The Impact of COVID-19 on Spanish Health Professionals: A Description of Physical and Psychological Effects

Modulating Elements of Nurse Resilience in Population Care during the COVID-19 Pandemic

COVID-19 has significantly affected the work environment of nurses. In the face of the challenges posed by stressors in clinical practice, some nurses adapt and prove to be resilient. In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, the nature of care itself and the new ways of working are potentially very stressful. We aim to analyze the resilience of care nurses to the psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study is a systematic review of nurse caregiver resilience to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2021. Our search was conducted in the WOS, Medline/PubMed, Cochrane, BVS/LILACS, and Cuiden databases. The inclusion criteria were: studies published in Spanish or English; carried out from March 2020 to May 2021 on nurses caring for patients with COVID-19; and investigating the factors influencing the psychological impact, resilience, strategies to develop it, and interventions to promote it during this pandemic and others, such as SARS, MERS, or ebola. The quality of the studies and the risk of bias were evaluated following ICROMS, STROBE and AMSTAR-2 criteria. Twenty-two studies were selected. Most of the studies highlighted the presence of stressors in nurses, emphasizing those of the environment, which converged in dysfunctional responses that hurt their resilience. The most persuasive factors were social and organizational support. Coping strategies developed by nurses and especially interventions by organizations were detected as instruments to foster resilience, but have not been well researched. Resilience has a key moderating role in mitigating the psychological impact of nurses in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Symptoms of Anxiety, Depression, and Insomnia in Spain in the COVID-19 Crisis

BACKGROUND

General population, frontline healthcare workers (HCWs), and adult students in Spain are at risk of anxiety, depression, and insomnia symptoms during the COVID-19 crisis. A meta-analysis of the individual studies on these symptoms would provide systematic evidence to aid policymakers and researchers in focusing on prevalence, risk, and best interventions.

OBJECTIVE

This paper aims to be the first meta-analysis and systematic review to calculate the prevalence of anxiety, depression, and insomnia symptoms in Spain's adult population (general population, frontline healthcare workers (HCWs), and adult students) during the Covid-19 epidemic.

METHOD

Random-effect meta-analysis was used to estimate the prevalence of anxiety, depression, and insomnia.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis includes 28 studies with 38 individual samples in Spain. The pooled prevalence of anxiety symptoms in 22 studies comprising a sample population of 82,024 was 20% (95% CI: 15-25%), that of depression symptoms in 22 articles with a total sample comprising 82,890 individuals was 22% (95% CI: 18-28%), and that of insomnia symptoms in three articles with a sample population of 745 was 57% (95% CI: 48-66%.

CONCLUSIONS

The accumulative evidence reveals that adults in Spain suffered higher prevalence rates of mental symptoms during the COVID-19 crisis, with a significantly higher rate relative to other countries such as China. Our synthesis also reveals a relative lack of studies on frontline and general HCWs in Spain.

Mental Health Screening of Healthcare Professionals Who Are Candidates for Psychological Assistance during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Healthcare professionals (HCPs) are among those most affected by the COVID-19 health emergency, with many presenting symptoms of anxiety and depression. Research shows that one of the factors involved in mitigating the impact of stressful situations is the use of cognitive emotional regulation mechanisms. The aims of this study were (a) to describe the functional and dysfunctional cognitive emotional regulation mechanisms (FRMs and DRMs) by gender, (b) to screen the main group of healthcare professionals who are candidates to receive psychological assistance based on FRMs and DRMs, and (c) to determine the HCP profile of candidates for psychological assistance. A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted. Data were obtained from an adhoc questionnaire-the Cognitive Emotional Regulation Questionnaire (CERQ-18), the Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7), and the nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). The representative sample comprised 1452 HCPs. The results revealed significant differences between men and women in the use of DRMs. Women showed a higher use of catastrophizing (≤0.001) and rumination (0.008). The screening procedure detected that 7.5% (109 cases) of the HCPs were candidates to receive psychological support. According to the results of this study, age group (30-39 years old), professional activity (being a nurse or nursing assistant), and having psychological symptoms of anxiety and depression are variables that independently increase the probability of requiring psychological assistance. The gender variable was not found to be an independent factor when it comes to receiving psychological support. In conclusion, it is necessary to consider the influence of cognitive emotional regulation strategies employed by HCPs in the screening of candidates for psychological assistance and design effective interventions to reverse the emotional distress caused by COVID-19.

Global prevalence of mental health problems among healthcare workers during the Covid-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Healthcare workers are at high risk of developing mental health issues during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. However, there is a need for a full picture of mental health problems with comprehensive analysis among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE

This review aimed to systematically identify the mental health problems among healthcare workers in various countries during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed of the following databases: PubMed, Academic Search Complete, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Science, MEDLINE Complete, and SocINDEX. The last date of our search was November 2, 2020. We included all cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies and used the Joanna Briggs Institute tool to assess their quality. A meta-analysis was performed to synthesize the pooled prevalence of mental health problems using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was measured using the I² statistic and Egger's test was used to assess publication bias.

RESULTS

A total of 38 studies were identified that reported the mental health problems of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. The distribution of healthcare workers analyzed in this review included 27.9% doctors, 43.7% nurses, and 7.0% allied health workers. The pooled prevalence of mental health problems for post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, depression, and distress was 49% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 22-75%), 40% (95% CI: 29-52%), 37% (95% CI: 29-45%), and 37% (95% CI: 25-50%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

This review yielded evidence that estimated the global prevalence of mental health problems among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Post-traumatic stress disorder was the most common mental health disorder reported by healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, followed by anxiety, depression, and distress. Additional studies remain necessary to assess the appropriate management strategies for treating and preventing mental health disorders among healthcare workers during the pandemic.

Factors Associated With Psychological Distress in Health-Care Workers During an Infectious Disease Outbreak: A Rapid Systematic Review of the Evidence

Objective: Health-care workers (HCW) are at risk for psychological distress during an infectious disease outbreak, such as the coronavirus pandemic, due to the demands of dealing with a public health emergency. This rapid systematic review examined the factors associated with psychological distress among HCW during an outbreak. Method: We systematically reviewed literature on the factors associated with psychological distress (demographic characteristics, occupational, social, psychological, and infection-related factors) in HCW during an outbreak (COVID-19, SARS, MERS, H1N1, H7N9, and Ebola). Four electronic databases were searched (2000 to 15 November 2020) for relevant peer-reviewed research according to a pre-registered protocol. A narrative synthesis was conducted to identify fixed, modifiable, and infection-related factors linked to distress and psychiatric morbidity. Results: From the 4,621 records identified, 138 with data from 143,246 HCW in 139 studies were included. All but two studies were cross-sectional. The majority of the studies were conducted during COVID-19 (k = 107, N = 34,334) and SARS (k = 21, N = 18,096). Consistent evidence indicated that being female, a nurse, experiencing stigma, maladaptive coping, having contact or risk of contact with infected patients, and experiencing quarantine, were risk factors for psychological distress among HCW. Personal and organizational social support, perceiving control, positive work attitudes, sufficient information about the outbreak and proper protection, training, and resources, were associated with less psychological distress. Conclusions: This review highlights the key factors to the identify HCW who are most at risk for psychological distress during an outbreak and modifying factors to reduce distress and improve resilience. Recommendations are that HCW at risk for increased distress receive early interventions and ongoing monitoring because there is evidence that HCW distress can persist for up to 3 years after an outbreak. Further research needs to track the associations of risk and resilience factors with distress over time and the extent to which certain factors are inter-related and contribute to sustained or transient distress.

Ansiedade e depressão em atendimento presencial e telessaúde durante a pandemia de Covid-19: um estudo comparativo

Resumo O estudo visou comparar escores de ansiedade e depressão em profissionais da saúde em atendimento remoto ou presencial em um hospital universitário brasileiro durante a pandemia de Covid-19 e identificar fatores associados à ansiedade e à depressão. Para tanto, realizou-se um estudo observacional e transversal. Os participantes responderam aos protocolos Patient Health Questionnaire-9 e General Anxiety Disorder-7, além de um questionário sociodemográfico, e foram divididos em três grupos: profissionais da telessaúde (G1), profissionais que exercem de maneira presencial (G2) e profissionais que exercem de ambas as formas (G3). Participaram 159 profissionais da saúde, sendo 36 homens e 123 mulheres, a maioria de enfermeiros, com a média de idade de 42 anos. Os participantes do G2 apresentaram maiores escores de ansiedade e depressão quando comparados aos demais. No entanto, não houve diferenças e associações estatísticas significantes entre esses grupos (p>0,05). ‘Idade’, ‘tipo de profissão’ e ‘receber diagnóstico de Covid-19’ tiveram associações estatísticas com ansiedade e depressão. Concluiu-se que não houve diferença significante entre ansiedade e depressão em profissionais da saúde que trabalham de forma remota ou presencial, assim como não houve associações entre os protocolos e os grupos. ‘Idade’ ‘profissão’ e ‘receber diagnóstico de Covid-19’ podem interferir nesses escores.

Risk and Protective Factors for the Mental Health of Brazilian Healthcare Workers in the Frontline of COVID-19 Pandemic

The objective was to compare the mental health indicators of health workers providing care to individuals with COVID-19 in Brazil, considering sociodemographic and occupational variables and the risk perception of contamination by the Sars-CoV-2 of workers from different professions, identifying risk and protective factors. A sample of 916 health workers was assessed: physicians, nursing workers, and workers from other professions (psychologists, physical therapists, nutritionists, speech therapists, occupational therapists, dentists, pharmacists, and social workers). REDCAP software was used to collect data online, using standardized instruments to assess anxiety, depression, posttraumatic stress, and insomnia, and one questionnaire addressed risk and protective variables. Statistical techniques for comparing groups were used along with logistic regression analysis. The results revealed that all the groups presented indicators of significant mental health problems (>36%), especially the nursing group. A larger percentage of participants, regardless of the profession, presented a high rate of insomnia disorders, while posttraumatic stress was the least expressive. Occupational variables stand out as risk factors for mental health, with specificities among the different groups. A protective factor for all the groups was having positive professional prospects. The protective factors for the physicians group included support provided by co-workers, being older and a man, while being satisfied with physical protective measures implemented by the employing institution was a protective factor for the groups composed of nursing workers and other professionals. These findings are relevant for devising mental health care strategies.

The Curvilinear Relationship Between Career Calling and Work Fatigue: A Moderated Mediating Model

Drawing on the job demands-resources (JD-R) model and event system theory (EST), this study constructed a moderated mediating model to investigate the direct effect of career calling on work fatigue, the mediating effect of role overload, and the moderating effect of COVID-19 event disruption in the above relationships. We administered an online questionnaire to 488 Chinese police officers who participated in frontline work to prevent and control the COVID-19 pandemic. The results showed a U-shaped curvilinear relationship of career calling with physical fatigue, mental fatigue, emotional fatigue, and role overload. Moreover, role overload partially mediated these curvilinear relationships. In addition, COVID-19 event disruption positively moderated the direct curvilinear effect of career calling on role overload, physical fatigue, and emotional fatigue, as well as the first stage of the mediating effect in the relationship between career calling and physical, mental, and emotional fatigue through role overload. Furthermore, the direct U-shaped curvilinear effects and the indirect effects were more significant when COVID-19 event disruption was high.