scholarly journals Reliability and Factor Structure of the 10-item Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) among Portuguese adults

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 729-736 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anabela Pereira ◽  
Carla Andreia Oliveira ◽  
Ana Bártolo ◽  
Sara Monteiro ◽  
Paula Vagos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psychological Distress ◽  
Factor Structure ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Dimensional Structure ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Portuguese Version ◽  
Psychological Distress Scale ◽  
Distress Scale ◽  
Kessler Psychological Distress Scale

Abstract The 10-item Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) has been presented as a valid measure to assess psychological distress levels in population surveys but its dimensional structure was not consensual. Our main objective was to provide a Portuguese version of the K10 exploring the reliability and factor structure of this measure. This cross-sectional study included 694 adults collected from a web-based survey and in training entities. Results showed that 37.9% of the individuals reported significant distress symptoms. A good internal consistency of the K10 scale (α=.91) and strong inter-item correlation (ranges from .350 to .659) were found in our study but the original one-dimensional structure was not confirmed. A two-factor model considering anxiety and depression as two latent, independent but correlated factors shows a good fit with the data even across two data collection methods. The K10 tool was sensitive to sociodemographic variables. Participants aged 40 or over and belonging to the general working class presented higher distress levels. Our data indicates the Portuguese version of K10 as a reliable tool with a factor structure to assess psychological distress.

scholarly journals Is it Just About Physical Health? An Internet -Based Cross-Sectional Study Exploring The Pyschological Impacts of COVID-19 Pandemic On University Students in Jordan Using Kessler Psychological Distress Scale

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ala'a B. Al-Tammemi ◽  
Amal Akour ◽  
Laith Alfalah
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Psychological Distress ◽  
Distance Learning ◽  
University Students ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Psychological Distress Scale ◽  
Distress Scale ◽  
Kessler Psychological Distress Scale

Abstract Background Since the spread of COVID-19 on a global scale, most of efforts at the local, national, and international levels were directed primarily to mitigate the spread of the disease. However, the psychological impacts of COVID-19 on global mental health were not thoroughly investigated yet, and studies that report the mental health risks of COVID-19 are still scarce.Objectives This study aimed to assess the level of psychological distress among university students in Jordan during the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated national measures.Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted using an online self-administered questionnaire, The survey comprised of questions about (i) sociodemographic information, (ii) the 10-item Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10), (iii) coping activities , and (iv) the students’ greatest concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic.Results A total of 381 completed questionnaires were included in the analysis. Female participants slightly predominated the sample (n=199, 52.2%). The respondents aged 18-38 years (mean 22.6 years, SD: 3.16). The total K10 distress scores had a mean of 34.2 (SD:9.4). However, the mean of total K10 distress scores had no significant association with gender (P=0.57). Age was negatively associated with total K10 distress score (P=0.0013). Concerning severity, most of respondents were regarded as having severe psychological distress (n=265, 69.5%), and females were found to have a statistically significant higher percentage in mild and severe psychological distress (P= 0.035), (P=0.016); respectively. 209 students (54.9%) reported that they had no motivation for distance learning. There was a statistically significant inverse relationship between severe psychological distress and motivation for distance learning (P<0.0001). The most common coping strategy among students was spending more time on social media (n=269, 70.6%). Besides, 49 students (12.9%) reported the use of medications to cope with COVID-10 related distress, and 209 students (54.9%) reported distance learning was their most serious concern.Conclusion The COVID-19 control measures resulted in a severe disruption of various human life activities, and this could impact the mental health of individuals, including students. A nationwide psychological support program should be incorporated into Jordan’s response strategy in combating the COVID-19, considering students and other vulnerable groups in Jordan.

Factor Structure of the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6) Among Emerging Adults

2015 ◽  
Vol 27 (5) ◽  
pp. 616-624 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa L. Bessaha
Keyword(s):  
Psychological Distress ◽  
Emerging Adults ◽  
Factor Structure ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Adult Population ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Depression And Anxiety ◽  
Psychological Distress Scale ◽  
Distress Scale ◽  
Kessler Psychological Distress Scale

Objective: Confirmatory factor analysis was used to assess the factor structure of the 6-item version of the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6). Methods: A subsample of emerging adults, aged 18–29 ( n = 20,699), from the 2013 National Survey of Drug Use and Health were used in this study. Results: Each of the models (one-factor, two-factor depression and anxiety and second-order two-factor psychological distress by depression and anxiety) demonstrated good fit, with significant loadings on each factor. The second-order two-factor model and the two-factor model were equivalent and a better fit than the one-factor model. Conclusions: Findings suggest that researchers and practitioners may confidently use the K6 to screen for psychological distress symptoms within the emerging adult population.

scholarly journals Stress gradation of medical practitioners during the pandemic (covid-19) along with ways to de-stress; a cross sectional study at tertiary care hospitals using Kessler’s 10 psychological distress scale.

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (09) ◽  
pp. 1239-1244
Author(s):  
Umair Toqueer ◽  
Muhammad Usama Zardad ◽  
Mahwish Toqueer ◽  
Anila Riyaz ◽  
Sana Khan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psychological Distress ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Junior Doctors ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Psychological Distress Scale ◽  
Tertiary Care Hospitals ◽  
Distress Scale ◽  
The Impact

Objectives: To determine stress grades of doctors working in tertiary care  hospitals by using a standard measuring tool i.e. Kessler 10 psychological distress scale along with finding out different coping methods adopted by doctors during the COVID-19 pandemic. Study Design: Cross Sectional study. Setting: Tertiary Care Hospitals of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK), Pakistan. Period: 15 March 2020 to 20 June 2020. Material & Methods: A structured questionnaire was sent online to the junior and senior doctors working during the pandemic. The data was automatically collected with the help of Google docs and then analysed using SPSS 26. Results: Of the 219 doctors who completed the questionnaire 142 were males (64.8%) and 77 were females (35.2%). Interestingly, analysis of the score revealed that 38.8% of the doctors were found likely to be well, 16.4% of the doctors were likely to have mild disease and 20.5% were likely to have a moderate disorder while 24.2% were likely to have a severe disorder. Further analysis showed that the mean of  Kessler’s score was greater for junior doctors as  compared to Consultants which was found to be statistically significant (p=0.044). Conclusion: The impact of Corona virus disease (COVID-19) on the stress levels of health workers warrants considerable attention as it was declared a pandemic. Assessing the psychological impact and ways to tackle them will not only help the health care workers during this pandemic but will be beneficial in future pandemics as well.

scholarly journals COVID-19: Factors associated with psychological distress, fear, and coping strategies among community members across 17 countries

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Aziz Rahman ◽  
Sheikh Mohammed Shariful Islam ◽  
Patraporn Tungpunkom ◽  
Farhana Sultana ◽  
Sheikh M. Alif ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psychological Distress ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Frontline Workers ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Psychological Distress Scale ◽  
And Coping ◽  
Distress Scale

Abstract Background The current pandemic of COVID-19 impacted the psychological wellbeing of populations globally. Objectives We aimed to examine the extent and identify factors associated with psychological distress, fear of COVID-19 and coping. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study across 17 countries during Jun-2020 to Jan-2021. Levels of psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale), fear of COVID-19 (Fear of COVID-19 Scale), and coping (Brief Resilient Coping Scale) were assessed. Results A total of 8,559 people participated; mean age (±SD) was 33(±13) years, 64% were females and 40% self-identified as frontline workers. More than two-thirds (69%) experienced moderate-to-very high levels of psychological distress, which was 46% in Thailand and 91% in Egypt. A quarter (24%) had high levels of fear of COVID-19, which was as low as 9% in Libya and as high as 38% in Bangladesh. More than half (57%) exhibited medium to high resilient coping; the lowest prevalence (3%) was reported in Australia and the highest (72%) in Syria. Being female (AOR 1.31 [95% CIs 1.09-1.57]), perceived distress due to change of employment status (1.56 [1.29-1.90]), comorbidity with mental health conditions (3.02 [1.20-7.60]) were associated with higher levels of psychological distress and fear. Doctors had higher psychological distress (1.43 [1.04-1.97]), but low levels of fear of COVID-19 (0.55 [0.41-0.76]); nurses had medium to high resilient coping (1.30 [1.03-1.65]). Conclusions The extent of psychological distress, fear of COVID-19 and coping varied by country; however, we identified few higher risk groups who were more vulnerable than others. There is an urgent need to prioritise health and well-being of those people through well-designed intervention that may need to be tailored to meet country specific requirements.

scholarly journals Perceived Stigma Towards Psychological Illness in Relation to Psychological Distress Among Medical Students in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

2020 ◽  
Vol 44 (5) ◽  
pp. 538-544 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dalal Ibrahim Alfayez ◽  
Norah Ali AlShehri
Keyword(s):  
Psychological Distress ◽  
Medical Students ◽  
Family Income ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Perceived Stigma ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Psychological Distress Scale ◽  
Strongly Agree ◽  
Distress Scale

Abstract Objective Due to the high prevalence of psychological distress among medical students and its related functional and cognitive implications, this study aimed to investigate the association between perceived stigma and psychological distress, estimate the prevalence of each level of distress among medical students, and determine the independent significant risk factors of outcome variables for each level of psychological distress. Methods A cross-sectional study was performed that surveyed medical students at King Saud University in 2018. Using the modified and validated stigma scale for receiving psychological help along with Kessler psychological distress scale, the survey measured perceived stigma towards mental illness in relation to the level of psychological distress. Results Among the 524 participants, 395 surveys were completed. Participants had a mean age of 21.56 years old, and 53% were female. The overall prevalence of severe psychological distress was 30.7% (N = 161). Furthermore, 25.6% of participants reported experiencing moderate distress (N = 134). Additionally, a significant association was found between females and severe psychological distress. Moreover, family income was significantly associated with severe psychological distress in the extreme lower and upper groups (5000–10,000 SR and above 20,000 SR). Participants with high levels of psychological distress were more likely than those with low levels to agree or strongly agree with 3 out of 10 items related to perceived stigma. Conclusions Medical students with moderate/severe psychological distress disclosed more concerns regarding stigma, particularly about perceived consequences of their mental health issues being revealed to others. Such opinions could cause physical health problems and decrease quality of life.

scholarly journals Higher stress scores for female medical students measured by the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) in Pakistan

2014 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Khadija Qamar ◽  
Muhammad Rizwan Bash Kiani ◽  
Aisha Ayyub ◽  
Atif Ahmed Khan ◽  
Mohammad Osama
Keyword(s):  
Psychological Distress ◽  
Medical Students ◽  
Stress Level ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Psychological Distress Scale ◽  
Distress Scale ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Academic Year ◽  
Self Administered Questionnaire ◽  
Kessler Psychological Distress Scale

The aim of this study was to determine the stress level of medical students and the relationship between stress and academic year. A cross-sectional, descriptive study was conducted at an undergraduate medical school with a five-year curriculum, in Pakistan, from January 2014 to April 2014. Medical students in the first four years were included in the study. The Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10), a self-administered questionnaire, was distributed to the students. A total of 445 medical students completed the questionnaire. The average stress score was 19.61 (SD = 6.76) with a range from 10 to 43. Stress was experienced by 169 students (41.7%). The scores of female students were higher than scores of males, indicating a higher stress level (P = 0.011). The relationship between stress and academic year was insignificant (P = 0.392).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document