Psychological and Coping Responses of Health Care Workers Toward Emerging Infectious Disease Outbreaks: A Rapid Review and Practical Implications for the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: In light of the current evolving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and the need to learn from past infectious disease outbreaks to provide better psychological support for our frontline health care workers (HCW), we conducted a rapid review of extant studies that have reported on both psychological and coping responses in HCW during recent outbreaks. DATA SOURCES: We performed a systematic search of the available literature using PubMed, MEDLINE (Ovid), and Web of Science, combining key terms regarding recent infectious disease outbreaks and psychological and coping responses. Papers published from database inception to April 20, 2020, were considered for inclusion. Only studies in the English language and papers from peer-reviewed journals were included. STUDY SELECTION: We identified 95 (PubMed) and 49 papers (Web of Science) from the database search, of which 23 papers were eventually included in the review. DATA EXTRACTION: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were used for data extraction. The McMaster University critical appraisal tool was used to appraise quantitative studies. Guidelines by Higginbotham and colleagues were used to appraise qualitative studies. Only studies exploring the combined psychological and coping responses of HCW amid infectious diseases were included. RESULTS: Salient psychological responses that can persist beyond the outbreaks included anxiety/fears, stigmatization, depression, posttraumatic stress, anger/frustration, grief, and burnout, but also positive growth and transformation. Personal coping methods (such as problem solving, seeking social support, and positive thinking) alongside workplace measures (including infection control and safety, staff support and recognition, and clear communication) were reported to be helpful. CONCLUSIONS: Psychological support for HCW in the current COVID-19 pandemic and future outbreaks should focus on both individual (eg, psychoeducation on possible psychological responses, self-care) and institutional (eg, clear communication, providing access to resources for help, recognition of efforts of HCW) measures.

Impact of the HOPE Intervention on Mental Health Literacy, Psychological Well-Being and Stress Levels amongst University Undergraduates: A Randomised Controlled Trial.

Mental health literacy (MHL) promotes mental health among youths. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the newly developed HOPE intervention in improving depression literacy, anxiety literacy, psychological well-being, and reducing personal stigma and stress levels amongst young adults at a university in Singapore. After two pilot studies, we conducted a randomised controlled trial (RCT) and recruited 174 participants aged 18-24 years old through social media platforms. The HOPE intervention group received four online sessions over two weeks and the control group received online inspirational quotes. Study outcomes were measured with self-reported questionnaires and they were assessed at baseline, post-intervention, and two-month follow-up (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04266119). Compared with the control arm, the intervention group was associated with increased depression and anxiety literacy levels at post-intervention and two-month follow-up. In addition, personal stigma for depression was reduced at the post-intervention juncture. However, there were no statistically significant changes in the ratings of psychological well-being and stress levels between the two groups. Longitudinal studies with larger sample sizes are warranted to replicate and extend the extant findings.

The Effect of COVID-19 Endemicity on the Mental Health of Health Workers.

OBJECTIVES: A major surge in COVID-19 cases despite Singapore's high vaccination has strained the health care system in October 2021. Our aim was to assess and compare Healthcare Worker (HCW) mental well-being in 2021 against a previously published cohort in 2020. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: HCWs from 4 public hospitals and a primary health care system over a 4-week duration in 2021 coinciding with a major surge compared with a similar period in 2020. METHODS: A survey comprising of the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ) was distributed via email. Primary endpoints were the proportion meeting OLBI thresholds for both disengagement and exhaustion and being at risk for both Anxiety and Depression using HADS. Multivariate analysis identified significant predictors among demographic, workplace, and SAQ data. Subgroup analysis of overseas HCWs was performed. RESULTS: We surveyed 1475 HCWs. Significantly more HCWs met primary outcomes using OLBI and HADS than in 2020 (84.1% and 39.6% vs 68.2% and 23.3%, respectively; P < .001). Burnout levels were uniformly high. A HADS score ≥8 in either subscale was significantly associated with meeting burnout thresholds (P < .001). Overseas HCWs (P = .002), South Asian ethnicity (P = .004), preuniversity educational qualifications (P = .026), and longer shift workhours of 8 to <12 (P = .015) and ≥12 (P = .001) were significantly associated with meeting HADS thresholds. Among overseas HCWs (n=407), seeing family more than a year ago was significantly associated with worse OLBI disengagement scores and a greater proportion meeting HADS thresholds vs seeing them within a year or being local HCWs (47.2% vs 37.2% and 35.6%, respectively; P = .001). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: HCW mental health has objectively worsened between 2020 and 2021 in the pandemic's second year. Avoiding prolonged shifts, adopting preventive mental health strategies, improving patient safety, and attention to HCWs of minority ethnicity, from overseas, and with preuniversity education may help.

Safety attitudes, burnout and wellbeing among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: an Indo-Pacific regional cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has had an unprecedented impact in Asia and has placed significant burden on already stretched healthcare systems. We examined the impact of COVID-19 on safety attitudes among healthcare workers (HCWs) as well as their associated demographic and occupational factors, and measures of burnout, depression and anxiety. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey study utilising snowball sampling was performed involving doctors, nurses and allied health professions from 23 hospitals in Singapore, Malaysia, India and Indonesia between 29 May 2020 and 13 July 2020. This survey collated demographic data and workplace conditions and included three validated questionnaires: Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ); Oldenburg Burnout Inventory; and Hospital and Anxiety Depression Scale. We performed multivariate mixed model regression to assess for independent associations with the SAQ Total Percentage Agree Rates (PAR). RESULTS: We obtained 3,163 responses. A SAQ Total PAR of 35.7%, 15.0%, 51.0% and 3.3% was calculated among respondents from Singapore, Malaysia, India and Indonesia, respectively. Burnout scores were highest among respondents from Indonesia and lowest in respondents from India at 70.9%-85.4% versus 56.3%-63.6%, respectively. Multivariate analyses revealed that meeting burnout and depression thresholds, and shifts lasting ≥ 12 hours were significantly associated with lower SAQ Total PAR. CONCLUSION: Addressing factors contributing to high burnout and depression, and placing strict limits on work hours per shift may contribute significantly towards improving safety culture among HCWs and should remain priorities as this pandemic continues.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Undergraduate Psychiatry Teaching, Educational Environment, and Learning Processes.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has brought about significant changes in the way undergraduate medical education is conducted including psychiatry teaching. In view of sparse data on how the perception of the undergraduate educational environment (EE) is affected by the pandemic, we sought to compare the ratings of EE and learning processes (motivation, engagement, equipping, appreciation of psychiatry) between the 2020 (during pandemic) and 2019 (before pandemic) cohorts of students, and examined how the perception of the EE would influence overall experience within the psychiatry rotation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The DREEM (Dundee Ready Education Environment Measure) was administered to fourth-year medical undergraduate students undergoing a psychiatry rotation in 2020 during the pandemic and these ratings were compared with those of the preceding cohort in 2019. Students also completed five additional items evaluating various learning processes and overall rating of the posting. Relationships between the DREEM scores, learning processes, and overall effectiveness of rotation were assessed using correlation and mediational analyses. RESULTS: Altogether, 84 (response rate 93.3%) and 269 (response rate 89.7%) medical undergraduates participated in the study from 2020 and 2019 cohorts, respectively. The 2020 cohort had higher scores on the total DREEM (p = 0.032), academic self-perception DREEM subscale (p = 0.002), felt more engaged (p = 0.043) and better equipped (p = 0.003) compared with the 2019 cohort. Overall, DREEM and subdomain scores correlated significantly with specific learning processes. The direct effect of total DREEM and overall rating of psychiatry posting was significant in mediational analyses. CONCLUSION: Our results highlighted that students' perception of the EE remained positive during the pandemic and impacts overall experience of the psychiatry posting. Undergraduate psychiatry training should continually seek to enhance the EE so as to optimize learning through better engagement and equipping of the learners even during the pandemic.

Psychological impact of repeated epidemic exposure on healthcare workers: findings from an online survey of a healthcare workforce exposed to both SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) and COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To measure the psychological well-being of healthcare workers (HCWs) during this COVID-19 pandemic and examine the experiences of the subgroup of participants who were also HCWs during the 2003 SARS epidemic. DESIGN: Anonymous online survey adapted from a similar study conducted during the SARS epidemic, disseminated from July 2020 to August 2020. SETTING: Nine healthcare institutions across Singapore ranging from primary care, community care, tertiary care and specialised referral centres. PARTICIPANTS: Employees working in the participating healthcare institutions. RESULTS: Of 3828 survey returns, 3616 had at least one completed item on the questionnaire. Majority were female (74.7%), nurses (51.7%), foreign-born (53.2%) and not working in the tertiary care setting (52.1%). The median score on the Impact of Events Scale (IES) was 15 (IQR 23) and 28.2% of the sample scored in the moderate/severe range. 22.7% of the participants were also HCWs during SARS and more than half of them felt safer and better equipped in the current pandemic. 25.2% of SARS HCWs and 25.9% of non-SARS HCWs had moderate/severe IES scores (p=0.904). After adjusting for age, marital status, parity and length of work experience, racial minority groups and living apart from family were independent predictors of high IES regardless of prior SARS epidemic experience. Daily exposure to confirmed or suspect COVID-19 cases increased the odds of high IES for non-SARS HCWs only. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Overall, while 28% of HCWs in our study suffered from significant trauma-related psychological symptoms regardless of prior experience with the SARS epidemic, those with prior experience reported feeling safer and better equipped, finding the workload easier to manage, as well as having more confidence in their healthcare leaders. We recommend for more trauma-informed support strategies for our HCWs especially those from racial minority groups, who are foreign-born and isolated from their families.

Implications of the COVID-19 pandemic for people with bipolar disorders: A scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019)-related pandemic represents a global source of societal and health burden. Yet, the impact of the pandemic on people with severe mental illness, including bipolar disorder (BD), remains unclear, warranting scoping review on the matter. METHODS: The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were systematically searched from inception up to April 24, 2021, adopting broad inclusion criteria to assess a variety of clinical and public health themes related to people with a primary diagnosis of BD during the COVID-19 pandemics. The present work complying with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) registered in the Open Science Framework (OSF) repository (https://osf.io/7evpx/). RESULTS: Fourteen papers informed the present scoping review. Four major themes were identified: (i) impact of COVID-19-related stressors on BD; (ii) impact of COVID-19 on mental health service utilization among people with BD; (iii) impact of BD on the risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection; (iv) engagement in preventative behaviors among people with BD. Additional themes warranting further research were nonetheless detected. LIMITATIONS: Further original studies are needed. CONCLUSION: The present study confirmed the high-vulnerability hypothesis concerning people with BD versus the general population, reinforcing the need for further research related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Additional information is warranted to compare the impact of the pandemic period among BD people against pre-pandemic records, the general population, and other severe mental illnesses, namely people with schizophrenia or major depressive disorder, to inform the public health and the delivery of patient-tailored interventions.

Determinants of burnout and other aspects of psychological well-being in healthcare workers during the Covid-19 pandemic: A multinational cross-sectional study.

The Covid-19 pandemic has placed unprecedented pressure on healthcare systems and workers around the world. Such pressures may impact on working conditions, psychological wellbeing and perception of safety. In spite of this, no study has assessed the relationship between safety attitudes and psychological outcomes. Moreover, only limited studies have examined the relationship between personal characteristics and psychological outcomes during Covid-19. From 22nd March 2020 to 18th June 2020, healthcare workers from the United Kingdom, Poland, and Singapore were invited to participate using a self-administered questionnaire comprising the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ), Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) to evaluate safety culture, burnout and anxiety/depression. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine predictors of burnout, anxiety and depression. Of 3,537 healthcare workers who participated in the study, 2,364 (67%) screened positive for burnout, 701 (20%) for anxiety, and 389 (11%) for depression. Significant predictors of burnout included patient-facing roles: doctor (OR 2.10; 95% CI 1.49-2.95), nurse (OR 1.38; 95% CI 1.04-1.84), and 'other clinical' (OR 2.02; 95% CI 1.45-2.82); being redeployed (OR 1.27; 95% CI 1.02-1.58), bottom quartile SAQ score (OR 2.43; 95% CI 1.98-2.99), anxiety (OR 4.87; 95% CI 3.92-6.06) and depression (OR 4.06; 95% CI 3.04-5.42). Significant factors inversely correlated with burnout included being tested for SARS-CoV-2 (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.51-0.82) and top quartile SAQ score (OR 0.30; 95% CI 0.22-0.40). Significant factors associated with anxiety and depression, included burnout, gender, safety attitudes and job role. Our findings demonstrate a significant burden of burnout, anxiety, and depression amongst healthcare workers. A strong association was seen between SARS-CoV-2 testing, safety attitudes, gender, job role, redeployment and psychological state. These findings highlight the importance of targeted support services for at risk groups and proactive SARS-CoV-2 testing of healthcare workers.

Perceived stress and associated factors among healthcare workers in a primary healthcare setting: the Psychological Readiness and Occupational Training Enhancement during COVID-19 Time (PROTECT) study.

INTRODUCTION: Disease outbreaks such as the COVID-19 pandemic significantly heighten the psychological stress of healthcare workers (HCWs). The objective of this study was to understand the factors contributing to the perceived stress levels of HCWs in a public primary care setting during the COVID-19 pandemic, including their training, protection and support (TPS), job stress (JS), and perceived stigma and interpersonal avoidance. METHODS: This cross-sectional study using an electronic self-administered questionnaire was conducted at the National Healthcare Group Polyclinics in March 2020. Data was collected anonymously. Analysis was performed using regression modelling. RESULTS: The response rate was 69.7% (n = 1,040). The mean perceived stress level of HCWs in various departments ranged from 17.2 to 20.3. Respondents who reported higher perceived stress were those who made alternative living arrangements, were more affected by the current pandemic, reported higher JS and were Muslims. Respondents who reported lower perceived stress were those who had been through the severe acute respiratory syndrome epidemic in 2003 and H1N1 pandemic in 2009 as HCWs, and those who had higher confidence in the organisation's TPS. CONCLUSION: All HCWs, regardless of their scope of work, were similarly stressed by the current pandemic compared to the general population. Improving the confidence of HCWs in their training, protection and the support of personal protective equipment, and retaining experienced HCWs who can provide advice and emotional support to younger colleagues are important. Adequate psychological support for HCWs in the pandemic can be transformed into reserves of psychological resilience for future disease outbreaks.

Burnout and Associated Factors Among Health Care Workers in Singapore During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: The strain on health care systems due to the COVID-19 pandemic has led to increased psychological distress among health care workers (HCWs). As this global crisis continues with little signs of abatement, we examine burnout and associated factors among HCWs. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Doctors, nurses, allied health professionals, administrative, and support staff in 4 public hospitals and 1 primary care service in Singapore 3 months after COVID-19 was declared a global pandemic. METHODS: Study questionnaire captured demographic and workplace environment information and comprised 3 validated instruments, namely the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI), Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Multivariate mixed model regression analyses were used to evaluate independent associations of mean OLBI-Disengagement and -Exhaustion scores. Further subgroup analysis was performed among redeployed HCWs. RESULTS: Among 11,286 invited HCWs, 3075 valid responses were received, giving an overall response rate of 27.2%. Mean OLBI scores were 2.38 and 2.50 for Disengagement and Exhaustion, respectively. Burnout thresholds in Disengagement and Exhaustion were met by 79.7% and 75.3% of respondents, respectively. On multivariate regression analysis, Chinese or Malay ethnicity, HADS anxiety or depression scores ≥8, shifts lasting ≥8 hours, and being redeployed were significantly associated with higher OLBI mean scores, whereas high SAQ scores were significantly associated with lower scores. Among redeployed HCWs, those redeployed to high-risk areas in a different facility (offsite) had lower burnout scores than those redeployed within their own work facility (onsite). A higher proportion of HCWs redeployed offsite assessed their training to be good or better compared with those redeployed onsite. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Every level of the health care workforce is susceptible to high levels of burnout during this pandemic. Modifiable workplace factors include adequate training, avoiding prolonged shifts ≥8 hours, and promoting safe working environments. Mitigating strategies should target every level of the health care workforce, including frontline and nonfrontline staff. Addressing and ameliorating burnout among HCWs should be a key priority for the sustainment of efforts to care for patients in the face of a prolonged pandemic.

Perceived Stress, Stigma, Traumatic Stress Levels and Coping Responses amongst Residents in Training across Multiple Specialties during COVID-19 Pandemic-A Longitudinal Study.

This study aimed to explore changes in psychological responses (perceived stress, traumatic stress, stigma, coping) over time in residents, as well as their predictors. The level of perceived stress, traumatic stress, stigma, and coping responses were assessed using the Perceived Stress Scale, Impact of Event-Revised, Healthcare Workers Stigma Scale, and Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE) Inventory, respectively. We collected responses from 274 residents at baseline and 221 residents at 3 months follow-up (timepoint 2) from the National Healthcare Group (NHG) residency programs in Singapore. All residents reported lower perceived stress and lower perceived stigma compared to baseline. Use of avoidance coping was associated with all three psychological responses (perceived stress, traumatic stress, and stigma) across the two timepoints. Compared to baseline, specific factors associated with perceived stress and traumatic stress at timepoint 2 were living alone, less problem solving, and seeking social support. Residency programs should encourage active coping strategies (e.g., seeking social support, positive thinking, problem solving) among residents, and proactively identify residents who may be at higher risk of psychological sequelae due to circumstances that contribute to isolation.

Psychological sequelae within different populations during the COVID-19 pandemic: a rapid review of extant evidence.

The rapid spread of COVID-19 has a potentially significant impact on not only physical health but also psychological well-being. To the best of our knowledge, no review thus far has consolidated the psychological impact of COVID-19 across different subpopulations. A systematic search of the literature until 15 June 2020 found 150 empirical papers pertinent to the mental health consequences of the pandemic. The majority (87.3%) were from China (45.3%), the rest of Asia (22.0%) and Europe (20.0%), and mostly examined the general population (37.3%), healthcare workers (31.3%) and those with pre-existing mental and physical illnesses (14.7%). The most common psychological responses across these subpopulations were anxiety (overall range 24.8%-49.5%), depression (overall range 18.6%-42.6%) and traumatic stress symptoms (overall range 12.7%-31.6%). Healthcare workers and those with pre-existing physical and mental illnesses were more severely affected. Future studies are needed on underexamined subgroups such as the elderly and patients who recovered from COVID-19.

Narrative synthesis of psychological and coping responses towards emerging infectious disease outbreaks in the general population: practical considerations for the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Emerging infectious disease outbreaks, such as the present coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, often have a psychological impact on the well-being of the general population, including survivors and caregivers. Our study aimed to synthesise extant literature regarding the combined psychological responses and coping methods used by the general population in past outbreaks. METHODS: We conducted a narrative synthesis of the published literature over the last two decades with a quality appraisal of included articles that reported both psychological responses and coping strategies within infectious disease outbreaks. RESULTS: A total of 144 papers were identified from the search, 24 of which were included in the review. Overall, 18 studies examined the psychosocial responses of the general population towards the severe acute respiratory syndrome epidemic, four studies focused on the Ebola epidemic and two studies covered the H1N1 outbreak. Common themes in psychological responses included anxiety/fears, depression, anger, guilt, grief and loss, post-traumatic stress and stigmatisation, but also a greater sense of empowerment and compassion towards others. Coping strategies adopted included problem-focused coping (seeking alternatives, self- and other-preservation), seeking social support, avoidance, and positive appraisal of the situation. CONCLUSION: Amid the range of psychosocial responses seen in past infectious disease outbreaks, practical considerations for the current COVID-19 pandemic need to focus on the individual in the context of the larger social environment, with an emphasis on raising awareness of the range of possible psychosocial responses, access to psychological help, self-care, empowering self-support groups and sustained engagement with updated, reliable information about the outbreak.