Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters

Database
Main subject
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
PLoS One ; 18(6): e0274927, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20234698

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil affected mental health among healthcare workers. To objective of this study was to evaluate the mental health of healthcare workers in in the central-west region of the Brazil, estimating the prevalence of mental health disorders, and investigating associated factors, perceptions of safety, and self-perceptions about mental health in times of the COVID-19 pandemic. The questionnaire was divided into two parts that included general information and perceptions about the work process and identified symptoms using the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21 (DASS-21), and multiple linear regression analysis was conducted. A total of 1,522 healthcare workers participated in the survey. Overall prevalence of symptoms was calculated for depression (58.7%), anxiety (59.7%), and stress (61.7%). Physicians had 3.75 times greater risk of depression (1.59-8.85, 95% CI). Independent variables associated with depression symptoms were not feeling safe with the way services were organized (1.12:1.03-1.21, 95% CI) and self-perception of poor mental health (8.06: 4.03-16.10% CI). Working in management was protective, and married professionals had 12% lower risk of exhibiting symptoms of depression (0.79-0.99, 95% CI). Participants with self-perception of poor mental health had 4.63 greater risk for symptoms of anxiety (2.58-8.31, 95% CI). Protective factors were not having sought support for mental health (0.90: 0.82-0.99, 95% CI), having a graduate degree (0.71: 0.54-0.94, 95% CI), and not having been diagnosed with COVID-19 (0.90: 0.83-0.98, 95% CI). Perception of poor mental health was associated with 6.95-fold greater chance of developing stress symptoms. Protective factors from stress were having a degree in dentistry (0.81: 0.68-0.97, 95% CI), residing in Mato Grosso do Sul (0.91: 0.85-0.98, 95% CI), and not having sought mental health support services (0.88: 0.82-0.95, 95% CI). The prevalence of mental health disorders is high among healthcare workers, and is associated with professional category, organization of services provided, and self-perception of poor mental health, reinforcing the need for preventative measures.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Brazil/epidemiology , Mental Health , Pandemics , Prevalence , SARS-CoV-2 , Depression/epidemiology , Health Personnel/psychology , Anxiety/epidemiology , Internet
2.
Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo ; 64: e69, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2114196

ABSTRACT

This cross-sectional observational study that describes the epidemiological data of the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Mato Grosso do Sul State, aimed to demonstrate the differences between indigenous and non-indigenous populations, characterize confirmed cases of COVID-19 according to risk factors related to ethnicity, comorbidities and their evolution and to verify the challenges in facing the disease in Brazil. SIVEP-Gripe and E-SUS-VE, a nationwide surveillance database in Brazil, from March 2020 to March 2021 in Mato Grosso do Sul state, were used to compare survivors and non-survivors from indigenous and non-indigenous populations and the epidemiological incidence curves of these populations. A total of 176,478, including 5,299 indigenous people, were confirmed. Among the indigenous population, 52.5% (confidence interval [CI] 51.2-53.9) were women, 38% (CI 36.7-39.4) were 20-39 years old, 56.7% were diagnosed by rapid antibody tests, 12.3% (CI 95%:11.5-13.2) had at least one comorbidity, and 5.3% (CI 95%:4.7-5.9) were hospitalized. In the non-indigenous patients, 56.8% were confirmed using RT-PCR, 4.4% (CI 95%:4.3-4.5) had at least one comorbidity, and 8.0% (CI 95%:7.9-8.2) were hospitalized. The majority of non-survivors were ≥60 years old (65.1% indigenous vs. 74.1% non-indigenous). The mortality in indigenous people was more than three times higher (11% vs. 2.9%). Indigenous people had a lower proportion of RT-PCR diagnoses; deaths were more frequent in younger patients and were less likely to be admitted to hospital. Mass vaccination may have controlled the incidence and mortality associated with COVID-19 in this population during the period of increased viral circulation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Female , Young Adult , Adult , Middle Aged , Male , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Indigenous Peoples , Indians, South American , Cross-Sectional Studies , Brazil/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL