ABSTRACT
AIM: Despite the much heralded epidemic of adjustment difficulties, health-care workers (HCW), who are likely to be at risk and impacted with mental health issues, have received scant attention. This study aimed to determine whether definable profiles exist in a cohort of HCWs associated with demographic and mental health problems. METHODS: An online cross-sectional survey was conducted in Oman. Demographic and mental health data were collected from 8 to 17 April 2020. A total of 1132 participants returned their completed questionnaire. A two-step cluster analysis was used to split the sample into three clusters. RESULTS: Cluster A (n = 416) was from HCW in non-frontline roles, and constituted "low-risk and least-impacted". Cluster B (n = 412) and Cluster C (n = 304) were from frontline HCW and constituted 'high-risk and moderate-impacted' and 'high-risk and high-impacted' groups, respectively. HCWs in Cluster C reported more depression (P < 0.001), anxiety (P < 0.001), stress (P < 0.001) and clinical insomnia (P < 0.001) compared with those in the other clusters. HCWs in Cluster C were at the highest risk for mental health problems during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Early psychological interventions targeting this vulnerable group may be beneficial. Management should develop different tailor-made strategic plans to address different mental health needs for each profile group.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Anxiety , Cluster Analysis , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression , Health Personnel , Humans , Oman/epidemiology , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: This 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 OUTCOMES: This 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. RESULTS: This 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). CONCLUSIONS: To 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.