BackgroundThe relatively young and inexperienced healthcare professionals in Mongolia faced with an unprecedent service demand in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to the small size of the healthcare workforce the Mongolian Health Ministry had no choice but to mandate continuous and long workhours from the healthcare workforce. Many of the healthcare professionals exhibited signs and symptoms of mental health disorders. This study aimed to discern the prevalence various mental health concerns, i.e., depression, anxiety and stress, insomnia, and to discern (...) the factors that increased susceptibility to mental health disorders among frontline healthcare professionals providing healthcare services for COVID-19 patients in Mongolia.MethodsA Cross-sectional research design was implemented. We collected data from 965 healthcare professional, randomly selected from 18 government hospitals, in four regions of Mongolia. Data were collected using the Depression Anxiety Stress-21, the General Self-Efficacy Scale, and the Insomnia Severity Index instruments. We constructed the scale of Pandemic Response Symptoms which captured stress, depression, and anxiety. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Kruskal–Wallis statistical test and multinominal logistic regression analysis.ResultsPrevalence of depression, anxiety, and stress was documented among Mongolian healthcare professionals. Perception of self-efficacy reduced susceptibility to PaReSy either at mild/moderate or severe/extremely severe level. Within each stratum of insomnia, the risk of experiencing PaReSy increased almost linearly both in the category of mild/moderate PaReSy and in the category of severe/extremely severe PaReSy.ConclusionImproving self-efficacy and sleeping quality can assist healthcare workers to manage depression, anxiety, and stress. Findings provide important evidence to implement measures and strategies to assist healthcare professionals in low- and middle-income countries to constructively address their mental health concerns and needs. (shrink)

The coronavirus disease imposes an unusual risk to the physical and mental health of healthcare workers and thereby to the functioning of healthcare systems during the crisis. This study investigates the clinical knowledge of healthcare workers about COVID-19, their ways of acquiring information, their emotional distress and risk perception, their adherence to preventive guidelines, their changed work situation due to the pandemic, and their perception of how the healthcare system has coped with the pandemic. It is based on a quantitative (...) cross-sectional survey of 185 Swiss healthcare workers directly attending to patients during the pandemic, with 22% of them being assigned to COVID-19-infected patients. The participants answered between 16th June and 15th July 2020, shortly after the first wave of COVID-19 had been overcome and the national government had relaxed its preventive regulations to a great extent. The questionnaire incorporated parts of the “Standard questionnaire on risk perception of an infectious disease outbreak”, which were adapted to the case of COVID-19. Clinical knowledge was lowest regarding the effectiveness of standard hygiene. Knowledge of infectiousness, incubation time, and life-threatening disease progression was higher, however still significantly lower than regarding asymptomatic cases and transmission without physical contact. 70% of the healthcare workers reported considerable emotional distress on at least one of the measured dimensions. They worried significantly more strongly about patients, elderly people, and family members, than about their own health. Adherence to preventive guidelines by the government displayed patterns such that not all guidelines were followed equally. Most of the participants were faced with a lack of protective materials, personnel, structures, processes, and contingency plans. An increase in stress level was the most prevalent among the diverse effects the pandemic had on their work situation. Better medical equipment, better protection for their own mental and physical health, more personnel, more comprehensive information about the symptoms of the disease, and a system of earlier warning were the primary lessons to be learned in view of upcoming waves of the pandemic. (shrink)

The new Coronavirus has been declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization. The sudden outbreak of this new virus and the measure of lockdown adopted to contain the epidemic have profoundly changed the lifestyles of the Italian population, with an impact on people’s quality of life and on their social relationships. In particular, due to forced and prolonged cohabitation, couples may be subject to specific stressors during the epidemic. In addition, living with a chronic health condition may add (...) specific challenges to the ones posed by the epidemic itself. The present cross-sectional study aimed to provide a picture of the challenges as well as the resources for both individual and relational well-being of Italian individuals in a couple relationship, with a specific attention to the comparison between individuals living with and without a chronic disease. Results showed that people with a chronic disease had lower psychological well-being and more fears and worries about the COVID-19. People with a chronic disease perceived fewer resources than healthy people. Moreover, the challenges are shown to be associated with less psychological well-being and high pessimism about the future. Instead individual, relational, and social resources play a protective role during the pandemic for both healthy and chronically ill people. (shrink)

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 has resulted in an increase in known risk factors for mental health problems. Mexico adopted lockdown and physical distancing as a containment strategy with potential consequences on day to day life, such as social isolation, loss of income and loneliness that can have important consequences in terms of mental health.Objective: We aimed to examine the effect of the initial phases of the COVID-19 pandemic on psychological distress, well-being and perceived physical health among Mexican-base respondents and to (...) examine whether coping strategies would play a potential intermediating role in relation to these variables. Under the Existential Positive Psychology perspective, an emphasis was made on meaning-centered coping.Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted between April 30 and June 16th 2020 among 604 Mexicans-base respondents of which 471 were women and 132 men. Data was collected by using online questionnaires. Psychological distress was measured using the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale. The Brief COPE Inventory was used to assess problem-focused and emotion-focused coping strategies. We also used the Meaning-Centered Coping Scale. PERMA-Profiler was used to assess well-being, perceived physical health, and loneliness. Profiler and Descriptive analyses and bivariate linear regression were performed to examine the association of variables.Results: 45.9% of the participants reported moderate to extremely severe psychological distress. Our results demonstrate that problem-focused and emotion-focused coping were positively related to psychological distress, whereas meaning-centered coping was negatively associated with distress. Furthermore, psychological distress played a potential negative role in the perceived physical health, while meaning-centered coping and well-being buffered the negative influence of psychological distress on perceived physical health (completely standardized indirect effect = –0.01, SE: 0.012, 95% CI [−0.065; −0.017].Conclusion: Meaning-centered coping was found to suppress the negative influence of psychological distress on sensation of decreased physical health corroborating the critical role of meaning in life in promoting well-being. Future studies can further examine the value of the critical role of meaning in life in promoting well-being as a protective factor against severe distress during traumatic events. Findings of this study can be used to orient policies and interventions aimed to alleviate suffering in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. (shrink)

Introduction:Healthcare workers facing the threatening COVID-19 can experience severe difficulties. Despite the need to evaluate both the psychological distress and positive protective resources, brief and reliable assessment tools are lacking.Aim:Study 1 aimed at developing a new assessment tool to measure psychological distress and esteem in healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Study 2 aimed to explore and compare the psychological reactions of healthcare workers of the COVID-19 and the non-COVID-19 wards.Methods:In Study 1, psychologists created 25 items based on their clinical (...) experience. A preliminary qualitative evaluation selected the best 15 items for the new tool assessing the COVID-19 psychological impact with 2 scales: psychological distress and esteem. The CPI-HP was administered to 110 healthcare professionals to study its psychometric properties and the internal structure with exploratory graph analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. Study 2 compared two groups of healthcare professionals of the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 departments.Results:In Study 1, the CPI-HP showed satisfying psychometric properties, and the two-factor structure was confirmed with good fit indices. In Study 2, the two groups of healthcare workers showed comparable levels of psychological distress and resilient coping, but the COVID-19 group displayed significantly higher esteem and appreciation of the experience.Discussion:All operators showed high psychological distress during the emergency, but the COVID-19 group reported higher resources, probably due to stronger group cohesion and greater esteem, perceived meaning, and own work value.Conclusion:Assessing the psychological distress and resources of healthcare professionals with specific tools is important. Psychological interventions should promote their psychological health. (shrink)

COVID-19 has affected millions of people around the globe. People's mental health, especially those of nurses, has been primarily affected by the fear of this virus. More focus has been paid to vaccination and treatment of the virus, but less attestation has been given to addressing the mental health of people affected by the virus. Empirical studies show that different external factors are not easily manageable and controllable by the individual. This study preliminarily explores the connection between fear of COVID-19 (...) and secondary traumatic stress in nurses. Further, it examines the moderating effects of occupational self-efficacy on the relationship between fear of COVID-19 and secondary traumatic stress. Data for the study was collected from the nurses of six large hospitals in Karachi, Pakistan. The final analysis was performed on 243 samples. Studies on COVID-19 suggest that increased occupational self-efficacy decreases fear and its impact. This study offers insights for managers to develop stress management programs and provide proper training and counseling sessions to the nurses to motivate them emotionally. Theoretically, this study broadens the understanding of the theory of emotions by using the pandemic as a stressor. Future studies may explore different roles of occupational self-efficacy and study its influential role in managing different kinds of emotions explained by the theory of emotions. Managers at the workplace could design different self-efficacy training for nurses to increase their self-motivation to fight different types of stress they face at the workplace. (shrink)

We explored the effects of resilience in the healthcare setting during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. Our study sheds light on the cross-level effects of resilience in hospitals and thus responds to calls to research this empirically. In a cross-sectional study design, the perceptions of resilience of employees in hospitals and of transformations at the individual, team, and organizational level were analyzed. An online survey was conducted in summer 2020 in Germany in which 1,710 healthcare workers completed a self-report questionnaire. (...) Results indicate that resilience is both a highly interrelated construct on the individual and organizational level and also positively linked to perceptions of transformation as an indicator for demonstration of resilience. We also found a partial mediation effect of organizational resilience and team efficacy, respectively, on the relationship between individual resilience and perceived transformation on the individual and organizational level as well as a full mediation on the team level. The study highlights the interdependence of individual and organizational resilience and its impact on perceived transformation in German hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic. Whereas team efficacy is crucial for performance in regular work operations, during a pandemic the organizational level becomes more relevant. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed. (shrink)

The situation caused by the 2019 coronavirus disease has been representing a great source of concern and a challenge to the psychological well-being of many individuals around the world. For couples in particular, this extraordinary rise in concern, combined with the stress posed by the virus containment measures, such as prolonged cohabitation and lack of support networks, may have increased the likelihood of couple problems. At the same time, however, COVID-19 concerns may have been a stimulus to activate couples’ stress (...) management processes. A couple’s resource, which may have an important role in dealing with COVID-19 concerns and stress, is dyadic coping, i.e., the process through which partners face stress together. Drawing on a sample of 1,823 Italian individuals involved in a couple relationship, the current study tested a serial mediation model in which concerns about COVID-19 predicted psychological well-being, through both explicit stress communication and perceived partner dyadic coping responses. In addition, the study explored whether this dyadic coping process functioned the same way in satisfied and dissatisfied couples. Results showed that concerns about the situation related to COVID-19 significantly threatened individuals’ psychological well-being. However, these concerns positively predicted explicit stress communication, which in turn positively predicted perceived partner’s dyadic coping responses, which finally positively predicted psychological well-being. In addition, in the group of dissatisfied individuals, the association between explicit stress communication and perceived partners’ dyadic coping responses was not significant. The present study adds to the research on couples’ coping by testing for the first time the whole theoretical model of dyadic coping and does so during a global emergency situation. The study also suggests key components of preventive interventions for individuals in couples. (shrink)

IntroductionFrontline healthcare workers have faced significant plight during the ongoing Coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Studies have shown their vulnerabilities to depression, anxiety disorders, post-traumatic stress, and insomnia. In a developing country like India, with a rising caseload, resource limitations, and stigma, the adversities faced by the physicians are more significant. We attempted to hear their “voices” to understand their adversities and conceptualize their resilience framework.MethodsA qualitative approach was used with a constructivist paradigm. After an initial pilot, a socio-demographically heterogeneous population (...) of 172 physicians working in COVID-designated centers were purposively sampled from all over India. Following in-depth virtual interviews using a pre-formed semi-structured guide, the data was transcribed and translated verbatim. The interview was focused on their challenges, needs, and processes of coping and support. Charmaz’s grounded theory was used for analysis supplemented by NVivo 10 software.ResultsFear of infection, uncertainty, stigma, guilt, and social isolation emerged as the main challenges. Simultaneously, their “unmet needs” were flexible work policies, administrative measures for better medical protection, the sensitivity of media toward the image of HCW, effective risk communication for their health, and finally, social inclusion. Their resilience “framework” emerged as a process while navigating these adversities and consisted of three facets: forming a “resilient identity,” managing the resilience, and working through the socio-occupational distress. The role of mental well-being, social network, peer support, problem negotiation, and self-care emerged as the key coping strategies.ConclusionThe study findings support the global call for better psychosocial health and quality of life of the frontline HCWs. Their “unheard voices” explored in the study can anchor subsequent resilience-enhancing interventions and policies. Guidelines focusing on the psychological wellbeing of frontline HCWs need to be grounded in their unmet needs and lived experiences. (shrink)