Is it time to rethink education and training? Learning how to perform under pressure: An observational study.

Emergency medicine workers are exposed daily to various stressors, especially work-related stress, which have been aggravated by the current SARS-CoV 2 pandemic and impact their physical and mental wellbeing. Nonetheless, although the efficacy of programs and strategies to improving the health of medical staff and patient care has been demonstrated, such programs and strategies are scarce. To assess the prevalence, types and consequences of stress in emergency medical workers in healthcare institutions and explore tools to cope with stressful situations at workplace. Two surveys were conducted. Survey 1 assessed the subjective stress levels and stressors of 21 emergency medicine professionals. Survey 2 was conducted amongst 103 healthcare workers at 3 hospitals in Germany. It comprised selected aspects of the German Mental Risk Assessment and a validated workload scale. None. The answer frequencies on Likert scales were descriptively evaluated. Survey 1: Emergency medical professionals experienced and reported the following high stress levels in acute situations: multitasking during a complex situation; factors associated with the work environment; fear of not appropriately controlling the situation; and lack of sleep. Survey 2: The highest stress levels were experienced in the areas "work environment" and "work organization." The highest scores on the workload scale were obtained for statements on work division, exhaustion, insufficient patient care due to time constraints, regulations, and lack of information. Approximately 80% of healthcare workers had experienced emotionally stressful situations at the workplace, and > 30% had lost a colleague to suicide. There are effective and proven methods to learn how to deal with stress that can easily be established in everyday clinical practice. Healthcare workers are subjected to numerous stressors in their work environment and observe the consequences of these stressors on their own and their colleagues' wellbeing. Coping strategies for high-pressure reduces and resists the job- immanent pressure and stress in healthcare workers.

Same name, same content? Evaluation of DSM-5-TR and ICD-11 prolonged grief criteria.

OBJECTIVE: Investigating the concordance of prolonged grief disorder (PGD) criteria that have been recently introduced to the 5th text revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5-TR) and the International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision (ICD-11). METHOD: N = 193 treatment-seeking bereaved adults were assessed with the prolonged grief disorder 13 + 9 interview. Data were examined in terms of (a) diagnostic rates for PGDDSM-5-TR and PGDICD-11, including increases of the PGDICD-11 accessory symptom threshold (PGDICD-11-X+) and time criterion (PGDICD-11-12 months), (b) dimensionality, (c) the frequency with which single PGD symptoms occur, and (d) concurrent validity in terms of psychological symptoms and loss-related characteristics. RESULTS: The diagnostic rate of PGDDSM-5-TR (52%) was significantly lower than that of PGDICD-11 (76%) and agreement between the two criteria sets was moderate, κ = 0.51, 95% CI [0.47-0.55]. Increasing the PGDICD-11 accessory symptom threshold did not improve the diagnostic agreement. In contrast, increasing the ICD-11 time criterion led to almost perfect agreement between PGDICD-11-12 months and PGDDSM-5-TR, κ = 0.91, 95% CI [0.89-0.93]. Confirmatory factor analysis results indicated a one-factor model fit best for both PGDDSM-5-TR and PGDICD-11. Emotional pain symptoms (e.g., guilt) were predominantly reported by patients with a PGDICD-11 diagnosis, while attachment disturbance symptoms (e.g., identity disruption) were reported more often by patients with a PGDDSM-5-TR diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Despite methodological limitations of this study, results indicate discordance in PGDDSM-5-TR and PGDICD-11 regarding diagnostic rates and single symptom occurrence, while the factor structure is similar. Changes in the ICD-11 time criterion could reduce these differences. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).