scholarly journals The association between witnessing patient death and mental health outcomes in frontline COVID‐19 healthcare workers

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariela Mosheva ◽  
Raz Gross ◽  
Nimrod Hertz‐Palmor ◽  
Ilanit Hasson‐Ohayon ◽  
Rachel Kaplan ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adjunct Professor ◽  
Frances Furio

BACKGROUND The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on various sectors and industries around the world. Globally, healthcare workers and first responders have found themselves faced with unprecedented challenges, both within and outside of the workplace. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this research was to identify and explore the complex mental health outcomes resulting from the various new challenges experienced by healthcare workers and first responders during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS A phenomenological qualitative study was conducted in an effort to understand the mental health outcomes resulting from the various challenges and barriers faced while working during the pandemic. A total of 31 healthcare workers and first responders were interviewed. RESULTS The mental health outcomes described were not isolated to increased stress and anxiety; participants also described complex experiences, perspectives, and feelings related to guilt, stoicism, helplessness, fear, and anger. This paper adds to the current body of literature by further exploring the personal experiences and perspectives of healthcare workers and first responders related to these complex mental health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Continued exploration, understanding, and awareness is needed in order to continue working towards addressing these outcomes and offering potential solutions.


BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. e042030 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muna Alshekaili ◽  
Walid Hassan ◽  
Nazik Al Said ◽  
Fatima Al Sulaimani ◽  
Sathish Kumar Jayapal ◽  
...  

ObjectiveThis study aims to assess and compare demographic and psychological factors and sleep status of frontline healthcare workers (HCWs) in relation to non-frontline HCWs.Design, settings, participants and outcomesThis cross-sectional study was conducted from 8 April 2020 to 17 April 2020 using an online survey across varied healthcare settings in Oman accruing 1139 HCWs.The primary and secondary outcomes were mental health status and sociodemographic data, respectively. Mental health status was assessed using the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21), and insomnia was evaluated by the Insomnia Severity Index. Samples were categorised into the frontline and non-frontline groups. χ2 and t-tests were used to compare groups by demographic data. The Mantel-Haenszel OR was used to compare groups by mental health outcomes adjusted by all sociodemographic factors.ResultsThis study included 1139 HCWs working in Oman. While working during the pandemic period, a total of 368 (32.3%), 388 (34.1%), 271 (23.8%) and 211 (18.5%) respondents were reported to have depression, anxiety, stress and insomnia, respectively. HCWs in the frontline group were 1.5 times more likely to report anxiety (OR=1.557, p=0.004), stress (OR=1.506, p=0.016) and insomnia (OR=1.586, p=0.013) as compared with those in the non-frontline group. No significant differences in depression status were found between the frontline and non-frontline groups (p=0.201).ConclusionsTo our knowledge, this is the first study to explore the differential impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on different grades of HCWs. This study suggests that frontline HCWs are disproportionally affected compared to non-frontline HCWs, with managing sleep–wake cycles and anxiety symptoms being highly endorsed among frontline HCWs. As psychosocial interventions are likely to be constrained owing to the pandemic, mental healthcare must first be directed to frontline HCWs.


Author(s):  
Rachel Hennein ◽  
Jessica Bonumwezi ◽  
Max Jordan Nguemeni Tiako ◽  
Petty Tineo ◽  
Sarah Lowe

Racial and gender discrimination are risk factors for adverse mental health outcomes in the general population; however, the effects of discrimination on the mental health of healthcare workers needs to be further explored, especially in relation to competing stressors. Thus, we administered a survey to healthcare workers to investigate the associations between perceived racial and gender discrimination and symptoms of depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress, and burnout during a period of substantial stressors related to the COVID-19 pandemic and a national racial reckoning. We used multivariable linear regression models, which controlled for demographics and pandemic-related stressors. Of the 997 participants (Mean Age = 38.22 years, SD = 11.77), 688 (69.01%) were White, 148 (14.84%) Asian, 86 (8.63%) Black, 73 (7.32%) Latinx, and 21 (2.11%) identified as another race. In multivariable models, racial discrimination predicted symptoms of depression (B = 0.04; SE: 0.02; p = .009), anxiety (B = 0.05; SE: 0.02; p = .004), and posttraumatic stress (B = 0.01; SE: 0.01; p = .006) and gender discrimination predicted posttraumatic stress (B = 0.11; SE: 0.05; p = .013) and burnout (B = 0.24; SE: 0.07; p = .001). Discrimination had indirect effects on mental health outcomes via inadequate social support. Hospital-wide diversity and inclusion initiatives are warranted to mitigate the adverse mental health effects of discrimination.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodolfo Rossi ◽  
Valentina Socci ◽  
Francesca Pacitti ◽  
Sonia Mensi ◽  
Antinisca Di Marco ◽  
...  

IntroductionDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers in Italy have been exposed to an unprecedented pressure and traumatic events. However, no direct comparison with the general population is available so far. The aim of this study is to detail mental health outcomes in healthcare workers compared to the general population.Methods24050 respondents completed an on-line questionnaire during the contagion peak, 21342 general population, 1295 second-line healthcare workers, and 1411 front-line healthcare workers. Depressive, anxious, post-traumatic symptoms and insomnia were assessed. Specific COVID-19 related potential risk factors were also considered in healthcare workers.ResultsDepressive symptoms were more frequent in the general population (28.12%) and front-line healthcare workers (28.35%) compared to the second-line healthcare workers (19.98%) groups. Anxiety symptoms showed a prevalence of 21.25% in the general population, 18.05% for second-line healthcare workers, and 20.55% for front-line healthcare workers. Insomnia showed a prevalence of 7.82, 6.58, and 9.92% for the general population, second-line healthcare workers, and front-line healthcare workers, respectively. Compared to the general population, front-line healthcare workers had higher odds of endorsing total trauma-related symptoms. Both second-line healthcare workers and front-line healthcare workers had higher odds of endorsing core post-traumatic symptoms compared to the general population, while second-line healthcare workers had lower odds of endorsing negative affect and dissociative symptoms. Higher total traumatic symptom score was associated with being a front-line healthcare worker, having a colleague infected, hospitalized, or deceased, being a nurse, female gender, and younger age.ConclusionThis study suggests a significant psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the Italian general population and healthcare workers. Front-line healthcare workers represent a specific at-risk population for post-traumatic symptoms. These findings underline the importance of monitoring and intervention strategies.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. e0246602
Author(s):  
Rachel Hennein ◽  
Emma J. Mew ◽  
Sarah R. Lowe

Background Healthcare workers are at increased risk of adverse mental health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Studies are warranted that examine socio-ecological factors associated with these outcomes to inform interventions that support healthcare workers during future disease outbreaks. Methods We conducted an online cross-sectional study of healthcare workers during May 2020 to assess the socio-ecological predictors of mental health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. We assessed factors at four socio-ecological levels: individual (e.g., gender), interpersonal (e.g., social support), institutional (e.g., personal protective equipment availability), and community (e.g., healthcare worker stigma). The Personal Health Questionnaire-9, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Primary Care Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, and Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Concise scales assessed probable major depression (MD), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and alcohol use disorder (AUD), respectively. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess unadjusted and adjusted associations between socio-ecological factors and mental health outcomes. Results Of the 1,092 participants, 72.0% were female, 51.9% were frontline workers, and the mean age was 40.4 years (standard deviation = 11.5). Based on cut-off scores, 13.9%, 15.6%, 22.8%, and 42.8% had probable MD, GAD, PTSD, and AUD, respectively. In the multivariable adjusted models, needing more social support was associated with significantly higher odds of probable MD, GAD, PTSD, and AUD. The significance of other factors varied across the outcomes. For example, at the individual level, female gender was associated with probable PTSD. At the institutional level, lower team cohesion was associated with probable PTSD, and difficulty following hospital policies with probable MD. At the community level, higher healthcare worker stigma was associated with probable PTSD and AUD, decreased satisfaction with the national government response with probable GAD, and higher media exposure with probable GAD and PTSD. Conclusions These findings can inform targeted interventions that promote healthcare workers’ psychological resilience during disease outbreaks.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven W. H. Chau ◽  
Oscar W. H. Wong ◽  
Rema Ramakrishnan ◽  
Sandra S. M. Chan ◽  
Evelyn K. Y. Wong ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The aims of this systematic review and meta-analysis are to examine the prevalence of adverse mental health outcomes, both short-term and long-term, among SARS patients, healthcare workers and the general public of SARS-affected regions, and to examine the protective and risk factors associated with these mental health outcomes. Methods We conducted a systematic search of the literature using databases such as Medline, Pubmed, Embase, PsycInfo, Web of Science Core Collection, CNKI, the National Central Library Online Catalog and dissertation databases to identify studies in the English or Chinese language published between January 2003 to May 2020 which reported psychological distress and mental health morbidities among SARS patients, healthcare workers, and the general public in regions with major SARS outbreaks. Results The literature search yielded 6984 titles. Screening resulted in 80 papers for the review, 35 of which were included in the meta-analysis. The prevalence of post-recovery probable or clinician-diagnosed anxiety disorder, depressive disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among SARS survivors were 19, 20 and 28%, respectively. The prevalence of these outcomes among studies conducted within and beyond 6 months post-discharge was not significantly different. Certain aspects of mental health-related quality of life measures among SARS survivors remained impaired beyond 6 months post-discharge. The prevalence of probable depressive disorder and PTSD among healthcare workers post-SARS were 12 and 11%, respectively. The general public had increased anxiety levels during SARS, but whether there was a clinically significant population-wide mental health impact remained inconclusive. Narrative synthesis revealed occupational exposure to SARS patients and perceived stigmatisation to be risk factors for adverse mental health outcomes among healthcare workers, although causality could not be determined due to the limitations of the studies. Conclusions The chronicity of psychiatric morbidities among SARS survivors should alert us to the potential long-term mental health complications of covid-19 patients. Healthcare workers working in high-risk venues should be given adequate mental health support. Stigmatisation against patients and healthcare workers should be explored and addressed. The significant risk of bias and high degree of heterogeneity among included studies limited the certainty of the body of evidence of the review.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document