ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND Despite its wide usage among healthcare workers (HCWs), Depression Anxiety Stress Scales 21 (DASS-21) has received scant attention in terms of its psychometric properties among HCWs. The present study examined the factor structure of DASS-21 among representative HCWs in Muscat Region, Oman. The related aim is to examine factorial invariance across samples of males and females. METHODS Confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to evaluate the latent structure of DASS-21. Factorial invariance between males and females was examined. The Cronbach alpha coefficients of DASS-21 were calculated to assess the internal consistency of the scale. RESULTS The CFA of the DASS-21 indicated that the three-factor solution best fits the data. The results also showed that DASS21 had overall good-to-excellent reliability. Multigroup analysis did not indicate gender differences. LIMITATIONS The present research study was limited as the accrued sample was drawn from HCWs working in the urban area, the Muscat region. As the study was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, this has the potential to constitute potential confounder to hamper the generalization of the present study. CONCLUSIONS The results supported the applicability of DASS-21 across cultures and sex. The present data provide initial support for the psychometric properties of Arabic DASS among HCWs.
ABSTRACT
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.