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.

Anxiety and depression among medical doctors in Catalonia, Italy, and the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Healthcare workers have had the longest and most direct exposure to COVID-19 and consequently may suffer from poor mental health. We conducted one of the first repeated multi-country analysis of the mental wellbeing of medical doctors (n = 5,275) at two timepoints during the COVID-19 pandemic (June 2020 and November/December 2020) to understand the prevalence of anxiety and depression, as well as associated risk factors. Rates of anxiety and depression were highest in Italy (24.6% and 20.1%, June 2020), second highest in Catalonia (15.9% and 17.4%, June 2020), and lowest in the UK (11.7% and 13.7%, June 2020). Across all countries, higher risk of anxiety and depression symptoms were found among women, individuals below 60 years old, those feeling vulnerable/exposed at work, and those reporting normal/below-normal health. We did not find systematic differences in mental health measures between the two rounds of data collection, hence we cannot discard that the mental health repercussions of the pandemic are persistent.

Mental health care of health workers during Covid-19: Recommendations based on evidence and expert consensus.

INTRODUCTION: The crisis situation generated by COVID-19 and the measures adopted have generated social changes in the normal dynamics of the general population and especially for health workers, who find themselves caring for patients with suspected or confirmed infection. Recent studies have detected in them depression and anxiety symptoms and burnout syndrome, with personal and social conditions impacting their response capacity during the health emergency. Our aim was to generate recommendations for the promotion and protection of the mental health of health workers and teams in the first line of care in the health emergency due to COVID-19. METHODS: A rapid literature search was carried out in PubMed and Google Scholar, and an iterative expert consensus and through electronic consultation, with 13 participants from the areas of psychology, psychiatry and medicine; the grading of its strength and directionality was carried out according to the international standards of the Joanna Briggs Institute. RESULTS: Thirty-one recommendations were generated on self-care of health workers, community care among health teams, screening for alarm signs in mental health and for health institutions. CONCLUSIONS: The promotion and protection activities in mental health to face the health emergency generated by COVID-19 worldwide can include coordinated actions between workers, health teams and health institutions as part of a comprehensive, community care, co-responsible and sustained over time.

Experiences of renal healthcare practitioners during the COVID-19 pandemic: a multi-methods approach.

BACKGROUND: Globally, renal healthcare practitioners provide intensive and protracted support to a highly complex multi-morbid patient population however knowledge about the impact of COVID-19 on these practitioners is extremely limited. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the experiences of COVID-19 with renal healthcare practitioners during the first global lockdown between June 2020 and September 2020. METHODS: A multi-methods approach was carried out including a quantitative survey and qualitative interviews. This was a multinational study of renal healthcare practitioners from 29 countries. Quantitative: A self-designed survey on COVID-19 experiences and standardised questionnaires (General Health Questionnaire-12; Maslach Burnout Inventory). Descriptive statistics were generated for numerical data. Qualitative: Online semi-structured interviews were conducted. Data was subjected to thematic analysis. Renal healthcare practitioners (n = 251) completed an online survey. Thirteen renal healthcare practitioners took part in semi-structured interviews (12 nurses and 1 dietician). RESULTS: The majority of participants surveyed were female (86.9 %; n = 218), nurses (86.9 %; n = 218) with an average 21.5 (SD = 11.1) years' experience since professional qualification, and 16.3 years (SD = 9.3) working in renal healthcare. Survey responses indicated a level of preparedness, training and satisfactory personal protective equipment during the pandemic however approximately 40.3 % experienced fear about attending work, and 49.8 % experienced mental health distress. The highest prevalence of burnout was emotional exhaustion (35.9 %). Three themes emerged from the qualitative analysis highlighting the holistic complexities in managing renal healthcare, a neglected specialist workforce, and the need for appropriate support at work during a pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Results have highlighted the psychological impact, in terms of emotional exhaustion and mental health distress in our sample of renal healthcare practitioners. As the pandemic has continued, it is important to consider the long-term impact on an already stretched workforce including the risk of developing mental health disorders. Future research and interventions are required to understand and improve the provision of psychological support for specialist medical and nursing personnel.

Psychological Consequences Among Residents and Fellows During the COVID-19 Pandemic in New York City: Implications for Targeted Interventions.

PURPOSE: To examine the psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on medical trainees (residents and fellows) working at Mount Sinai Hospital (MSH) in New York City (NYC), the initial epicenter of the United States pandemic. METHOD: The authors administered a survey to 991 trainees in frontline specialties working at MSH in NYC between April and May 2020. The instrument assessed symptoms of major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, COVID-19-related posttraumatic stress disorder, and burnout. Psychiatric screens were aggregated into 1 composite measure, and meeting criteria on any of the 3 scales was considered a positive screen for psychiatric symptoms. The survey also assessed COVID-19-related exposures, worries, coping strategies, and desired interventions. Multivariable logistic regressions were conducted to identify factors associated with psychiatric symptoms and burnout. RESULTS: Of the 560 respondents (56.6% response rate), 29.7% screened positive for psychiatric symptoms and 35.8% screened positive for burnout. History of a mental illness, COVID-19-related duties and personal/career worries, and coping by substance use were associated with increased likelihood of screening positive for psychiatric symptoms. Positive emotion-focused coping and feeling valued by supervisors were associated with decreased likelihood. Internal medicine and surgical specialties, a history of mental illness, increased duty hours, duty-related worries, personal/career worries, coping via self-blame and venting, and coping via substance use were associated with higher odds of burnout. Feeling valued by supervisors was associated with decreased burnout odds. The most common crisis-related needs included access to personal protective equipment, food provisions, and financial support. CONCLUSIONS: Psychological distress and burnout affected approximately one-third of trainees sampled during the height of the pandemic in NYC. As the pandemic surged beyond NYC, these findings suggest that interventions should include addressing basic needs, promoting leadership affirmation, moderating duty hours, supporting trainees financially, and enhancing mental health support.

Psychosocial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on 4378 UK healthcare workers and ancillary staff: initial baseline data from a cohort study collected during the first wave of the pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: This study reports preliminary findings on the prevalence of, and factors associated with, mental health and well-being outcomes of healthcare workers during the early months (April-June) of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. METHODS: Preliminary cross-sectional data were analysed from a cohort study (n=4378). Clinical and non-clinical staff of three London-based NHS Trusts, including acute and mental health Trusts, took part in an online baseline survey. The primary outcome measure used is the presence of probable common mental disorders (CMDs), measured by the General Health Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes are probable anxiety (seven-item Generalised Anxiety Disorder), depression (nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire), post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (six-item Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder checklist), suicidal ideation (Clinical Interview Schedule) and alcohol use (Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test). Moral injury is measured using the Moray Injury Event Scale. RESULTS: Analyses showed substantial levels of probable CMDs (58.9%, 95% CI 58.1 to 60.8) and of PTSD (30.2%, 95% CI 28.1 to 32.5) with lower levels of depression (27.3%, 95% CI 25.3 to 29.4), anxiety (23.2%, 95% CI 21.3 to 25.3) and alcohol misuse (10.5%, 95% CI 9.2 to 11.9). Women, younger staff and nurses tended to have poorer outcomes than other staff, except for alcohol misuse. Higher reported exposure to moral injury (distress resulting from violation of one's moral code) was strongly associated with increased levels of probable CMDs, anxiety, depression, PTSD symptoms and alcohol misuse. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that mental health support for healthcare workers should consider those demographics and occupations at highest risk. Rigorous longitudinal data are needed in order to respond to the potential long-term mental health impacts of the pandemic.

A Broader View of Risk to Health Care Workers: Perspectives on Supporting Vulnerable Health Care Professional Households During COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted both that frontline workers face a new set of personal hazards in health care settings and that there are not well-established recommendations to address the broader risks to these workers and their families. Particularly vulnerable households include dual health care professional households, single-parent health care professional households, and households with health care professionals responsible for a high-risk family member (i.e., an older adult or immunocompromised person). While the demographics of these households are heterogeneous, it is expected that the professional and personal concerns specific to COVID-19 will be similar. These concerns include family safety, balancing full-time work with home-based schooling for children, the looming threat of illness to 1 or both partners, the potential of infecting high-risk family members, and the challenges of planning for the future during uncertain times. To elucidate these concerns in their department, the authors sought input from colleagues in dual health care professional households through an open-ended email communication. Respondents expressed a range of concerns centered on balancing professional and family responsibilities during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this commentary, the authors propose several recommendations in the areas of support networks, leadership and culture, and operations and logistics that health care institutions can adopt to minimize the burden on these vulnerable households during states of emergency. The successful implementation of these recommendations hinges on creating a work environment in which all health care providers feel comfortable voicing their concerns.

Psychological burden of covid-19 health crisis on health professionals and interventions to minimize the effect: what has history already taught us?

Health professionals have been at the frontline of the health service since the outbreak of covid-19, responding promptly to diagnose, support and treat infected patients. World Health Organization (WHO) has already praised their contribution and their essential role in controlling this disease. Some of the main concerns of covid-19's impact to health service staff include work overload, exhaustion, and high risk of self-infection or transmission to family members. Moreover, during the pandemic, caregivers' mental health inevitably becomes vulnerable, with salient stress and anxiety-related symptoms. Uncertainty, fear of contagion, guilt, hopelessness, stigmatization and, in some cases, long-term post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are few of the potential effects posed by this outbreak on health workers. In this review, lessons learnt from previous global crises or pandemics on the psychological impact of health workers are presented. History could potentially provide essential information on how to best manage, support and optimize our approach to this highly appreciated and much needed group of professionals. Targeted and prompt interventions could reduce the psychological strain of health professionals, thus, further improving provided patient care. Covid-19 is an on-going health crisis and this work, even though generated by limited existing data, could be used to inform governments and/or institutions and lead on decisions and changes in current guidelines.

In Their Own Words: What Do Healthcare Workers Want from Their Organization during the COVID-19 Pandemic?

Pandemics are associated with heightened distress among healthcare workers (HCWs). We report qualitative findings from a two-stage survey administered to HCWs at a large acute care hospital in Ontario during the COVID-19 pandemic to identify their concerns and wellness needs. Responses reflected HCWs' desires to be heard, protected, prepared, supported and cared for by the organization. HCWs' concerns were diverse and dynamic, reflecting the specific circumstances of their work and personal lives as well as the shifting landscape of the pandemic. We discuss implications for organizations seeking to promote and protect HCWs' psychological well-being and resilience during pandemics.

The cost of caring during recent epidemics: a rapid review of risk factors, psychological manifestations, and strategies for its treatment.

BACKGROUND: During epidemics, health care workers (HCWs) are particularly exposed to the risk of secondary trauma. If not effectively addressed, the consequences of such psychological distress can progress to more severe conditions. METHODS: A systematic search of several databases on the effect of SARS, MERS, and COVID-19 epidemics on the mental health of HCWs was performed according to both the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the WHO Rapid Review Guide for Health Policy and Systems Research. RESULTS: The 77 reviewed studies highlighted that work organization and individual characteristics can add to mental health risk. Providing adequate training to prevent infection and prepare HCWs to handle the epidemic, strengthening team work to improve organization, and ensuring appropriate protective equipment is available can help prevent risk of psychiatric illness. CONCLUSIONS: Monitoring and addressing through tailored interventions the mental health consequences of pandemics in HCWs is necessary.

Prevalence of mental health problems in frontline healthcare workers after the first outbreak of COVID-19 in China: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: More than 210,000 medical workers have fought against the outbreak of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Hubei in China since December 2019. However, the prevalence of mental health problems in frontline medical staff after fighting COVID-19 is still unknown. METHODS: Medical workers in Wuhan and other cities in Hubei Province were invited to participate a cross-sectional and convenience sampling online survey, which assessed the prevalence of anxiety, insomnia, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). RESULTS: A total of 1,091 responses (33% male and 67% female) were valid for statistical analysis. The prevalence was anxiety 53%, insomnia 79%, depression 56%, and PTSD 11%. Healthcare workers in Wuhan were more likely to face risks of anxiety (56% vs. 52%, P = 0.03) and PTSD (15% vs. 9%, P = 0.03) than those in other cities of Hubei. In terms of educational attainment, those with doctoral and masters' (D/M) degrees may experience more anxiety (median of 7.0, [interquartile range (IQR) 2.0-8.5] vs. median 5.0 [IQR 5.0-8.0], P = 0.02) and PTSD (median 26.0 [IQR 19.5-33.0] vs. median 23.0 [IQR 19.0-31.0], P = 0.04) than those with lower educational degrees. CONCLUSIONS: The mental problems were an important issue for the healthcare workers after COVID-19. Thus, an early intervention on such mental problems is necessary for healthcare workers.

Symptoms related to mental disorder in healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil.

BACKGROUND: Studies of previous pandemics indicate that healthcare workers have a high risk of developing symptoms related to mental health, especially depression, anxiety, and stress. OBJECTIVE: To identify mental disorder symptoms among Brazilian healthcare workers during the Sars-Cov-2 pandemic and compare findings in different work categories. METHODS: This was an online cross-sectional study. Information related to the pandemic and mental disorder symptoms was collected. The Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale and the Impact of Event Scale-revised were used. Associations were estimated by the chi-square test. The mean scores were compared among work categories with ANOVA (α = 5%) and the prevalence of symptoms was estimated. RESULTS: 1,609 healthcare workers participated in the survey [mean age: 36.9 (SD = 11.6) years, women = 83.6%]. There was no association between work category and changes in mental health during the pandemic (p = 0.288) or prevalence of unsafe feeling (p = 0.218). A significant relationship was observed between maintaining work activities during the pandemic and work category (p < 0.001). Physicians had the lowest out-of-work prevalence (9.5%) while dentists had the highest (32.3%). Physicians and nurses showed the highest prevalence of in-person work routine. Psychologists presented the highest prevalence of remote work (64.0%) while dentists had the lowest (20.2%). A high prevalence of depression (D), anxiety (A), and stress (S) symptoms was observed in all professional categories (D: 57.2, 95% CI 48.3-66.1%; A: 46.20%, 95% CI = 37.2-55.2%; S: 55.80%, 95% CI = 46.8-64.8%), with physicians (D = 38.4%, A = 25.80%, S = 37.90%), psychologists (D = 50.2%, A = 39.0%, S = 43.1%), and nurses (D = 50.0%, A = 40.9%, S = 49.0%) having significantly lower scores. Psychologists had the lowest pandemic-related psychological impact (42.70%, 95% CI 36.8-48.6%). CONCLUSION: Extreme changes in the work routine of dentists and psychologists and an overall high prevalence of mental symptoms due to the pandemic were found. Researchers should focus on gathering information that can identify workers at increased risk of mental illness to guide discussions and develop actions to minimize the harm of the pandemic. In addition, we suggest that healthcare and support systems urgently adopt mental health care measures with specialized professionals to protect the psychological well-being of the healthcare community.

[Health professionals facing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: What are the mental health risks?] / Les professionnels de santé face à la pandémie de la maladie à coronavirus (COVID-19) : quels risques pour leur santé mentale ?

OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused major sanitary crisis worldwide. Half of the world has been placed in quarantine. In France, this large-scale health crisis urgently triggered the restructuring and reorganization of health service delivery to support emergency services, medical intensive care units and continuing care units. Health professionals mobilized all their resources to provide emergency aid in a general climate of uncertainty. Concerns about the mental health, psychological adjustment, and recovery of health care workers treating and caring for patients with COVID-19 are now arising. The goal of the present article is to provide up-to-date information on potential mental health risks associated with exposure of health professionals to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Authors performed a narrative review identifying relevant results in the scientific and medical literature considering previous epidemics of 2003 (SARS-CoV-1) and 2009 (H1N1) with the more recent data about the COVID-19 pandemic. We highlighted most relevant data concerning the disease characteristics, the organizational factors and personal factors that may contribute to developing psychological distress and other mental health symptoms. RESULTS: The disease characteristics of the current COVID-19 pandemic provoked a generalized climate of wariness and uncertainty, particularly among health professionals, due to a range of causes such as the rapid spread of COVID-19, the severity of symptoms it can cause in a segment of infected individuals, the lack of knowledge of the disease, and deaths among health professionals. Stress may also be caused by organizational factors, such as depletion of personal protection equipment, concerns about not being able to provide competent care if deployed to new area, concerns about rapidly changing information, lack of access to up-to-date information and communication, lack of specific drugs, the shortage of ventilators and intensive care unit beds necessary to care for the surge of critically ill patients, and significant change in their daily social and family life. Further risk factors have been identified, including feelings of being inadequately supported, concerns about health of self, fear of taking home infection to family members or others, and not having rapid access to testing through occupational health if needed, being isolated, feelings of uncertainty and social stigmatization, overwhelming workload, or insecure attachment. Additionally, we discussed positive social and organizational factors that contribute to enhance resilience in the face of the pandemic. There is a consensus in all the relevant literature that health care professionals are at an increased risk of high levels of stress, anxiety, depression, burnout, addiction and post-traumatic stress disorder, which could have long-term psychological implications. CONCLUSIONS: In the long run, this tragic health crisis should significantly enhance our understanding of the mental health risk factors among the health care professionals facing the COVID-19 pandemic. Reporting information such as this is essential to plan future prevention strategies. Protecting health care professionals is indeed an important component of public health measures to address large-scale health crisis. Thus, interventions to promote mental well-being in health care professionals exposed to COVID-19 need to be immediately implemented, and to strengthen prevention and response strategies by training health care professionals on mental help and crisis management.

Psychological effects caused by the COVID-19 pandemic in health professionals: A systematic review with meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Psychological suffering by health professionals may be associated with the uncertainty of a safe workplace. Front-line professionals exposed and involved in the diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19 patients are more susceptible. METHOD: This review was conducted based on papers that were published at MEDLINE, BMJ, PsycINFO, and LILACS, the according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes (PRISMA). RESULTS: Health professionals had a higher level of anxiety (13.0 vs. 8.5%, p < 0.01, OR = 1.6152; 95%CI 1.3283 to 1.9641; p < 0.0001) and depression 12.2 vs. 9.5%; p = 0.04; OR = 1.3246; 95%CI 1.0930 to 1.6053; p = 0.0042), besides somatizations and insomnia compared to professionals from other areas. CONCLUSION: Health professionals, regardless of their age, showed significant levels of mental disorders. We observed a prevalence of anxiety and depression. Insomnia was a risk factor for both.

Predictive factors of anxiety and depression among nurses fighting coronavirus disease 2019 in China.

Anxiety and depression are common mental illnesses among nurses fighting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the precise factors that affect anxiety and depression in this population require further evaluation. This study aimed to explore factors associated with anxiety and depression among nurses fighting COVID-19 in China. We used convenience sampling to recruit 282 nurses fighting COVID-19 in three hospitals. Participants were questioned about demographic characteristics, daily working time, daily sleep duration, sleep quality, anxiety, depression, resilience, and coping styles. Linear regression analysis indicated that resilience (ß = -0.217, P < 0.001), positive coping style (ß = -0.281, P < 0.001), negative coping style (ß = 0.395, P < 0.001), and sleep quality (ß = 0.153, P = 0.010) were predictive factors for anxiety, and the model explained 44.20% (P < 0.001) of variability. Resilience (ß = -0.239, P < 0.001), positive coping style (ß = -0.222, P < 0.001), negative coping style (ß = 0.152, P < 0.001), and sleep quality (ß = 0.104, P = 0.003) were identified as explanatory factors for depression, and the model explained 34.50% (P < 0.001) of variability. The present study suggested that resilience, coping styles, and sleep quality could account for an individual's levels of anxiety and depression.

Infodemia: Another Enemy for Romanian Frontline Healthcare Workers to Fight during the COVID-19 Outbreak.

Background and Objectives: The population has been overwhelmed with false information related to the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) crisis, spreading rapidly through social media and other channels. We aimed to investigate if frontline healthcare workers affected by infodemia show different psychological consequences than frontline clinicians who do not declare to be affected by false news related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and Methods: One hundred twenty-six frontline healthcare workers from the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and Emergency Departments in Romania completed a survey to assess stress, depression, anxiety, and sleep disorders, between March and April 2020. We split the sample of frontline healthcare workers into two groups based on the self-evaluated criteria: if they were or were not affected by infodemia in their activity. Results: Considering limitations such as the cross-sectional design, the lack of causality relationship, and the sample size, the results show that, the frontline medical workers who declared to be affected by false news were significantly more stressed, felt more anxiety, and suffered more from insomnia than healthcare workers who are not affected by false information related to pandemic time. Conclusions: The infodemia has significant psychological consequences such as stress, anxiety, and insomnia on already overwhelmed doctors and nurses in the outbreak of the COVID-19 crisis. These findings suggest that medical misinformation's psychological implications must be considered when different interventions regarding frontline healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic are implemented.