ABSTRACT
A quantitative method is adopted to survey 197 students at the department of social work at a university in Taiwan from April to May in 2020. The study aims to explore the impact of the new coronavirus on social work students' career determination. The result presents the participants with higher social loneliness have lower "Career Determination of Clinical Medical Social Work (CDCMSW)", and the mental burden feeling, and family relationship are predictive of the CDCMSW. © 2023 Author(s).
ABSTRACT
The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic turned out to be a serious threat to mental and physical health. However, the relative contribution of corona-specific (DHs) and general stressors (DHg) on mental burden, and specific protective and risk factors for mental health are still not well understood. In a representative sample (N = 3,055) of the German adult population, mental health, potential risk, and protective factors as well as DHs and DHg exposure were assessed online during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (June and July 2020). The impact of these factors on mental health was analyzed using descriptive statistics, data visualizations, multiple regressions, and moderation analyses. The most burdensome DHg were financial and sleeping problems, respectively, and DHs corona-media reports and exclusion from recreational activities/important social events. 31 and 24% of total mental health was explained by DHg and DHs, respectively. Both predictors combined explained 36%, resulting in an increase in variance due to DHs of only 5% (R2 adjusted). Being female, older and a lower educational level were identified as general risk factors, somatic diseases as a corona-specific risk factor, and self-efficacy and locus of control (LOC) proved to be corona-specific protective factors. Further analyses showed that older age and being diagnosed with a somatic illness attenuated the positive influence of LOC, self-efficacy, and social support on resilience. Although the data showed that after the first easing restrictions, the stressor load was comparable to pre-pandemic data (with DHs not making a significant contribution), different risk and protective factors could be identified for general and corona-specific stressors. In line with observations from network analysis from other groups, the positive impact of resilience factors was especially diminished in the most vulnerable groups (elderly and somatically ill). This highlights the need to especially target these vulnerable groups to foster their resilience in upcoming waves of the corona pandemic.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Female , Humans , Aged , Male , COVID-19/epidemiology , Germany/epidemiology , Social SupportABSTRACT
PURPOSE: There is evidence for mental burden and moral distress among healthcare workers during the pandemic. However, there is scarcity of analyses regarding possible correlations of mental burden and moral distress in this context. This study provides data to quantify mental burden and possible associations with moral distress among physicians and nurses working in oncology in Germany. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey with physicians and nurses working in oncology in Germany between March and July 2021. Next to sociodemographic characteristics and working conditions, mental burden and moral distress were assessed using standardized instruments. Binary multivariate logistic regression using the enter method was performed in order to explore the relationship between mental burden and moral distress. RESULTS: 121 physicians and 125 nurses were included in the study. Prevalence of clinically relevant depressive symptoms, anxiety, somatic symptoms, burnout symptoms and moral distress was 19.2, 14.5, 12.7, 46.0 and 34.7% in physicians and 41.4, 24.0, 46.8, 46.6 and 60.0% in nurses respectively. Mental burden was significantly associated with moral distress, being female/diverse, younger age < 40 and increase in workload. Nurses who felt sufficiently protected from COVID-19 reported significantly less moral distress. CONCLUSION: To improve pandemic resilience, there is a need to ensure safe working environment including psychosocial support. Further evidence on risk and protective factors for moral distress is needed to be able to develop and implement strategies to protect healthcare workers within and beyond the pandemic.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic is a continuing burden on society and the health system. The vaccination willingness among healthcare workers is of particular interest, as these groups play a key role in the pandemic response. OBJECTIVES: The present study investigated how the willingness of healthcare workers in Germany to get vaccinated depends on sociodemographic, occupational, and COVID-19-specific characteristics, as well as mental health. METHODS: Between November 2020 and January 2021, 6217 employees in the German healthcare system were questioned about their vaccination willingness, sociodemographic, occupational, COVID-19-specific, and psychosocial characteristics using the online VOICE survey within the framework of the University Medicine Network (NUM). RESULTS: The vaccination willingness of the sample group was 65.3%. A higher vaccination willingness was associated with male gender; age >â¯40 years; having no children or no migration background; not working in direct patient care; belonging to a COVID-19 risk group or professional group of physicians and psychologists in comparison with nursing staff; feeling sufficiently informed about COVID-19 and protected by the measures of the national or local authorities and the employer; fear of infection; and lack of signs of depression. Physicians showed the highest willingness to get vaccinated. CONCLUSIONS: During the study period, an overall moderate vaccination willingness against COVID-19 in the health sector was described. Information about the disease and vaccination, especially for younger people, females, and non-physicians, adequate protective measures and prevention of depressive symptoms could increase the vaccination willingness.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Female , Germany , Health Personnel , Humans , Male , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Universities , VaccinationABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The infection protection measures adopted as part of the COVID-19 pandemic led to profound restrictions and changes in the social, (pre-) school, family, and leisure areas. The objective of the current study was to examine the mental burden of children and adolescents and their families during the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, this study aimed to identify possible factors that influence the mental burden. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The examinations were carried out between autumn 2020 and spring 2021 in a clinical sample (nâ¯= 280 patients aged 4-17 years) and a community sample (nâ¯= 1958 children and adolescents aged 4-19 years recruited via schools and preschools). Ratings of parents as well as children and adolescents via questionnaires were assessed. RESULTS: Mental burden due to the corona pandemic was assessed as slightly to moderately increased across both rating perspectives and both samples. Overall, around 60 to 70% of the parents, children, and adolescents describe an increase in mental burden; in contrast, up to 12% of parents as well as children and adolescents describe relief. When comparing both samples, a slightly higher burden on children and adolescents can only be seen in the self-assessment of the clinical sample. None of the socio-demographic factors analyzed influences the mental burden statistically significant. However, low to moderate correlations between the subjectively experienced deterioration in the family and social situation and an increased level of stress is found. DISCUSSION: Targeted interventions for exposed subgroups should be offered during a pandemic. Universal interventions are not indicated.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Problem Behavior , Adolescent , Child , Child, Preschool , Germany/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
AIM: The aim of this study was to clarify the physical and mental burden of the COIVD-19 pandemic on obstetricians and gynecologists in Japan and to identify factors that increase the burden of their psychological stress. METHODS: A web-based questionnaire was sent to obstetricians and gynecologists in Japan via email and social media to collect voluntary responses. This survey was conducted from September 1 to 30, 2020. RESULTS: A total of 852 valid responses were included in the analysis; 76% (644) of the physicians felt that the COVID-19 pandemic caused them physical and mental stress equal to or greater than the most severe disaster they had ever experienced. Physicians who reported high mental and physical stress were more likely to be in areas with high numbers of infected patients (odds ratio (OR) 1.571, p = 0.012). Physicians experienced great stress to the point of wearing heavy personal protective equipment during routine vaginal deliveries by mothers with no COVID-19 symptoms. This trend was markedly pronounced for physicians working in regions with fewer cases of COVID-19 infection. CONCLUSIONS: Obstetricians and gynecologists who reported high mental and physical stress were more likely to be in areas with high numbers of infected patients. One potential reason for this may be that they were required to wear more personal protective equipment than necessary. Infection control methods that ensure the safety of obstetricians and gynecologists while not causing unnecessary physical or psychological stress are needed.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Physicians , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
Context: This study is a quanti-qualitative analysis of all contacts to a helpline service for hospital workers during the COVID-19 crisis. Our aim was to describe the nature of mental burden in hospital workers and factors subjectively associated to this burden from the workers' perspective. Methods: We included all 50 contacts from 25 different workers and 10 different professions over the course of 1 month. We described the corpus and reported the computerized qualitative analysis of summary of contacts. We performed a descendant hierarchical analysis and analyzed specificities of classes of age with a correspondence factor analysis. Results: The corpus was composed of three classes: (1) distress specific to the COVID-19 situation, (2) help provided, and (3) pre-existing psychological vulnerability. Factors subjectively responsible for mental distress were: (a) the contamination risk, (b) confinement, and (c) the rapidly evolving situation and changing instructions. Lack of "COVID-free time" seemed to increase negative emotions. Reassignment to a high viral density unit was a stressor, especially in older workers. Young workers mentioned pre-existing vulnerability more than others. Fear of death was shared by all classes of age, regardless of the objective risk of contamination. Discussion: Hospital workers experience mental distress factors both in common with the general population and specific to the hospital environment. Preserving and organizing support for the mental health of all hospital workers is a critical challenge, including those with poorly recognized professions. Leads for institutions to avoid additional stressors for hospital workers are presented. Young workers with pre-existing vulnerability seem particularly impacted.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: While the second wave of COVID-19 has started in Europe, data are still missing on the consequences of the first one for patients with cancer. The aim of our study was to learn more about the experiences of German patients and staff in the oncology services. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An anonymous online survey was conducted among cancer patients and their therapists (physicians, medical staff, psychologists, spiritual care givers) in Germany between April and May 2020 asking about burden, fears, and perceived changes in German oncology service system. Besides answer frequencies of different stakeholders, uni- and multivariate analyses were performed for selected items to identify areas of high impact. RESULTS: In total 752 participants were included. All groups have identified high mental burden as central problem. A majority was confused about varying information policies and strategies against the pandemic. Patient reported restricted visits, isolation and delay of treatment as central fears and problems. The majority of fears could be coped by the health care workers. The patients describe processes at the oncology services during the first wave. Personal experiences with COVID-19 have had no influence on the felt burden of the patients. Physicians, medical staff, psychologists and spiritual care givers were extremely stressed but repressed their own burden. They await financial, physical and mental problems for their own future. CONCLUSIONS: The presented personal views and experiences allow focusing the discussions about heath care systems during the on-going pandemic. Support for health care workers, as much routine as possible in oncology services, and transparency in information will be the keys for good management in futural situations of crisis.