Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
Front Med (Lausanne) ; 9: 861052, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1952379

ABSTRACT

Introduction: In the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic, frontline healthcare providers who are engaged in the direct diagnosis, treatment, and care of patients face a high risk of infection and inadequate protection from contamination, overwork, frustration, and exhaustion. These impose significant psychological and mental health concerns for frontline healthcare providers. Objectives: This study aimed to explore the experiences and challenges faced and coping strategies adopted by frontline healthcare providers in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in Kelantan, Malaysia. Methodology: This phenomenological approach to qualitative study used a telephone-based in-depth interview that followed a semistructured interview guide. The number of frontline healthcare providers was based on saturation theory. All the participants recruited fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria from May to July 2020 in Raja Perempuan Zainab II Hospital. All interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic data analysis using NVIVO version 10 was performed. Result: The 10 respondents involved in this study consisted of doctors, medical assistants, and nurses. The findings were divided into four main themes: invaluable experiences during the pandemic, challenges, coping strategies, and future expectations. The providers responded well in facing the disease even though they felt psychologically disturbed at the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusion: Healthcare providers perceived themselves as being more resilient and less vulnerable to psychological impacts than they were before the pandemic.

2.
Front Med (Lausanne) ; 8: 783982, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1686493

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Vaccination is an essential intervention to curb the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This review aimed to estimate the pooled proportion of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance worldwide. METHODS: A systematic search of the MEDLINE (PubMed) database using "COVID-19," "vaccine" and "acceptance" to obtain original research articles published between 2020 and July 2021. Only studies with full text and that were published in English were included. The Joanna Briggs Institute meta-analysis was used to assess the data quality. The meta-analysis was performed using generic inverse variance with a random-effects model using the Review Manager software. RESULTS: A total of 172 studies across 50 countries worldwide were included. Subgroup analyses were performed with regard to vaccine acceptance, regions, population, gender, vaccine effectiveness, and survey time. The pooled proportion of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was 61% (95% CI: 59, 64). It was higher in Southeast Asia, among healthcare workers, in males, for vaccines with 95% effectiveness, and during the first survey. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 vaccine acceptance needs to be increased to achieve herd immunity to protect the population from the disease. It is crucial to enhance public awareness of COVID-19 vaccination and improve access to vaccines. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO 2021, identifier CRD42021268645.

3.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(9)2021 May 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1231485

ABSTRACT

Frontline healthcare providers are exposed to indirect trauma through dealing with traumatized patients. This puts them at risk of vicarious traumatization. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, this study seeks to establish the psychometric properties of the Malay version of the Vicarious Traumatization Questionnaire among healthcare providers. A cross-sectional study was conducted. The translated Malay version of the Vicarious Traumatization Questionnaire was completed by 352 healthcare providers in Kelantan, Malaysia. The data was entered using IBM SPSS Statistics version 26.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA, 2019), and descriptive analysis was performed. The psychometric properties of the scale were assessed in two phases. The Rasch model to assess the validity and reliability was performed using Winsteps version 3.72.3. The confirmatory factor analysis using the structural equation modeling was performed using AMOS version 23.0. The Rasch analysis showed that the 38 items, in two constructs, had high item reliability and item separation at 0.97 and item separation at 5.36, respectively, while good person reliability and person separation were at 0.95 and 4.58, respectively. The correlations of all persons and items are greater than 0.20. There are no misfitting or overfitting items in the outfit MNSQ. There are four items that are challenging in answering the scale. The final model of the confirmatory factor analysis shows two constructs with 38 items demonstrating acceptable factor loadings, domain to domain correlation, and best fit (Chi-squared/degree of freedom = 4.73; Tucker-Lewis index = 0.94; comparative fit index = 0.94; and root mean square error of approximation = 0.10). Composite reliability and average variance extracted of the domains were higher than 0.7 and 0.5, respectively. The Vicarious Traumatization Questionnaire tested among healthcare providers has been shown to valid and reliable to assess vicarious traumatization.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Compassion Fatigue , Chicago , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Latent Class Analysis , Malaysia , Pandemics , Psychometrics , Reproducibility of Results , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL