The mediating role of resilience between perceived social support and sense of security in medical staff following the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic not only posed a serious threat to public life and health but also had a serious impact on people's mental health, especially that of medical staff. Perceived social support is an important factor in one's sense of security. Objective: Following the COVID-19 pandemic, the goal is to explore the potential mediating role of resilience in the relationship between perceived social support and the sense of security of Chinese medical personnel. Methods: The multi-stage proportionally stratified convenience sampling method was adopted to select 4,076 medical professionals from 29 hospitals in Guangdong Province between September 2020 and October 2020. The Sense of Security Scale for Medical Staff, the Chinese version of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, and the Perceived Social Support Scale were employed in this study. For statistical analysis and structural equation modeling (SEM), the SPSS 23.0 and Amos 24.0 software packages were used. Regression analysis was used to select the control variables to be included in the SEM. SEM analysis was conducted to verify the mediating effect of resilience on the relationship between perceived social support and a sense of security. Results: Pearson's correlation analysis showed that perceived social support and resilience were positively associated with a sense of security (correlation coefficients range from 0.350 to 0.607, P < 0.01), and perceived social support (correlation coefficients range from 0.398 to 0.589, P < 0.01) was positively associated with resilience. Structural equation modeling revealed that resilience played a partial mediating role in the association between perceived social support and a sense of security (60.3% of the effect of perceived social support on security was direct, and 39.7% of the effect was mediated by resilience). Conclusions: Hospital managers should make efforts to develop resilience. Interventions based on resilience should be developed to enhance the perception of social support and strengthen one's sense of security.

Safety Profile of GSK's Inactivated Quadrivalent Seasonal Influenza Vaccine in Belgium, Germany and Spain: Passive Enhanced Safety Surveillance Study for the 2019/2020 Influenza Season.

INTRODUCTION: Seasonal influenza infects millions annually in Europe. Annual influenza vaccination is the most effective measure to reduce the risk of infection and its complications, especially among young children and older adults. OBJECTIVE: We assessed adverse event (AE) frequency after receiving GSK's inactivated quadrivalent seasonal influenza vaccine (IIV4). METHODS: A passive enhanced safety surveillance study was conducted in Belgium, Germany, and Spain. Adults who had received GSK's IIV4 or the parent(s)/guardian(s)/legally acceptable representative(s) of children given the vaccine were invited to complete an adverse drug reaction (ADR) card to document AEs experienced within 7 days post vaccination. RESULTS: A total of 1082 participants (51.6% females) received GSK's IIV4, including 115 children < 9 years of age who received two doses. The ADR card return rate was 97.0% (n = 1049) after dose 1 and 100% (n = 115) after dose 2. All participants in Belgium and Germany were adults. In Spain, 71.2% were children. After dose 1, 39.2% reported one or more AE. The most frequent AEs category was "general disorders and administration site conditions" (GDASC). AEs were most frequently reported in adults aged 18-65 years (47.2%), followed by children aged 6 months-17 years (38.1%), and adults aged > 65 years (31.6%). After dose 2, 7.8% reported one or more AE, and GDASC was again the most frequent AE category. There were no serious AEs related to GSK's IIV4 within 7 days post vaccination. CONCLUSION: No serious AEs related to GSK's IIV4 within 7 days post vaccination were reported. This study supports the favourable risk-benefit safety profile of GSK's IIV4.

Seasonal influenza infects millions annually in Europe, especially young children and older adults. Annual influenza vaccination is the most effective measure to reduce the risk of infection and its complications. As the wild influenza virus strains change every year, the composition of the influenza vaccine changes as well. Since the vaccine is produced in the same way over the years, extensive safety studies are no longer required by regulatory authorities. Instead, monitoring of any unwanted medical incidents (adverse events) after vaccination is required. For the 2019/2020 season, we monitored the adverse events reported by a representative sample of people in Belgium, Germany, and Spain within 7 days after receiving GSK's seasonal influenza vaccine.Of the 1082 people who received the first dose of the vaccine, 39% reported at least one adverse event, such as pain and swelling at the injection site, tiredness, fever, headache, or dizziness. A total of 115 children under 9 years of age received two doses 4 weeks apart. After their second dose, few of these children (8%) reported adverse events. The most frequent adverse events were fever, swelling and pain at the injection site, runny nose, or irritability. No serious adverse events were reported after either the first or second dose.No serious adverse events related to GSK's seasonal influenza vaccine within the 7 days after vaccination were reported. This study supports the favourable risk­benefit safety profile of GSK's seasonal influenza vaccine.

The psychological impact of COVID-19 pandemic on medical staff in Guangdong, China: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: During previous pandemic outbreaks, medical staff have reported high levels of psychological distress. The aim of the current study was to report a snapshot of the psychological impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and its correlated factors on medical staff in Guangdong, China. METHODS: On the 2nd and 3rd February 2020, soon after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, we surveyed medical staff at four hospitals in Guangdong, China, to collect demographic characteristics, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-14), and Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) scores. RESULTS: Complete responses were received from 1045 medical staff. Respondents were divided into high- and low-risk groups according to their working environment of contacting with potential or confirmed COVID-19 cases. The proportion of staff with anxiety (55.4% v. 43.0%, p < 0.001) or depression (43.6% v. 36.8%, p = 0.028) was significantly higher in the high-risk group than the low-risk group. The percentage of staff with severe anxiety was similar in the two groups. Doctors were more susceptible to moderate-to-severe depressive symptoms. The high-risk group had higher levels of clinical insomnia (13.5% v. 8.5%, p = 0.011) and were more likely to be in the upper quartile for stress symptoms (24.7% v. 19.3%, p = 0.037) than the low-risk group. Additionally, work experience negatively correlated with insomnia symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: It is important for hospitals and authorities to protect both the physical and psychological health of medical staff during times of pandemic, even those with a low exposure risk.