How anxious were Quebec healthcare professionals during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic? A web-based cross-sectional survey.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may cause significant anxiety among healthcare professionals (HCPs). COVID-19-related psychological impacts on HCPs in Western countries have received relatively little attention.Objective
This study aims to assess the levels of anxiety in HCPs working in the province of Quebec (Canada) during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic and identify factors associated with changes in anxiety scores.Methods
An exploratory online cross-sectional survey was conducted among Quebec HCPs from April to July 2020. The Spielberger's State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) was used to measure state anxiety among HCPs. Descriptive and multivariate analyses were performed.Results
A total of 426 HCPs completed the survey. Anxiety scores ranged from 20 to 75 points, with 80 being the highest possible value on the STAI scale. Being a female HCP [B = 5.89, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.49-9.3] and declaring having the intention to avoid caring for patients with COVID-19 (B = 3.75, 95% CI: 1.29-6.22) were associated with increased anxiety scores. Having more years of experience was associated with decreased anxiety scores [B = -0.2, 95% CI: -0.32-(-0.08)].Conclusion
Organizational strategies aimed at preventing and relieving anxiety should target junior female HCPs who express the intention to avoid caring for patients with COVID-19. Seniority could become an important criterion in selecting frontline HCPs during pandemics. Further studies are needed to comprehensively examine the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on Canadian HCPs and identify evidence-based coping strategies.
SUBMITTER: Cleophat JE
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8673505 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic has initiated an upheaval in society and has been the cause of considerable stress during this period. Healthcare professionals have been on the front line during this health crisis, particularly paramedical staff. The aim of this study was to assess the high level of stress of healthcare workers during the first wave of the pandemic.Materials and methodsThe COVISTRESS international study is a questionnaire disseminated online collecting demographic and stress-related data over the globe, during the pandemic. Stress levels were evaluated using non-calibrated visual analog scale, from 0 (no stress) to 100 (maximal stress).ResultsAmong the 13,537 individuals from 44 countries who completed the survey from January to June 2020, we included 10,051 workers (including 1379 healthcare workers, 631 medical doctors and 748 paramedical staff). The stress levels during the first wave of the pandemic were 57.8 ± 33 in the whole cohort, 65.3 ± 29.1 in medical doctors, and 73.6 ± 27.7 in paramedical staff. Healthcare professionals and especially paramedical staff had the highest levels of stress (p < 0.001 vs non-healthcare workers). Across all occupational categories, women had systematically significantly higher levels of work-related stress than men (p < 0.001). There was a negative correlation between age and stress level (r = -0.098, p < 0.001). Healthcare professionals demonstrated an increased risk of very-high stress levels (>80) compared to other workers (OR = 2.13, 95% CI 1.87-2.41). Paramedical staff risk for very-high levels of stress was higher than doctors' (1.88, 1.50-2.34). The risk of high levels of stress also increased in women (1.83, 1.61-2.09; p < 0.001 vs. men) and in people aged <50 (1.45, 1.26-1.66; p < 0.001 vs. aged >50).ConclusionsThe first wave of the pandemic was a major stressful event for healthcare workers, especially paramedical staff. Among individuals, women were the most at risk while age was a protective factor.
| S-EPMC8494302 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionHealthcare workers are vulnerable to adverse mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. We assessed prevalence of mental disorders and associated factors during the first wave of the pandemic among healthcare professionals in Spain.MethodsAll workers in 18 healthcare institutions (6 AACC) in Spain were invited to web-based surveys assessing individual characteristics, COVID-19 infection status and exposure, and mental health status (May 5 - September 7, 2020). We report: probable current mental disorders (Major Depressive Disorder-MDD- [PHQ-8≥10], Generalized Anxiety Disorder-GAD- [GAD-7≥10], Panic attacks, Posttraumatic Stress Disorder -PTSD- [PCL-5≥7]; and Substance Use Disorder -SUD-[CAGE-AID≥2]. Severe disability assessed by the Sheehan Disability Scale was used to identify probable "disabling" current mental disorders.Results9,138 healthcare workers participated. Prevalence of screen-positive disorder: 28.1% MDD; 22.5% GAD, 24.0% Panic; 22.2% PTSD; and 6.2% SUD. Overall 45.7% presented any current and 14.5% any disabling current mental disorder. Workers with pre-pandemic lifetime mental disorders had almost twice the prevalence than those without. Adjusting for all other variables, odds of any disabling mental disorder were: prior lifetime disorders (TUS: OR=5.74; 95%CI 2.53-13.03; Mood: OR=3.23; 95%CI:2.27-4.60; Anxiety: OR=3.03; 95%CI:2.53-3.62); age category 18-29 years (OR=1.36; 95%CI:1.02-1.82), caring "all of the time" for COVID-19 patients (OR=5.19; 95%CI: 3.61-7.46), female gender (OR=1.58; 95%CI: 1.27-1.96) and having being in quarantine or isolated (OR= 1.60; 95CI:1.31-1.95).ConclusionsOne in seven Spanish healthcare workers screened positive for a disabling mental disorder during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Workers reporting pre-pandemic lifetime mental disorders, those frequently exposed to COVID-19 patients, infected or quarantined/isolated, female workers, and auxiliary nurses should be considered groups in need of mental health monitoring and support.
| S-EPMC10068024 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionHealthcare workers are vulnerable to adverse mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. We assessed prevalence of mental disorders and associated factors during the first wave of the pandemic among healthcare professionals in Spain.MethodsAll workers in 18 healthcare institutions (6 AACC) in Spain were invited to web-based surveys assessing individual characteristics, COVID-19 infection status and exposure, and mental health status (May 5 - September 7, 2020). We report: probable current mental disorders (Major Depressive Disorder-MDD- [PHQ-8≥10], Generalized Anxiety Disorder-GAD- [GAD-7≥10], Panic attacks, Posttraumatic Stress Disorder -PTSD- [PCL-5≥7]; and Substance Use Disorder -SUD-[CAGE-AID≥2]. Severe disability assessed by the Sheehan Disability Scale was used to identify probable "disabling" current mental disorders.Results9,138 healthcare workers participated. Prevalence of screen-positive disorder: 28.1% MDD; 22.5% GAD, 24.0% Panic; 22.2% PTSD; and 6.2% SUD. Overall 45.7% presented any current and 14.5% any disabling current mental disorder. Workers with pre-pandemic lifetime mental disorders had almost twice the prevalence than those without. Adjusting for all other variables, odds of any disabling mental disorder were: prior lifetime disorders (TUS: OR=5.74; 95%CI 2.53-13.03; Mood: OR=3.23; 95%CI:2.27-4.60; Anxiety: OR=3.03; 95%CI:2.53-3.62); age category 18-29 years (OR=1.36; 95%CI:1.02-1.82), caring "all of the time" for COVID-19 patients (OR=5.19; 95%CI: 3.61-7.46), female gender (OR=1.58; 95%CI: 1.27-1.96) and having being in quarantine or isolated (OR= 1.60; 95CI:1.31-1.95).ConclusionsOne in seven Spanish healthcare workers screened positive for a disabling mental disorder during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Workers reporting pre-pandemic lifetime mental disorders, those frequently exposed to COVID-19 patients, infected or quarantined/isolated, female workers, and auxiliary nurses should be considered groups in need of mental health monitoring and support.
| S-EPMC7726524 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSince the COVID-19 pandemic began, there have been concerns related to the preparedness of healthcare workers (HCWs). This study aimed to describe the level of awareness and preparedness of hospital HCWs at the time of the first wave.MethodsThis multinational, multicenter, cross-sectional survey was conducted among hospital HCWs from February to May 2020. We used a hierarchical logistic regression multivariate analysis to adjust the influence of variables based on awareness and preparedness. We then used association rule mining to identify relationships between HCW confidence in handling suspected COVID-19 patients and prior COVID-19 case-management training.ResultsWe surveyed 24,653 HCWs from 371 hospitals across 57 countries and received 17,302 responses from 70.2% HCWs overall. The median COVID-19 preparedness score was 11.0 (interquartile range [IQR] = 6.0-14.0) and the median awareness score was 29.6 (IQR = 26.6-32.6). HCWs at COVID-19 designated facilities with previous outbreak experience, or HCWs who were trained for dealing with the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak, had significantly higher levels of preparedness and awareness (p<0.001). Association rule mining suggests that nurses and doctors who had a 'great-extent-of-confidence' in handling suspected COVID-19 patients had participated in COVID-19 training courses. Male participants (mean difference = 0.34; 95% CI = 0.22, 0.46; p<0.001) and nurses (mean difference = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.53, 0.81; p<0.001) had higher preparedness scores compared to women participants and doctors.InterpretationThere was an unsurprising high level of awareness and preparedness among HCWs who participated in COVID-19 training courses. However, disparity existed along the lines of gender and type of HCW. It is unknown whether the difference in COVID-19 preparedness that we detected early in the pandemic may have translated into disproportionate SARS-CoV-2 burden of disease by gender or HCW type.
| S-EPMC8694437 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Resilience is defined as the capacity to cope successfully with change or adversity. The aims of our study were to investigate levels of resilience in Italian healthcare professionals (HCPs) during the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and to identify potential predictors of resilience. We performed a web-based survey of HCPs (n = 1009) working in Italian hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey contained a 14-item resilience scale (RS14) and questionnaires to evaluate depression and anxiety symptoms. Non-HCP individuals (n = 375) from the general population were used for comparison. HCPs showed significantly lower resilience compared to the control group (p = 0.001). No significant differences were observed after stratification for geographical area, work setting, role, or suspected/confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19. In a linear regression analysis, RS14 was inversely correlated with depression (R2 = 0.227, p < 0.001) and anxiety (R2 = 0.117, p < 0.001) and directly correlated with age (R2 = 0.012, p < 0.001) but not with body mass index (BMI, R2 = 0.002, p = 0.213). In male HCPs, higher depression score (odds ratio (OR) 1.147, p < 0.001) or BMI (OR 1.136, p = 0.011) significantly predicted having low resilience. In female HCPs, higher depression score (OR 1.111, p < 0.0001) and working in a COVID-19 free setting (OR 2.308, p = 0.002) significantly predicted having low resilience. HCPs satisfied with personal protective equipment had higher levels of resilience (p < 0.010). Our findings suggest that resilience was lower in Italian HCPs than in the general population after the first COVID-19 wave. Specific factors can be identified, and targeted interventions may have an important role to foster resilience of HCPs.
| S-EPMC7760580 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Mandatory occupational vaccination for health care workers (HCWs) is a debatable issue, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to determine Mongolian HCWs' attitudes towards mandatory occupational vaccination, the intention to get the COVID-19 vaccine, and the associated factors. A cross-sectional study based on an online survey with a convenience sampling strategy was conducted from February to April 2021 among 238 Mongolia HCWs. Chi-square and logistic regression were performed for analysis. While only 39.9% of HCWs were aware of recommended occupational vaccinations, they highly agreed with the mandatory occupational vaccination on HCWs (93.7%). The agreement rate is significantly higher than their attitude toward general vaccination (93.7% vs. 77.8%). HCW's willingness to get the COVID-19 vaccine was high (67.2%). HCWs aged 26-35 years old who worked in tertiary level hospitals had less willingness to get the COVID-19 vaccine (50%). Participants with lower confidence in the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine (ORs = 15.659) and less positive attitudes toward general vaccination (ORs = 5.288) were less likely to get the COVID-19 vaccine. Mongolian HCWs' agreement rate of mandatory occupational vaccination is higher than other countries. Their intention to get the COVID-19 vaccine is high and associated with confidence in the effectiveness of the vaccine.
| S-EPMC8751197 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDuring the Covid-19 pandemic the Dutch government implemented its so-called 'intelligent lockdown' in which people were urged to leave their homes as little as possible and work from home. This life changing event may have caused changes in lifestyle behaviour, an important factor in the onset and course of diseases. The overarching aim of this study is to determine life-style related changes during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic among a representative sample of the adult population in the Netherlands.MethodsLife-style related changes were studied among a random representative sample of the adult population in the Netherlands using an online survey conducted from 22 to 27 May 2020. Differences in COVID-19-related lifestyle changes between Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) users and non-CAM users were determined. The survey included a modified version of the I-CAM-Q and 26 questions on lifestyle related measures, anxiety, and need for support to maintain lifestyle changes.Results1004 respondents were included in the study, aged between 18 and 88 years (50.7% females). Changes to a healthier lifestyle were observed in 19.3% of the population, mainly due to a change in diet habits, physical activity and relaxation, of whom 56.2% reported to be motivated to maintain this behaviour change in a post-COVID-19 era. Fewer respondents (12.3%) changed into an unhealthier lifestyle. Multivariable logistic regression analyses revealed that changing into a healthier lifestyle was positively associated with the variables 'Worried/Anxious getting COVID-19' (OR: 1.56, 95% C.I. 1.26-1.93), 'CAM use' (OR: 2.04, 95% C.I. 1.38-3.02) and 'stress in relation to financial situation' (OR: 1.89, 95% C.I. 1.30-2.74). 'Age' (OR 18-25: 1.00, OR 25-40: 0.55, 95% C.I. 0.31-0.96, OR 40-55:0.50 95% C.I. 0.28-0.87 OR 55+: 0.1095% C.I. 0.10-0.33), 'stress in relation to health' (OR: 2.52, 95% C.I. 1.64-3.86) and 'stress in relation to the balance work and home' (OR: 1.69, 95% C.I. 1.11-2.57) were found predicting the change into an unhealthier direction.ConclusionThese findings suggest that the coronavirus crisis resulted in a healthier lifestyle in one part and, to a lesser extent, in an unhealthier lifestyle in another part of the Dutch population. Further studies are warranted to see whether this behavioural change is maintained over time, and how different lifestyle factors can affect the susceptibility for and the course of COVID-19.
| S-EPMC8231077 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimThe aim of the study was to evaluate the psychological impact on nursing students at the end of period of confinement during the first wave of the COVID-19 outbreak in Spain.DesignA cross-sectional study reported in line with the STROBE guidelines.MethodsNursing students were invited to complete an online questionnaire at the end of the 2019-2020 academic year using convenience sampling. The questionnaire collected data on sociodemographic factors, work, and life experiences in relation to COVID-19, habits and lifestyle using the World Health Organization Five Well-Being Index (WHO-5) and the Generalized Anxiety disorder-7 scale. Variables related to anxiety were analysed using multiple lineal regression analysis, RESULTS: The prevalence of low psychological well-being in the 203 students was 44.3% and of anxiety 55.7%. In the multivariate analysis the variables associated with anxiety were having worked in the pandemic, having had symptoms of COVID-19 and having been afraid of getting infected.ConclusionsThe levels of anxiety due to the COVID-19 pandemic in nursing students have been high, and levels of psychological well-being have been low. The fact of having worked during the pandemic, having had symptoms compatible with COVID-19 or being afraid of getting infected are associated with the highest scores for anxiety.Relevance to clinical practiceThis study gives more evidence on the psychological impact on nursing students during the first wave of the pandemic in Spain. This can be used to design anxiety management programmes for inclusion into teaching syllabuses. It also gives arguments for the setting up of psychological and emotional support services for these students and other healthcare professionals working during the pandemic.
| S-EPMC9190679 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the important role of professionals in designing and communicating effective policies. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the level of trust in the COVID-19 national public health policy among public health professionals in Israel and its correlates during the first wave of the pandemic.MethodsA purposive sampling of public health professionals in Israel, through professional and academic public health networks (N = 112). The survey was distributed online during May 2020. Level of trust was measured by the mean of 18 related statements using a 5-point Likert scale, where 1 means not at all and 5 means to a very high extent, and grouped as low and high trust by median (2.75).ResultsA moderate level of trust in policy was found among professionals (Mean: 2.84, 95% Cl: [2.70, 2.98]). The level of trust among public health physicians was somewhat lower than among researchers and other health professionals (Mean: 2.66 vs. 2.81 and 2.96, respectively, p = 0.286), with a higher proportion expressing low trust (70% vs. 51% and 38%, respectively, p < 0.05). Participants with a low compared to high level of trust in policy were less supportive of the use of Israel Security Agency tools for contact tracing (Mean = 2.21 vs. 3.17, p < 0.01), and reported lower levels of trust in the Ministry of Health (Mean = 2.52 vs. 3.91, p < 0.01). A strong positive correlation was found between the level of trust in policy and the level of trust in the Ministry of Health (rs = 0.782, p < 0.01). Most professionals (77%) rated their involvement in decision making as low or not at all, and they reported a lower level of trust in policy than those with high involvement (Mean = 2.76 vs. 3.12, p < 0.05). Regarding trust in the ability of agencies to deal with the COVID-19 crisis, respondents reported high levels of trust in the Association of Public Health Physicians (80%) and in hospitals (79%), but very low levels of trust in the Minister of Health (5%).ConclusionsThis study shows that Israeli public health professionals exhibited moderate levels of trust in COVID-19 national public health policy and varied levels of trust in government agencies during the first wave of COVID-19. The level of trust in policy was lower among most of the participants who were not involved in decision making. The level of trust found is worrisome and should be monitored, because it may harm cooperation, professional response, and public trust. Professionals' trust in policy-making during early stages of emergencies is important, and preemptive measures should be considered, such as involving professionals in the decision-making process, maintaining transparency of the process, and basing policy on scientific and epidemiological evidence.
| S-EPMC8995887 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsThe proportion of UK oncology healthcare professionals (HCPs) infected with SARS-CoV-2 during the COVID-19 pandemic's first wave is unknown. The primary aim of this study was to determine the SARS-CoV-2 infection and seroprevalence rates among HCPs.Materials and methodsPatient-facing oncology HCPs working at three large UK hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic's first wave underwent polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and antibody testing [Luminex and point-of-care (POC) tests] on two occasions 28 days apart (June-July 2020).ResultsIn total, 434 HCPs were recruited: nurses (58.3%), doctors (21.2%), radiographers (10.4%), administrators (10.1%); 26.3% reported prior symptoms suggestive of SARS-CoV-2. All participants were PCR negative during the study, but 18.4% were Luminex seropositive on day 1, of whom 42.5% were POC seropositive. Nurses had the highest seropositive prevalence trend (21.3%, P = 0.2). Thirty-eight per cent of seropositive HCPs reported previous SARS-CoV-2 symptoms: 1.9 times higher odds than seronegative HCPs (P = 0.01). Of 400 participants retested on day 28, 13.3% were Luminex seropositive (92.5% previously, 7.5% newly). Thirty-two per cent of initially seropositive HCPs were seronegative on day 28.ConclusionIn this large cohort of PCR-negative patient-facing oncology HCPs, almost one in five were SARS-CoV-2 antibody positive at the start of the pandemic's first wave. Our findings that one in three seropositive HCPs retested 28 days later became seronegative support regular SARS-CoV-2 PCR and antibody testing until widespread immunity is achieved by effective vaccination.
| S-EPMC8064872 | biostudies-literature