Sleep quality and mental health status of healthcare professionals during the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

To investigate the sleep quality and mental health status of healthcare professionals during the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in order to promote timely intervention and treatment. An Questionnaire Star of WeChat online survey was conducted at Hwamei Hospital, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, NingBo, China. The questionnaire consisted of two parts including sociodemographic characteristics, and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), the Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) scale, a depression screening scale (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9]) so as to investigate the sleep quality and mental health status of healthcare professionals during the outbreak of COVID-19.The data were analyzed with the t-test, χ2 test, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Pearson correlation, P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. The mean score of PSQI is 5.8 ± 3.7 and the incidence of sleep disorders was 28.8% among the healthcare professionals and was related to occupation, title, education level, role and some underlying diseases. The positive rates for anxiety and depression among the healthcare professionals were 33.2% and 39.4% according to the GAD-7 and PHQ-9. Mental health status was related to occupation, education level, role and some underlying diseases. During the COVID-19 outbreak, sleep quality was significantly correlated with anxiety and depression among the healthcare professionals. The incidences of sleep disorder, anxiety and depression among healthcare professionals have been high. Furthermore, these disorders are interrelated and require timely intervention and treatment.

Psychological and occupational impact on healthcare workers and its associated factors during the COVID-19 outbreak in China.

PURPOSE: China was affected by an outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in 2019-2020. Research data are needed to develop evidence-driven strategies to reduce the adverse psychological and occupational impacts on healthcare workers (HCWs). METHODS: From March 1, 2020, to March 8, 2020, 946 HCWs in China completed a survey consist of sociodemographic data, precautionary measures against COVID-19, and concerns about COVID-19. Self-administered questionnaire were collected to assess psychological and occupational adverse outcomes of HCWs. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with the outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 55.0%, 56.0% and 48.3% of the HCWs experienced burnout, psychological distress and posttraumatic stress, respectively. A total of seven factors were independently associated with burnout: good health status (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.36-0.71), fear of contagion (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.003-1.79), avoiding contact with children (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.03-1.91), enough staff support at the workplace (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38-0.92), having to work overtime (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.03-1.83), maladaptive coping (OR 3.28, 95% CI 2.42-4.45) and adaptive coping (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.35-0.62). A total of 11 factors were independently associated with high psychological distress: having one child (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.38-0.77), good health status (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.39-0.83), alcohol abuse (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.02-2.25), thinking the epidemic would continue for quite a long time (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.08-2.34), wearing extra-work clothes (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.06-2.15),effective protective equipment (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.22-0.90), enough staff support at the workplace (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.34-0.89), unable to take care of families (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.42-2.78), economic losses (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.14-2.31), maladaptive coping (OR 6.88, 95% CI 4.75-9.97),and adaptive coping (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.21-0.41). These factors were independently associated with posttraumatic stress: living with the elderly (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.04-2.05), alcohol abuse (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.002-1.98), working at a 3A hospital(OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.49-0.88), acquaintances confirmed COVID-19 (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.20-3.84), fear of contagion (OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.40-2.50), believing they would survive if infected (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.46-0.86), self-disinfected after arriving home (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.01-2.02), interpersonal isolation (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.21-2.26), unable to take care of families (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.05-1.88) and maladaptive coping (OR 3.09, 95% CI 2.32-4.11). CONCLUSION: The variance in adverse outcomes was explained by the effect of various factors, which will help policymakers better prepare for subsequent potential outbreaks of COVID-19.