ABSTRACT
The World Health Organization has the potential to make use of evidence-based sets of resource-enhancing tools and interventions for professionals and proliferate their use internationally. To conclude, we would like to draw the attention of the experts in the field (i.e., researchers, policymakers) to an alternative perspective. Rather than adopting a loss and deficit framework or a wear hypothesis, a positive salutogenic perspective can and should be applied by all. We should be mobilized to pay attention to what COVID-19 pandemic crisis can teach us and what we can learn. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Since the onset of the pandemic, nurses have been repeatedly exposed to their patients' COVID-19-related traumatic experiences. Therefore, they are at high risk for Secondary Traumatic Stress (STS), the stress syndrome resulting from helping others who are suffering. Positive psychological outcomes following this vicarious exposure are also likely. Vicarious posttraumatic growth (VPTG) refers to the positive changes from working with patients who themselves have coped with traumatic experiences. Objective(s): This study aims to examine STS and VPTG among 429 nurses during three lockdowns of the COVID-19 pandemic in Greece. Method(s):A repeated cross-sectional survey with a convenience and snowball sampling procedure was conducted. The Secondary Traumatic Stress Scale (STSS), the Post-Traumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI), the Brief Resilience Scale, and the Brief Cope (BC) were used to measure STS, VPTG, resilience, and coping strategies, respectively. Result(s): Nurses in Greece demonstrated high levels of STS at the first lockdown, significantly lower in the second one, which raised again -but not significantly- in the third lockdown. Resilience significantly decreased, whereas VPTG significantly increased across the three lockdowns. Following the escalation of the pandemic nurses in general used significantly more adaptive and less maladaptive coping strategies to deal with the crisis. Conclusion(s): Further research is needed to clarify the longitudinal course of the negative and positive psychological effects of the pandemic on healthcare staff. Conclusions can guide the development of interventions to safeguard nurses from the deleterious impacts of the COVID-19 and support them in their process of growth. (Figure Presented).
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic raised a lot of anxiety around the world. France is composed of several overseas territories with major cultural differences but also with a different exposure to the COVID-19. Reunion Island is the most populated overseas French department, but few researches have focused on this population. Therefore, the main objective was to explore and compare the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic (perceived stress, risk and fear of being infected, severity, lockdown respect, perceived stress, quality of life, quality of relationship, loneliness, resilience) during the lockdown among residents of metropolitan France and of Reunion Island. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A sample of 347 participants, aged from 18 to 78 (M=37.90; DS=13.20) replied to a questionnaire posted online during the last ten days of the lockdown in France. The sample is divided into 227 metropolitans (M=38.24 DS=13.41; 13.2% of men) and 120 residents of Reunion Island (M=37.26; DS=12.81; 31.7% of men). Resilience, loneliness and perceived stress have been assessed using validating scales while specific items have been created to assess COVID-19 impacts. RESULTS: The majority of the total sample has been little exposed to the COVID-19, but the estimated severity was high throughout the sample. Several significant differences have been observed between overseas and metropolitans. The latter, who were more exposed, were more respectful of lockdown measures and felt more concerned about being contaminated. They also had different professional activities (work at home, stop working) since the lockdown than did the overseas sample. Non-significant higher scores of resilience and quality of life during the lockdown contrast in the overseas sample, who estimated risk, fear and severity similarly. In correlational analyses, many relationships were significant only in one sample. For example, in metropolitans the higher the loneliness, the higher the severity. In the other sample, the higher the perceived stress, the higher the respect of lockdown measures, while more metropolitans felt lonely the more they respected these measures. Regressional analysis showed different predictive variables of the scores of perceived stress and fear of being contaminated. In metropolitans, stress was explained by COVID-19 related variables (fear, severity, respect), loneliness and negatively by resilience and quality of life while in the other sample it was explained by fear of being infected and negatively by resilience. Fear of being infected was explained by risk and stress in the overseas, but also by quality of life in the metropolitan sample. CONCLUSIONS: This study brings new data on the important psychosocial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on two French samples. Observed differences highlight a higher fear of being infected among the metropolitans who were generally more exposed. Overseas from La Réunion did not feel more spared by this risk, despite the limited number of cases since the appearance of the first case in March 11th and the end of the lockdown in May 11th. Despite exposure, our results could be explained by several cultural differences such as way of life or beliefs. Overseas life in Reunion Island might bring more resilience and less loneliness given the particular familial, social and religious functioning. Given the limits of this study and the lack of similar comparisons, more work could highlight the protective factors of these populations.