ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic has affected people in many ways, including mental health status. Depression, anxiety, and stress (DAS) are terms often used to describe mental health status worldwide. The present study describes the prevalence of DAS and its associated factors among healthcare workers (HCWs) in the northwest region of Malaysia, during the early phase of recovery of movement control order (RMCO), where some restrictions were lifted, and cases are reducing in number. This cross-sectional study used HCW's mental health surveillance data using the DASS-21 questionnaire. A total of 981 data collected between 1 July and 31 August 2020 were randomly sampled. Socio-demographic factors, occupational characteristics, and health backgrounds were extracted and analyzed using multiple logistic regression. The prevalences of DAS are 8.4% (6.7, 10.3), 17.1% (14.8, 19.6), and 6.4% (5.0, 8.1), respectively. Age is significantly associated with depression (Adjusted Odd Ratio (Adj.OR) 0.96 (0.93, 0.99)) and stress (Adj.OR 0.96 (0.93, 0.997)). Working at the hospital is associated with depression (Adj.OR 1.88 (1.19, 2.97)) as well as anxiety (Adj.OR 1.91 (1.36, 2.68). HCWs with a degree or postgraduate education level are more stressed compared to those with lower educational levels (Adj.OR 8.43 (1.95, 36.37)). Mental health surveillance helps to identify those at risk. Those younger in age, working in hospitals, and with more responsibility in management are the most affected. With the easing of COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, which lead to the release of certain movement control, the mental health status of HCWs was less affected. Those working directly with COVID-19 patients and with more responsibility in management are the most affected.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Anxiety/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Malaysia/epidemiology , Mental Health , PandemicsABSTRACT
During the first phase of the Movement Control Order, many medical lecturers had difficulty adapting to the online teaching and learning methods that were made compulsory by the institutional directives. Some of these lecturers are clinicians who need to juggle between clinical work and teaching, and consider a two-week adaptation during this period to be not enough. Furthermore, converting traditional face-to-face learning to online formats for undergraduate and postgraduate clinical programmes would reduce the learning outcomes, especially those related to clinical applications and the acquisition of new skills. This editorial discusses the impact that movement restrictions have had on medical teaching and learning, the alternatives and challenges and the way forward.