COVID-19 and Psychosocial Well-Being: Did COVID-19 Worsen U.S. Frontline Healthcare Workers' Burnout, Anxiety, and Depression?

Anxiety Evolution among Healthcare Workers-A Prospective Study Two Years after the Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic Including Occupational and Psychoemotional Variables

Background and objectives: Although previous research has found a high prevalence of anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic among healthcare workers, longitudinal studies on post-pandemic anxiety and predictor variables have been less abundant. To examine the evolution of anxiety in healthcare workers from the beginning of the pandemic until one and a half years later, analyzing the influence of occupational and psychosocial variables, as well as their possible predictors. Materials and Methods: This was a prospective longitudinal design with three periods of data collection: (1) between 5 May and 21 June 2020, (2) six months after the end of the state of alarm (January-March 2021), and (3) one year after this second assessment (April-July 2022), in which generalized anxiety (GAD-7) was evaluated, as well as occupational and psycho-emotional variables (i.e., social support, self-efficacy, resilience, and cognitive fusion) in healthcare workers in direct contact with COVID-19 patients in Spain. Results: A high prevalence of anxiety was found, with a clear decrease over time. Associations were found between anxiety and certain sociodemographic and work variables (i.e., years of experience, p = 0.046; COVID-19 symptoms, p = 0.001; availability of PPE, p = 0.002; workload, p < 0.001; family contagion concern, p = 0.009). Anxiety maintained negative relationships with social support (p < 0.001), self-efficacy (p < 0.001), and resilience (p < 0.001) and positive associations with cognitive fusion (p < 0.001). Cognitive fusion seemed to be a clear predictor of anxiety. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that social support, self-efficacy, and resilience act as buffers for anxiety, whilst cognitive fusion was found to be a clear risk factor for anxiety. It is important to emphasize the risk role played by cognitive fusion on HCWs as a clear risk factor for stressful work events. The findings emphasize the need to implement specific interventions to promote the mental well-being of healthcare workers, particularly in crisis contexts such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

Prevalence and Determinants of Anxiety and Depression Among Healthcare Workers in Liaoning Province, China

Purpose

To assess the anxiety and depression and their predictors among healthcare workers in Liaoning Province, China.

Methods

In order to explore the influencing factors and prevalence of anxiety and depression among healthcare workers, a cross-sectional research design was used to survey 500 healthcare workers using the 14-item Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS), the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES), the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS), and the Survey of Perceived Organizational Support (SPOS).

Results

About 47.12% of the healthcare workers suffered from anxiety and 71.63% suffered from depression. In our study, we found that the health status (OR: 0.540, 95% CI: 0.298-0.976), self-esteem (OR: 0.395, 95% CI: 0.251-0.619), PSS (OR: 0.621, 95% CI: 0.388-0.994), organizational support (OR: 0.533, 95% CI. 0.333-0.854) were protective factors for healthcare workers suffering from anxiety, and resistance to COVID-19 (OR: 1.703, 95% CI: 1.082-2.681) was a risk factor for healthcare workers suffering from anxiety, while good quality of life (OR: 0.385, 95% CI: 0.206-0.719) self-esteem (OR: 0.187, 95% CI: 0.110-0.317), and PSS (OR: 0.475, 95% CI: 0.267-0.847) were protective factors for healthcare workers suffering from depression, and at the age of 35-40 years (OR: 2.475, 95% CI: 1.140-5.369) and resistance to COVID-19 (OR: 2.219, 95% CI: 1.313-3.751) were risk factors for healthcare workers suffering from depression.

Conclusion

The anxiety and depression status of healthcare workers in China is poor, and hospital administrators should take positive measures to support healthcare workers and give positive expectations to alleviate negative emotions such as anxiety and depression.

Availability and use of institutional support programs for emergency department healthcare personnel during the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic placed health care personnel (HCP) at risk for stress, anxiety, burnout, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). To address this, hospitals developed programs to mitigate risk. The objectives of the current study were to measure the availability and use of these programs in a cohort of academic emergency departments (EDs) in the United States early in the pandemic and identify factors associated with program use.

METHODS

Cross-sectional survey of ED HCP in 21 academic EDs in 15 states between June and September 2020. Site investigators provided data on the availability of 28 programs grouped into 9 categories. Individual support programs included: financial, workload mitigation, individual COVID-19 testing, emotional (e.g., mental health hotline), and instrumental (e.g., childcare) Clinical work support programs included: COVID-19 team communication (e.g., debriefing critical incident), patient-family communication facilitation, patient services (e.g., social work, ethics consultation), and system-level exposure reduction. Participants provided corresponding data on whether they used the programs. We used generalized linear mixed models clustered on site to measure the association between demographic and facility characteristics and program use.

RESULTS

We received 1,541 survey responses (96% response rate) from emergency physicians or advanced practice providers, nurses, and nonclinical staff. Program availability in each of the 9 categories was high (>95% of hospitals). Program use was variable, with clinical work support programs used more frequently (28-50% of eligible HCP across categories) than individual employee support programs (6-13% of eligible HCP across categories). Fifty-seven percent of respondents reported that the COVID-19 pandemic had affected their stress and anxiety, and 12% were at elevated risk for PTSD. Program use did not significantly differ for HCP who reported symptoms of anxiety and/or stress compared to those who did not.

CONCLUSIONS

Early in the pandemic, support programs were widely available to ED HCP, but program use was low. Future work will focus on identifying barriers and facilitators to use and specific programs most likely to be effective during periods of highest occupational stress.

U.S. Physicians' Training and Experience in Providing Trauma-Informed Care in Clinical Settings

Trauma-informed care (TIC) is a comprehensive approach that focuses on the whole individual. It acknowledges the experiences and symptoms of trauma and their impact on health. TIC prioritizes physical and emotional safety through a relationship of trust that supports patient choice and empowerment. It provides a safe and respectful healing environment that considers specific needs while promoting a greater sense of well-being, patient engagement, and partnership in the treatment process. Given the prevalence of trauma, this descriptive cross-sectional study examined the attitudes and perspectives of U.S. physicians (N = 179; 67% males; 84% White; 43% aged 56-65) in providing trauma-informed care using an anonymous 29-item online survey administered by Reaction Data. Findings showed that 16% (n = 18) of physicians estimated that >50% of their patients have a history of trauma. Commonly perceived barriers to providing TIC were resource/time/administrative constraints, provider stress, limited awareness of the right provider to refer patients who experienced trauma, and inadequate TIC emphasis in medical education/training. Expanding physicians' knowledge base of trauma through training and organizational policy/support is crucial in enhancing their TIC competence, particularly in caring for patients with complex care needs whose social determinants increase their risk of exposure to adverse experiences that carry lasting physical and psychological effects.

Evaluation of psychological distress, burnout and structural empowerment status of healthcare workers during the outbreak of coronavirus disease (COVID-19): a cross-sectional questionnaire-based study

BACKGROUND

In light of several recent studies, there is evidence that the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused various mental health concerns in the general population, as well as among healthcare workers (HCWs). The main aim of this study was to assess the psychological distress, burnout and structural empowerment status of HCWs during the COVID-19 outbreak, and to evaluate its predictors.

METHODS

This multi-center, cross-sectional web-based questionnaire survey was conducted on HCWs during the outbreak of COVID-19 from August 2020 to January 2021. HCWs working in hospitals from 48 different countries were invited to participate in an online anonymous survey that investigated sociodemographic data, psychological distress, burnout and structural empowerment (SE) based on Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale 21 (DASS-21), Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) and Conditions for work effectiveness questionnaire (CWEQ_II), respectively. Predictors of the total scores of DASS-21, MBI and CWEQ-II were assessed using unadjusted and adjusted binary logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Out of the 1030 HCWs enrolled in this survey, all completed the sociodemographic section (response rate 100%) A total of 730 (70.9%) HCWs completed the DASS-21 questionnaire, 852 (82.6%) completed the MBI questionnaire, and 712 (69.1%) completed the CWEQ-II questionnaire. The results indicate that 360 out of 730 responders (49.3%) reported severe or extremely severe levels of stress, anxiety, and depression. Additionally, 422 out of 851 responders (49.6%) reported a high level of burnout, while 268 out of 712 responders (37.6%) reported a high level of structural empowerment based on the DASS-21, MBI, and CWEQ-II scales, respectively. In addition, the analysis showed that HCWs working in the COVID-19 areas experienced significantly higher symptoms of severe stress, anxiety, depression and higher levels of burnout compared to those working in other areas. The results also revealed that direct work with COVID-19 patients, lower work experience, and high workload during the outbreak of COVID-19 increase the risks of negative psychological consequences.

CONCLUSION

Health professionals had high levels of burnout and psychological symptoms during the COVID-19 emergency. Monitoring and timely treatment of these conditions is needed.

COVID-19 crisis management of German ICU clinicians in leadership - a metaphor analysis

The COVID-19 pandemic coincided with an already long-standing crisis in health systems around the world characterized by economic pressure and increasing staff shortage. "Crisis" became a global metaphor to convey collective experiences of the COVID-19 threat. Little is known on how crisis metaphors influence thought and speech on crisis management and the challenging staff situation of intensive care unit (ICU) clinicians in leadership positions and how they act. Therefore, we were interested in (1) which metaphorical concepts ICU clinicians in leadership use to express experiences and strategies in dealing with coinciding crises, (2) how these change over time, and (3) how metaphors in speech reveal self-images of crisis management. We conducted a systematic metaphor analysis focusing on data from three participants of a qualitative interview study with twenty-four healthcare professionals in ICUs in Germany. The participants were interviewed at two time points between April 2020 and March 2021. We identified and reconstructed metaphorical concepts of three interviewees (ICU clinicians in leadership) with regard to the pandemic management, and developed a typology based on the dimensions of mood, modus operandi, location, and scope. The typology consists of eight self-images (protagonists) for the crisis management of ICU clinicians in leadership, such as the figure of the soldier ("to unite everyone behind this flag"), the distributor ("sometimes it is a crazy patchwork [wahnsinniges Gestückel]") or the critic ("we are the fool for everything"). They embody different qualities of a leader and refer to intra- and inter-role conflicts within multiple crisis conditions. Metaphor analysis reveals different self-images of ICU leadership clinicians in relation to crisis management. This illustrates that thinking and perceptions of crisis management may strongly differ between and within leaders and may change over the course of crises. Our findings highlight the need both to improve knowledge on challenges associated with leadership in crises and preparedness, and to support clinicians in their leadership by recognizing and addressing differences and changes in leaders' self-image.