Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
2.
BMC Public Health ; 22(1): 1884, 2022 10 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2064777

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Occupational exposures may play a key role in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection risk. We used a job-exposure matrix linked to the UK Biobank to measure occupational characteristics and estimate associations with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. METHODS: People reporting job titles at their baseline interview in England who were < 65 years of age in 2020 were included. Healthcare workers were excluded because of differential access to testing. Jobs were linked to the US Occupational Information Network (O*NET) job exposure matrix. O*NET-based scores were examined for occupational physical proximity, exposure to diseases/infection, working outdoors exposed to weather, and working outdoors under cover (score range = 1-5). Jobs were classified as remote work using two algorithms. SARS-CoV-2 test results were evaluated between August 5th-November 10th, 2020, when the UK was released from lockdown. Cox regression was used to calculate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs), accounting for age, sex, race, education, neighborhood deprivation, assessment center, household size, and income. RESULTS: We included 115,451 people with job titles, of whom 1746 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. A one-point increase in physical proximity score was associated with 1.14 times higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 (95%CI = 1.05-1.24). A one-point increase in the exposure to diseases/infections score was associated with 1.09 times higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 (95%CI = 1.02-1.16). People reporting jobs that could not be done remotely had higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 regardless of the classification algorithm used (aHRs = 1.17 and 1.20). Outdoors work showed an association with SARS-CoV-2 (exposed to weather aHR = 1.06, 95%CI = 1.01-1.11; under cover aHR = 1.08, 95%CI = 1.00-1.17), but these associations were not significant after accounting for whether work could be done remotely. CONCLUSION: People in occupations that were not amenable to remote work, required closer physical proximity, and required more general exposure to diseases/infection had higher risk of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. These findings provide additional evidence that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an occupational disease, even outside of the healthcare setting, and indicate that strategies for mitigating transmission in in-person work settings will remain important.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Occupational Exposure , Biological Specimen Banks , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Communicable Disease Control , Humans , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom/epidemiology
3.
J Gen Intern Med ; 37(5): 1204-1210, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1653720

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The rapid spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has created considerable strain on the physical and mental health of healthcare workers around the world. The effects have been acute for physician trainees-a unique group functioning simultaneously as learners and care providers with limited autonomy. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the longitudinal effects of physician trainee exposure to patients being tested for COVID-19 on stress, anxiety, depression, and burnout using three surveys conducted during the early phase of the pandemic. DESIGN: Longitudinal survey study. PARTICIPANTS: All physician trainees (N = 1375) at an academic medical center. MAIN MEASURE: Assess the relationship between repeated exposure to patients being tested for COVID-19 and stress, anxiety, depression, and burnout. KEY RESULTS: Three hundred eighty-nine trainees completed the baseline survey (28.3%). Of these, 191 and 136 completed the ensuing surveys. Mean stress, anxiety, and burnout decreased by 21% (95% confidence interval (CI): - 28 to - 12%; P < 0.001), 25% (95% CI: - 36 to - 11%; P < 0.001), and 13% (95% CI: - 18 to - 7%; P < 0.001), respectively, per survey. However, for each survey time point, there was mean increase in stress, anxiety, and burnout per additional exposure: stress [24% (95% CI: + 12 to + 38%; P < 0.001)], anxiety [22% (95% CI: + 2 to + 46%; P = 0.026)], and burnout [18% (95% CI: + 10 to + 28%; P < 0.001)]. For depression, the association between exposure was strongest for the third survey, where mean depression scores increased by 33% per additional exposure (95% CI: + 18 to + 50%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Training programs should adapt to address the detrimental effects of the "pileup" of distress associated with persistent exposure through adaptive programs that allow flexibility for time off and recovery.


Subject(s)
Burnout, Professional , COVID-19 , Anxiety/epidemiology , Burnout, Professional/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Depression/epidemiology , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
4.
Appl Clin Inform ; 12(3): 507-517, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1254109

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This article investigates the association between changes in electronic health record (EHR) use during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the rate of burnout, stress, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, and anxiety among physician trainees (residents and fellows). METHODS: A total of 222 (of 1,375, 16.2%) physician trainees from an academic medical center responded to a Web-based survey. We compared the physician trainees who reported that their EHR use increased versus those whose EHR use stayed the same or decreased on outcomes related to depression, anxiety, stress, PTSD, and burnout using univariable and multivariable models. We examined whether self-reported exposure to COVID-19 patients moderated these relationships. RESULTS: Physician trainees who reported increased use of EHR had higher burnout (adjusted mean, 1.48 [95% confidence interval [CI] 1.24, 1.71] vs. 1.05 [95% CI 0.93, 1.17]; p = 0.001) and were more likely to exhibit symptoms of PTSD (adjusted mean = 15.09 [95% CI 9.12, 21.05] vs. 9.36 [95% CI 7.38, 11.28]; p = 0.035). Physician trainees reporting increased EHR use outside of work were more likely to experience depression (adjusted mean, 8.37 [95% CI 5.68, 11.05] vs. 5.50 [95% CI 4.28, 6.72]; p = 0.035). Among physician trainees with increased EHR use, those exposed to COVID-19 patients had significantly higher burnout (2.04, p < 0.001) and depression scores (14.13, p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Increased EHR use was associated with higher burnout, depression, and PTSD outcomes among physician trainees. Although preliminary, these findings have implications for creating systemic changes to manage the wellness and well-being of trainees.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Education, Medical , Electronic Health Records/statistics & numerical data , Mental Health/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Burnout, Professional/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Pandemics , Stress, Psychological/epidemiology
5.
BMC Med Educ ; 21(1): 216, 2021 Apr 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1190071

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a transformation of clinical care practices to protect both patients and providers. These changes led to a decrease in patient volume, impacting physician trainee education due to lost clinical and didactic opportunities. We measured the prevalence of trainee concern over missed educational opportunities and investigated the risk factors leading to such concerns. METHODS: All residents and fellows at a large academic medical center were invited to participate in a web-based survey in May of 2020. Participants responded to questions regarding demographic characteristics, specialty, primary assigned responsibility during the previous 2 weeks (clinical, education, or research), perceived concern over missed educational opportunities, and burnout. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between missed educational opportunities and the measured variables. RESULTS: 22% (301 of 1375) of the trainees completed the survey. 47% of the participants were concerned about missed educational opportunities. Trainees assigned to education at home had 2.85 [95%CI 1.33-6.45] greater odds of being concerned over missed educational opportunities as compared with trainees performing clinical work. Trainees performing research were not similarly affected [aOR = 0.96, 95%CI (0.47-1.93)]. Trainees in pathology or radiology had 2.51 [95%CI 1.16-5.68] greater odds of concern for missed educational opportunities as compared with medicine. Trainees with greater concern over missed opportunities were more likely to be experiencing burnout (p = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: Trainees in radiology or pathology and those assigned to education at home were more likely to be concerned about their missed educational opportunities. Residency programs should consider providing trainees with research or at home clinical opportunities as an alternative to self-study should future need for reduced clinical hours arise.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Education, Medical, Graduate/trends , Internship and Residency , Physicians , Humans , Pandemics , Risk Factors , Surveys and Questionnaires
7.
PLoS One ; 15(8): e0237301, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-695948

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has put considerable physical and emotional strain on frontline healthcare workers. Among frontline healthcare workers, physician trainees represent a unique group-functioning simultaneously as both learners and caregivers and experiencing considerable challenges during the pandemic. However, we have a limited understanding regarding the emotional effects and vulnerability experienced by trainees during the pandemic. We investigated the effects of trainee exposure to patients being tested for COVID-19 on their depression, anxiety, stress, burnout and professional fulfillment. All physician trainees at an academic medical center (n = 1375) were invited to participate in an online survey. We compared the measures of depression, anxiety, stress, burnout and professional fulfillment among trainees who were exposed to patients being tested for COVID-19 and those that were not, using univariable and multivariable models. We also evaluated perceived life stressors such as childcare, home schooling, personal finances and work-family balance among both groups. 393 trainees completed the survey (29% response rate). Compared to the non-exposed group, the exposed group had a higher prevalence of stress (29.4% vs. 18.9%), and burnout (46.3% vs. 33.7%). The exposed group also experienced moderate to extremely high perceived stress regarding childcare and had a lower work-family balance. Multivariable models indicated that trainees who were exposed to COVID-19 patients reported significantly higher stress (10.96 [95% CI, 9.65 to 12.46] vs 8.44 [95% CI, 7.3 to 9.76]; P = 0.043) and were more likely to be burned out (1.31 [95% CI, 1.21 to1.41] vs 1.07 [95% CI, 0.96 to 1.19]; P = 0.002]. We also found that female trainees were more likely to be stressed (P = 0.043); while unmarried trainees were more likely to be depressed (P = 0.009), and marginally more likely to have anxiety (P = 0.051). To address these challenges, wellness programs should focus on sustaining current programs, develop new and targeted mental health resources that are widely accessible and devise strategies for creating awareness regarding these resources.


Subject(s)
Burnout, Professional , Coronavirus Infections/pathology , Health Personnel/psychology , Pneumonia, Viral/pathology , Stress, Psychological , Adult , Anxiety/pathology , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Depression/pathology , Female , Humans , Internet , Linear Models , Male , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
8.
J Med Internet Res ; 22(8): e21366, 2020 08 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-695617

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The response to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has created an unprecedented disruption in work conditions. This study describes the mental health and well-being of workers both with and without clinical exposure to patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to measure the prevalence of stress, anxiety, depression, work exhaustion, burnout, and decreased well-being among faculty and staff at a university and academic medical center during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and describe work-related and personal factors associated with their mental health and well-being. METHODS: All faculty, staff, and postdoctoral fellows of a university, including its medical school, were invited in April 2020 to complete an online questionnaire measuring stress, anxiety, depression, work exhaustion, burnout, and decreased well-being. We examined associations between these outcomes and factors including work in high-risk clinical settings and family/home stressors. RESULTS: There were 5550 respondents (overall response rate of 34.3%). Overall, 34% of faculty and 14% of staff (n=915) were providing clinical care, while 61% of faculty and 77% of staff were working from home. Among all workers, anxiety (prevalence ratio 1.37, 95% CI 1.09-1.73), depression (prevalence ratio 1.28, 95% CI 1.03-1.59), and high work exhaustion (prevalence ratio 1.24, 95% CI 1.13-1.36) were independently associated with community or clinical exposure to COVID-19. Poor family-supportive behaviors by supervisors were also associated with these outcomes (prevalence ratio 1.40, 95% CI 1.21-1.62; prevalence ratio 1.69, 95% CI 1.48-1.92; and prevalence ratio 1.54, 95% CI 1.44-1.64, respectively). Age <40 years and a greater number of family/home stressors were also associated with these poorer outcomes. Among the subset of clinicians, caring for patients with COVID-19 and working in high-risk clinical settings were additional risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the pandemic has had negative effects on the mental health and well-being of both clinical and nonclinical employees. Mitigating exposure to COVID-19 and increasing supervisor support are modifiable risk factors that may protect mental health and well-being for all workers.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections , Mental Health , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Adult , Anxiety/epidemiology , COVID-19 , Depression , Female , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Male , Occupational Diseases , Prevalence , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL