Healthcare Workers’ (HCWs) attitudes towards mandatory influenza vaccination: 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.

Download Full-text

Physical relaxation for occupational stress in healthcare workers: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

Journal of Occupational Health ◽

10.1002/1348-9585.12243 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 63 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Michael Zhang ◽

Brittany Murphy ◽

Abegail Cabanilla ◽

Christina Yidi

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Occupational Stress ◽

Healthcare Workers ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Randomized Controlled

Download Full-text

Interventions to reduce sickness absence among healthcare workers: a systematic review

International Journal of Emergency Services ◽

10.1108/ijes-05-2018-0028 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 8 (2) ◽

pp. 147-162

Author(s):

Laura Simmons ◽

Arwel W. Jones ◽

Niro Siriwardena ◽

Christopher Bridle

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Influenza Vaccination ◽

Sickness Absence ◽

Healthcare Workers ◽

Healthcare Services ◽

Primary Outcome Measure ◽

Healthcare Sector ◽

Intervention Programme ◽

Content Type ◽

Multicomponent Intervention

Purpose Sickness absence is a major concern for healthcare services and their employees with healthcare workers having higher sickness absence rates compared to the general population. The purpose of this paper is to systematically review randomised control trials (RCTs) that aimed to reduce sickness absence among healthcare workers. Design/methodology/approach A systematic review was conducted that aimed to include RCTs with study participants who were employed in any part of the healthcare sector. This review included any type of intervention with the primary outcome measure being sickness absence. Findings Seven studies were included in the review and consisted of one exercise-only intervention, three multicomponent intervention programmes, two influenza vaccination interventions and one process consultation. Three studies (exercise-only, one multicomponent intervention programme and one influenza vaccination intervention) were able to demonstrate a reduction in sickness absence compared to control. Research limitations/implications Due to the lack of high-quality evidence, this review identified that there are currently no interventions that healthcare organisations are able to use to effectively reduce sickness absence among their employees. This review also highlights the importance of a standardised measure of sickness absence for healthcare staff, such as shifts. Originality/value To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first systematic review to synthesise such evidence among healthcare workers.

Download Full-text

Burden of predominant psychological reactions among the healthcare workers and general during COVID-19 pandemic phase: a systematic review and meta-analysis

10.1101/2021.01.02.21249126 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Bhaskar Thakur ◽

Mona Pathak

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Healthcare Workers ◽

Global Mental Health ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Random Effect ◽

Anxiety And Depression ◽

Psychological Reactions ◽

Frontline Healthcare Workers ◽

Anxiety Depression

ABSTRACTAimPresent systematic review and meta-analysis examined the burden of psychological reactions predominantly anxiety, depression, stress and insomnia during novel COVID-19 pandemic phase among the frontline healthcare, non-frontline healthcare and general.MethodologyPubMed, EMBASE and SCOPUS were searched for studies between Jan 1, 2020 to May 25, 2020. Brief protocol of the systematic review was registered with the PROSPERO database, (CRD42020186229).Any study that reported the burden of at least one of psychological reactions including anxiety or depression or stress or insomnia was eligible. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistic and results were synthesized using random effect meta-analysis.ResultsOut of 52eligible studies, 43 reported anxiety, 43 reported depression, 20 reported stress and 11 reported insomnia. Overall prevalence for anxiety, depression, stress and insomnia were 26.6%, 26.2%,26.2% and 34.4% respectively. Anxiety and depression were found highest among the COVID-19 patients (43.3% and 51.75 respectively). Apart from COVID-19 patients, prevalence of anxiety, depression, stress and insomnia were found highest among the frontline healthcare (27.2%, 32.1%,55.6% and 34.4% respectively) as compared to general healthcare workers (26.9%, 15.7%, 7.0% and 34.0% respectively) and general population (25.9%, 25.9%,25.4% and 29.4% respectively).ConclusionAnxiety and depression were found highest among the COVID-19 patients. Apart from COVID-19 patients, the anxiety, depression, stress and insomnia were more prevalent among frontline healthcare workers compared to general. Such increased prevalence is prompting towards the global mental health emergency. Therefore a call of urgent attention and pan-region effective mental-health intervention are required to mitigate these psychological reactions.

Download Full-text