Dataset Information

Predictors of critical care nurses' stress, anxiety, and depression in response to COVID-19 pandemic.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic directly affects the psychological well-being of critical care nurses. Several studies had investigated the psychological impact of the pandemic on nurses caring for patients with COVID-19, but few were conducted to identify the predictors of this impact.

Aims and objectives

The objective of this study is to identify the predictors of critical care nurses' stress, anxiety, and depression in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Design

A cross-sectional survey was conducted in five intensive care units in five hospitals in Alexandria, Egypt.

Methods

An online questionnaire was distributed. It included socio-demographic and work-related data and the depression, anxiety, and stress scale scores of the nurses under study. A multiple linear regression model was developed to identify the predictors of critical care nurses' stress, anxiety, and depression in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Results

Two hundred (64%) of 308 nurses completed the electronic questionnaire. Significant predictors of stress included the number of infected colleagues (P < .001) and availability of hospital resources (P = .01). Significant predictors of anxiety were age, gender, satisfactory income (P < .001), years of experience, time spent caring for patients with COVID-19 (P = .04), continuous training, number of infected colleagues (P = .01), and availability of hospital resources (P = .02). Finally, significant predictors of depression included gender, history of physical problems (P = .04), educational attainment, availability of hospital resources, history of psychological problems (P < .001), and number of infected colleagues (P = .001).

Conclusion

The hospital's lack of human and physical resources and the number of colleagues infected with COVID-19 were the strongest predictors of stress, anxiety, and depression among nurses.

Relevance to clinical practice

Identifying the predictors of stress, anxiety, and depression among nurses who care for patients with COVID-19 is a vital step in developing mental health promotion strategies to support nurses during this pandemic.

SUBMITTER: Baraka AAE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8662302 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic is putting healthcare workers across the world in an unprecedented situation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the levels of depression, anxiety, and stress among Hubei pediatric nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic and to analyze the potential factors associated with them.Materials and methodsA self-designed online questionnaire survey, which consisted of the demographic and selected features, the occupational protection knowledge, attitudes, and practices of COVID-19, and the Chinese version of Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale, were used to assess the levels of depression, anxiety, and stress among Hubei pediatric nurses during COVID-19 pandemic. The logistic regression analyses were performed to analyze the potential factors associated with depression, anxiety, and stress.ResultsA total of 617 pediatric nurses were included in the survey. A considerable proportion of pediatric nurses reported symptoms of depression (95 [15.4%]), anxiety (201 [32.6%]), and stress (111 [18.0%]). Results of multivariable logistic regression analyses indicated that the good occupational protection practices (for depression: OR = 0.455, 95%CI: 0.281 to 0.739; for anxiety: OR = 0.597, 95%CI: 0.419 to 0.851; for stress: OR = 0.269, 95%CI: 0.166 to 0.438) and the personal protective equipment (PPE) meeting work requirements (for depression: OR = 0.438, 95%CI: 0.246 to 0.778; for anxiety: OR = 0.581, 95%CI: 0.352 to 0.959; for stress: OR = 0.504, 95%CI: 0.283 to 0.898) were independent protective factors against depression, anxiety, and stress, respectively. Yet, working in an isolation ward or fever clinic was an independent risk factor associated with depression, anxiety, and stress, respectively (for depression: OR = 1.809, 95%CI: 1.103 to 2.966; for anxiety: OR = 1.864, 95%CI: 1.221 to 2.846; for stress: OR = 2.974, 95%CI: 1.866 to 4.741). Having suspected or confirmed COVID-19 patients in the departments (OR = 1.554, 95%CI: 1.053 to 2.294) and coming in contact with the patient's bodily fluids or blood (OR = 1.469, 95%CI: 1.031 to 2.095) were independent risk factors for anxiety, while >3 times of training for COVID-19 related information was an independent protective factor for depression (OR = 0.592, 95%CI: 0.360 to 0.974). Moreover, >10 years of working was an independent risk factor for stress (OR = 1.678, 95%CI: 1.075 to 2.618).ConclusionDuring the COVID-19 outbreak, a considerable proportion of Hubei pediatric nurses had psychological problems. The pediatric nurses endorsing the higher number of risk factors should be given special attention and necessary psychological intervention. Improving the levels of PPE so as to meet the work requirements and intensifying occupational protection practices might help safeguard pediatric nurses from depression, anxiety, and stress.

Project description:AimThe aim of the study was to determine levels of depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms and factors associated with psychological burden amongst critical care healthcare workers in the early stages of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.MethodsAn anonymous Web-based survey distributed in April 2020. All healthcare workers employed in a critical care setting were eligible to participate. Invitations to the survey were distributed through Australian and New Zealand critical care societies and social media platforms. The primary outcome was the proportion of healthcare workers who reported moderate to extremely severe scores on the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale-21 (DASS-21).ResultsOf the 3770 complete responses, 3039 (80.6%) were from Australia. A total of 2871 respondents (76.2%) were women; the median age was 41 years. Nurses made up 2269 (60.2%) of respondents, with most (2029 [53.8%]) working in intensive care units. Overall, 813 (21.6%) respondents reported moderate to extremely severe depression, 1078 (28.6%) reported moderate to extremely severe anxiety, and 1057 (28.0%) reported moderate to extremely severe stress scores. Mean ± standard deviation values of DASS-21 depression, anxiety, and stress scores amongst woman vs men was as follows: 8.0 ± 8.2 vs 7.1 ± 8.2 (p = 0.003), 7.2 ± 7.5 vs 5.0 ± 6.7 (p < 0.001), and 14.4 ± 9.6 vs 12.5 ± 9.4 (p < 0.001), respectively. After adjusting for significant confounders, clinical concerns associated with higher DASS-21 scores included not being clinically prepared (? = 4.2, p < 0.001), an inadequate workforce (? = 2.4, p = 0.001), having to triage patients owing to lack of beds and/or equipment (? = 2.6, p = 0.001), virus transmission to friends and family (? = 2.1, p = 0.009), contracting coronavirus disease 2019 (? = 2.8, p = 0.011), being responsible for other staff members (? = 3.1, p < 0.001), and being asked to work in an area that was not in the respondents' expertise (? = 5.7, p < 0.001).ConclusionIn this survey of critical care healthcare workers, between 22 and 29% of respondents reported moderate to extremely severe depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms, with women reporting higher scores than men. Although female gender appears to play a role, modifiable factors also contribute to psychological burden and should be studied further.

Project description:BackgroundEthical conflict is a problem with negative consequences, which can compromise the quality and ethical standards of the nursing profession and it is a source of stress for health care practitioners', especially for nurses.ObjectivesThe main aim of this study was to analyze Spanish critical care nurses' level of exposure to ethical conflict and its association with sociodemographic, occupational, and COVID-19-related variables. Research Design, Participants, and Research context: This was a quantitative cross-sectional descriptive study conducted among 117 nurses working in critical care units. Data collection tools were sociodemographic, occupational, and COVID-19-related questionnaires and previously validated Spanish version of Ethical Conflict in Nursing Questionnaire-Critical Care Version.Ethical considerationsWe obtained permission from the Ethics Committee and participants' informed consent.FindingsData indicates a moderate level of exposure to ethical conflicts. The most frequent ethical conflicts were related to situations about "treatment and clinical procedures." The most intensity of ethical conflicts was related to situations about "treatment and clinical procedures" and "dynamics of the service and working environment." No statistical significance was identified between the socio-demographic variables and level of exposure to ethical conflicts. However, for critical care nurses working in ICU, nurses with perceived worked stress had a higher level of exposure to ethical conflicts. Likewise, critical care nurses whose family/friends were infected with COVID-19 had a higher level of exposure.ConclusionsCritical care nurses experience a moderate level of exposure to ethical conflicts which is consistent with the results of previous studies. A deeper understanding of ethical conflicts in conflictive situations allows recognition of the situations that occur in everyday clinical practice, identification of the ethical conflicts, and facilitation of the nurses working in the challenging clinical situation.

Project description:BackgroundThe continuous spreading of the respiratory coronavirus disease, COVID-19, has been a threat to global health, especially among those fighting directly against it. Nurses who work in critical care have reported very high levels of stress during these extreme circumstances. It is very important to measure the level of stress and resilience among these nurses in order to diminish further psychological distress. This study aims to assess the levels of perceived stress and resilience among critical care nurses.MethodologyIn this correlational cross-sectional study, critical care nurses (n = 139) were recruited by gatekeepers in a governmental university hospital in Riyadh City between 12 March and 8 April 2021 to complete an online questionnaire. The measurement tools used in this study were the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale 10 (CD-RISC-10) and the Perceived Stress Scale of COVID-19 (PSS-10 items). Data were analyzed using a descriptive and inferential analysis to calculate frequencies to determine the distribution of stress and resilience, and multiple regression was applied to assess the relationship between them.ResultsOne hundred and thirty-nine critical care nurse (64%) responded. The perceived levels of stress reported were: no stress (8%; n = 12), mild stress (14%; n = 21), moderate stress (38%; n = 55), high stress (22%; n = 32), and severe stress (18%; n = 26). The levels of resilience reported were: very low (8%; n = 11), low (18%; n = 26), moderate (42%; n = 62), and high (32%; n = 47). The level of stress and resilience reported by the majority of critical care nurses was moderate; there was no significant correlation between COVID-19-related stress and resilience among the critical care nurses. Severe levels of stress were mostly reported among critical care nurses working in the NICU and high levels of stress were reported among those working in the emergency department. The nurses reported being highly confident that they were able to handle personal epidemic related problems with a mean score of 2.36. This reflects having a high level of resilience (42%; n = 62) and was significantly associated with years of experience as a nurse (p < 0.0027).ConclusionAlthough COVID-19 cases had declined significantly during the study period in Saudi Arabia, the majority of nurses were still experiencing moderate to high levels of stress about the epidemic, but were, at the same time, moderately resilient. Continued monitoring of the stress levels of this high-risk group is highly essential. Conducting more research is needed to measure the effectiveness of psychosocial support interventions.