The Impact of Sociodemographic Characteristics on Coping Strategies Used by Nurses Working at COVID and Non-COVID Hospital Departments during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of our study was to compare coping strategies applied by nurses working during the COVID-19 pandemic at COVID-19 (CoV) and non-COVID-19 (non-CoV) hospital departments with regards to their sociodemographic characteristics in order that the system can provide them better support in future similar situations. METHODS: A total of 380 out of 1305 nurses participated in the survey during December 2020. Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations (CISS) was used. Stepwise regression analysis was used to determine the interaction between sociodemographic characteristics and coping strategies. RESULTS: The CoV married nurses (62.2%) used problem- (p = 0.010) and emotion- (p = 0.003) focused coping more and avoidance coping less (p = 0.007). CoV nurses with master's degrees (11.1%) used both problem- and emotion-focused coping less (p < 0.01), and older nurses used emotional coping more than the younger nurses (p = 0.027), whereas younger nurses used more avoidance coping (p < 0.01). CoV nurses without children (41%) used avoidance strategies more than nurses who had 2-3 children (p < 0.001). Among non-CoV nurses, less use of emotional coping was recorded in nurses with master's degrees (4%) than in those with a high school diploma (44.2%) (p = 0.002). Avoidance coping was also used more by married non-CoV nurses (79.1%) (p < 0.001) and those without children (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Sociodemographic factors such as working experience, age, level of education and marital status influenced chosen coping strategies during the health crisis.

The Impact of Sociodemographic Characteristics on Coping Strategies Used by Nurses Working at COVID and Non-COVID Hospital Departments during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background: The aim of our study was to compare coping strategies applied by nurses working during the COVID-19 pandemic at COVID-19 (CoV) and non-COVID-19 (non-CoV) hospital departments with regards to their sociodemographic characteristics in order that the system can provide them better support in future similar situations. Methods: A total of 380 out of 1305 nurses participated in the survey during December 2020. Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations (CISS) was used. Stepwise regression analysis was used to determine the interaction between sociodemographic characteristics and coping strategies. Results: The CoV married nurses (62.2%) used problem- (p = 0.010) and emotion- (p = 0.003) focused coping more and avoidance coping less (p = 0.007). CoV nurses with master's degrees (11.1%) used both problem- and emotion-focused coping less (p < 0.01), and older nurses used emotional coping more than the younger nurses (p = 0.027), whereas younger nurses used more avoidance coping (p < 0.01). CoV nurses without children (41%) used avoidance strategies more than nurses who had 2–3 children (p < 0.001). Among non-CoV nurses, less use of emotional coping was recorded in nurses with master's degrees (4%) than in those with a high school diploma (44.2%) (p = 0.002). Avoidance coping was also used more by married non-CoV nurses (79.1%) (p < 0.001) and those without children (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Sociodemographic factors such as working experience, age, level of education and marital status influenced chosen coping strategies during the health crisis.

Difference in Pandemic-Related Experiences and Factors Associated with Sickness Absence among Nurses Working in COVID-19 and Non-COVID-19 Departments.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to determine the main variables associated with nurses' sickness absence (SA) and to improve the prediction of SA based on pandemic-related experiences. The second aim is to examine the differences between COVID-19 (CoV) and non-COVID-19 (non-CoV) nurses in levels of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, personality traits, coping strategies and professional stressors experienced. METHODS: This historical prospective study enrolled 1305 nurses from the University Hospital of Split, Croatia. A total of 380 subjects participated in the study, 163 non-CoV and 217 CoV subjects. Nurses' pandemic-related experience questionnaires, Big Five Inventory (BFI), Post-traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist (PCL-5), Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations (CISS) and Occupational Stress Questionnaire, were used for evaluation. RESULTS: Non-CoV nurses felt more fear of infection, were more socially distanced, had more PTSD symptoms and neuroticism and felt more stress due to public criticism and job requirements compared to CoV nurses; p < 0.001. The groups of SA users and non-SA users could be distinguished based on predictor variables in CoV and non-CoV nurses, with a correct classification of 84.8% vs. 79.1%. CONCLUSIONS: It was possible to predict the probability of using SA among nurses due to pandemic professional experience, personality traits and coping strategies.

Psychosocial effects of the quarantine during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic on the residents of the island of Brac.

BACKGROUND: An unprecedented health and economic crisis in small island communities during the COVID-19 pandemic indicated the importance of studying its harmful effects on residents' mental health. OBJECTIVES: To examine the differences in negative affectivity, perceived stressors, and social support both on the quarantined and not quarantined islands. METHODS: A web-based survey and correlational cross-sectional research design were used, based on a nonprobabilistic convenience sampling method to select 613 Croatian islands' residents during May 2020. The participants completed the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21) and the General Information Questionnaire, data on their exposures to stressors during the COVID-19 pandemic and the perceived social support. RESULTS: Compared with the nonquarantined residents of other islands, the island of Brac residents scored significantly higher on the symptoms of depression (M = 11.61; t = 2.13, P < 0.05) and stress (M = 13.06; t = 3.21, P = 0.001) subscales, receiving more support from religious communities (t = 2.34, P = 0.02) and less from the physicians (t = -2.68, P = 0.01). Lower sociodemographic status was associated with higher levels of depression, anxiety, and stress. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the urgent need to protect mental health in isolated island areas specially for singles and people of low socioeconomic status.

BACKGROUND: This study contributed to the recognition and understanding of the pandemic's impact on the mental health of the isolated island population. The aim was to examine the differences in perceived stressors, perceived social support, and negative affectivity (symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress) between residents of Brac directly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and residents of other islands not directly exposed to the pandemic. METHODS AND EXAMINEES: A total of 613 inhabitants of the Croatian islands were included in the analysis during pandemic in May 2020. All participants answered web-based survey about perceived stressors, social support, and psychological symptoms. RESULTS: Staying on the quarantined island during the pandemic significantly contributed to the levels of depressive, anxiety, and stress symptoms. It also highlighted the positive impact of connections with family members and the religious community as well as the negative impact of lower socioeconomic status on adaptation in times of pandemic. CONCLUSION: Despite the short duration, the psychological effects of a pandemic were more visible in residents of an island affected by a pandemic compared with residents of other islands not exposed to COVID-19 pandemic.

Questionnaire for Assessing Social Contacts of Nurses Who Worked with Coronavirus Patients during the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

(1) Background: The aim of the present study was to develop and validate the psychometric characteristics of a scale measuring nurses' experiences working with COVID-19 patients. (2) Methods: The participants were 180 Croatian nurses who worked in departments with COVID-19 patients, with a mean age of 36.8 years (ranging from 20 to 48). Research was conducted from March to June 2020. For the purpose of constructing the scale, 10 statements were developed. Factor analysis was used to determine the factor structure and construct validity of the scale. (3) Results: The scale consisted of nine statements divided into a three-factor structure: factor I-stigmatization and mistrusting (four items), factor II-social distancing (four items), and factor III-fear of infection (two items). Cronbach α was calculated to confirm the reliability of the scale: factor I-α = 0.80, factor II-α = 0.76, and factor III-α = 0.70. (4) Conclusion: The nurses' pandemic-related experiences scale showed good psychometric properties and can be applied in future research as a standardized tool for measuring health care workers' experience during COVID-19 or other infectious crises.

Peritraumatic Distress and Posttraumatic Stress Symptoms During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Contributions of Psychosocial Factors and Pandemic-Related Stressors.

The present study aimed to identify the contributions of sociodemographic factors, psychological hardiness, and pandemic-related stressors to the development of peritraumatic distress and posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. We also examined the mediating contribution of peritraumatic distress with respect to the associations between PTSS and (a) individual characteristics and (b) pandemic-related stressors. A total of 1,238 participants (82.1% women, 17.9% men) aged 18-75 years were included in the study. Participants completed the Dispositional Resilience Scale, Peritraumatic Distress Inventory, and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Checklist. The results showed that 11.5% of participants scored above the clinical cutoff for peritraumatic distress, and 12.8% of participants scored above the clinical cutoff for PTSS. Regression models showed that higher levels of peritraumatic distress were statistically predicted by female gender, ß = -.12, p < .001; exposure to more than one stressor, ß = .21, p < .001; lower levels of commitment to people and activities, ß = -.12, p = .002; and resistance to challenges, ß = -.17, p < .001. Additionally, male gender, ß = .05, p = .007; younger age, ß = -.05, p = .005; lower levels of commitment to people and activities, ß = -.11, p < .001; lower ratings of hardiness with regard to challenge, ß = -.04, p = .043; and more severe peritraumatic distress, ß = .75, p < .001, predicted more severe PTSS during the pandemic. Peritraumatic distress mediated the associations between PTSS and both the number of experienced stressors and psychological hardiness.