ABSTRACT
A multicenter cross-sectional survey study involving four Italian University Hospitals was performed to test the hypothesis that negative affect and positive affect (affective dimensions) mediate the association between risk perception (perceived risk of infection and death;cognitive dimensions) and the feeling of work exhaustion (WE) among obstetrics healthcare providers (HCPs) during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Totally, 570 obstetrics HCPs were invited to complete the 104-item IPSICO survey in May 2020. A theoretical model built on the tested hypothesis was investigated by structural equation modelling. The model explained 32.2% of the WE variance. Only negative affect mediated the association between cognitive dimensions and WE and also the association between WE and psychological well-being before the pandemic, experiences of stressful events, female gender, and dysfunctional coping. Non-mediated associations with WE were observed for work perceived as a duty, experience of stressful events, support received by colleagues, and the shift strategy. Only previous psychological well-being, support by colleagues, and shift strategies were inversely associated with WE. Based on study results, monitoring negative than positive affect appears superior in predicting WE, with practical implications for planning psychological interventions in HCPs at the individual, interpersonal, and organizational levels.
ABSTRACT
Objective: To assess the psychological distress of healthcare providers (HCPs) working in the field of obstetrics during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and to identify factors associated with psychological distress at the individual, interpersonal, and organizational level. Design: Cross-sectional survey study. Setting: Four University hospitals in Italy. Participants: HCPs working in obstetrics, including gynecologists, residents in gynecology and obstetrics, and midwives. Methods: The 104-item survey Impatto PSIcologico COVID-19 in Ostetricia (IPSICO) was created by a multidisciplinary expert panel and administered to HCPs in obstetrics in May 2020 via a web-based platform. Main Outcome Measures: Psychological distress assessed by the General Health Questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12) included in the IPSICO survey. Results: The response rate to the IPSICO survey was 88.2% (503/570), and that for GHQ-12 was 84.4% (481/570). Just over half (51.1%; 246/481) of the GHQ-12 respondents reported a clinically significant level of psychological distress (GHQ-12 ≥3). Psychological distress was associated with either individual (i.e., female gender, stressful experience related to COVID-19, exhaustion, and the use of dysfunctional coping strategies), interpersonal (i.e., lower family support, limitations in interactions with colleagues), and organizational (i.e., reduced perception of protection by personal protective equipment, perceived delays on updates and gaps in information on the pandemic) factors in dealing with the pandemic. Conclusions: Results confirm the need for monitoring and assessing the psychological distress for HCPs in obstetrics. Interventions at the individual, interpersonal, and organizational level may relieve the psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic and foster resilience skills in facing emotional distress.