Associations between the working experiences at frontline of COVID-19 pandemic and mental health of Korean public health doctors

Impacts for health and care workers of Covid-19 and other public health emergencies of international concern: living systematic review, meta-analysis and policy recommendations

BACKGROUND

Health and care workers (HCW) faced the double burden of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: as members of a society affected by a public health emergency and as HWC who experienced fear of becoming infected and of infecting others, stigma, violence, increased workloads, changes in scope of practice, among others. To understand the short and long-term impacts in terms of the COVID-19 pandemic and other public health emergencies of international concern (PHEICs) on HCW and relevant interventions to address them, we designed and conducted a living systematic review (LSR).

METHODS

We reviewed literature retrieved from MEDLINE-PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, LILACS, the World Health Organization COVID-19 database, the ClinicalTrials.org and the ILO database, published from January 2000 until December 2021. We included quantitative observational studies, experimental studies, quasi-experimental, mixed methods or qualitative studies; addressing mental, physical health and well-being and quality of life. The review targeted HCW; and interventions and exposures, implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic or other PHEICs. To assess the risk of bias of included studies, we used the Johanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tools. Data were qualitatively synthetized using meta-aggregation and meta-analysis was performed to estimate pooled prevalence of some of the outcomes.

RESULTS

The 1013 studies included in the review were mainly quantitative research, cross-sectional, with medium risk of bias/quality, addressing at least one of the following: mental health issue, violence, physical health and well-being, and quality of life. Additionally, interventions to address short- and long-term impact of PHEICs on HCW included in the review, although scarce, were mainly behavioral and individual oriented, aimed at improving mental health through the development of individual interventions. A lack of interventions addressing organizational or systemic bottlenecks was noted.

DISCUSSION

PHEICs impacted the mental and physical health of HCW with the greatest toll on mental health. The impact PHEICs are intricate and complex. The review revealed the consequences for health and care service delivery, with increased unplanned absenteeism, service disruption and occupation turnover that subvert the capacity to answer to the PHEICs, specifically challenging the resilience of health systems.

Stress, resilience, and moral distress among health care providers in oncology during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

The coronavirus pandemic has potential implications for stress levels and resilience among oncology healthcare professionals (HCPs). This study aims to assess perceived stress, resilience, and moral distress levels among oncology HCPs in Jordan during the pandemic and identify associated risk factors.

Methods

An online cross-sectional survey was conducted among oncology HCPs in Jordan using three validated tools: Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RSIC), and Moral Distress Thermometer (MDT). Seven items were used to assess sources of stress.

Results

A total of 965 participants enrolled with a 74% response rate. The participants' ages ranged from 20 to 74 (mean = 32.74, SD = 5.197), with 79.1% males, 45.1% were physicians, 32.6% were public hospital workers, 57.1% were married, and 56.6% had children below 18 years. Findings indicated moderate perceived stress (Mean = 15.87, SD = 5.861), low resilience (Mean = 29.18, SD = 5.197), and high moral distress (Mean = 4.72, SD = 2.564). Females, unmarried individuals, and younger age groups exhibited higher PSS (p = 0.009, p < 0.001, and P<0.001) and lower resilience (p = 0.024, p = 0.034, and p = 0.001). Not having children below 18 years correlated with higher perceived stress (P < 0.001). In linear regression analysis, age and gender emerged as significant predictors of both perceived stress and resilience. Female participants reported stress related to the risk of contracting COVID-19 (p = 0.001), transmitting it to others (p = 0.017), social isolation (P < 0.001), and having children at home due to school closures (p = 0.000). A cohort of 239 participants repeated the survey within a two-month interval, revealed a statistically significant decrease in the CD-RISC scores (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Oncology HCPs in Jordan experienced moderate stress, high moral distress, and poor resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic. These factors may negatively affect the quality of oncology care. Urgent measures are necessary to support HCPs in coping with unforeseen circumstances in the future.

"It took so much of the humanness away": Health care professional experiences providing care to dying patients during COVID-19

COVID-19 has affected healthcare in profound and unprecedented ways, distorting the experiences of patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) alike. One area that has received little attention is how COVID-19 affected HCPs caring for dying patients. The goal of this study was to examine the experiences of HCPs working with dying patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Between July 2020-July 2021, we recruited HCPs (N = 25) across Canada. We conducted semi-structured interviews, using a qualitative study design rooted in constructivist grounded theory methodology. The core themes identified were the impact of the pandemic on care utilization, the impact of infection control measures on provision of care, moral distress in the workplace, impact on psychological wellbeing, and adaptive strategies to help HCPs manage emotions and navigate pandemic imposed changes. This is the first Canadian study to qualitatively examine the experiences of HCPs providing care to dying patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Implications include informing supportive strategies and shaping policies for HCPs providing palliative care.

Associations among the workplace violence, burnout, depressive symptoms, suicidality, and turnover intention in training physicians: a network analysis of nationwide survey

Depression and anxiety are the most common mental disorders among physicians, who have a greater risk of suicide than those in other professional occupations. Relationships among a demanding workload, workplace violence, burnout, and intention to turnover have also been reported. The current study examined the principal components and propagating patterns of mental health and working environment interactions in training physicians. A total of 1981 training physicians completed online self-report questionnaires during September-October (midpoint of the training year) 2020. Regularized partial correlations in a mixed graphical model (MGM) and joint probability distributions (directed acyclic graph; DAG) were estimated for four subtypes of workplace violence (verbal abuse/physical violence perpetrated by clients/hospital staff), three burnout subdomains (Maslach Burnout Inventory), thoughts about quitting, and nine depressive symptoms, including suicidality, comprising the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for major depressive disorder (assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9). Thoughts of death/self-harm showed directional dependencies on the joint probability distributions of psychomotor agitation/retardation, concentration difficulty, self-reproach, and sadness in the DAG. In the MGM, a partial correlation with psychomotor agitation/retardation (r = 0.196) accounted for 56.5% of the variance in thoughts of death/self-harm. Partial correlations with concentration difficulties (r = 0.294), self-reproach (r = 0.257), changes in appetite (r = 0.184), and worker-on-worker physical violence (r = 0.240) in the MGM accounted for 54.4% of the variance in psychomotor agitation/retardation. Thoughts about quitting were partially correlated with and dependent upon the joint probability distributions of emotional exhaustion (r = 0.222), fatigue (r = 0.142), anhedonia (r = 0.178), and sadness (r = 0.237). In contrast, worker-on-worker (r = 0.417) and client-on-physician (r = 0.167) verbal abuse had regularized partial correlations with directional dependencies on thoughts about quitting. Organization-level interventions aiming to reduce the worker-on-worker violence and individual-level approaches of clinical screening program and psychiatric counseling clinic are required. Follow-up studies to verify the effectiveness of these interventions for training physicians are needed.

Stress, Burnout, and General Mental Health among Healthcare Workers in Poland during the Long-Lasting COVID-19 Pandemic

Medical professions are characterized by a great responsibility for human health and life; they are also vulnerable to burnout. The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has brought new challenges and threats. This study aimed to assess the mental health of healthcare workers after a year and a half of working in COVID-19 pandemic conditions. The Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10), the Link Burnout Questionnaire (LBQ), and the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-28) were utilized in this cross-sectional investigation. A total of 335 healthcare employees from Polish hospitals (median age 44 years) filled out online questionnaires between the 16 August 2021 and the 30 March 2022. Most of the sample was female (86%). In this study, 40.0% of the surveyed healthcare workers reported a high stress intensity. Burnout was reported by 9.6% of the workers, and the most frequently experienced symptom was psychophysical exhaustion. Almost half of the healthcare workers surveyed (49.6%) reported health disorders at both the mental and physiological levels. Interestingly, working in a COVID-19 ward did not significantly differentiate healthcare workers in any of the evaluated variables: PSS-10 (gr. A F = 1.21; gr. B F = 0.71; p > 0.05), LBQ (gr. A F = 1.89, F = 0.94, F = 1.08, F = 2.57; gr. B F = 0.32, F = 1.14, F = 0.77, F = 0.36; p > 0.05), and GHQ-28 (gr. A F = 0.85, F = 0.52, F = 0.57, F = 0.31; gr. B F = 0.31, F = 0.06, F = 0.06, F = 0.54; p > 0.05). Furthermore, there were no statistically significant differences between the compared occupational groups of healthcare workers: PSS-10 (F = 1.08; p > 0.05) and GHQ-28 (F = 1.78; F = 0.85; F = 0.62; F = 0.54; p > 0.05). The mental health of healthcare workers is alarming, and psychophysical conditions can affect the quality of work and relations with patients. Psychological care in workplaces and workshops that build resources for dealing with difficult situations are necessary.

Presenteeism and mental health of workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review

Background

A large number of workers attend work despite being ill. Attending work during sickness can have a number of consequences for the worker (e.g., worsening of physical and mental condition), for co-workers, and for the company, and for service users.

Objectives

The aim of this study was to assess the factors influencing presenteeism and mental health of workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

A systematic review following the PRISMA format was conducted in the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science (WoS), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycInfo, and ScienceDirect electronic databases in January 2023, using the following key words: Presenteeism, Mental Health, and COVID-19. The eligibility criteria applied were original articles published in English, Spanish, French, German, and Portuguese, workers during the COVID-19 pandemic (data collection date: January 01, 2020 - January 01, 2023), and articles assessing at least one measure of presenteeism and mental health status. Methodological quality was assessed using the critical appraisal tools of the Joanna Briggs Institute. The followed protocol is listed in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) with code CRD42023391409.

Results

A total of 25 studies were included in this review recruiting a total of 164,274 participants. A number of factors influencing mental health and sickness presenteeism were identified: (1) mental health-related factors (burnout [in 4 studies], stress [in 9 studies], depression [in 1 study], fear of COVID-19 [in 1 study], no well-being [in 2 studies], etc.); (2) individual factors (health status [in 1 study], being young [in 1 study], workers who experienced interrupted medical care [in 2 studies], having a chronic disease [in 1 study], etc.); (3) factors related to the situation caused by COVID-19 (confinement, symptoms, loss of contract, risk of bankruptcy, etc. [in 1 study each one]); and (4) factors derived from working conditions (organisational support [in 1 study], patient care [in 1 study], work functioning or task performance impairment [in 4 studies], work fatigue [in 2 studies], safety climate [in 1 study], workload [in 1 study], etc.).

Conclusion

Identifying the key determinants of presenteeism and understanding the phenomena and origins of sickness presenteeism will help to create a safe working environment and optimal organisational systems to protect vulnerable workers in a pandemic context.

Systematic review registration

The unique identifier is CRD42023391409.

Karakatsoulis G, Abraham S, Adorjan K, Ahmed HU, Alarcón RD, Arai K, Auwal SS, Bobes J, Bobes-Bascaran T, Bourgin-Duchesnay J, Bredicean CA, Bukelskis L, Burkadze A, Cabrera Abud II, Castilla-Puentes R, Cetkovich M, Colon-Rivera H, Corral R, Cortez-Vergara C, Crepin P, de Berardis D, Zamora Delgado S, de Lucena D, de Sousa A, di Stefano R, Dodd S, Elek LP, Elissa A, Erdelyi-Hamza B, Erzin G, Etchevers MJ, Falkai P, Farcas A, Fedotov I, Filatova V, Fountoulakis NK, Frankova I, Franza F, Frias P, Galako T, Garay CJ, Garcia-Álvarez L, García-Portilla P, Gonda X, Gondek TM, Morera González D, Gould H, Grandinetti P, Grau A, Groudeva V, Hagin M, Harada T, Hasan TM, Azreen Hashim N, Hilbig J, Hossain S, Iakimova R, Ibrahim M, Iftene F, Ignatenko Y, Irarrazaval M, Ismail Z, Ismayilova J, Jacobs A, Jakovljević M, Jakšić N, Javed A, Yilmaz Kafali H, Karia S, Kazakova O, Khalifa D, Khaustova O, Koh S, Kopishinskaia S, Kosenko K, Koupidis SA, Kovacs I, Kulig B, Lalljee A, Liewig J, Majid A, Malashonkova E, Malik K, Iqbal Malik N, Mammadzada G, Mandalia B, Marazziti D, Marčinko D, Martinez S, Matiekus E, Mejia G, Memon RS, Meza Martínez XE, Mickevičiūtė D, Milev R, Mohammed M, Molina-López A, Morozov P, Muhammad NS, Mustač F, Naor MS, Nassieb A, Navickas A, Okasha T, Pandova M, Panfil AL, Panteleeva L, Papava I, Patsali ME, Pavlichenko A, Pejuskovic B, Pinto da Costa M, Popkov M, Popovic D, Raduan NJN, Vargas Ramírez F, Rancans E, Razali S, Rebok F, Rewekant A, Reyes Flores EN, Rivera-Encinas MT, Saiz PA, Sánchez de Carmona M, Saucedo Martínez D, Saw JA, Saygili G, Schneidereit P, Shah B, Shirasaka T, Silagadze K, Sitanggang S, Skugarevsky O, Spikina A, Mahalingappa SS, Stoyanova M, Szczegielniak A, Tamasan SC, Tavormina G, Tavormina MGM, Theodorakis PN, Tohen M, Tsapakis EM, Tukhvatullina D, Ullah I, Vaidya R, Vega-Dienstmaier JM, Vrublevska J, Vukovic O, Vysotska O, Widiasih N, Yashikhina A, Prezerakos PE, Berk M, Levaj S, Smirnova D. Results of the COVID-19 mental health international for the health professionals (COMET-HP) study: depression, suicidal tendencies and conspiracism

INTRODUCTION

The current study aimed to investigate the rates of anxiety, clinical depression, and suicidality and their changes in health professionals during the COVID-19 outbreak.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The data came from the larger COMET-G study. The study sample includes 12,792 health professionals from 40 countries (62.40% women aged 39.76 ± 11.70; 36.81% men aged 35.91 ± 11.00 and 0.78% non-binary gender aged 35.15 ± 13.03). Distress and clinical depression were identified with the use of a previously developed cut-off and algorithm, respectively.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Descriptive statistics were calculated. Chi-square tests, multiple forward stepwise linear regression analyses, and Factorial Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) tested relations among variables.

RESULTS

Clinical depression was detected in 13.16% with male doctors and 'non-binary genders' having the lowest rates (7.89 and 5.88% respectively) and 'non-binary gender' nurses and administrative staff had the highest (37.50%); distress was present in 15.19%. A significant percentage reported a deterioration in mental state, family dynamics, and everyday lifestyle. Persons with a history of mental disorders had higher rates of current depression (24.64% vs. 9.62%; p < 0.0001). Suicidal tendencies were at least doubled in terms of RASS scores. Approximately one-third of participants were accepting (at least to a moderate degree) a non-bizarre conspiracy. The highest Relative Risk (RR) to develop clinical depression was associated with a history of Bipolar disorder (RR = 4.23).

CONCLUSIONS

The current study reported findings in health care professionals similar in magnitude and quality to those reported earlier in the general population although rates of clinical depression, suicidal tendencies, and adherence to conspiracy theories were much lower. However, the general model of factors interplay seems to be the same and this could be of practical utility since many of these factors are modifiable.

Early impact of COVID-19 social distancing on social determinants of health and their effects on mental health and quality of life of Korean undergraduate students

Introduction

This study aimed to investigate the association between social determinants of health and perception of COVID-19 social distancing/mental health/quality of life during COVID-19 social distancing in Korean undergraduate students using online survey data augmented with natural language processing.

Methods

An online cross-sectional survey including sociodemographic characteristics, students' perceptions of COVID-19 social distancing, and social determinants of health was conducted between July and November in 2020. We conducted logistic regression analysis to investigate the relationship between social determinants of health (independent variables) and perceptions of COVID-19 social distancing, mental health, and quality of life (dependent variables). This association was augmented using sentiment analysis and word clouds by visualizing open-ended comments on COVID-19 social-distancing policies.

Results

Data were collected from 1,276 undergraduate students. Participants who experienced negative impacts on their social-networking activities due to COVID-19 social distancing were at significantly higher odds to perceive COVID-19 social distancing as not being beneficial [odds ratio (OR) = 1.948, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.254-3.027], to have increased stress levels (OR = 1.619, 95% CI 1.051-2.496), and to experience decreased quality of life over 5 weeks (OR = 2.230, 95% CI 1.448-3.434) against those who answered neutrally. In contrast, Participants who reported positive perceptions of social-networking activities during the COVID-19 pandemic had lower odds of feeling depressed or anxious (OR = 0.498, 95% CI 0.278-0.894) and reporting a low quality of life over 5 weeks (OR = 0.461, 95% CI 0.252-0.842) compared to those who reported neutral perceptions. Furthermore, the results of the word cloud and sentiment analyses showed that most students perceived social distancing negatively.

Conclusions

The government's social-distancing policy to prevent the spread of COVID-19 may have had a negative impact, particularly on undergraduate students' social-networking activities. This highlights the need for greater social support for this population, including access to psychotherapeutic resources, and improvements in policies to prevent infectious diseases while still maintaining social connections.

Lack of compensation for COVID-19-related overtime work and its association with burnout among EMS providers in Korea

OBJECTIVES

This study examined the association between lack of compensation for COVID-19-related overtime work (LCCOW) and burnout among emergency medical service (EMS) providers in Seoul, Korea.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 693 EMS providers in Seoul, Korea. Participants were classified into 3 groups according to their experience of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related overtime work and LCCOW: (1) "did not experience," (2) "experienced and was compensated," and (3) "experienced and was not compensated." Burnout was measured using the Korean version of the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory, which has 3 subdomains: personal burnout (PB), work-related burnout (WRB), and citizen-related burnout (CRB). Multiple linear regression was applied to examine whether LCCOW was associated with burnout after adjusting for potential confounders.

RESULTS

In total, 74.2% of participants experienced COVID-19-related overtime work, and 14.6% of those who worked overtime experienced LCCOW. COVID-19-related overtime work showed a statistically non-significant association with burnout. However, the association differed by LCCOW. Compared to the "did not experience" group, the "experienced and was not compensated" group was associated with PB (β=10.519; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.455 to 17.584), WRB (β=10.339; 95% CI, 3.398 to 17.280), and CRB (β=12.290; 95% CI, 6.900 to 17.680), whereas no association was observed for the "experienced and was compensated" group. Furthermore, an analysis restricted to EMS providers who worked overtime due to COVID-19 showed that LCCOW was associated with PB (β=7.970; 95% CI, 1.064 to 14.876), WRB (β=7.276; 95% CI, 0.270 to 14.283), and CRB (β=10.000; 95% CI, 3.435 to 16.565).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that LCCOW could be critical in worsening burnout among EMS providers who worked overtime due to COVID-19.

Longitudinal comparisons of mental health, burnout and well-being in patient-facing, non-patient-facing healthcare professionals and non-healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic: findings from the CoPE-HCP study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic may disproportionately affect the mental health of healthcare professionals (HCPs), especially patient-facing HCPs.

AIMS

To longitudinally examine mental health in HCPs versus non-HCPs, and patient-facing HCPs versus non-patient-facing HCPs.

METHOD

Online surveys were distributed to a cohort at three phases (baseline, July to September 2020; phase 2, 6 weeks post-baseline; phase 3, 4 months post-baseline). Each survey contained validated assessments for depression, anxiety, insomnia, burnout and well-being. For each outcome, we conducted mixed-effects logistic regression models (adjusted for a priori confounders) comparing the risk in different groups at each phase.

RESULTS

A total of 1574 HCPs and 147 non-HCPs completed the baseline survey. Although there were generally higher rates of various probable mental health issues among HCPs versus non-HCPs at each phase, there was no significant difference, except that HCPs had 2.5-fold increased risk of burnout at phase 2 (emotional exhaustion: odds ratio 2.50, 95% CI 1.15-5.46, P = 0.021), which increased at phase 3 (emotional exhaustion: odds ratio 3.32, 95% CI 1.40-7.87, P = 0.006; depersonalisation: odds ratio 3.29, 95% CI 1.12-9.71, P = 0.031). At baseline, patient-facing HCPs (versus non-patient-facing HCPs) had a five-fold increased risk of depersonalisation (odds ratio 5.02, 95% CI 1.65-15.26, P = 0.004), with no significant difference in the risk for other outcomes. The difference in depersonalisation reduced over time, but patient-facing HCPs still had a 2.7-fold increased risk of emotional exhaustion (odds ratio 2.74, 95% CI 1.28-5.85, P = 0.009) by phase 3.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic had a huge impact on the mental health and well-being of both HCPs and non-HCPs, but there is disproportionately higher burnout among HCPs, particularly patient-facing HCPs.

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.

Frontline physician burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic: national survey findings

BACKGROUND

Physician burnout and wellbeing are an ongoing concern. Limited research has reported on the impact of the COVID 19 pandemic on burnout over time among U.S. physicians.

METHODS

We surveyed U.S. frontline physicians at two time points (wave one in May-June 2020 and wave two in Dec 2020-Jan 2021) using a validated burnout measure. The survey was emailed to a national stratified random sample of family physicians, internists, hospitalists, intensivists, emergency medicine physicians, and infectious disease physicians. Burnout was assessed with the Professional Fulfillment Index Burnout Composite scale (PFI-BC). Responses were weighted to account for sample design and non-response bias. Random effects and quantile regression analyses were used to estimate change in conditional mean and median PFI-BC scores, adjusting for physician, geographic, and pandemic covariates.

RESULTS

In the random effects regression, conditional mean burnout scores increased in the second wave among all respondents (difference 0.15 (CI: 0.24, 0.57)) and among respondents to both waves (balanced panel) (difference 0.21 (CI: - 0.42, 0.84)). Conditional burnout scores increased in wave 2 among all specialties except for Emergency medicine, with the largest increases among Hospitalists, 0.28 points (CI: - 0.19,0.76) among all respondents and 0.36 (CI: - 0.39,1.11) in the balanced panel, and primary care physicians, 0.21 (CI: - 0.23,0.66) among all respondents and 0.31 (CI: - 0.38,1.00) in the balanced panel. The conditional mean PFI-BC score among hospitalists increased from 1.10 (CI: 0.73,1.46) to 1.38 (CI: 1.02,1.74) in wave 2 in all respondents and from 1.49 (CI: 0.69,2.29) to 1.85 (CI: 1.24,2.46) in the balanced panel, near or above the 1.4 threshold indicating burnout. Findings from quantile regression were consistent with those from random effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Rates of physician burnout during the first year of the pandemic increased over time among four of five frontline specialties, with greatest increases among hospitalist and primary care respondents. Our findings, while not statistically significant, were consistent with worsening burnout; both the random effects and quantile regressions produced similar point estimates. Impacts of the ongoing pandemic on physician burnout warrant further research.

Feeling Anxious Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic: Factors Associated With Anxiety Symptoms Among Nurses in Hong Kong

Background: The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has increased the burden for the medical systems around the world. In Hong Kong, the pandemic not only affects the local populations, but also the healthcare workers. Healthcare workers, especially nurses, involving in COVID-19 treatments are highly susceptible to adverse psychological outcomes (e.g., anxiety symptoms). Studies have shown that socio-demographic characteristics, COVID-19-specific worries, and work settings-related variables are associated with healthcare workers' well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, relevant studies for nurses in Hong Kong are limited. This study examined the psychosocial correlates of anxiety symptoms among nurses in Hong Kong.

Methods: Nurses (N = 1,510) working in hospitals and community settings were recruited through nursing associations in Hong Kong between August 8, 2020 and September 22, 2020. They were invited to complete a cross-sectional survey measuring their anxiety symptoms, sociodemographic characteristics, COVID-19-specific worries, and satisfaction with work and workplace pandemic-control guidelines.

Results: 17.2% of nurses reported moderate to severe levels of anxiety symptoms. Results from hierarchical regressions found that higher COVID-19-specific worries (contracting COVID-19, family members contracting COVID-19 due to their nursing work, insufficient protective equipment at workplace) (βs ranged from 0.07 to 0.20, ps < 0.01), higher perceived stigma of being a healthcare worker (β = 0.18, p < 0.001), and lower work satisfaction (β = −0.21, p < 0.001) were associated with higher anxiety symptoms.

Conclusion: A moderate proportion of nurses in Hong Kong did report levels of anxiety symptoms amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Futures studies could focus on the contributing factors of anxiety symptoms to design for effective strategies to promote nurses' well-being during pandemic situations.

Impact of COVID-19 on Lifestyle, Personal Attitudes, and Mental Health Among Korean Medical Students: Network Analysis of Associated Patterns

The current COVID-19 pandemic have affected our daily lifestyle, pressed us with fear of infection, and thereby changed life satisfaction and mental health. The current study investigated influencing cascade of changes during the COVID-19 among the lifestyle, personal attitudes, and life (dis)satisfaction for medical students, using network-based approaches. This cross-sectional survey used self-reports of 454 medical students during June and July of 2020. Depressive mood, anxiety, and intention to drop out of school were observed in 11.9, 18.5, and 38.3% of medical students, respectively. Directed acyclic graph that estimated directional propagation of the COVID-19 in medical students' daily lives initiated from the perception of unexpected event, propagated to nervous and stressed feeling, trouble relaxing, feeling like a failure, and were followed by trouble concentrating, feeling loss of control for situation, and fear of infecting colleagues. These six features were also principal mediators within the intra-individual covariance networks comprised of changed lifestyle, personal attitude, and mental health at COVID-19 pandemic. Psychosocial supports targeting nervousness, trouble relaxing and concentrating, fear of spreading infection to colleagues, feelings of a failure or loss of situational control are required for better mental health of medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic.