The lack of structured diagnostic assessments (instead of screening tools), the relatively small sample size for some study components, and the uncontrolled nature of the study are among the limitations to be noted. All data collection took place between 15 January 2013 and 15 February 2017. Contact coverage increased 7.5% for AUD (from 0% at baseline), 12.2% for depression (from 0%), 11.7% for epilepsy (from 1.3%), and 50.2% for psychosis (from 3.2%) when using service utilisation data over 12 months; community survey results did not reveal significant changes over time. Health worker detection of depression increased by 15.7% (from 8.9% to 24.6%) 6 months after training, and 10.3% (from 8.9% to 19.2%) 24 months after training; for AUD the increase was 58.9% (from 1.1% to 60.0%) and 11.0% (from 1.1% to 12.1%) for 6 months and 24 months, respectively. Provision of minimally adequate treatment subsequent to diagnosis for depression was 93.9% at 6 months and 66.7% at 24 months; for AUD these values were 95.1% and 75.0%, respectively. Changes in treatment outcomes demonstrated small to moderate effect sizes (9.7-point reduction [d = 0.34] in AUD symptoms, 6.4-point reduction [d = 0.43] in psychosis symptoms, 7.2-point reduction [d = 0.58] in depression symptoms) at 12 months post-treatment.ConclusionsThese combined results make a promising case for the feasibility and impact of community- and primary-care-based services delivered through an integrated district mental healthcare plan in reducing the treatment gap and increasing effective coverage for MNS disorders. While the integrated mental healthcare approach does lead to apparent benefits in most of the outcome metrics, there are still significant areas that require further attention (e.g., no change in community-level contact coverage, attrition in AUD detection rates over time, and relatively low detection rates for depression).

Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 has created serious mental health consequences for essential workers or people who have become unemployed as a result of the pandemic. Digital mental health tools have the potential to address this problem in a timely and efficient manner.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to document the extent of digital mental health tool (DMHT) use by essential workers and those unemployed due to COVID-19, including asking participants to rate the usability and user burden of the DMHT they used most to cope. We also explored which aspects and features of DMHTs were seen as necessary for managing stress during a pandemic by having participants design their own ideal DMHT.MethodsA total of 2000 people were recruited from an online research community (Prolific) to complete a one-time survey about mental health symptoms, DMHT use, and preferred digital mental health features.ResultsThe final sample included 1987 US residents that identified as either an essential worker or someone who was unemployed due to COVID-19. Almost three-quarters of the sample (1479/1987, 74.8%) reported clinically significant emotional distress. Only 14.2% (277/1957) of the sample used a DMHT to cope with stress associated with COVID-19. Of those who used DMHTs to cope with COVID-19, meditation apps were the most common (119/261, 45.6%). Usability was broadly in the acceptable range, although participants unemployed due to COVID-19 were less likely to report user burden with DMHTs than essential workers (t198.1=-3.89, P<.001). Individuals with emotional distress reported higher financial burden for their DMHT than nondistressed individuals (t69.0=-3.21, P=.01). When the sample was provided the option to build their own DMHT, the most desired features were a combination of mindfulness/meditation (1271/1987, 64.0%), information or education (1254/1987, 63.1%), distraction tools (1170/1987, 58.9%), symptom tracking for mood and sleep (1160/1987, 58.4%), link to mental health resources (1140/1987, 57.4%), and positive psychology (1131/1986, 56.9%). Subgroups by employment, distress, and previous DMHT use status had varied preferences. Of those who did not use a DMHT to cope with COVID-19, most indicated that they did not consider looking for such a tool to help with coping (1179/1710, 68.9%).ConclusionsDespite the potential need for DMHTs, this study found that the use of such tools remains similar to prepandemic levels. This study also found that regardless of the level of distress or even past experience using an app to cope with COVID-19, it is possible to develop a COVID-19 coping app that would appeal to a majority of essential workers and unemployed persons.

Project description:ImportanceIntegrated care for children is rarely studied, especially in low- and middle-income countries, where generalists often provide mental health care.ObjectivesTo explore the effect of adding a child and youth component to an existing adult collaborative care program on mental health outcomes and receipt of care.Design, setting, and participantsThis cluster randomized trial was conducted within an adult collaborative care program in Tehran, Iran. General practitioners (GPs), their 5- to 15-year-old patients, and patients' parents were included. Children and youths coming for routine medical visits who scored greater than the cutoff on the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) were followed up for 6 months. The study was conducted from May 2018 to October 2019, and analysis was conducted from March 2020 to August 2021.InterventionsGPs were randomized to either a 2.5-day training on managing common child mental health problems (intervention) or refresher training on identification and referral (control).Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcome was change in SDQ total problems score; secondary outcomes included discussion of psychosocial issues by the GPs and receipt of mental health care during the follow-up period.ResultsOverall, 49 GPs cared for 389 children who scored greater than the cutoff on the SDQ (216 children in intervention group, 173 in control group). Patients' mean (SD) age was 8.9 (2.9) years (range, 5 to 15 years), and 182 (47%) were female patients. At 6 months, children in the intervention group had greater odds of receiving mental health care during the study (odds ratio [OR], 3.0; 95% CI, 1.1 to 7.7), parents were more likely to report that intervention GPs had discussed parent (OR, 2.1; 95% Cl, 1.1 to 3.8) and child (OR, 2.0; 95% Cl, 0.9 to 4.8) psychosocial issues, and intervention GPs were more likely to say they had provided counseling (OR, 1.8; 95% Cl, 1.02 to 3.3). However, there was no greater improvement in SDQ scores among children seen by intervention vs control GPs. Adjusted for clustering within GP, the variables used for balanced allocation (practice size, practice ownership, and study wave), and the other variables associated with change in SDQ scores over time, there was not a significant time-treatment interaction at either the 3- or 6-month follow-up points (linear combination of coefficients for intervention, 0.57 [95% CI, -1.07 to 2.22] and -0.08 [95%CI, -1.76 to 1.56], respectively). In a subgroup of GPs with practices composed of 50% or more children, children seen by intervention GPs improved to a significantly greater extent (-3.6 points; 95% CI, -6.7 to -0.46 points; effect size d = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.30 to 1.01) compared with those seen by control GPs.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cluster randomized trial, GP training on managing common child mental health problems did not demonstrate greater improvement in child SDQ scores. Child mental health training for GPs in collaborative care can improve children's access to mental health care, but prior experience working with children and their families may be required for GPs to use a brief training in a way that improves child outcomes.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03144739.