Dataset Information

The prevalence of common and stress-related mental health disorders in healthcare workers based in pandemic-affected hospitals: a rapid systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Background: Healthcare workers (HCWs) are considered at elevated risk of experiencing mental health disorders in working with patients with COVID-19. Objective: To estimate the prevalence of common mental health disorders in HCWs based in hospitals where pandemic-affected patients were treated. Method: Databases were searched for studies published before 30 March 2020. Quantitative synthesis was used to obtain estimates of the prevalence of mental health disorders in four time windows, determined a priori (the acute phase, i.e. during and up to 1.5 months post-pandemic; 1.5-5.9 months; 6-11.9 months; 12 months and later). Results: Nineteen studies met the review criteria. They predominantly addressed the acute phase of the SARS outbreak in Asia. The most studied outcomes were clinically significant post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) and general psychiatric caseness. For clinically significant PTSS in the acute phase, the prevalence estimate was 23.4% (95% CI 16.3, 31.2; N = 4147; I² = 96.2%); in the 12 months plus window, the estimate was 11.9% (8.4, 15.8; N = 1136; I² = 74.3%). For general psychiatric caseness, prevalence estimates were acute phase, 34.1% (18.7, 51.4; N = 3971; I² = 99.1%); 6-12 months, 17.9% (13.1, 23.2; N = 223; I² = 0.0%); 12 months plus, 29.3% (6.0, 61.0; N = 710; I² = 97.8%). No differences between doctors and nurses with respective to PTSS and general psychiatric caseness were apparent in the acute phase. Conclusions: Mental health disorders are particularly common in HCWs working with pandemic-afflicted patients immediately following a pandemic, but the course of disorders following this period is poorly understood. There was considerable heterogeneity between studies, likely linked to methodological differences. More extended follow up of HCWs is needed.

SUBMITTER: Allan SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7678680 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesThis study aimed to measure the prevalence of burnout syndrome, anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic disorders (PTSD), as well as examine their associated factors among Thai healthcare workers (HCWs) during COVID-19 outbreak.MethodWe employed a multiple-method design at a tertiary-care hospital in Bangkok between May 22, 2021 and June 30, 2021 by using an online survey. The information included demographic characteristics, work details, perceived support, PTSD symptoms, Maslach Burnout Inventory: General Survey (MBI-GS), General Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2 and PHQ-9), and narrative response to an open-ended question. The associated factors of mental health problems were analysed by multiple logistic regression analyses. The qualitative data were analysed by the content analysis method.ResultsA total of 986 HCWs (89.1% female; mean age = 34.89 ± 11.05 years) responded to the survey. 16.3%,16%, and 53.5% of respondents had a high level of emotional exhaustion, depersonalisation, and diminished personal achievement, respectively. 33.1%, 13.8%, and 2.3% of respondents had anxiety, depression, and PTSD. Risk factors of emotional exhaustion were male sex (ORadj = 2.29), nurses (ORadj = 3.04), doctors (ORadj = 4.29), working at COVID-19 inpatient unit (ORadj = 2.97), and working at COVID-19 intensive care unit (ORadj = 3.00). Additionally, preexisting mental illness was associated with anxiety (ORadj = 2.89), depression (ORadj = 3.47), and PTSD (ORadj = 4.06). From qualitative analysis, participants reported that these factors would improve their mental health: supportive and respectful colleagues, appropriate financial compensation, reduced workload, clarity of policy and communication channel, and adequate personal protective equipment.ConclusionsThai HCWs experienced negative mental health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic substantially. This issue needs attention and actions should be implemented to support them.

Project description:AimsThis review aims to explore the prevalence and incidence rates of mental health conditions in healthcare workers during and after a pandemic outbreak and which factors influence rates.BackgroundPandemics place considerable burden on care services, impacting on workers' health and their ability to deliver services. We systematically reviewed the prevalence and incidence of mental health conditions in care workers during pandemics.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesSearches of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and PsychINFO for cohort, cross-sectional and case-control studies were undertaken on the 31 March 2020 (from inception to 31 March 2020).Review methodsOnly prevalence or incidence rates for mental health conditions from validated tools were included. Study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were carried out by two reviewers. Meta-analyses and subgroup analyses were produced for pandemic period (pre- and post), age, country income, country, clinical setting for major depression disorder (MDD), anxiety disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).ResultsNo studies of incidence were found. Prevalence estimates showed that the most common mental health condition was PTSD (21.7%) followed by anxiety disorder (16.1%), MDD (13.4%) and acute stress disorder (7.4%) (low risk of bias). For symptoms of these conditions there was substantial variation in the prevalence estimates for depression (95% confidence interval [CI]:31.8%; 60.5%), anxiety (95% CI:34.2%; 57.7%) and PTSD symptoms (95% CI,21.4%; 65.4%) (moderate risk of bias). Age, level of exposure and type of care professional were identified as important moderating factors.ConclusionMental disorders affect healthcare workers during and after infectious disease pandemics, with higher proportions experiencing symptoms.ImpactThis review provides prevalence estimates of mental health conditions during and after a pandemic which could be used to inform service staffing impact and formulation of preventative strategies, by identifying clinical populations who may be at high risk of developing mental health symptoms and conditions.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Integrating care for common mental disorders (CMDs) such as depression, anxiety and alcohol abuse into primary healthcare (PHC) should assist in reducing South Africa (SA)'s quadruple burden of disease. CMDs compromise treatment adherence, health behaviour change and self-management of illnesses. Appropriate identification of mental disorders in primary care can be facilitated by brief, easy-to-administer screening that promotes high specificity. OBJECTIVES:To establish the criterion-based validity of a seven-item Brief Mental Health (BMH) screening tool for assessing positive symptoms of CMDs in primary care patients. METHODS:A total of 1 214 participants were recruited from all patients aged ?18 years visiting 10 clinics as part of routine care in the Newcastle subdistrict of Amajuba District in KwaZulu-Natal Province, SA, over a period of 2 weeks. Consenting patients provided basic biographical information prior to screening with the BMH tool. PHC nurses remained blind to this assessment. PHC nurse-initiated assessment using the Adult Primary Care (APC) guidelines was the gold standard against which the performance of the BMH tool was compared. A specificity standard of 80% was used to establish cut-points. Specificity was favoured over sensitivity to ensure that those who did not have CMD symptoms were excluded, as well as to reduce over-referrals. RESULTS:Of the participants, 72% were female. The AUD-C (alcohol abuse) performed well (area under the curve (AUC) 0.91 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 - 0.95), cut-point ?4, Cronbach alpha 0.87); PHQ-2 (depression) performed reasonably well (AUC 0.72 (95% CI 0.65 - 0.78), cut-point ?3, alpha 0.71); and GAD-2 (anxiety) performance was acceptable (AUC 0.69 (95% CI 0.58 - 0.80), cut-point ?3, alpha 0.62). Using the higher cut-off scores, patients who truly did not have CMD symptoms had negative predictive values (NPVs) of >90%. Overall, 26% of patients had CMD positive symptoms relative to 8% using the APC guidelines. CONCLUSIONS:Using a higher specificity index, the positive predictive value and NPV show that at higher cut-point values the BMH not only helps identify individuals with alcohol misuse, depression and anxiety symptoms but also identifies a majority of those who do not have symptoms (true negatives), thus not overburdening nurses with false positives needing assessment. Research is needed to assess whether use of such a short and valid screening tool is generalisable to other clinic contexts as well as how mental health screening should best be introduced into routine clinic functioning and practice.

Project description:Objective: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to summarize the prevalence and risk factors of mental health problems among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We applied an optimized search strategy across the PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, PsycINFO, and four Chinese databases, with hand searching supplemented to identify relevant surveys. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were published in peer-reviewed literature and used a validated method to assess the prevalence and risk factors of mental health problems among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Heterogeneity was quantified using Q statistics and the I 2 statistics. The potential causes of heterogeneity were investigated using subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis. Sensitivity analysis was performed to examine the robustness of the results. Results: We pooled and analyzed data from 20 studies comprising 10,886 healthcare workers. The prevalence of depression, anxiety, insomnia, post-traumatic stress symptoms, phobia, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, and somatization symptoms was 24.1, 28.6, 44.1, 25.6, 35.0, 16.2, and 10.7%, respectively. Female and nurses had a high prevalence of depression and anxiety. Frontline healthcare workers had a higher prevalence of anxiety and a lower prevalence of depression than the those in the second-line. Furthermore, the proportion of moderate-severe depression and anxiety is higher in the frontline. Additionally, four studies reported on risk factors of mental health problems. Conclusions: In this systematic review, healthcare workers have a relatively high prevalence of depression, anxiety, insomnia, post-traumatic stress symptoms, phobia, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, and somatization symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic, and focus should be on the healthcare workers at high risk of mental problems. Mental health problems in healthcare workers should be taken seriously, and timely screening and appropriate intervention for the high-risk group are highly recommended. Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020179189.

Dataset Information

The prevalence of common and stress-related mental health disorders in healthcare workers based in pandemic-affected hospitals: a rapid systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets