Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Front Psychiatry ; 13: 1127444, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2228735
2.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(17)2022 Sep 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2010047

ABSTRACT

Nurses may be at a higher risk of experiencing work-related traumatic stress response during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to other clinicians. This study aimed to investigate the correlations between work-related trauma symptoms and demographic factors, psychosocial hazards and stress response in a census sample of nurses working in COVID-19 settings in Cyprus. In this nationwide descriptive and cross-sectional study, data were collected between April and May 2020 using a questionnaire that included sociodemographic, educational and employment and work-related variables, as well as a modified version of the Secondary Traumatic Stress Scale (STSS) for the assessment of work-related trauma symptoms during the pandemic. Overall, 233 nurses participated (with a response rate of 61.3%) and 25.7% of them reported clinical work-related trauma symptoms (STSS-M > 55; actual scale range: 17-85). The mean value for emotional exhaustion was 7.3 (SD: 2.29; visual scale range: 1-10), while the value for distress that was caused by being avoided due to work in COVID-19 units was 6.98 (SD: 2.69; visual scale range: 1-10). Positive associations were noted between trauma symptoms and both emotional exhaustion and distress from being avoided by others due to work in a COVID-19 setting and a negative association was also found between trauma symptoms and satisfaction from organizational support variables (all p < 0.002). Working in COVID-19 settings during the pandemic is a stressful experience that has been linked to psychologically traumatic symptoms Thus, supportive measures are proposed for healthcare personnel, even in countries with low COVID-19 burden.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Nurses , Occupational Stress , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Job Satisfaction , Occupational Stress/epidemiology , Occupational Stress/psychology , Pandemics , Surveys and Questionnaires
3.
Eur J Public Health ; 32(3): 481-487, 2022 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1740862

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Students are a vulnerable group for the indirect impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly their mental health. This paper examined the cross-national variation in students' depressive symptoms and whether this can be related to the various protective measures implemented in response to the initial stage of the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: Student data stem from the COVID-19 International Student Well-being Study, covering 26 countries during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Country-level data on government responses to the COVID-19 pandemic were retrieved from the Oxford COVID-19 Tracker. Multilevel analyses were performed to estimate the impact of the containment and economic support measures on students' depressive symptoms (n = 78 312). RESULTS: School and workplace closures, and stay-at-home restrictions were positively related to students' depressive symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic, while none of the economic support measures significantly related to depressive symptoms. Countries' scores on the index of these containment measures explained 1.5% of the cross-national variation in students' depressive symptoms (5.3%). This containment index's effect was stable, even when controlling for the economic support index, students' characteristics, and countries' epidemiological context and economic conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings raise concerns about the potential adverse effects of existing containment measures (especially the closure of schools and workplaces and stay-at-home restrictions) on students' mental health.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Depression/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Schools , Students/psychology
4.
Cancers (Basel) ; 13(24)2021 Dec 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1572373

ABSTRACT

A population-based cross-sectional study was conducted during the first COVID-19 wave, to examine the impact of COVID-19 on mental health using an anonymous online survey, enrolling 9565 individuals in 78 countries. The current sub-study examined the impact of the pandemic and the associated lockdown measures on the mental health, and protective behaviors of cancer patients in comparison to non-cancer participants. Furthermore, 264 participants from 30 different countries reported being cancer patients. The median age was 51.5 years, 79.9% were female, and 28% had breast cancer. Cancer participants reported higher self-efficacy to follow recommended national guidelines regarding COVID-19 protective behaviors compared to non-cancer participants (p < 0.01). They were less stressed (p < 0.01), more psychologically flexible (p < 0.01), and had higher levels of positive affect compared to non-cancer participants. Amongst cancer participants, the majority (80.3%) reported COVID-19, not their cancer, as their priority during the first wave of the pandemic and females reported higher levels of stress compared to males. In conclusion, cancer participants appeared to have handled the unpredictable nature of the first wave of the pandemic efficiently, with a positive attitude towards an unknown and otherwise frightening situation. Larger, cancer population specific and longitudinal studies are warranted to ensure adequate medical and psychological care for cancer patients.

5.
Front Psychiatry ; 12: 707293, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1523785

ABSTRACT

Background: Data support the link between the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and mental distress in healthcare workers (HCWs). Although previous studies have documented the association between organizational policies and employees' psychological and mental status, there is still scant evidence regarding the effect of perceived organizational support (POS) on mental distress in HCWs during the pandemic. Aims: The present study aimed to assess the association between POS and mental distress in HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic. The role of POS in stress, depressive and trauma symptoms in HCWs was investigated. Methods: This was an online cross-sectional study in 424 HCWs. Data were collected during the first wave of the pandemic, and included demographics, a 7-item questionnaire assessing POS, the "Patient Health Questionnaire" assessing depressive symptoms, the "Impact of Events Scale Revised," measuring post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms and the "Perceived Stress Scale" assessing perceived stress. Results: The mean POS score was 3.33 [standard deviation:1.85; range 0-7]. Younger (p < 0.001), less experienced (p < 0.001), female (p = 0.002), and non-physician HCWs (p = 0.031) were more likely to report lower self-perceived organizational support than older, male, more experienced physicians. Self-perceived organizational support was significantly and negatively associated with and self-assessed intensity of stress, depressive and traumatic symptoms, after adjusting for putative confounders (p < 0.001). Discussion: Self-perceived organizational support was significantly associated with HCWs' self-assessed mental status during the pandemic. Organizational support and mental distress should be addressed simultaneously in HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic to increase resilience among them.

6.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(4)2021 02 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1060772

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has a great impact on healthcare workers (HCWs) that includes negative mental health outcomes, such as post-traumatic stress, anxiety and depressive symptoms. In this cross-sectional study, we report on mental health outcomes among HCWs in Cyprus. Data were collected between 3 May and 27 May 2020, with the use of an online questionnaire that included demographics (sex, age, occupation, education, work sector, years of work experience), the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) which assesses depressive symptoms, the Impact of Events Scale Revised (IES-R), which measures post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, and the-10 item Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10) which quantifies stress responses. Participants (42% physicians, 24% nurses, 18% physiotherapists, 16% classified as "other") were 58% of female gender and aged 21-76. A total of 79 (18.6%) and 62 HCWs (14.6%) reported clinically significant depressive (PHQ-9 ≥ 10) and post-traumatic stress (IES-R > 33) symptoms respectively. Nurses were more likely than physicians to suffer from depression (adjusted prevalence ratio 1.7 (1.06-2.73); p = 0.035) and PTSD (adjusted prevalence ratio 2.51 (1.49-4.23); p = 0.001). Even in a country with a rather low spread of the COVID-19, such as Cyprus, HCWs reported a substantial mental health burden, with nurses reporting increased depressive and PTSD symptoms compared to other HCWs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Personnel/psychology , Mental Health , Pandemics , Adult , Aged , Cross-Sectional Studies , Cyprus/epidemiology , Depression/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/epidemiology , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult
7.
Int J Clin Pract ; 75(4): e13944, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-991414

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: In late July, Cyprus experienced the second epidemic wave of COVID-19. We present the steps taken by the government and evaluate their effect on epidemic trends. MATERIALS: Cyprus Press and Information Office data were analysed. Using an R-based forecasting program, two models were created to predict cases up to 01/09/2020: Model 1, which utilised data up to 09/06/2020, when airports reopened to foreign travelers with COVID-19 screening; and Model 2, which utilised data until 24/06/2020, when screening for passengers from low-transmission countries was discontinued. RESULTS: PIO data revealed no significant policy changes between 24/06/2020 and 31/07/2020. Prediction models were robust and accurate (Model 1, R2  = 0.999, P < .001; Model 2, R2  = 0.998, P < .001). By August 30th, recorded cases exceeded those predicted by Model 1 by 24.47% and by Model 2 by 20.95%, with P values <.001 for both cases. CONCLUSIONS: The significant difference between recorded cases and those projected by Models 1 and 2 suggests that changes in epidemic trends may have been associated with policy changes after their respective dates. Discontinuation of major restrictions such as airport reopening, can destabilise the control of the epidemic, and may concomitantly necessitate a reevaluation of the current epidemic status. In the face of an evolving situation such as the COVID-19 pandemic, states are forced to balance the imposing of restrictions against their impact on the economy.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Public Policy , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cyprus/epidemiology , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL