Stressors faced by healthcare professionals and coping strategies during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Frenkel MO
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8765664 | biostudies-literature | 2022
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Stressors faced by healthcare professionals and coping strategies during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany.
Frenkel Marie Ottilie MO Pollak Katja Mareike KM Schilling Oliver O Voigt Laura L Fritzsching Benedikt B Wrzus Cornelia C Egger-Lampl Sebastian S Merle Uta U Weigand Markus Alexander MA Mohr Stefan S
PloS one 20220118 1
<h4>Background</h4>The COVID-19 pandemic has exerted great pressure on national health systems, which have aimed to ensure comprehensive healthcare at all times. Healthcare professionals working with COVID-19 patients are on the frontline and thereby confronted with enormous demands. Although early reports exist on the psychological impact of the pandemic on frontline medical staff working in Asia, little is known about its impact on healthcare professionals in other countries and across various ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:COVID-19 pandemic has triggered psychological stress such as anxiety and depression among people around the globe. Due to the nature of the job, healthcare professionals (HCPs) are at high risk of infection and are facing social stigma as well. This research was conducted with the objective to evaluate the psychological influence of the COVID-19 pandemic among HCPs in Yemen and the coping strategies adopted thereof. A web-based, as well as face-to-face cross-sectional study was carried out from July to December 2021 among HCPs of Yemen. The generalized anxiety disorder (GAD-7), patient health questionnaire (PHQ-9), and Brief-COPE scales were applied for the evaluation of anxiety, depression, and coping strategies. A total of 197 HCPs participated in the study where 28.4% and 43.1% had anxiety and depression respectively. The prevalence of both anxiety and depression in the majority were found of the minimal to none and mild categories (71.6% vs. 56.9% respectively). The respondents who had received training on COVID-19 had statistically significant lower GAD-7 scores than those who did not (6.32 vs. 8.02 respectively). A significant statistical difference was observed between physicians versus nurses regarding depression based on the working area (p < 0.05). The physician and pharmacist had a significant positive association with brief COPE scores at the 50th centile compared to other HCPs. The female respondents had statistically significant higher mean Brief COPE scores than male respondents (78.11 vs. 69.50 respectively). Our findings illustrate the requirement for efficient policies through administrative, clinical, and welfare perspectives from the regulatory body in preparedness and preventive measures towards such a pandemic that aids HCPs to provide service in a stress-free condition and assurance of a better healthcare system..
| S-EPMC9979999 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Starting from China, the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) contagion spread unexpectedly and quickly all over the world, particularly affecting Italy. In the early stages of the epidemic, healthcare professionals have been in the front-line to manage the infection. The current study aimed to analyse the impact of COVID-19 outbreak on healthcare professionals and to detect some risk and protective factors of their distress levels, with regard to socio-demographic variables, direct exposure to COVID-19 and the coping strategies used to deal with stress. The data were collected during the peak of the infection. A total of 595 healthcare professionals enrolled in the study and completed the measures of socio-demographical and professional data, perceived stress (PSS) and coping strategies (COPE- NVI-25). Overall, we found that a positive attitude towards the stressful situation was the main protective factor, while female gender, seeking social support, avoidance strategies and working with COVID-19 patients were risk factors. Economic status, problem solving ability and turning to religion were not associated with stress levels. This study, one of the first on this topic, highlighted the main coping strategies used by healthcare professionals in facing the highly stressful situation caused by the pandemic.
| S-EPMC7397939 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesIncreased levels of stress have been reported among parents due to the factors associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. Although social support is known as a protective factor for the stressors, restrictions due to the pandemic could influence the provision and forms of social support. To date, few qualitative studies have examined the stressors and coping strategies in detail. In particular, the role of social support for single mothers during the pandemic remains largely unclear. The purpose of this study is to explore the stressors and coping strategies of single parents during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a focus on social support as a coping strategy.MethodsIn-depth interviews with 20 single mothers were conducted in Japan between October and November 2021. Data were deductively coded using thematic coding based on codes related to stressors and coping strategies, focusing on social support as a coping strategy.ResultsMost interviewees recognized additional stressors after the COVID-19 outbreak. Five stressors were mentioned by the participants: (1) fear of infection, (2) financial concerns, (3) stress caused by interactions with their children, (4) restrictions on childcare facilities, and (5) stress related to staying at home. The major coping strategies were (1) informal social support from family, friends, and coworkers, (2) formal social support from municipalities or nonprofit organizations, and (3) self-coping strategies.ConclusionSingle mothers in Japan recognized additional stressors after the COVID-19 outbreak. Our results support the importance of both formal and informal social support for single mothers, either in-person or online, to cope with stress during the pandemic.
| S-EPMC9994735 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Increasing cases, insufficient amount of personal protection equipment, extremely demanding workloads, and lack of adequate therapies to save lives can contribute to a psychological burden directly related to working during disease outbreaks. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at a high risk of contracting COVID-19 due to its ability to spread efficiently through asymptomatic and symptomatic individuals. There are limited studies assessing the pandemic's psychological impact on HCWs, specifically those in close proximity to hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Our study explored the emotions, perceived stressors, and coping strategies of front-line HCWs at high risk of exposure to COVID-19 during the first surge at our community-based teaching hospital, the epicenter of COVID-19 in Connecticut. A validated comprehensive questionnaire derived and modified from previous epidemics was used to inquire about staff feelings, factors that caused stress and factors that mitigated stress. Personal coping strategies and factors that can increase staff's motivation to work during future events of similar nature were also asked. Emotional reactions, coping mechanisms, and stressors varied by healthcare role, while some experiences and reactions were similar among groups. Willingness to participate in a second wave of the pandemic or future outbreaks is strongly driven by adequate personal protective equipment, financial recognition, and recognition from management, similarly reported in previous disease outbreaks. All groups felt a reduction in stress due to a sense of camaraderie and teamwork, as well as when sharing jokes or humor with colleagues. Our HCWs at high risk of exposure experienced significant emotional distress during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. By understanding the needs and experiences of our HCWs at highest risk, we can improve our psychological support using targeted interventions during future waves of this pandemic or similar devastating events.
| S-EPMC8270181 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Spreading rapidly across the United States beginning in the spring of 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic radically disrupted Americans' lives. Previous studies of community-wide disasters suggested people are fairly resilient and identified resources and strategies that promote that resilience. Yet, the COVID-19 pandemic is in some ways unique, with high levels of uncertainty, evolving implications and restrictions, and varied and uneven impacts. How resilient were Americans as the pandemic progressed? What psychosocial resources and coping strategies facilitated adjustment as the country moved into a summer of uneven reopenings and reclosures? Data from a national sample of 674 Americans were gathered at the height of early lockdowns and peaking infections in mid-April, 2020, and again, 5 and 10 weeks later. The study aimed to determine levels and sources of distress and to identify the resources and coping efforts that promoted or impeded resilience. Early levels of distress diminished to some extent over subsequent months while levels of wellbeing were comparable with usual norms, suggesting a largely resilient response. COVID-19-related stress exposure also decreased gradually over time. Older age, higher levels of mindfulness and social support, and meaning focused coping predicted better adjustment, reflecting resilience, while avoidance coping was particularly unhelpful. In models predicting change over time, approach-oriented coping (i.e., active coping, meaning-focused coping, and seeking social support) was minimally predictive of subsequent adjustment. Given the unique and ongoing circumstances presented by COVID-19, specific interventions targeting psychosocial resources and coping identified here may help to promote resilience as the pandemic continues to unfold. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
| S-EPMC8595499 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused increasing challenges for healthcare professionals globally. However, there is a dearth of information about these challenges in many developing countries, including Bangladesh. This study aims to explore the challenges faced by healthcare professionals (doctors and nurses) during COVID-19 in Bangladesh. Methods: We conducted qualitative research among healthcare professionals of different hospitals and clinics in Khulna and Dhaka city of Bangladesh from May 2020 to August 2020. We conducted 15 in-depth telephone interviews using a snowball sampling technique. We used an in-depth interview guide as data were collected, audiotaped, and transcribed. The data were analyzed both manually and using QDA Miner software as we used thematic analysis for this study. Results: Seven themes emerged from the study. Participants experienced higher workload, psychological distress, shortage of quality personal protective equipment (PPE), social exclusion/stigmatization, lack of incentives, absence of coordination, and proper management during their service. These healthcare professionals faced difficulty coping with these challenges due to situational and organizational factors. They reported of faith in God and mutual support to be the keys to adapt to adversities. Adequate support to address the difficulties faced by healthcare professionals is necessary for an overall improved health outcome during the pandemic. Conclusion: The findings highlight the common challenges faced by healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 outbreak. This implies the need to support adequate safety kits, protocols, and support for both physical and mental health of the healthcare professionals.
| S-EPMC8383315 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has led to a wide range of stressors related to depressive symptoms. Prevention measures like physical distancing have burdened the general population, especially in highly urbanized areas. However, little is known about the associations between pandemic-related stressors, coping strategies, and depressive symptoms in highly urbanized vs. less urbanized environments.MethodsParticipants were recruited in a cross-sectional online survey in Germany. Propensity score matching yielded a matched sample of city (n = 453) and town (n = 453) inhabitants. Depressive symptoms, COVID-19-related stressors, and coping strategies were compared between cities and towns. Multiple regression analysis was performed to determine associations between pandemic-related stressors and depressive symptoms for the two groups separately.ResultsCity inhabitants showed significantly higher depression scores than town inhabitants (t = 2.11, df = 897.95, p = 0.035). Seven coping strategies were more often used by the city sample. Depressive symptoms were associated with "restricted physical social contact" and "difficult housing conditions" (adjusted R 2= 0.19, F [9,443] = 12.52, p < 0.001) in city inhabitants, and with "fear of infection" and "difficult housing conditions" (adjusted R 2= 0.20, F [9,443] = 13.50, p < 0.001) in town inhabitants.LimitationsThe data were collected at the end of the first wave and represent a snapshot without causal inferences. Pandemic-related stressors were measured with a newly developed scale.ConclusionDepressive symptoms, perceived stressors, and approach/avoidance coping strategies differed between city vs. town inhabitants. These differences should be considered in policy-making and mental health care.
| S-EPMC8828998 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study aimed to examine the psychosocial impact and identify risk factors for poor psychosocial outcomes in healthcare professionals during the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Cyprus. Healthcare professionals are in the forefront of the COVID-19 pandemic facing an unprecedented global health crisis, which can have consequences on their psychosocial health. There is a need to identify risk factors for poor psychosocial outcomes to inform the design of tailored psychological interventions. Cross-sectional online study. A total of 1071 healthcare professionals completed self-report questionnaires. Measures included sociodemographic information, COVID-19-related characteristics, quality of life (Brief World Health Organization Quality of Life; WHOQOL-Bref), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7; GAD-7), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-8; PHQ-8), occupational burnout (Copenhagen Burnout Inventory; CBI), and coping (Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced; Brief COPE). This article follows the STROBE reporting guidelines. The prevalence of moderate to severe anxiety and clinically significant depression was 27.6% and 26.8%, respectively. Significant risk factors for poor psychological outcomes included being female, being a nurse or doctor (vs non-medical professional), working in frontline units (inpatient, intensive care), perceptions of inadequate workplace preparation to deal with the pandemic, and using avoidance coping. Depression and occupational burnout were significant risk factors for poor quality of life. The findings suggest several individual, psychosocial, and organisational risk factors for the adverse psychological outcomes observed in healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study highlights the urgent need for screening for anxiety and depression and psychological interventions to combat an imminent mental health crisis in healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic. Pandemic response protocols and public health initiatives aiming to improve and prevent mental health problems in healthcare professionals during the current and future health crises, need to account for the various factors at play.
| S-EPMC8447326 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealthcare professionals in Taiwan are exposed to a myriad of occupational health and safety hazards, including physical, biological, chemical, ergonomic, and psychosocial hazards. Healthcare professionals working in hospitals and healthcare facilities are more likely to be subjected to these hazards than their counterparts working in other areas.ObjectivesThis review aims to assess current research literature regarding this situation with a view to informing policy makers and practitioners about the risks of exposure and offer evidence-based recommendations on how to eliminate or reduce such risks.MethodsUsing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses review strategy, we conducted a systematic review of studies related to occupational health and safety conducted between January 2000 and January 2019 using MEDLINE (Ovid), PubMed, PMC, TOXLINE, CINAHL, PLOS One, and Access Pharmacy databases.ResultsThe review detected 490 studies addressing the issue of occupational health and safety hazards; of these, 30 articles were included in this systematic review. These articles reported a variety of exposures faced by healthcare professionals. This review also revealed a number of strategies that can be adopted to control, eliminate, or reduce hazards to healthcare professionals in Taiwan.ConclusionHospitals and healthcare facilities have many unique occupational health and safety hazards that can potentially affect the health and performance of healthcare professionals. The impact of such hazards on healthcare professionals poses a serious public health issue in Taiwan; therefore, controlling, eliminating, or reducing exposure can contribute to a stronger healthcare workforce with great potential to improve patient care and the healthcare system in Taiwan. Eliminating or reducing hazards can best be achieved through engineering measures, administrative policy, and the use of personal protective equipment.ImplicationsThis review has research, policy, and practice implications and provides future students and researchers with information on systematic review methodologies based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses strategy. It also identifies occupational health and safety risks and provides insights and strategies to address them.
| S-EPMC7235655 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Healthcare professionals (HCP) might be at increased risk of acquisition of multidrug-resistant bacteria (MDRB), i.e., methillicin-resistant Staphy l oc occus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE), and multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacteria (MDRGN) and could be an unidentified source of MDRB transmission. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence as well as risk factors of MDRB colonization among HCP. HCP (n=107) taking part in an antibiotic stewardship program, were voluntarily recruited to perform a rectal swab and to fill in a questionnaire to identify risk factors of MDRB carriage, i.e. being physician, gender, travel abroad within the previous 12 months, vegetarianism, regular consumption of raw meat, contact to domestic animals, household members with contact to livestock, work or fellowship abroad, as well as medical treatment abroad and antibiotic therapy within the previous 12 months. Selective solid media were used to determine the colonization rate with MRSA, VRE and MDRGN. MDRGN were further characterized by molecular analysis of underlying β-lactamases. None of the participants had an intestinal colonization with MRSA or VRE. 3.7% of the participants were colonized with extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae, predominantly bla CTX-M type. Neither additional flouroquinolone resistance nor carbapenem resistance was detected in any of these isolates. No risk factors were identified to have a significant impact of MDRB carriage among HCP. A colonization rate of 3.7% with ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae is of interest, but comparing it to previously published data with similar colonization rates in the healthy population in the same geographic area, it is probably less an occupational risk.
| S-EPMC6301738 | biostudies-other