Healthcare workers' perception of gender and work roles during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods study

Inequality on the frontline: A multi-country study on gender differences in mental health among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic

Healthcare workers (HCWs) were at increased risk for mental health problems during the COVID-19 pandemic, with prior data suggesting women may be particularly vulnerable. Our global mental health study aimed to examine factors associated with gender differences in psychological distress and depressive symptoms among HCWs during COVID-19. Across 22 countries in South America, Europe, Asia and Africa, 32,410 HCWs participated in the COVID-19 HEalth caRe wOrkErS (HEROES) study between March 2020 and February 2021. They completed the General Health Questionnaire-12, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and questions about pandemic-relevant exposures. Consistently across countries, women reported elevated mental health problems compared to men. Women also reported increased COVID-19-relevant stressors, including insufficient personal protective equipment and less support from colleagues, while men reported increased contact with COVID-19 patients. At the country level, HCWs in countries with higher gender inequality reported less mental health problems. Higher COVID-19 mortality rates were associated with increased psychological distress merely among women. Our findings suggest that among HCWs, women may have been disproportionately exposed to COVID-19-relevant stressors at the individual and country level. This highlights the importance of considering gender in emergency response efforts to safeguard women's well-being and ensure healthcare system preparedness during future public health crises.

"Family doctors are also people": a qualitative analysis of how family physicians managed competing personal and professional responsibilities during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Family physicians (FPs) fill an essential role in public health emergencies yet have frequently been neglected in pandemic response plans. This exclusion harms FPs in their clinical roles and has unintended consequences in the management of concurrent personal responsibilities, many of which were amplified by the pandemic. The objective of our study was to explore the experiences of FPs during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic to better understand how they managed their competing professional and personal priorities.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with FPs from four Canadian regions between October 2020 and June 2021. Employing a maximum variation sampling approach, we recruited participants until we achieved saturation. Interviews explored FPs' personal and professional roles and responsibilities during the pandemic, the facilitators and barriers that they encountered, and any gender-related experiences. Transcribed interviews were thematically analysed.

RESULTS

We interviewed 68 FPs during the pandemic and identified four overarching themes in participants' discussion of their personal experiences: personal caregiving responsibilities, COVID-19 risk navigation to protect family members, personal health concerns, and available and desired personal supports for FPs to manage their competing responsibilities. While FPs expressed a variety of ways in which their personal experiences made their professional responsibilities more complicated, rarely did that affect the extent to which they participated in the pandemic response.

CONCLUSIONS

For FPs to contribute fully to a pandemic response, they must be factored into pandemic plans. Failure to appreciate their unique role and circumstances often leaves FPs feeling unsupported in both their professional and personal lives. Comprehensive planning in anticipation of future pandemics must consider FPs' varied responsibilities, health concerns, and necessary precautions. Having adequate personal and practice supports in place will facilitate the essential role of FPs in responding to a pandemic crisis while continuing to support their patients' primary care needs.

Gender Differences among Nurses in Managing Arterial Puncture-Related Pain: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study

There is evidence that healthcare can be executed differentially depending on the gender of patients, researchers, and clinicians. The aim was to analyze the possible existence of nursing gender differences in pain management produced by arterial puncture for blood gas analysis. A cross-sectional, multicenter study designed was conducted in Castilla-la Mancha (Spain). Variables of interest were collected from nurses in the public health system of a European region through a questionnaire. Data were collected for four months; the primary outcome was the use of any intervention to reduce pain and the explanatory variable was the nurse's gender. Bivariate analysis was carried out to assess associations between gender and pain-reducing interventions and a multivariate model was created with those factors that were relevant using logistic regression. A significantly higher proportion of men reported using some form of intervention (45% vs. 30%) and had more specific training (45.9% vs. 32.4%). The adjusted probability of using pain-reducing interventions by men was 71% higher than women. Thus, we found gender differences in the management of pain caused by arterial punctures performed by nurses as the main healthcare providers.

Psychosocial risk in healthcare workers after one year of COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic overwhelmed the capacity of the healthcare system, affecting the volume of demands and the care tasks of healthcare workers.

AIMS

To examine the health indicators and exposure to psychosocial risks of Spanish healthcare workers 1 year into the COVID-19 pandemic and compare them with the results of the first wave.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study using an online questionnaire (April-May 2020 and 2021). The data stem from the COTS 1 project database, corresponding to the first wave of COVID-19 (n = 1989) and COTS 2 (n = 1716) corresponding to 1 year later. The samples were independent. The prevalence of exposure to psychosocial risks and adverse health indicators was estimated for every occupational group, segregating the data by sex.

RESULTS

Professionals of all types presented worse perception of health. In general, the results were worse for women, while geriatric assistants presented the greatest exposure to psychosocial risk in COTS 2 compared to COTS 1. Sleep problems, high quantitative demands and high concern about becoming infected and spreading COVID-19 were cross-disciplinary in COTS 1, while worse perception of health, high pace of work, high work-life conflict and low development opportunities stood out in COTS 2.

CONCLUSIONS

Exposure to psychosocial risks was already high during the first wave and a significant decline in working conditions was observed. The prolongation of the pandemic exacerbated these results and seems to have multiplied the pre-existing inequalities between the axes of segregation in the labour market.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Productivity of Workers in the Health Sector between Working in a Hospital and from Home

BACKGROUND

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, workplaces in the medical field experienced changes. Non-frontline workers in the health sector (WHS) were in many cases allowed to work from home (WFH). Changes in work locations have affected the perception of productivity during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic perception. Studies regarding this research field are rare for WHS. The aim of the present study was to investigate the perception of productivity and its impact on symptoms of depression during the COVID-19 pandemic. The second objective was to assess the implications for post-pandemic work settings such as WFH or work scenarios in hospitals during pandemics.

METHODS

At three points in time during the COVID-19 pandemic (t1; n = 161: April 2020, t2; n = 1598 winter 2020/2021, t3; n = 1879 winter 2021/2022), an online survey of WHS (e.g., medical doctors, nurses, scientific staff) in Austria concerning their productivity in their current workplace (pre- and post-pandemic) was conducted. The online survey included questions about the perceptions of productivity changes (i.e., perceptions of lower, equal, and higher productivity, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic) in different work settings (e.g., working in a hospital or working from home), as well as standardized questionnaires like the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), assessing symptoms of depression in WHS.

RESULTS

χ2 tests showed that WHS working in hospitals experienced significantly fewer fluctuations in their perceptions of productivity than WHS working from home. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) indicated that WHS with a lower perception of productivity tended to have higher self-assessed depressive symptoms.

CONCLUSION

The possibility of remaining working in the hospital in stressful scenarios like the COVID-19 pandemic might stabilize the feeling of productivity. Moreover, productivity is associated with self-assessed depressive symptoms. Hence, looking into the reasons behind this discrepancy between WHS in hospitals and those working from home might help to improve the home office modality and to create better structures, which are related to symptoms of depression.

Levels and Predictors of Proactive Practical Experience to Solve COVID-19 among Public Health Officers in Primary Care Units in the Upper Southern Region, Thailand: An Explanatory Mixed Methods Approach

Public Health Officers (PHOs)' experiences in reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic can be based on whether the PHO is active or passive regarding five experience aspects, including knowledge, understanding, opinion, participation, and practice. Therefore, this study's objectives are to identify the types of experiences and analyse the predictors of proactive practical experiences in addressing the COVID-19 pandemic among PHOs in the southern region of Thailand.

METHODS

An explanatory mixed methods approach was used to collect data, through questionnaires and online in-depth interviews. This study was conducted from 4 August 2020 to 3 August 2021.

RESULTS

The results include 60 PHOs from 60 Primary Care Units in six provinces, with 41 (68.3%) females and an average age of 35.57 years (SD = 11.61). The PHOs' knowledge, understanding, and participation experience aspects were mostly proactive rather than passive. The factors that significantly predicted proactive practical experiences included sex (ORadj = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.04-2.21), age (ORadj = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.16-2.48), married status (ORadj = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.16-2.48), education level (ORadj = 1.50, 95% CI = 1.02-2.20), and position for work (ORadj = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.16-2.48). The results of quantitative method were confirmed by 12 sub-themes of 8 PHOs' experiences from qualitative method.

CONCLUSIONS

The PHOs' knowledge, understanding, opinion, and participation experiences were significant predictors of practical experience. Primary health care systems should promote proactive experiences in all four aspects to increase proactive practical experiences.

Association between physician characteristics and practice-level uptake of paediatric virtual mental healthcare: a population-based study

OBJECTIVE

To examine physician factors associated with practice-level uptake of virtual mental healthcare for children and adolescents.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A population-based data linkage study of a cohort of all physicians (n=12 054) providing outpatient mental healthcare to children and adolescents (aged 3-17 years, n=303 185) in a single-payer provincial health system in Ontario, Canada from 1 July 2020 to 31 July 2021.

EXPOSURES

Physician characteristics including gender, age, specialty, location of training, practice region, practice size and overall and mental health practice size.

MAIN OUTCOMES

Practice-level proportion of outpatient virtual care provided: (1) mostly in-person (<25% virtual care), (2) hybrid (25%-99% virtual care) or (3) exclusively virtual (100% virtual care). Multinomial logistic regression models tested the association between practice-level virtual care provided and physician characteristics.

RESULTS

Among physicians, 1589 (13.2%) provided mostly in-person mental healthcare with 8714 (67.8%) providing hybrid care, and 2291 (19.0%) providing exclusively virtual care. The provision of exclusive virtual care (vs mostly in-person) was associated with female sex (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.97, 95% CI 1.70 to 2.27 (ref: male)), foreign training (aOR 1.27, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.50 (ref: Canadian-trained)), family physicians (aOR 2.05, 95% CI 1.56 to 2.69 (ref: psychiatrist)) and reversely associated with large practice size (aOR 0.32, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.40 (ref smallest quintile)). Mostly in-person care was associated with older age physicians (71+ years) and practice outside the Toronto region.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In a single-payer universal healthcare system that remunerates physicians using the same fee structure for in-person and virtual outpatient care, there is heterogeneity in utilisation of virtual care that is associated with provider factors. This practice variation, with limited evidence on effectiveness and appropriate contexts for virtual care use, suggests there may be opportunity for further outcomes research and guidance on appropriate context for paediatric virtual mental healthcare delivery.

Still Exhausted: The Role of Residual Caregiving Fatigue on Women in Medicine and Science Across the Pipeline

Understanding the impact of caregiving responsibilities on women in medicine is crucial for ensuring a healthy and intact workforce, as caregiving responsibilities have the potential to affect the careers of women in health care along the entire pipeline, from students and trainees to physicians, physician-scientists, and biomedical researchers.

The SIMI Gender '5 Ws' Rule for the integration of sex and gender-related variables in clinical studies towards internal medicine equitable research

Biological sex and sociocultural gender matter when it comes to health and diseases. They have been both proposed as the undeniable gateways towards a personalized approach in care delivery. The Gender Working Group of the Italian Society of Internal Medicine (SIMI) was funded in 2019 with the aim of promoting good practice in the integration of sex and gender domains in clinical studies. Starting from a narrative literature review and based on regular meetings which led to a shared virtual discussion during the national SIMI congress in 2021, the members of the WG provided a core operational framework to be applied by internal medicine (IM) specialists to understand and implement their daily activity as researchers and clinicians. The SIMI Gender '5 Ws' Rule for clinical studies has been conceptualized as follows: Who (Clinical Internal Medicine Scientists and Practitioners), What (Gender-related Variables-Gender Core Dataset), Where (Clinical Studies/Translational Research), When (Every Time It Makes Sense) and Why (Explanatory Power of Gender and Opportunities). In particular, the gender core dataset was identified by the following domains (variables to collect accordingly): relations (marital status, social support, discrimination); roles (occupation, caregiver status, household responsibility, primary earner, household dimension); institutionalized gender (education level, personal income, living in rural vs urban areas); and gender identity (validated questionnaires on personality traits). The SIMI Gender '5 Ws' Rule is a simple and easy conceptual framework that will guide IM for the design and analysis of clinical studies.

Willingness to Work during Public Health Emergencies: A Systematic Literature Review

The identification of the factors underlying the willingness or lack thereof to respond to public health emergencies is paramount to informing more capable health services. The interest in this topic appears renewed with each surge of threat, either referring to natural disasters, man-made violence, or epidemic and pandemics. However, there is no systematic approach to the research patterns and related main findings concerning individual and contextual determinants. The present article contributes to this theme through a systematic literature review of a sample of 150 articles published in the last 30 years on the subject of willingness and preparedness of health professionals to deal with public health threats. Our findings show that the research is mainly phenomena and contextual driven, responding to whichever emergency threat is more salient in a given period. Geographically, research on this topic is led by USA and China, mostly solely, while European countries invest in collaborations that are more international. Universities, including health institutes and schools, and researchers at hospitals conduct most of the research on the topic. The main research areas are medicine, psychology, and psychiatry. Pandemics, including COVID-19, influenza, and natural disasters, are the phenomena gauging more attention as opposed to terrorism events and biological accidents. The specific role of health professionals within the institution, their belief in ethical duties, preparation training, and concerns regarding infection of self and family are the main variables influencing the willingness and ability to report to work in public health emergencies.