Effect of 2019 Coronavirus Pandemic on Ophthalmologists Practicing in Saudi Arabia: A Psychological Health Assessment

Prevalence and sociodemographic factors of depression, anxiety and stress in Saudi Arabia: a survey of respiratory therapists

Background

Depression, anxiety and stress are prevalent among healthcare providers but limited data is available regarding respiratory therapists (RTs). This study aimed to assess the prevalence of depression, anxiety and stress, and identify the associated sociodemographic factors among RTs in Saudi Arabia.

Methods

A cross-sectional online survey was distributed to RTs in Saudi Arabia. Data were summarized using frequency and percentages. Stress, anxiety, and depression prevalence rates were expressed as proportions with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The associated factors of stress, anxiety, and depression were subjected to logistic regression.

Results

Overall, 988 (91%) RTs, 661 (66.9%) males, completed the online survey. The prevalence (95% CI) of depression, anxiety and stress among RTs was 81.3% (0.787, 0.837), 89.6% (0.875, 0.914), and 45.5% (0.424, 0.487), respectively. RT staff who were ≥41 years old, divorced, widowed or separated, or had > 10 years of clinical experience were more likely to experience stress. RTs who were (divorced, widowed or separated), did not live with their family, were current smokers, or worked the night shift were more likely to experience anxiety. RTs who were (divorced, widowed or separated), were current smokers, had >10 years of clinical experience were more likely to experience depression.

Conclusion

Stress, anxiety and depression are prevalent among RTs. Several sociodemographic factors are associated with the incidence of stress, anxiety and depression.

Sex Disparities in Ophthalmology From Training Through Practice: A Systematic Review

Importance

Sex-based research in medicine has revealed inequities against females on almost every metric at almost every career stage; ophthalmology is no exception.

Objective

To systematically review the experiences of females in ophthalmology (FiO) from training through practice in high-income countries (HICs).

Evidence Review

A systematic review of English-language studies, published between January 1990 and May 2022, relating to FiO in HICs was performed. PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase electronic databases were searched, as well as the Journal of Academic Ophthalmology as it was not indexed in the searched databases. Studies were organized by theme at each career stage, starting in medical school when an interest in ophthalmology is expressed, and extending up to retirement.

Findings

A total of 91 studies, 87 cross-sectional and 4 cohort, were included. In medical school, mentorship and recruitment of female students into ophthalmology was influenced by sex bias, with fewer females identifying with ophthalmologist mentors and gender stereotypes perpetuated in reference letters written by both male and female referees. In residency, females had unequal learning opportunities, with lower surgical case volumes than male trainees and fewer females pursued fellowships in lucrative subspecialties. In practice, female ophthalmologists had lower incomes, less academic success, and poorer representation in leadership roles. Female ophthalmologists had a greater scholarly impact factor than their male counterparts, but this was only after approximately 30 years of publication experience. Pervasive throughout all stages of training and practice was the experience of greater sexual harassment among females from both patients and colleagues. Despite these disparities, some studies found that females reported equal overall career satisfaction rating with males in ophthalmology, whereas others suggested higher burnout rates.

Conclusions and Relevance

Ophthalmology is approaching sex parity, however, the increase in the proportion of females in ophthalmology had not translated to an increase in female representation in leadership positions. Sex disparities persisted across many domains including recruitment, training, practice patterns, academic productivity, and income. Interventions may improve sex equity in the field.

On the Asymmetric Relationship Between Physician Mental Health Disorders on Quality of Healthcare Under the COVID-19 Pandemic in Taiwan: Quantile on Quantile Regression Analyses

Purpose

When examining the nexus of physician mental health disorders and healthcare quality from the empirical perspective, mental health disorders are frequently associated with cyclical patterns corresponding to cyclic seasonality, mood swings, emission of air pollution and business cycles, the potential asymmetric effects of physician mental health disorders on healthcare quality have not received adequate attention from researchers. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to explore the asymmetric relationship between physician mental health disorders and healthcare quality during the pandemic outbreak in Taiwan.

Methods

Daily data for care quality indicators and physician mental health disorders were collected from the National Insurance Research Database in Taiwan, and the quantile-on-quantile regression model was applied to proceed with our analyses.

Results

Our results indicated that the overall aggregate effects of each quantile of physician mental health disorders on the cumulative quantiles of healthcare quality are negative (positive) for the 14-day readmission rate (preventable hospitalization rate and non-urgent ED-visit rate). Positively (negatively) cumulative effects of each quantile of physician mental health disorders were detected in the middle (low and high) quantiles of the preventable hospitalization rate. The cumulative effects of each quantile of physician mental health disorders on the high (low and middle) quantiles of the 14-day readmission rate are negative (positive), but the cumulative effects on various quantiles of the non-urgent ED-visit rate exhibit the opposite pattern.

Conclusion

The observed variation in the relationship between physician mental health disorders and different quantiles of healthcare quality suggests the need for tailored strategic interventions based on distinct levels of healthcare quality when addressing the higher risk of physician mental health disorders during the pandemic outbreak conditions.

The pandemic's unseen wounds: COVID-19's profound effects on mental health

Objective

This review aims to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health, with a focus on the physiological and psychological consequences, including comorbidities. The goal is to understand the direct and indirect populations affected by mental distress and identify potential interventions.

Methodology

A comprehensive literature search was conducted using various databases, including Google Scholar, ResearchGate, ScienceDirect, PubMed, PLoS One, and Web of Science. The search utilized relevant keywords to investigate the direct and indirect impacts of COVID-19 on mental health. The selected articles were critically evaluated and analyzed to identify key findings and insights.

Main findings

Mental health, being an intrinsic component of overall well-being, plays a vital role in physiological functioning. The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the emergence of the novel SARS-CoV-2 virus, has had a devastating global impact. Beyond the respiratory symptoms, individuals recovering from COVID-19 commonly experience additional ailments, such as arrhythmia, depression, anxiety, and fatigue. Healthcare professionals on the frontlines face an elevated risk of mental illness. However, it is crucial to recognize that the general population also grapples with comparable levels of mental distress.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the significance of addressing mental health concerns. Various strategies can help mitigate the impact, including counselling, fostering open lines of communication, providing mental support, ensuring comprehensive patient care, and administering appropriate medications. In severe cases, treatment may involve the supplementation of essential vitamins and antidepressant therapy. By understanding the direct and indirect impacts of COVID-19 on mental health, healthcare providers and policymakers can develop targeted interventions to support individuals and communities affected by the pandemic. Continued research and collaborative efforts are essential to address this pervasive issue effectively.

Prevalence, correlates, and network analysis of depression and its associated quality of life among ophthalmology nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Nurses in Ophthalmology Department (OD) had a high risk of infection during the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This study examined the prevalence, correlates, and network structure of depression, and explored its association with quality of life (QOL) in Chinese OD nurses.

Methods

Based on a cross-sectional survey, demographic and clinical data were collected. Depression was measured with the 9-item Self-reported Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), and QOL was measured using the World Health Organization Quality of Life Questionnaire-brief version (WHOQOL-BREF). Univariate analyses, multivariate logistic regression analyses, and network analyses were performed.

Results

Altogether, 2,155 OD nurses were included. The overall prevalence of depression among OD nurses was 32.71% (95%CI: 30.73-34.70%). Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that having family or friends or colleagues who were infected (OR = 1.760, p = 0.003) was significantly associated with higher risk of depression. After controlling for covariates, nurses with depression reported lower QOL (F(1, 2,155) = 596.784, p < 0.001) than those without depression. Network analyses revealed that 'Sad Mood', 'Energy Loss' and 'Worthlessness' were the key central symptoms.

Conclusion

Depression was common among OD nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic. Considering the negative impact of depression on QOL and daily life, regular screening for depression, timely counselling service, and psychiatric treatment should be provided for OD nurses, especially those who had infected family/friends or colleagues. Central symptoms identified in network analysis should be targeted in the treatment of depression.

The Mental Health State of Canadian Ophthalmologists during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Survey-Based Study and Review

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted the practice of medicine, causing stress and uncertainty among ophthalmologists. This cross-sectional, survey-based study of Canadian Ophthalmological Society members (n = 1152) aims to report on Canadian ophthalmologists’ mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Four questionnaires were administered between December 2020 and May 2021: the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), the 7-item Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), and the Impact of Event Scale—Revised (IES-R). From all of the responses, 60/85 answers were deemed complete and were included. The median age was 50–59 years and 53% were women. On PHQ-9, most respondents had no or minimal depressive symptoms (n = 38, 63%), while 12% (n = 7) had moderately severe depressive symptoms and 12% (n = 7) reported impaired daily functioning and/or thoughts of suicide or self-harm. On the GAD-7 scale, 65% (n = 39) had no significant anxiety, while 13% (n = 8) had moderate to severe anxiety. Most respondents did not have clinically significant insomnia (n = 41, 68%). Finally, 16 respondents (27%) had an IES-R score ≥24 suggesting possible post-traumatic stress disorder. No significant differences were found based on demographics. During the COVID-19 pandemic, up to 40% of respondents experienced varying degrees of depression, anxiety, insomnia, and distress from the event. In 12%, there were concerns for impaired daily functioning and/or suicidal thoughts.

Effects of COVID-19 pandemic on mental health among frontline healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

As some countries announced to remove Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) border, it indicates that the COVID-19 may have entered its terminal stage. In this COVID-19 pandemic, the mental health of frontline healthcare workers (HCWs) experienced unprecedented challenges. However, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health among frontline HCWs lacks a high-quality and long-term systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA guidelines. The system searches EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, ScienceNet, and ERIC. Analyze the mental health problems of frontline HCWs in different regions and periods, including insomnia, stress, anxiety and depression. This study was registered in PROSPERO under the number CRD42021253821.

Results

A total of 19 studies on the effects of COVID-19 pandemic on mental health among frontline HCWs were included in this study. The overall prevalence of insomnia was 42.9% (95% CI, 33.9-51.9%, I 2 = 99.0%) extracted from data from 14 cross-sectional studies (n = 10 127), 1 cohort study (n = 4,804), and 1 randomized controlled trial (RCT; n = 482) in 10 countries. The overall prevalence of stress was 53.0% (95% CI, 41.1-64.9%, I 2 = 78.3%) extracted from data from nine cross-sectional studies (n = 5,494) and 1 RCT study (n = 482) from eight countries. The overall prevalence of anxiety and depression was 43.0% (95% CI, 33.8-52.3%, I 2 = 99.0%) and 44.6% (95% CI, 36.1-53.1%, I 2 = 99.0%) extracted from data from 17 cross-sectional studies (n = 11,727), one cohort study (n = 4,804), and one RCT study (n = 482) from 12 countries. The prevalence of stress and depression was higher in 2020, while the prevalence of insomnia and anxiety was higher in 2021. The prevalence of mental health problems among physicians was higher than that of other frontline HCWs. The prevalence of mental health problems among frontline HCWs is higher in South America and lower in North America.

Conclusions

This systematic review and meta-analysis showed that the COVID-19 pandemic have significant effects on mental health among frontline HCWs. The overall prevalence of insomnia, stress, anxiety and depression among frontline HCWs is high. Therefore, the health policy-makers should pay attention to and respond to the mental health problems of frontline HCWs in the context of public health emergencies.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/.

Impact of the COVID pandemic on mental health and training opportunities of Public Health Residents from 4 European countries: A cross-sectional study

Objectives

There is little evidence on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Public Health Residents' (PHR) mental health (MH). This study aims at assessing prevalence and risk factors for depression, anxiety and stress in European PHR during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Between March and April 2021, an online survey was administered to PHR from France, Italy, Portugal and Spain. The survey assessed COVID-19 related changes in working conditions, training opportunities and evaluated MH outcomes using the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales-21. Multivariable logistic regressions were applied to identify risk factors.

Results

Among the 443 respondents, many showed symptoms of depression (60.5%), anxiety (43.1%) and stress (61.2%). The main outcome predictors were: female gender for depression (adjOR = 1.59, 95%CI [1.05-2.42]), anxiety (adjOR = 2.03, 95%CI [1.33-3.08]), and stress (adjOR = 2.35, 95%CI [1.53-3.61]); loss of research opportunities for anxiety (adjOR = 1.94, 95%CI [1.28-2.93]) and stress (adjOR = 1.98, 95%CI [1.26-3.11]); and COVID-19 impact on training (adjOR = 1.78, 95%CI [1.12-2.80]) for depression.

Conclusions

The pandemic had a significant impact on PHR in terms of depression, anxiety and stress, especially for women and who lost work-related opportunities. Training programs should offer PHR appropriate MH support and training opportunities.

Evaluation of the perception of physical and emotional health of ophthalmologists in Spain and the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic

Objective

The main objective was to study the perception of physical and emotional health of Spanish ophthalmologists and their health habits, as well as the possible influence of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

An observational, cross-sectional, non-randomized and uncontrolled study was carried out among at Spanish ophthalmologists through an online survey of 47 questions on eating habits, tobacco, alcohol, physical exercise, workload, and perception of physical and emotional state.

Results

Of a total of 2,179 ophthalmologists, 260 (11.9%) of whom 55% were men responded to the survey, with a mean age of 52.9 ± 11.4 years. 5.8% were smokers. In total, 51.5% reported good physical health, with a mean Body Mass Index of 24.4 kg/m². Overall, 53.5% reported depression, 66.9% tiredness, 34.6% difficulty sleeping, and 57.3% considered their work hard. Up to 28.5% of those surveyed had thought about leaving their job and 60.8% about reorganizing their workload. In total, 91.9% would continue to choose Ophthalmology as a specialty. In total, 36.2% reported an increase in workload, 42.3% worsening of physical state and 63.8% worsening of emotional state as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Conclusions

Spanish ophthalmologists have a positive perception of their physical and emotional health, despite having life habits that are not always healthy and feeling mostly down. The COVID-19 pandemic has had a negative influence on the physical and emotional health of ophthalmologists.

The mental health of healthcare workers in GCC countries during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives

The aim of this study was to summarize the available evidence on the prevalence of stress, burnout, anxiety and depression among healthcare providers in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries (KSA, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates) during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Google scholar for related studies published between January 2020 and April 2021 and conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Results

Of the 1815 identified studies, 29 met the inclusion criteria, and 19 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled estimate of prevalence for moderate to severe anxiety as reported using GAD-7 was 34.57% (95% CI = 19.73%, 51.12%), that for moderate to severe depression using PHQ-9 was 53.12% (95% CI = 32.76%, 72.96%), and that for moderate to severe stress using the 10-item Perceived Stress Scales was 81.12% (95% CI = 72.15%, 88.70%). Meta-analysis was not performed for burnout due to the small number of identified studies and the different tools used; however, the highest prevalence was reported at 76% (95% CI = 64%, 85%). Overall, a positive trend was observed over time for moderate to severe anxiety and depression, p = 0.0059 and 0.0762, respectively. Of note, the heterogeneity was significant among the studies, and many studies were of poor quality.

Conclusion

The prevalence of mental health disorders during the current pandemic among healthcare workers in GCC countries is high. However, the results could be affected by the high heterogeneity and low quality studies.

Manifestation of Generalized Anxiety Disorder and Its Association With Somatic Symptoms Among Occupational and Physical Therapists During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to examine the level of generalized anxiety disorder among occupational and physical therapists during treatment sessions and its association with somatic symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

A descriptive cross-sectional design was used in this study. Data were collected during the month of April 2021, and the study included occupational and physical therapists who practiced during COVID-19 from March 2020 to March 2021. The generalized anxiety disorder scale (GAD-7) and a modified patient health questionnaire (mPHQ-15) were used to examine self-reported anxiety and somatic symptoms among the study participants. The independent t-test was used to determine differences between groups based on GAD-7 and mPHQ-15 results. Spearman's correlation test and chi-squared test were used to find the relationships between different variables such as anxiety and somatic symptoms.

Results

The study (n = 98 participants) included 56 occupational and 42 physical therapists. An 84% response rate was achieved. GAD-7 final score was μ = 9.21 ± 5.63 with 27% reporting no anxiety, 14% mild, 38% moderate, and 21% severe. Independent t-tests on GAD-7 scores showed significant differences between therapist specializations [t₍₉₆₎ = −2.256; p = 0.026] and between therapists residing with or without their parents [t₍₉₆₎ = −2.536; p = 0.013]. The mPHQ-15 final score was μ = 9.52 ± 5.54 with 13% reporting no symptoms (n = 13), 20% mild (n = 20), 38% moderate (n = 37), and 29% severe (n = 28). GAD-7 and mPHQ-15 scores were moderately positively correlated [r₍₉₆₎ = 0.569; p <0.000]. The chi-squared test showed a significant association between GAD-7 levels of anxiety and mPHQ-15 levels of somatic symptoms [x²_{(9, N = 98)} = 70.62 p <0.000]. Therapists reported that the quality (76%) and effectiveness (20%) of their rehabilitation services were negatively impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Conclusion

The majority of study participants experienced moderate to severe anxiety and associated somatic symptoms. During COVID-19, ongoing psychological counseling of healthcare professionals such as occupational and physical therapists is required to maintain positive mental health. Implications for practice are presented.

Pandemics and the Impact on Physician Mental Health: A Systematic Review

Physician mental health is a major area of concern with physician burnout on the rise, while at the same time pandemics are becoming more frequent and serious in nature. This combination of physician burnout and pandemics has the potential for serious negative implications for physicians, patients, and health care organizations. Thus, we conduct a systematic review that examines the effect of pandemics on physician mental health using the burnout cascade as a framework. We identified 30 quantitative studies for inclusion. We find that Stages 4 and 5 of the burnout cascade are particularly troublesome with physicians experiencing high levels of anxiety and depression. Furthermore, we find in the degradation phase that physicians experience stigma which may intensify other negative effects. Physicians who are women, younger, and have less training are more susceptible to the negative effects of pandemics. We discuss overall implications and recommendations for future research.

The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on health care workers' anxiety levels: a meta-analysis

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has been declared a public health emergency of international concern, causing excessive anxiety among health care workers. Additionally, publication bias and low-quality publications have become widespread, which can result in the dissemination of unreliable information. A meta-analysis was performed for this study with the following two aims: (1) to examine the prevalence of anxiety among health care workers and determine whether it has increased owing to the COVID-19 pandemic and (2) to investigate whether there has been an increase in publication bias.

Methods

All relevant studies published between 2015 and 2020 were searched in electronic databases (namely Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, PsycInfo, PsyArXiv, and medRxiv). The heterogeneity of the studies was assessed using the I 2 statistic. The effect size (prevalence rate of anxiety) and 95% CI for each study were also calculated. We used moderator analysis to test for the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on health care workers' anxiety levels and to detect publication bias in COVID-19 studies. We assessed publication bias using funnel plots and Egger's regression.

Results

A total of 122 studies with 118,025 participants met the inclusion criteria. Eighty-eight articles (75,066 participants) were related to COVID-19, 13 articles (9,222 participants) were unrelated to COVID-19 (i.e., articles related to other outbreaks, which were excluded), and 21 preprints (33,737 participants) were related to COVID-19. The pooled meta-analysis prevalence was 33.6% (95% CI [30.5-36.8]; 95% PI [6.5-76.3]). Moderator analysis revealed no significant differences between articles related to COVID-19 and those unrelated to COVID-19 (p = 0.824). Moreover, no significant differences were found between articles and preprints related to COVID-19 (p = 0.843). Significant heterogeneity was observed in each subgroup. An Egger's test revealed publication bias in both articles and preprints related to COVID-19 (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Determining whether the anxiety state of health care workers is altered by the COVID-19 pandemic is currently difficult. However, there is evidence that their anxiety levels may always be high, which suggests that more attention should be paid to their mental health. Furthermore, we found a substantial publication bias; however, the quality of the studies was relatively stable and reliable.

Investigating Predictors of Psychological Distress for Healthcare Workers in a Major Saudi COVID-19 Center

This study investigated the relationship between fear of COVID-19, previous exposure to COVID-19, perceived vulnerability to disease, sleep quality, and psychological distress among healthcare workers (HCWs) in Taif city in Saudi Arabia, which has a population of 702,000 people. A cross-sectional study design was adopted. HCWs (n = 202) completed a survey containing the Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S), Perceived Vulnerability to Disease (PVD), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), and Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21). FCV-19S and sleep quality were significant predictors for psychological distress. Female gender was a significant predictor for depression and stress. Single, divorced, and widowed marital status were predictive for anxiety. FCV-19S was weakly correlated with PVD but moderately with depression, anxiety, and stress. Of the two PVD subscales, perceived infectability was weakly correlated with psychological distress. PVD and previous experience with COVID-19 were not significant predictors. Sleep quality and FCV-19S were major predictors of psychological distress. Findings indicated that poor sleep quality was strongly associated with psychological distress, while fear of COVID-19 had a moderate association. Such results support the need to design and implement psychological programs to assist HCWs in dealing with the psychological impact of this ongoing pandemic.

Sleep disturbances during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the extent of sleep disturbances during the COVID-19 pandemic. Eleven databases and six preprint repositories were searched for the period from November 1, 2019, to July 15, 2021. The DerSimonian and Laird method was used to develop random-effect meta-analyses. Two hundred and fifty studies comprising 493,475 participants from 49 countries were included. During COVID-19, the estimated global prevalence of sleep disturbances was 40.49% [37.56; 43.48%]. Bayesian meta-analysis revealed an odds of 0.68 [0.59; 0.77] which translates to a rate of approximately 41%. This provides reassurance that the estimated rate using classical meta-analysis is robust. Six major populations were identified; the estimated prevalence of sleep problem was 52.39% [41.69; 62.88%] among patients infected with COVID-19, 45.96% [36.90; 55.30%] among children and adolescents, 42.47% [37.95; 47.12%] among healthcare workers, 41.50% [32.98; 50.56%] among special populations with healthcare needs, 41.16% [28.76; 54.79%] among university students, and 36.73% [32.32; 41.38%] among the general population. Sleep disturbances were higher during lockdown compared to no lockdown, 42.49% versus 37.97%. Four in every ten individuals reported a sleep problem during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients infected with the disease, children, and adolescents appeared to be the most affected groups.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Ophthalmology Resident Perceptions of Clinical Experience, Surgical Training, and Personal Life

Objective The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected multiple areas of health care, including residency training programs. Elucidating the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on resident clinical experience, surgical training, and wellness is essential to identify areas in which programs can provide additional educational and personal resources to trainees. This study aims to evaluate the experiences of ophthalmology residents during the pandemic.

Design The design is a cross-sectional, nonvalidated survey study. The survey was administered online with data collection from August 22 to August 31, 2020.

Participants Applicants to the Bascom Palmer Eye Institute ophthalmology residency program during the 2016 to 2019 application cycles were invited to complete the survey to encompass trainees currently in ophthalmology residency during the COVID-19 pandemic. Applicants who were not training at an ophthalmology residency program during the pandemic were excluded.

Methods This study involved eliciting feedback from ophthalmology residents on the perceived impact of COVID-19 on their residency experiences through survey questions.

Main Outcome Measures Perceived didactic, clinical, surgical, and overall experiences of residents during the COVID-19 pandemic, effect on cataract and noncataract surgical case volume, and perceived effects on resident personal life.

Results Responses were obtained from 357 (22.8%) individuals, 193 of which met inclusion criteria (59.1% male, 54.9% aged 30–34). Most participants reported overall worsening of their ophthalmology training experience due to COVID-19 (75.1%), with worsening of clinical training reported by 72.5% of participants and worsening of surgical training reported by 89.1% of participants. There were no significant differences in the perception of the impact of COVID-19 on overall training experience, clinical training experience, or surgical training experience among geographic regions (p = 0.43, p = 0.23, p = 0.27, respectively). A higher percentage of post-graduate year 3 (PGY3) and PGY4 trainees reported worsened clinical (p = 0.003) or surgical (p = 0.03) experience compared with PGY2 trainees. Participants also reported impact on personal life including time spent away from family (52.9%), worsened friendships with co-residents (29.5%), forced changes in living situation (15.0%), and increased expenses (13.5%).

Conclusion The COVID-19 pandemic has substantially impacted clinical and surgical experience of ophthalmology residents, who also report personal stressors due to the pandemic. Identifying alterations in the ophthalmology residency experience is essential to provide additional resources to support ophthalmology trainees professionally and personally during this time.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Ophthalmology Residents: A Narrative Review

The ongoing outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has drastically affected medical societies. We aim to provide an overview and summarize the information published so far concerning the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on ophthalmology residency programs and the mental wellbeing of trainees, and to establish factors to help maintain successful residency training to ensure high-quality, specialist ophthalmic training. A literature search was conducted in October 2021 of the PubMed database for articles assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of ophthalmology trainees and on ophthalmology residency programs. Cross-sectional survey studies, editorials, articles in scientific journals, letters to editors, and commentaries were considered; finally, 19 studies were included after excluding abstract-only publications and conference posters. The studies’ demographic details, participant characteristics, interventions, outcomes, and limitations were extracted. Our summarized information showed the alarmingly significant impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on ophthalmology trainees’ mental health and the associated considerable changes in ophthalmic training programs. Thus, in future, virtual training and surgical simulators should be permanently introduced, in addition to traditional teaching, to complete successful ophthalmology residency programs. Additionally, we emphasize the need for a widely facilitated and encouraged access to psychological support programs for healthcare workers, including ophthalmologists.

Psychological distress among healthcare providers during COVID-19 in Asia: Systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

COVID-19 pandemic is having a devastating effect on the mental health and wellbeing of healthcare providers (HCPs) globally. This review is aimed at determining the prevalence of depression, anxiety, stress, fear, burnout and resilience and its associated factors among HCPs in Asia during the COVID-19 pandemic.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We performed literature search using 4 databases from Medline, Cinahl, PubMed and Scopus from inception up to March 15, 2021 and selected relevant cross-sectional studies. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plot. Random effects model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence while risk factors were reported in odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI.

RESULTS

We included 148 studies with 159,194 HCPs and the pooled prevalence for depression was 37.5% (95%CI: 33.8-41.3), anxiety 39.7(95%CI: 34.3-45.1), stress 36.4% (95%CI: 23.2-49.7), fear 71.3% (95%CI: 54.6-88.0), burnout 68.3% (95%CI: 54.0-82.5), and low resilience was 16.1% (95%CI: 12.8-19.4), respectively. The heterogeneity was high (I2>99.4%). Meta-analysis reported that both females (OR = 1.48; 95% CI = 1.30-1.68) and nurses (OR = 1.21; 95%CI = 1.02-1.45) were at increased risk of having depression and anxiety [(Female: OR = 1.66; 95% CI = 1.49-1.85), (Nurse: OR = 1.36; 95%CI = 1.16-1.58)]. Females were at increased risk of getting stress (OR = 1.59; 95%CI = 1.28-1.97).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, one third of HCPs suffered from depression, anxiety and stress and more than two third of HCPs suffered from fear and burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic in Asia.

Review of the Psychological Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Healthcare Workers in Saudi Arabia

Purpose

The Covid-19 pandemic has significantly burdened healthcare systems worldwide and substantially affected the psychological state. The objective of this narrative review was to summarize the psychological outcome of the “Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic” on healthcare workers in kingdom of Saudi Arabia to assess their mental health outcome that can aid in development of guidelines and psychological interventions that can improve healthcare workers' quality of life, work and decision-making capability toward patient treatment during the pandemic.

Materials and Methods

A comprehensive research was done to overview current available literature on psychological and mental health issues observed among healthcare workers “HCW” in Saudi Arabia. The search included all articles published since the beginning of the pandemic from January 2020 till February 2021 relevant to the subject of the review. In this review, a total of 10 primary research articles were included following a cross-sectional survey method to analyze the impact of various psychological variables.

Results

Anxiety symptoms were reported by between 33.3% and 68.5% of HCWs. Between 27.9% and 55.2% of HCWs reported depressive symptoms. HCWs reported anxiety, depression, sleep disturbances and distress with a range comprised between 27.9% and 68.5%.

Conclusion

The Covid-19 pandemic has certainly led to multifaceted and vigorous psychological and mental impact on healthcare providers, it is now both an opportunity and challenge to design further studies that can lead to development of guidelines in Saudi Arabia and worldwide to improve mental health infrastructure that strengthen patient oriented treatment of care plan during this pandemic.

Prevalence of Psychological Impacts on Healthcare Providers during COVID-19 Pandemic in Asia

COVID-19 has impacted people psychologically globally, including healthcare providers. Anxiety, depression, and stress are the most common impacts that have affected these people. Thus, this study was aimed to ascertain the estimated prevalence of psychological impacts among healthcare providers in the Asian region. A systematic search was performed in the MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Scopus databases for original research articles published between 2020 and April 2021. Only studies published in English were included. The quality of data was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Meta-Analysis, and the analysis was performed using generic inverse variance with a random-effects model by Review Manager software. A total of 80 studies across 18 countries in Asia region were pooled to assess the data prevalence on anxiety (34.81% (95% CI: 30.80%, 38.83%)), depression (34.61% (95% CI: 30.87%, 38.36%)), stress (31.72% (95% CI: 21.25%, 42.18%)), insomnia (37.89% (95% CI: 25.43%, 50.35%)), and post-traumatic stress disorder (15.29% (95% CI: 11.43%, 19.15%)). Subgroup analyses were conducted across regions, type of healthcare providers, sex, and occupation. This review has identified a high prevalence of anxiety, depression, stress, and insomnia but a low prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder among healthcare providers in Asia regions. Effective intervention support programs are urgently needed to improve psychological health of healthcare providers and maintaining the health system.

Prevalence of Depression among Healthcare Workers during the COVID-19 Outbreak: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: There is evidence of a high psychological toll from the COVID-19 pandemic in healthcare workers. This paper was aimed at conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting levels of depression among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 and estimating the pooled prevalence of depression. Methods: We searched for cross-sectional studies listed on PubMed from 1 December 2019 to 15 September 2020 that reported prevalence of depression in healthcare workers, nurses, medical doctors, and COVID-19 frontline professionals. The pooled proportions of depression were calculated with random effects models. Results: We identified 57 studies from seventeen countries. The pooled prevalence of depression in healthcare workers was 24% (95% CI: 20–28%), 25% for nurses (95% CI: 18–33%), 24% for medical doctors (95% CI: 16–31%), and 43% for frontline professionals (95% CI: 28–59%). Conclusions: The proportion of depression in nurses and medical doctors during the COVID-19 pandemic was similar to that found in the general population as previously reported in other meta-analyses conducted with smaller numbers of studies. Importantly, almost half of the frontline healthcare workers showed increased levels of depression. There is need for a comprehensive, international response to prevent and treat common mental health problems in healthcare workers.

Gender-specific estimates of sleep problems during the COVID-19 pandemic: Systematic review and meta-analysis

The outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) changed lifestyles worldwide and subsequently induced individuals’ sleep problems. Sleep problems have been demonstrated by scattered evidence among the current literature on COVID‐19; however, little is known regarding the synthesised prevalence of sleep problems (i.e. insomnia symptoms and poor sleep quality) for males and females separately. The present systematic review and meta‐analysis aimed to answer the important question regarding prevalence of sleep problems during the COVID‐19 outbreak period between genders. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses guideline and Newcastle–Ottawa Scale checklist, relevant studies with satisfactory methodological quality searched for in five academic databases (Scopus, PubMed Central, ProQuest, Web of Science , and EMBASE) were included and analysed. The protocol of the project was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; identification code CRD42020181644). A total of 54 papers (N = 67,722) in the female subgroup and 45 papers (N = 45,718) in the male subgroup were pooled in the meta‐analysis. The corrected pooled estimated prevalence of sleep problems was 24% (95% confidence interval [CI] 19%–29%) for female participants and 27% (95% CI 24%–30%) for male participants. Although in both gender subgroups, patients with COVID‐19, health professionals and general population showed the highest prevalence of sleep problems, it did not reach statistical significance. Based on multivariable meta‐regression, both gender groups had higher prevalence of sleep problems during the lockdown period. Therefore, healthcare providers should pay attention to the sleep problems and take appropriate preventive action.

Government response moderates the mental health impact of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of depression outcomes across countries

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic represents a public health, economic and mental health crisis. We hypothesized that timely government implementation of stringent measures to reduce viral transmission would benefit mental health, as evidenced by reduced rates of depressive symptoms (i.e., Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ]-9≥10, PHQ-2≥3).

METHODS

The systematic review herein (PROSPERO CRD42020200647) evaluated to what extent differences in government-imposed stringency and timeliness of response to COVID-19 moderate the prevalence of depressive symptoms across 33 countries (k=114, N=640,037). We included data from six lower-middle-income countries, nine upper-middle-income countries, and 18 higher-income countries. Government-imposed stringency and timeliness in response were operationalized using the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response ("Stringency") Index.

RESULTS

The overall proportion of study participants with clinically significant depressive symptoms was 21.39% (95% CI 19.37-23.47). The prevalence of clinically significant depressive symptoms was significantly lower in countries wherein governments implemented stringent policies promptly. The moderating effect of government response remained significant after including the national frequency of COVID cases at the time of study commencement, Healthcare Access and Quality index, and the inclusion of COVID patients in the study.

LIMITATIONS

Factors that may have confounded our results include, for example, differences in lockdown duration, lack of study participant and outcome assessor blinding, and retrospective assessment of depressive symptom severity.

CONCLUSIONS

Governments that enacted stringent measures to contain the spread of COVID-19 benefited not only the physical, but also the mental health of their population.

Sleep problems during COVID-19 pandemic and its' association to psychological distress: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The emerging novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become one of the leading cause of deaths worldwide in 2020. The present systematic review and meta-analysis estimated the magnitude of sleep problems during the COVID-19 pandemic and its relationship with psychological distress.

METHODS

Five academic databases (Scopus, PubMed Central, ProQuest, ISI Web of Knowledge, and Embase) were searched. Observational studies including case-control studies and cross-sectional studies were included if relevant data relationships were reported (i.e., sleep assessed utilizing the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index or Insomnia Severity Index). All the studies were English, peer-reviewed papers published between December 2019 and February 2021. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020181644.

FINDINGS

168 cross-sectional, four case-control, and five longitudinal design papers comprising 345,270 participants from 39 countries were identified. The corrected pooled estimated prevalence of sleep problems were 31% among healthcare professionals, 18% among the general population, and 57% among COVID-19 patients (all p-values < 0.05). Sleep problems were associated with depression among healthcare professionals, the general population, and COVID-19 patients, with Fisher's Z scores of -0.28, -0.30, and -0.36, respectively. Sleep problems were positively (and moderately) associated with anxiety among healthcare professionals, the general population, and COVID-19 patients, with Fisher's z scores of 0.55, 0.48, and 0.49, respectively.

INTERPRETATION

Sleep problems appear to have been common during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, sleep problems were found to be associated with higher levels of psychological distress. With the use of effective programs treating sleep problems, psychological distress may be reduced. Vice versa, the use of effective programs treating psychological distress, sleep problems may be reduced.

FUNDING

The present study received no funding.

Psychological Impact of COVID-19 on Frontline Healthcare Workers in Saudi Arabia

This study assesses the determinants and severity of psychological distress among frontline Ministry of Health workers within Saudi Arabia during the rapid acceleration phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic. Moreover, we assess distress sustainability and stress-coping behaviors. We conducted an online national cross-sectional survey. The Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (k10) is a highly reliable instrument used to assess depression and anxiety. We evaluated stress-coping behavior and the persistence of the disorders. Binary logistic regression identified the sociodemographic factors related to severe distress. The prevalence of severe psychological distress among COVID-19 frontline healthcare workers (HCWs) was 27.3%. Factors associated with severe psychological distress in multiple regression analyses were male gender (p < 0.001), working for >45 hours/week (p = 0.009), age of >40 years (p = 0.038), years of experience for more than seven years (p = 0.048), Asir region (p = 0.003), and using psychological services (p < 0.001). The prevalence of severe psychological distress was 27.3%. Factors associated with severe psychological distress in multiple regression analyses were male gender, working >45 hours/week, age, years of experience, region, and using psychological services. The results form a foundation for targeted psychological health support services at the individual and institutional levels to prevent progression to mental illness.

Prevalence of anxiety in health care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic: A rapid systematic review (on published articles in Medline) with meta-analysis

During the COVID-19, healthcare workers are exposed to a higher risk of mental health problems, especially anxiety symptoms. The current work aims at contributing to an update of anxiety prevalence in this population by conducting a rapid systematic review and meta-analysis. Medline and Pubmed were searched for studies on the prevalence of anxiety in health care workers published from December 1, 2019 to September 15, 2020. In total, 71 studies were included in this study. The pooled prevalence of anxiety in healthcare workers was 25% (95% CI: 21%-29%), 27% in nurses (95% CI: 20%-34%), 17% in medical doctors (95% CI: 12%-22%) and 43% in frontline healthcare workers (95% CI: 25%-62%). Our results suggest that healthcare workers are experiencing significant levels of anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially those on the frontline and nurses. However, international longitudinal studies are needed to fully understand the impact of the pandemic on healthcare workers' mental health, especially those working at the frontline.

Ophthalmology and Ethics in the COVID-19 Era

Purpose

The novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19), has disrupted the practice of ophthalmology and threatens to forever alter how we care for our patients. Physicians across the country encounter unique clinical dilemmas daily. This paper presents a curated set of ethical dilemmas facing ophthalmologists both during and following the pandemic.

Design

Perspective.

Methods

Case presentations drawn from actual clinical scenarios were presented during a virtual ophthalmology grand rounds and discussed with the director of clinical ethics at Columbia University Irving Medical Center.

Results

It has become routine to expect an ophthalmologist to be involved in many levels of care for patients critically ill with COVID-19. Ophthalmology patients, even those with chronic, progressive conditions, are being triaged, and vision-saving interventions are being postponed. Four questions were applied to each scenario, allowing for ethical conclusions to be reached. The following questions were posed: what is the imminence and severity of the harm expected without intervention? What is the efficacy of the intervention under consideration? What are the risks of treatment for the patient? What are the risks of treating the patient for the health care team?

Conclusions

During this pandemic and for months, perhaps years, to come, it is critical to reconsider the ethical principles underlying modern medicine and ophthalmic care as well as the ramifications of our decisions and actions.

Experiences and management of physician psychological symptoms during infectious disease outbreaks: a rapid review

BACKGROUND

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, physicians experienced unprecedented levels of burnout. The uncertainty of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic along with increased workload and difficult medical triage decisions may lead to a further decline in physician psychological health.

METHODS

We searched Medline, EMBASE, and PsycINFO for primary research from database inception (Medline [1946], EMBASE [1974], PsycINFO [1806]) to November 17, 2020. Titles and abstracts were screened by one of three reviewers and full-text article screening and data abstraction were conducted independently, and in duplicate, by three reviewers.

RESULTS

From 6223 unique citations, 480 articles were reviewed in full-text, with 193 studies (of 90,499 physicians) included in the final review. Studies reported on physician psychological symptoms and management during seven infectious disease outbreaks (severe acute respiratory syndrome [SARS], three strains of Influenza A virus [H1N1, H5N1, H7N9], Ebola, Middle East respiratory syndrome [MERS], and COVID-19) in 57 countries. Psychological symptoms of anxiety (14.3-92.3%), stress (11.9-93.7%), depression (17-80.5%), post-traumatic stress disorder (13.2-75.2%) and burnout (14.7-76%) were commonly reported among physicians, regardless of infectious disease outbreak or country. Younger, female (vs. male), single (vs. married), early career physicians, and those providing direct care to infected patients were associated with worse psychological symptoms.

INTERPRETATION

Physicians should be aware that psychological symptoms of anxiety, depression, fear and distress are common, manifest differently and self-management strategies to improve psychological well-being exist. Health systems should implement short and long-term psychological supports for physicians caring for patients with COVID-19.

Burden of Sleep Disturbance During COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may exert adverse impacts on sleep among populations, which may raise awareness of the burden of sleep disturbance, and the demand of intervention strategies for different populations. We aimed to summarize the current evidence for the impacts of COVID-19 on sleep in patients with COVID-19, healthcare workers (HWs), and the general population. We searched PubMed and Embase for studies on the prevalence of sleep disturbance. Totally, 86 studies were included in the review, including 16 studies for COVID-19 patients, 34 studies for HWs, and 36 studies for the general population. The prevalence of sleep disturbance was 33.3%-84.7%, and 29.5-40% in hospitalized COVID-19 patients and discharged COVID-19 survivors, respectively. Physiologic and psychological traumatic effects of the infection may interact with environmental factors to increase the risk of sleep disturbance in COVID-19 patients. The prevalence of sleep disturbance was 18.4-84.7% in HWs, and the contributors mainly included high workloads and shift work, occupation-related factors, and psychological factors. The prevalence of sleep disturbance was 17.65-81% in the general population. Physiologic and social-psychological factors contributed to sleep disturbance of the general population during COVID-19 pandemic. In summary, the sleep disturbance was highly prevalent during COVID-19 pandemic. Specific health strategies should be implemented to tackle sleep disturbance.

Mental health among healthcare providers during coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) was recently declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). The first confirmed case in Saudi Arabia was announced on March 2, 2020. Several psychiatric manifestations may appear during pandemics, especially among frontline healthcare providers.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to explore depression and anxiety levels among healthcare providers during the COVID-19 outbreak in Saudi Arabia.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study of a convenience sample of 502 healthcare providers in the Ministry of Health. Depression and anxiety were assessed via the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 (GAD-7) questionnaires, respectively.

RESULTS

The respondents represented various healthcare occupations: administrators (28.49%), nurses (26.29%), physicians (22.11%), non-physician specialists (13.94%), technicians (6.77%), and pharmacists (2.30%). The majority of them were male (68.1%). More than half of them had depressive disorder (55.2%), which ranged from mild (24.9%), moderate (14.5%), and moderately severe (10%) to severe (5.8%). Half of the sample had generalized anxiety disorder (51.4%), which ranged from mild (25.1%) and moderate (11%) to severe (15.3%). Multivariate analysis showed that males were significantly less predicted to have anxiety (Beta=-0.22, P-value <0.04), 30-39 years age group were significantly more predicted to have depression and anxiety group (Beta=0.204, P-value <0.001 and beta=0.521, P-value <0.003 respectively), and nurses had significantly higher mean score of anxiety (Beta=0.445, P-value <0.026).

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed that depression and anxiety are prevailing conditions among healthcare providers. Although efforts were accelerated to support their psychological well-being, more attention should be paid to the mental health of female, 30-39 age group and nursing staff. Promoting healthcare service as a humanitarian and national duty may contribute to making it a more meaningful experience in addition to advocating for solidarity, altruism, and social inclusion. Longitudinal research studies need to be conducted to follow up on healthcare providers' mental health symptoms and develop evidence-based interventions.

Mental Health Outcomes Amongst Health Care Workers During COVID 19 Pandemic in Saudi Arabia

Objectives: The study aimed to assess the mental health outcomes and associated factors among health care workers during COVID 19 in Saudi Arabia. Design, Setting, and Participants: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of health care workers from tertiary care and ministry of health Centers across the Central, Eastern, and Western regions of Saudi Arabia. There were 1,130 participants in the survey, and we collected demographic and mental health measurements from the participants. Primary Outcomes and Measures: The magnitude of symptoms of depression, anxiety, and insomnia was measured using the original version of 9-item patient health questionnaire (PHQ-9), the 7-item generalized anxiety disorder scale (GAD-7), and 7-item insomnia severity index (ISI). We use the multiple logistic regression analysis to identify the associated risk factors of individual outcomes. Results: The scores on the PHQ-9 showed that the largest proportion of health care workers (76.93%) experienced only normal to mild depression (50.83 and 26.1%, respectively). The scores on the GAD-7 showed that the largest proportion of health care workers (78.88%) experienced minimal to mild anxiety (50.41 and 28.47%, respectively). The scores on the ISI showed that the largest proportion of health care workers (85.83%) experienced absence to subthreshold insomnia (57.08 and 28.75%, respectively). The risk factors for depression in health care workers were Saudi, living with family, working from an isolated room at home and frontline worker. For anxiety, being female was risk factor and for insomnia, being frontline worker was risk factor. Conclusion: It was observed that the symptoms of depression, anxiety, and insomnia were reported in a lower proportion of health care workers in our study. The participants who were female, frontline workers, Saudi, living with family, and working from home in isolated rooms were predisposed to developing psychological disorders.