Non-frontline Healthcare Workers Research Articles

Employee recognition giving in crisis: a study of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic

PurposeEmployee recognition systems are ubiquitous in organizations (WorldatWork, 2019) and have positive effects on work outcomes (e.g. Stajkovic and Luthans, 2001). However, psychologically meaningful recognition relies on the recognition giver being motivated to observe and recognize coworkers. Crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic may impact recognition giving in varying ways, yet little research considers this possibility.Design/methodology/approachThis longitudinal field study examined the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on recognition and acknowledgment giving among frontline and nonfrontline healthcare workers at daily and aggregated levels. We tested the relationships between publicly available daily indicators of COVID-19 and objectively measured daily recognition and acknowledgment giving within a web-based platform.FindingsWe found that the amount of daily recognition giving was no different during the crisis compared to the year before, but fewer employees gave recognition, and significantly more recognition was given on days when COVID-19 indicators were relatively high. In contrast, the amount of acknowledgment giving was significantly lower in frontline staff and significantly higher in nonfrontline staff during the pandemic than before, but on a daily-level, acknowledgment was unrelated to COVID-19 indicators.Practical implicationsOur results suggest that organizational crises may at once inhibit and stimulate employee recognition and acknowledgment.Originality/valueOur research is the first to empirically demonstrate that situational factors associated with a crisis can impact recognition giving behavior, and they do so in ways consistent with ostensibly contradictory theories.

Healthcare workers' knowledge and risk perception regarding the first wave of COVID-19 in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan: an online cross-sectional survey.

Increased COVID-19 transmission among the populace may be caused by healthcare workers (HCWs) who lack knowledge, awareness, and good preventive practices. Additionally, it may cause elevated stress levels, anxiety, poor medical judgement, and situational overestimation. The present survey aimed to assess knowledge and risk perception regarding COVID-19 among HCWs in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), Pakistan. A web-based online, pre-tested questionnaire comprising 26 items was circulated via social media in April 2020 amongst HCWs in major tertiary care facilities in KP. The study's results, revealing both the commendable knowledge levels among HCWs about COVID-19 and their heightened risk perception, highlight the critical need for targeted interventions to address the potential impact on self-protective behaviour and mental health within this vital workforce. This insight is important for designing strategies that not only enhance HCWs' well-being but also ensure the continued effectiveness of healthcare delivery during pandemics. The percentage mean score (PMS) of COVID-19 knowledge was 85.14±10.82. Male HCWs and those with an age older than or equal to 32 years demonstrated a higher knowledge score (85.62±11.08; P=0.032 and 87.59±7.33, P=0.021, respectively). About 76% of HCWs feared contracting COVID-19. Nearly 82% of respondents were mentally preoccupied with the pandemic and also terrified of it. 'Of these, 81% were nurses, 87% had a job experience of 6-8 years and 54.45% were frontline workers. Feelings of panic and concern about the pandemic were found to be more in HCWs who were physicians above the age of 32, and who had 3-5 years of work experience. HCWs' overall risk perception was found to be significantly different between males (7.04±2.26) and females (8.01±1.97), job experience of 6-10 years (8.04±177) with 3-5 years and younger than or equal to 2 years job experience (7.18±2.43,6.93±2.22), respectively, and between frontline HCWs (7.50±2.10) and non-frontline HCWs (6.84±2.40). HCWs demonstrated good knowledge about COVID-19. As the risk perception of COVID-19 among HCWs is high, it can raise concerns about their self-protective behaviour, and mental health. These issues need to be addressed.

Emotional exhaustion and traumatic stress among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: Longitudinal changes and protective factors

Background Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at high risk of experiencing work-related stress, burnout syndrome, and depression, especially during infectious disease outbreaks like COVID-19. Contributing factors include increased workload, lack of personal protective equipment, and inadequate support from the healthcare administration. Longitudinal studies have shown that the mental health status of HCWs has deteriorated over time. Social support and compassion satisfaction (CS) are protective factors that can mitigate adverse mental health effects. The present longitudinal study examined the mental health status of HCWs during the COVID-19 outbreak and aimed to identify potential predictors and protective factors. Methods The study comprised 386 healthcare workers in Hungary and was conducted in two waves (T1 and T2) from January 2021 to January 2022. Participants completed an online survey including the Professional Quality of Life Scale, Maslach Burnout Inventory, demographic and work-related background factors. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics, and a cross-lagged panel model (CLPM). Results Frontline HCWs had higher levels of secondary traumatic stress (STS) and emotional exhaustion (EE) than non-frontline healthcare workers. Both groups experienced significant increases in these measures between T1 and T2. The CLPM indicated that EE had a significant lagged effect on STS among frontline workers, while STS had a significant lagged effect on EE among non-frontline workers. CS had a significant protective effect on both STS and EE in both groups. Conclusions The findings suggest that CS protects EE and STS, particularly among frontline HCWs. The study also showed that different causative relationships exist between these factors among frontline and non-frontline HCWs, which underlines the possible cyclical relationship between the two depending on the circumstances. The results provide insights into the protective role of positive work experiences and the importance of considering the needs of both frontline and non-frontline HCWs in preventive intervention programs.

Risk factors of developing psychological problems among frontline healthcare professionals working in the COVID-19 pandemic era: a meta-analysis

BackgroundThis study sought to evaluate the risk factors behind developing psychological problems as per specific mental health assessment instruments. This study focuses specifically on frontline healthcare professionals of the COVID-19 pandemic era, and evaluated the psychological assessment of frontline healthcare professionals.MethodsStudies reporting on the psychological assessment of frontline healthcare professionals were retrieved from the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Ovid, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library databases. The recommended method was used to assess the risk of bias of the included studies. The random-effects method was applied when significant heterogeneity was observed.ResultsThe combined results from the 20 included articles indicated that frontline healthcare professionals had a higher risk of developing anxiety in comparison with non-frontline healthcare workers, with similar levels of depression scoring were observed. Healthcare providers aged > 40 years had a lower probability of developing anxiety and seemed to experience minimal depression. Conversely, frontline workers had a higher incidence of anxiety than that of depression. Being single (not in a relationship) could influence the PHQ-9 scores instead of those concerning the GAD-7. The gender gap was not proven to be significantly wide between healthcare professionals with or without anxiety; however, being male was proven to be positively correlated with depression.ConclusionIn general, the risk factors for susceptibility to psychological problems among frontline healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic concerned those of a lower age, being single, being male, and being engage in frontline healthcare work.

Anxiety and perceived mental healthcare need among non-frontline in coronavirus referral hospital, Surabaya

Link of Video Abstract: https://youtu.be/szoOkhYlQwY Introduction: The pandemic of COVID-19 has put healthcare workers under high pressure with possible psychological problems and its most common effects are insomnia, depression, distress, anxiety, and somatization symptoms. Previous studies in several centers have shown different results between frontline and non-frontline healthcare workers. This study aims to evaluate the levels of anxiety and perceived needs for mental healthcare among non-frontline healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in a referral hospital in Surabaya. Patients and methods: This cross-sectional study involved forty respondents, but one was discontinued due to technical problems. Questionnaire of The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) was adopted that has 14 scales with two subscales. The subscales include HADS-A for Anxiety and HADS-D for depression Results: The results show that both HADS-A and HADS-D have significant differences between the indirect and direct groups of contact healthcare workers, except in gender and depression, as shown in Table 3, with an average score of 8.000 (SD 5.02169) and 8.7333 (SD 4.71270), respectively. Conclusion: Anxiety and depression remain a problem for all healthcare workers, whether frontline or non-frontline. Therefore, issues must be used to mitigate both the frontline and non-frontline healthcare workers.

Prevalence of Burnout in Healthcare Workers of Tertiary-Care Hospitals during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Survey from Two Central European Countries

COVID-19 has led to an unprecedented strain on healthcare workers (HCWs). This study aimed to determine the prevalence of burnout in hospital employees during a prolonged pandemic-induced burden on healthcare systems. An online survey among employees of a Czech and Slovak university hospital was conducted between November 2021 and January 2022, approximately when the incidence rates peaked in both countries. The Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Services Survey was applied. We obtained 807 completed questionnaires (75.1% from Czech employees, 91.2% from HCWs, 76.2% from women; mean age of 42.1 ± 11 years). Burnout in emotional exhaustion (EE) was found in 53.2%, depersonalization (DP) in 33%, and personal accomplishment (PA) in 47.8% of respondents. In total, 148 (18.3%) participants showed burnout in all dimensions, 184 (22.8%) in two, and 269 (33.3%) in at least one dimension. Burnout in EE and DP (65% and 43.7%) prevailed in physicians compared to other HCWs (48.6% and 28.8%). Respondents from COVID-19-dedicated units achieved burnout in the EE and DP dimensions with higher rates than non-frontline HCWs (58.1% and 40.9% vs. 49.9% and 27.7%). Almost two years of the previous overloading of healthcare services, caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, resulted in the relatively high prevalence of burnout in HCWs, especially in physicians and frontline HCWs.

Dispositional Resilience as Mediator in Psychological Stress on Healthcare Workers: A Multi-Group Analysis of Frontline and Non-Frontline Workers.

The experiences of healthcare workers (HCWs) during COVID-19 have been characterized by psychological symptoms such as stress, anxiety and depression, compassion fatigue and post-traumatic stress, which are long-lasting. The general picture of HCWs, especially frontline workers, is that of a physically and psychologically exhausted group. The aim of the study was to examine the potential mediating role of dispositional resilience in the impact of depression, anxiety and stress on professional quality of life among HCWs during the pandemic period. We also investigated possible differences between the frontline and non-frontline HCWs. The study enrolled 487 participants from public Italian hospitals. The variables of stress and anxiety predicted all factors related to professional quality of life, against depression which positively predicted only burnout and secondary traumatic Stress. Resilience was an important mediator in all these paths and the multigroup analysis suggested statistically significant differences between frontline and non-frontline HCWs. Results emphasised the importance of caring and concern for frontline HCWs to improve their quality of life, satisfaction and have positive impacts on the quality of service and care provided. There is a need to reflect on the necessity to develop projects and protocols that address health emergencies in advance.

Mental health and the effects on methylation of stress-related genes in front-line versus other health care professionals during the second wave of COVID-19 pandemic: an Italian pilot study

Healthcare workers experienced high degree of stress during COVID-19. Purpose of the present article is to compare mental health (depressive and Post-Traumatic-Stress-Disorders—PTSD—symptoms) and epigenetics aspects (degree of methylation of stress-related genes) in front-line healthcare professionals versus healthcare working in non-COVID-19 wards. Sixty-eight healthcare workers were included in the study: 39 were working in COVID-19 wards (cases) and 29 in non-COVID wards (controls). From all participants, demographic and clinical information were collected by an ad-hoc questionnaire. Depressive and PTSD symptoms were evaluated by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and the Impact of Event Scale—Revised (IES-R), respectively. Methylation analyses of 9 promoter/regulatory regions of genes known to be implicated in depression/PTSD (ADCYAP1, BDNF, CRHR1, DRD2, IGF2, LSD1/KDM1A, NR3C1, OXTR, SLC6A4) were performed on DNA from blood samples by the MassARRAY EpiTYPER platform, with MassCleave settings. Controls showed more frequent lifetime history of anxiety/depression with respect to cases (χ2 = 5.72, p = 0.03). On the contrary, cases versus controls presented higher PHQ-9 (t = 2.13, p = 0.04), PHQ-9 sleep item (t = 2.26, p = 0.03), IES-R total (t = 2.17, p = 0.03), IES-R intrusion (t = 2.46, p = 0.02), IES-R avoidance (t = 1.99, p = 0.05) mean total scores. Methylation levels at CRHR1, DRD2 and LSD1 genes was significantly higher in cases with respect to controls (p < 0.01, p = 0.03 and p = 0.03, respectively). Frontline health professionals experienced more negative effects on mental health during COVID-19 pandemic than non-frontline healthcare workers. Methylation levels were increased in genes regulating HPA axis (CRHR1) and dopamine neurotransmission (DRD2 and LSD1), thus supporting the involvement of these biological processes in depression/PTSD and indicating that methylation of these genes can be modulated by stress conditions, such as working as healthcare front-line during COVID-19 pandemic.

Sleep Quality Worsens While Perceived Stress Improves in Healthcare Workers over Two Years during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Results of a Longitudinal Study.

The purpose of the study was to measure changes in sleep quality and perceived stress and their interrelationships in a sample of healthcare workers two years post the COVID-19 pandemic. Using a cohort design, data were collected from frontline healthcare workers (FLHCW, n = 70) and non-frontline healthcare workers (NFLHCW, n = 74) in April 2020 (T1) and in February 2022 (T2). The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10) were administered at both time points. There were no differences in sleep quality or perceived stress between FLHCW and NFLHCW at either timepoint. For the entire sample, the PSQI scores at T2 were significantly higher than at T1 (7.56 ± 3.26 and 7.25 ± 3.29, respectively) (p = 0.03, Cohen’s d = 0.18). PSS-10 scores at T2 were significantly lower than at T1 (19.85 ± 7.73 and 21.13 ± 7.41, respectively) (p = 0.001, Cohen’s d = 0.78). Baseline sleep quality PSQI (T1) was a significant predictor for changes in sleep quality. During the initial months of the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, poor sleep quality and perceived stress were common for healthcare workers. Two years into the pandemic, the perceived stress was reduced, but sleep quality worsened.

The Association Between Exposure to COVID-19 and Mental Health Outcomes Among Healthcare Workers.

Due to the unprecedented impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on health care systems, there has been great interest in the mental wellbeing of healthcare workers. While most studies investigated mental health outcomes among frontline vs. non-frontline healthcare workers, little is known about the impact of various work-related variables. The present study aimed to examine the association between work-related [i.e., having contact with COVID-19 patients, being redeployed due to the pandemic and availability of sufficient personal protective equipment (PPE)] and subjective (i.e., worries about getting infected or infecting others) exposures and self-reported mental health outcomes (i.e., psychological distress, depressive symptoms, and posttraumatic stress symptoms). Between February and May 2021, 994 healthcare workers employed at a variety of healthcare settings in the Netherlands filled out an online survey as part of the COVID-19 HEalth caRe wOrkErS (HEROES) study. Mental health outcomes were measured using the General Health Questionnaire-12, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, and the Primary Care PTSD Screen for DSM-5. Approximately 13% reported depressive symptoms, 37% experienced psychological distress, and 20% reported posttraumatic stress symptoms. Multilevel linear models consisted of three levels: individual (work-related and subjective exposures), healthcare center (aggregated redeployment and availability of sufficient PPE), and regional (cumulative COVID-19 infection and death rates). Worries about infection were associated with all three mental health outcomes, whereas insufficient PPE was associated with psychological distress and depressive symptoms. There were no differences in outcomes between healthcare centers or provinces with different COVID-19 infection and death rates. Our findings highlight the importance of adequate PPE provision and the subjective experience of the COVID-19 pandemic. These factors should be part of interventions aimed at mitigating adverse mental health outcomes among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Working with patients and the mental health of health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Anxiety and concern are among the most common problems facing healthcare workers (HCWs) during epidemic diseases. To identify the predictive factors of anxiety, fears, and psychological distress among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. An online survey method was used on a sample of 153 of HCWs; (110) frontline and (43) non-frontline HCWs. They answered on the Hamilton anxiety rating scale, the Kessler psychological distress scale (K10), and the COVID-19 Concerns Questionnaire. The results demonstrated that 47.05% of HCWs have a severe level of fear related to COVID-19, 43.13% have very severe anxiety, and 30.71% experience severe psychological distress. The differences between frontline and non-frontline HCWs, female and male HCWs, and HCWs working in medical clinics, on quarantine, or in another place were significant in the three scales. Predictive factors of anxiety, fear, and psychological distress include working on the front lines, being female, and being over 50 years old. Meanwhile, working in a workplace with COVID-19 patients predicted anxiety and psychological distress, but not fears associated with COVID-19. HCWs have a high prevalence of symptoms of mental disorders that may interfere with their work. These results may have therapeutic applications during pandemics.

Mental Health Consequences of the COVID-19 Pandemic Long-Term Exposure in Italian Dermatologists.

The present study aimed at assessing the consequences of prolonged exposure to COVID-19 distress on mental health in non-frontline health care workers. For this purpose, we have conducted a survey on 425 Italian dermatologists, in the period February–March 2021. The psychopathological symptoms, depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSD), as well as resilience, have been evaluated. The main factors that influence the physician’s psychological health have been also investigated. Our study showed that the physicians older than 40 years, as well as those who lived this period in company, reported more personal resources, better managing the distress. Resilience, COVID-19 beliefs, COVID-19 working difficulties, and age were the common predictors of the severe psychopathological symptoms. An interesting result is that the lower level of resilience was the most powerful predictor of a more severe depression, as well as of a higher severity of generalized anxiety disorder, but not of COVID-19 PTSD. The fear of COVID-19 was the most powerful predictor of COVID-19 PTSD. Home conditions and previous SARS-CoV2 infection constituted significant predictors of severe depressive symptoms, but not of anxiety and COVID-19 PTSD. These results are useful in a better understanding of protective and risk factors involved in COVID-19 long-term distress exposure.

The prevalence of common mental disorders among healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic at a tertiary Hospital in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in unprecedented morbidity, mortality, and health system crisis leading to a significant psychological destress on healthcare workers (HCWs). The study aimed to determine the prevalence of symptoms of common mental disorders among HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic at St. Paul's Hospital, Ethiopia.MethodsA self-administered cross-sectional study was conducted to collect socio-demographic information and symptoms of mental disorders using validated measurement tools. Accordingly, PHQ-9, GAD-7, ISI, and IES-R were used to assess the presence of symptoms of depression, anxiety, insomnia, and distress, respectively. Chi-square test, non-parametric, and logistic regression analysis were used to detect risk factors for common mental disorders.ResultsA total of 420 healthcare workers participated in the survey. The prevalence of symptoms of depression, anxiety, insomnia, and psychological distress was 20.2%, 21.9%, 12.4%, and 15.5% respectively. Frontline HCWs had higher scores of mental health symptoms than non-frontline healthcare workers. Binary logistic regression analysis showed that being married was associated with a high level of depression. Furthermore, working in a frontline position was an independent risk factor associated with a high-level of symptoms of depression, anxiety, and psychological distress.LimitationsIt is a single-center cross-sectional study and the findings may not be nationally representative or reveal causality.ConclusionsA significant proportion of healthcare workers are suffering from symptoms of mental disorders. Frontline HCWs were at a greater risk of severe symptoms. Therefore, psychological interventions should be implemented to support health professionals, especially frontline workers.

Associations between Personality Traits, Intolerance of Uncertainty, Coping Strategies, and Stress in Italian Frontline and Non-Frontline HCWs during the COVID-19 Pandemic-A Multi-Group Path-Analysis.

The COVID-19 pandemic represented a very difficult physical and psychological challenge for the general population and even more for healthcare workers (HCWs). The main aim of the present study is to test whether there were significant differences between frontline and non-frontline Italian HCWs concerning (a) personality traits, intolerance of uncertainty, coping strategies and perceived stress, and (b) the models of their associations. A total of 682 Italian HCWs completed a self-report questionnaire: 280 employed in COVID-19 wards and 402 in other wards. The analysis of variance omnibus test revealed significant differences between the two groups only for perceived stress, which was higher among the frontline. The multi-group path analysis revealed significant differences in the structure of the associations between the two groups of HCWs, specifically concerning the relations between: personality traits and intolerance of uncertainty; intolerance of uncertainty and coping strategies. Regarding the relation between coping strategies and stress no difference was identified between the two groups. In both of them, emotionally focused coping was negatively related with perceived stress, whereas dysfunctional coping was positively related with stress. These results could be useful in planning actions aiming to reduce stress and improve the effectiveness of HCWs’ interventions. Training programs aimed to provide HCWs with a skillset to tackle uncertain and stressful circumstances could represent an appropriate support to develop a preventive approach during outbreaks.

Retrospective Analysis of COVID-19 Conversion Rate Among Anesthesiologists in Acute Care Centers.

Brief description of the primary research objectiveAmong healthcare workers, anesthesiologists are regarded as frequently exposed frontline providers in the fight against COVID-19 due to their proximity to patient airways and involvement in aerosolized procedures. As such, the risk of contracting the COVID-19 virus as an occupational hazard is presumed to be higher. To date, in most published studies, all healthcare workers were grouped together, independent of specialty or profession. At the time that this survey was distributed, we did not find any peer-reviewed articles that differentiated COVID-19 infection rates among frontline, such as anesthesiologists vs. non-frontline healthcare workers. This retrospective survey’s primary research objective was to report the rate of COVID-19 infection among anesthesiologists compared to the general population of healthcare workers.MethodologyA survey was sent among anesthesiology attendings and residents in Northern New Jersey and Brooklyn, New York hospitals on duty during the peak pandemic from March 2020 to May 2020. Questions in the survey focused on infection rates and adherence to standards of infection precaution and personal protective equipment (PPE) utilization.Main FindingsThis retrospective study highlights the rate of infection among anesthesiologists as a particularly vulnerable subgroup of frontline residents and physicians, as they are called to duty when emergent airway management is required. In our study, the reported rate of contracting COVID-19 among anesthesiologists was 16.7%. This statistic is higher than the infection rates published by studies by New York State and the CDC.ConclusionThe survey sent to anesthesiologists is useful to understand the impact of COVID-19 on this subgroup of frontline providers and the importance of adhering to standards of infection protocol and the role of PPE.

Impact of COVID-19 on the mental health of frontline and non-frontline healthcare workers in Sri Lanka.

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at risk of mental health problems during a pandemic. Being stationed at the frontline or not may have implications on their mental health. The aims of this study were to assess depression, anxiety and stress among HCWs, to explore differences between frontline and non-frontline workers, and to investigate associated factors. In this cross-sectional study, frontline and non-frontline HCWs were recruited from a COVID-19 screening hospital in Sri Lanka. Mental health impact was assessed using Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21). Sociodemographic data and perceptions of social and occupational circumstances were gathered. Categorical variables were analyzed using Chi square and logistic regression. Odds ratios were calculated for the effect of different perceptions on psychological morbidity. A total of 467 HCWs participated, comprising 244 (52.2%) frontline and 223 (47.8%) non-frontline workers, with female preponderance (n=341, 77%). Prevalence of depression, anxiety and stress among HCWs were 19.5%, 20.6%, 11.8%, respectively. Non-frontline group showed a higher prevalence of depression (27% vs. 11%, p<0.001), anxiety (27% vs. 14%, p=0.001) and stress (15% vs. 8%, p=0.026). Being married, having children, living with family and higher income were associated with better psychological outcomes. Perceived lack of personal protective equipment, inadequate support from hospital authorities, greater discrimination, and lack of training to cope with the situation predicted poor mental health outcomes, and non-frontline HCWs were more likely to hold such perceptions. Addressing factors leading to negative psychological outcomes in HCWs should be a key concern during this pandemic.

Comparative Study of Occupational Burnout and Job Stress of Frontline and Non-Frontline Healthcare Workers in Hospital Wards during COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background:Paying attention to the issue of mental health in the workplace, especially with current pandemic conditions of COVID-19 is of significant importance. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the factors affecting occupational burnout among health care center staff during the pandemic of coronavirus infection.Methods:The present study was a case-control study carried out in the first half of the year 2020 on medical staff working in hospitals in Tehran. The sample size was 324 individuals, including 175 employees working in general (non-COVID) wards and 149 people working in COVID-19 wards. Demographic characteristics questionnaire and two standard questionnaires of Maslach Burnout Inventory and Parker and DeCotiis Job Stress Scale were distributed.Results:Total score of job stress and its two dimensions (time and pressure) had a significant relationship with different levels of occupational burnout. Logistic regression analyses showed significant relations between job stress with emotional exhaustion (95% CI, 1.11–1.19, OR=1.15) and depersonalization. Participants in both wards experienced statistically significant increasing trends given the different components of occupational burnout concurrently by increasing their total stress score.Conclusion:Hospital staff’s levels of stress and occupational burnout regardless of where they worked (COVID-19 wards or general wards) were not significantly different and existed among the members of both groups. On the other hand, job stress and its dimensions (time pressure and anxiety) had a significant relationship with the main dimensions of occupational burnout.

The Prevalence and Clinical Characteristics of the Healthcare Workers Infected with SARS Cov-2 in Baqubah Teaching Hospital, Diyala-Iraq

Background: In 2019, a novel coronavirus was identified. It first appeared in Wuhan, China and caused a cluster of pneumonia cases. The virus was named severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). The World Health Organization designated the disease COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019). Objective: To find the prevalence of COVID-19 infection among symptomatic frontline and non-frontline healthcare workers, their main complaint and clinical outcomes. Patients and Methods: This is a cross sectional study done on retrospective data in which all symptomatic healthcare workers in Baqubah teaching hospital were involved in the study and full questionnaire forms were filled. Nasal and throat swabs were taken for polymerase chain reaction test and high-resolution computed tomography were done. Results: From (1413) symptomatic healthcare workers tested for COVID-19 (185) were positive yielding a (13%) prevalence from the total employed healthcare workers in Baqubah teaching hospital, with (63%) were male. Most of the affected were nurses (63.2%) ,(59.5%) of the affected healthcare workers were non-frontline staff. Fever was the most common symptom and was seen in(79.5%) followed by shortness of breath in(63.8%).The disease course was mild in (83.8%) of the affected healthcare workers and only (2.7%) need admission to the hospital and the mortality rate was (0.5%). Conclusion: Most infections among healthcare workers occurred during the last two months of the disease outbreak. The prevalence of the COVID-19 infection among our healthcare workers was high and mostly in non–frontlie staff. Rapid identification of staff with potential infection and routine screening among asymptomatic staff could help protect other healthcare workers.

COVID-19 phobia in healthcare workers; a cross-sectional study from a pandemic hospital.

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at the forefront of the fight against coronavirus. The purpose of this study was to evaluate COVID-19 phobia levels of HCWs of a pandemic hospital and explore associated factors. This was a descriptive cross-sectional study conducted on HCWs employed in a pandemic hospital. A total of 365 HCWs (95 physicians, 187 nurses and 83 assistant healthcare staffs) were included in the study. In order to evaluate COVID-19 phobia, coronavirus-19 phobia scale (C19P-S) was administrated. Chronophobia levels of frontline and nonfrontline HCWs were compared. Additionally, the effect of working in different departments, profession and associated factors on COVID-19 phobia was evaluated. Overall, 172 HCWs completed the C19P-S and agreed to participate in the study. Mean total CP19P-S score of the HCWs included in the study was 50.1 ± 17.3. Of the study population, 59.3% participants were frontline HCWs and 40.7% were non-frontline HCWs. When frontline HCWs and nonfrontline HCWs were compared in terms of total C19P-S and subscales scores (psychological, psycho-somatic, economic, social), no statistically significant differences were found (p= 0.914, p= 0.687, p= 0.766, p= 0.347, p= 0.794, respectively).When the HCWs were divided into three groups according to departments (clinics, intensive care unit (ICU), emergency department) where they worked regardless of whether they cared for patients with COVID-19, HCWs employed in the ICUs had the highest scores regarding total C19P-S and subscales scores (p= 0.002, p= 0.001, p= 0.001, p= 0.012, p= 0.002,respectively) . Profession based comparison revealed no significant difference between the groups regarding total C19P-S score (p= 0.117). It is essential to make a comprehensive evaluation regarding the effects of pandemics on HCWs, not only for controlling the COVID-19 pandemic but also to protect the mental health of HCWs. Critical care professions appear to need particular attention among HCWs. The C19P-S, which assesses coronaphobia levels with psychological, psycho-somatic, economic, and social aspects could be a convenient screening tool for evaluating COVID-19 phobia levels in HWCs.

Psychological impact of the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic on non-frontline healthcare workers: results of a cross-sectional study in a tertiary care hospital in India

Background: The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic affected millions of people physically and many more psychologically. Health care workers (HCWs) are amongst those bearing the brunt of the pandemic-induced psychological trauma. This study was one of the first to analyze the psychological effects of the second pandemic wave in India on non-frontline HCWs, a group that has not received much consideration so far.Methods: A cross-sectional survey-based study was performed on a COHORT of 139 HCWs involved in non-covid services during the early phase of the second pandemic wave. In addition to information on demographics and other baseline characteristics, the survey included questions from the depression, anxiety, and stress scale-21 items (DASS-21).Results: The prevalence rates of depression, anxiety and stress in the COHORT were 14.33%, 15.82% and 12.23% respectively. Clinical HCWs had higher mean anxiety scores than the non-clinical group (p=0.01), while the depression and stress scores were similar across all groups (p=0.23 and 0.21, respectively). Multivariate analysis demonstrated correlation of multiple factors with the DASS-21 scores, of which covid positivity and a longer time spent on covid-related information correlated well with all the DASS-21 scale scores (p&lt;0.05).Conclusions: This study demonstrates reasonable prevalence rates of depression, stress and anxiety amongst non-frontline HCWs in the setting of the second covid wave in India. Clinical HCWs seem to be more prone to pandemic-induced anxiety during this wave. There is an urgent need for promoting psychological coping strategies amongst all classes of HCWs.