Burnout dimension profiles among healthcare workers in Indonesia

Background Besides biological impact, COVID-19 also poses a threat to psychological wellbeing and the quality of life. Healthcare workers, especially those assuming a front-line post, are at a higher risk of being affected, both physically and psychologically. This study aims to analyse variables potentially associated with burnout and psychological distress among healthcare workers with various health center stratifications, where we commenced a nationwide survey to establish the baseline data. Method An analytic observational study with a cross-sectional design was conducted on the 11th – September 18, 2020. Participants were enrolled from healthcare institutions represented by epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia, which were Java, Sumatra, Bali, and were asked questionnaires, including the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale 21 (DASS-21), Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), Somatic Symptom Scale 8 (SSS-8), also Well-Being Index (WBI). A linear mixed effect model was used to analyse how three dimensions of burnout vary across occupations. Results A total of 3629 healthcare workers were analysed in this study. Burnout syndrome was found in 37.5% of healthcare workers. The prevalence of burnout among medical personnel, nurses, and midwives was 44.6%, 33.5%, and 36.2%, respectively. The prevalence of burnout in healthcare workers was most common in Java (38.4%) and healthcare workers who work in the hospital (28.6%). Based on the burnout dimensions, 48.2% of healthcare workers experienced moderate to high emotional exhaustion, 51.8% moderate to high depersonalization, and 96.9% high personal accomplishment. The R2 values was 0.33,0.28,0.27 for emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and personal accomplishment model. Calculated power of the emotional exhaustion and depersonalization model was 100% for both midwife and nurse variable. Meanwhile, the power of the personal accomplishment model was 100% for midwife and 94.7% for nurse variable. Conclusion The extent of the three burnout dimensions is pervasive in all occupational levels and the place of work (hospital/community health center).

Burnout dimension profiles among healthcare workers in Indonesia.

Background: Besides biological impact, COVID-19 also poses a threat to psychological wellbeing and the quality of life. Healthcare workers, especially those assuming a front-line post, are at a higher risk of being affected, both physically and psychologically. This study aims to analyse variables potentially associated with burnout and psychological distress among healthcare workers with various health center stratifications, where we commenced a nationwide survey to establish the baseline data. Method: An analytic observational study with a cross-sectional design was conducted on the 11th - September 18, 2020. Participants were enrolled from healthcare institutions represented by epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia, which were Java, Sumatra, Bali, and were asked questionnaires, including the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale 21 (DASS-21), Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), Somatic Symptom Scale 8 (SSS-8), also Well-Being Index (WBI). A linear mixed effect model was used to analyse how three dimensions of burnout vary across occupations. Results: A total of 3629 healthcare workers were analysed in this study. Burnout syndrome was found in 37.5% of healthcare workers. The prevalence of burnout among medical personnel, nurses, and midwives was 44.6%, 33.5%, and 36.2%, respectively. The prevalence of burnout in healthcare workers was most common in Java (38.4%) and healthcare workers who work in the hospital (28.6%). Based on the burnout dimensions, 48.2% of healthcare workers experienced moderate to high emotional exhaustion, 51.8% moderate to high depersonalization, and 96.9% high personal accomplishment. The R 2 values was 0.33,0.28,0.27 for emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and personal accomplishment model. Calculated power of the emotional exhaustion and depersonalization model was 100% for both midwife and nurse variable. Meanwhile, the power of the personal accomplishment model was 100% for midwife and 94.7% for nurse variable. Conclusion: The extent of the three burnout dimensions is pervasive in all occupational levels and the place of work (hospital/community health center).

The value of anal swab RT-PCR for COVID-19 diagnosis in adult Indonesian patients.

OBJECTIVE: This study will test the performance of the anal swab PCR test when compared with the nasopharyngeal swab PCR test as a diagnostic tool for COVID-19. DESIGN: An observational descriptive study which included hospitalised suspected, or probable cases of hopitalised COVID-19 patients, conducted in Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo National Hospital, Ciputra Hospital, Mitra Keluarga Depok Hospital and Mitra Keluarga Kelapa Gading Hospital, Indonesia. Epidemiological, clinical, laboratory and radiology data were obtained. Nasopharyngeal and anal swabs specimens were collected for SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection. RESULTS: We analysed 136 subjects as part of this study. The clinical spectrum of COVID-19 manifesation in this study was typical of hospitalised patients, with 25% classified as mild cases, 14.7% in severe condition and 12.5% of subjects classified as having acute respiratory distress syndrome. When compared with nasopharyngeal swab as the standard specimen for reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen, the sensitivity and specificity of the anal swab was 36.7% and 93.8%, respectively. The positive and negative predictive value were 97.8% and 16.5 %, respectively. The performance of the anal swab remained similar when only the subgroup of patients with gastrointestinal symptoms (n=92, 67.6%) was analysed (sensitivity 40% and specificity 91.7%). Out of all the subjects included in analysis, 67.6% had gastrointestinal symptoms. Similarly, 73.3% of patients in the anal swab-positive group had gastrointestinal symptoms. The two most common gastrointestinal symptoms in the subjects' population were nausea and anorexia. CONCLUSION: Anal swab specimen has low sensitivity (36.7%) but high specificity (93.8%) for detecting SARS-CoV-2 antigen by RT-PCR. Only one additional positive result was found by anal swab among the nasopharyngeal swab-negative group. Anal swab may not be needed as an additional test at the beginning of a patient's diagnostic investigation and nasopharyngeal swab RT-PCR remains as the standard diagnostic test for COVID-19.

A Clinical and Procedural Guideline for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Units during COVID-19 Pandemic Era.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has declared COVID-19 as global pandemic since there are tremendous growing numbers of confirmed cases for SARS-C0V-2 infection, the number of affected countries and high mortality rate. The global COVID-19 pandemic also will affect various aspects of health care including endoscopic service. The Indonesian Society for Digestive Endoscopy (ISDE), which provides a scope for doctors who perform endoscopic procedures, has developed a clinical and procedural guideline that may serve as a reference for doctors performing gastrointestinal endoscopy in Indonesia.