Experiences of Work-Family Conflict and Mental Health Symptoms by Gender Among Physician Parents During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has placed increased strain on health care workers and disrupted childcare and schooling arrangements in unprecedented ways. As substantial gender inequalities existed in medicine before the pandemic, physician mothers may be at particular risk for adverse professional and psychological consequences. Objective: To assess gender differences in work-family factors and mental health among physician parents during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study included 276 US physicians enrolled in the Intern Health Study since their first year of residency training. Physicians who had participated in the primary study as interns during the 2007 to 2008 and 2008 to 2009 academic years and opted into a secondary longitudinal follow-up study were invited to complete an online survey in August 2018 and August 2020. Exposures: Work-family experience included 3 single-item questions and the Work and Family Conflict Scale, and mental health symptoms included the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 scale. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were work-to-family and family-to-work conflict and depressive symptoms and anxiety symptoms during August 2020. Depressive symptoms between 2018 (before the COVID-19 pandemic) and 2020 (during the COVID-19 pandemic) were compared by gender. Results: Among 215 physician parents who completed the August 2020 survey, 114 (53.0%) were female and the weighted mean (SD) age was 40.1 (3.57) years. Among physician parents, women were more likely to be responsible for childcare or schooling (24.6% [95% CI, 19.0%-30.2%] vs 0.8% [95% CI, 0.01%-2.1%]; P < .001) and household tasks (31.4% [95% CI, 25.4%-37.4%] vs 7.2% [95% CI, 3.5%-10.9%]; P < .001) during the pandemic compared with men. Women were also more likely than men to work primarily from home (40.9% [95% CI, 35.1%-46.8%] vs 22.0% [95% CI, 17.2%-26.8%]; P < .001) and reduce their work hours (19.4% [95% CI, 14.7%-24.1%] vs 9.4% [95% CI, 6.0%-12.8%]; P = .007). Women experienced greater work-to-family conflict (ß = 2.79; 95% CI, 1.00 to 4.59; P = .03), family-to-work conflict (ß = 3.09; 95% CI, 1.18-4.99; P = .02), and depressive (ß = 1.76; 95% CI, 0.56-2.95; P = .046) and anxiety (ß = 2.87; 95% CI, 1.49-4.26; P < .001) symptoms compared with men. We observed a difference between women and men in depressive symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic (mean [SD] PHQ-9 score: 5.05 [6.64] vs 3.52 [5.75]; P = .009) that was not present before the pandemic (mean [SD] PHQ-9 score: 3.69 [5.26] vs 3.60 [6.30]; P = .86). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found significant gender disparities in work and family experiences and mental health symptoms among physician parents during the COVID-19 pandemic, which may translate to increased risk for suicide, medical errors, and lower quality of patient care for physician mothers. Institutional and public policy solutions are needed to mitigate the potential adverse consequences for women's careers and well-being.

Psychological effect of COVID-19 pandemic among women undergoing infertility care, a French cohort - PsyCovART Psychological effect of COVID-19: PsyCovART.

PURPOSE: To assess psychological state of women who experienced postponement of ART care during the first COVID-19 wave in a French public ward of reproductive medicine. METHODS: An online anonymous survey was emailed between July and August 2020 to all women whose infertility care, including the first consultation for infertility, have been delayed at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Anxiety, depression, and stress were assessed using Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10). Feelings about COVID-19 outbreak, lockdown and suspension of fertility care were assessed by Multiple-Choice Questions and Visual Analog Scales. RESULTS: 435 women answered to the survey (response rate 34.6%). Mean levels of the HADS-A (anxiety), HADS-D (depression) and PSS10 were respectively 7.58(±3.85), 4.51(±3.48), and 27(±6.75). Prevalence of stress was 50.8% and almost half of women presented clear or suggestive anxiety symptoms (respectively 21.6% and 25.7%). Stress and anxiety rates were much higher than those expected in infertile population. Increased stress was observed in women above 35 years and those stopped 'in cycle' or during pre-treatment for in-vitro fertilization or frozen embryo transfer. Patient with history of depression or anxiety had a higher prevalence of perceived stress (p = 0.0006). Postponement was perceived as 'unbearable' for women experiencing stress (p = 0.0032). After the first wave of pandemic, pregnancy desire remained the same and 84.3% of women wanted to resume fertility care as soon as possible. CONCLUSION: Stopping fertility care during the COVID-19 pandemic had a significant psychological impact on women with an increase of stress, and anxiety. Psychological counseling should always be offered especially during this difficult period.

Baduanjin exercise can alleviate anxiety and depression of patients with COVID-19 in Square cabin hospital: A cross-sectional survey.

ABSTRACT: To investigate the anxiety and depression of patients with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who participated in Baduanjin exercise.From February 20, 2020 to March 7, 2020, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale (HAD) were used to investigate the anxiety and depression levels of patients with COVID-19 who participated in Baduanjin exercise. Ninety one questionnaires were received, including 40 males and 51 females. Stepwise regression analysis was used to analyze the effects of related factors on anxiety and depression levels.In Square cabin hospital, 91% of patients participated in Baduanjin exercise had no obvious anxiety and 82% had no obvious depression. The scores of anxiety and depression of female patients were significantly higher than that of male patients. Bachelor degree or above with low scores for anxiety and depression. The frequency of Baduanjin exercise was negatively correlated with anxiety and depression score.The development of Baduanjin exercise has a certain positive influence on the COVID-19 patients in the Square cabin hospital, which is conducive to alleviate anxiety and depression symptoms of the patients.

Determinants of worry using the SARS-CoV-19 worry (CoV-Wo) scale among United States residents.

We sought to develop a brief Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2-related worry (CoV-Wo) scale to understand COVID-19-related worry among adults in the United States. We also aimed to model key determinants of worry in the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. A total of 806 participants completed an online survey in late March 2020. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses assessed scale structure. Factor analysis stratified by depression was used to assess measurement invariance. Linear regression models examined COVID-19-related worry determinants. The CoV-Wo scale exhibited good reliability (α = 0.80) and a two-factor structure: health (α = 0.83) and resources (α = 0.71). The full scale and both subscales were higher among participants who stopped working due to COVID-19 and those with depression. Perception of quality medical care if infected with COVID-19 was associated with reduced worry. The CoV-Wo scale is a low burden assessment of COVID-19-related worry, that captures common worries in domains affected by COVID-19 and can be used to develop psychosocial resources.

Prevalence of burnout risk and factors associated with burnout risk among ICU nurses during the COVID-19 outbreak in French speaking Belgium.

OBJECTIVE: Burnout is a global work-related phenomenon. Intensive care unit (ICU) nurses are at risk of burnout and the COVID-19 pandemic may increase this risk. The objectives of this study were to assess the prevalence of burnout risk and identify risk factors among ICU nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY: Web-based survey performed during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in French speaking Belgium. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Risk of burnout was assessed with the Maslach Burnout Inventory scale. RESULTS: A total of 1135 ICU nurses responded to the questionnaire. The overall prevalence of burnout risk was 68%. A total of 29% of ICU nurses were at risk of depersonalisation (DP), 31% of reduced personal accomplishment (PA), and 38% of emotional exhaustion (EE). A 1:3 nurse-to-patient ratio increased the risk of EE (OR = 1.77, 95% CI: 1.07-2.95) and DP (OR = 1.38, 95% CI: 1.09-2.40). Those who reported having a higher perceived workload during the COVID-19 pandemic were at higher risk for all dimensions of burnout. Shortage of personal protective equipment increased the risk of EE (OR = 1.78, 95% CI: 1.35-3.34) and nurses who reported having symptoms of COVID-19 without being tested were at higher risk of EE (OR = 1.40, 95% CI: 1.68-1.87). CONCLUSIONS: Two-thirds of ICU nurses were at risk of burnout and this risk was associated with their working conditions during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. We recommend monitoring the risk of burnout and implementing interventions to prevent and manage it, taking into account the factors identified in this study.

Physician Burnout in Primary Care during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Study in Portugal.

BACKGROUND: Primary care physicians have been present on the frontline during the ongoing pandemic, adding new tasks to already high workloads. Our aim was to evaluate burnout in primary care physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as associated contributing factors. METHODS: Cross-sectional study with an online questionnaire disseminated through social media, applying the snowball technique. The target population was primary care physicians working in Portugal during the first outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition to sociodemographic data, the questionnaire collected responses to the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI), the Resilience Scale and the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scales (DASS-21). Data were collected from May 9 to June 8, 2020, a period comprising the declaration of a national calamity and then state of emergency, and the subsequent ease of lockdown measures. Levels of burnout in 3 different dimensions (personal, work, and patient-related), resilience, stress, depression, and anxiety were assessed. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify factors associated with burnout levels. RESULTS: Among the 214 physician respondents, burnout levels were high in the 3 dimensions. A strong association was found between gender, years of professional experience, depression and anxiety, and burnout levels. CONCLUSIONS: Physician burnout in primary care is high and has increased during the pandemic. More studies are needed in the long term to provide a comprehensive assessment of COVID-19'simpact on burnout levels and how to best approach and mitigate it during such unprecedented times.

Did COVID-19 change the interventions provided by oncology social workers in the epicenter of the pandemic? A natural experiment.

Background: Throughout history, the field of medical social work has been shaped by epidemics and pandemics. As COVID-19 rapidly overwhelmed the healthcare system in 2020, oncology departments found that space, staff, and funds were reallocated to address patient needs during the pandemic. Traditional outpatient services were required to operate with reduced resources, with special attention to additional measures to protect workers and patients from exposure to the virus. Little is known about how these changes affected the nature of the practice of oncology social work.Methods: We compared data on OSW interventions for three months (March-May) 2019 to the same period in 2020. Mount Sinai Downtown Cancer Center's Department of Social Work routinely collects data on services provided by social workers using a validated instrument. As NYC became the epicenter of the COVID-19 in March 2020, the comparison of these time periods creates a natural experiment to examine whether and how the presence of the virus impacted the services provided by OSWs.Findings: There was little difference in the number of encounters that took place between the two time periods (2186 encounters in 2019 and 2084 encounters in 2020); however, there were notable differences in the types of interventions. While interventions involving supportive counseling decreased in 2020, we identified a significant increase specific to bereavement counseling.Conclusion: The study shows a remarkable consistency in the volume and types of services provided by OSWs, in spite of the radical increase in stressors they experienced during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings suggest that the OSWs did not allow these stressors to interfere with their work with patients. This study demonstrates how routine use of an instrument to measure OSW interventions can be used to examine services provided over time and to evaluate potential influences of external factors.

Reliability of the tools used to examine psychological distress, fear of COVID-19 and coping amongst migrants and non-migrants in Australia.

Study tools examining psychological distress, fear of COVID-19 and coping amongst migrants and non-migrants in Australia are very limited. The aim of this research was to assess the psychometric properties and correlation of the English version of Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K-10), Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCSV-19S), and Brief Resilient Coping Scale (BRCS) tools during the COVID-19 pandemic situation in Australia. Data from a cross-sectional survey (n = 516) were utilized to examine reliability; 299 (57.9%) were migrants. High internal consistency, as evidenced by Cronbach's alpha, was found for the K-10 (0.92), FCV-19S (0.87) and BRCS (0.66) tools. The corresponding values for migrants and non-migrants were (0.92, 0.87, 0.67) and (0.92, 0.86, 0.63), respectively. Item-total correlations ranged 0.57-0.78 for K-10, 0.62-0.69 for FCV-19S, and 0.39-0.50 for BRCS tools. EFA retained a single factor for each tool with adequate factor loadings. The scoring of K-10 was significantly predicted by the scoring of FCV-19S (r = 0.284, P < 0.001) and BRCS tool (r = 0.132, P < 0.01). Therefore, these tools can be used reliably amongst both migrant and non-migrant population in Australia.

Psychological Effects and Associated Factors of COVID-19 in a Mexican Sample.

OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID 19) is a new viral zoonosis of global concern that could cause psychological sequelae. We examined the levels of psychological distress, anxiety, depression, and stress during the COVID-19 outbreak in a Mexican sample. METHODS: An online survey was applied that collected information on demographic and financial status data, physical status, contact history, knowledge, concerns, and precautionary measures concerning COVID-19. Impact of Event Scale-Revised and Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale were included. RESULTS: A total of 50.3% of respondents rated psychological distress as moderate-severe; 15.7% reported moderate-severe depressive symptoms; 22.6% reported moderate-severe anxiety symptoms; and 19.8% reported moderate-severe stress levels. Female gender, older age, divorced status, lack of confidence related to security of the test, lower satisfaction of health information concerning COVID-19, history of direct or indirect contact with a COVID-19 confirmed case, live with just 1 other person, and spent >9 h/d at home were associated with greater psychological distress and/or higher levels of stress, anxiety, and depression. By contrast, precautionary measures, such as hand hygiene and wearing masks, were associated with lower levels of psychological distress, depression, anxiety, and stress. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 outbreak results in considerable psychological effects among the Mexican sample.

The mediating role of fear of COVID-19 in the relationship between intolerance of uncertainty and depression.

OBJECTIVES: Living during the COVID-19 pandemic is characterized by the emergence of great uncertainty surrounding multiple aspects of daily life. This study explored the relationship between intolerance of uncertainty (IU) and depression, as well as the potential mediation effect of COVID-19-related fear. DESIGN AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted through an online survey from 10 April until 13 April 2020, three weeks after a national lockdown had been imposed in Greece. The convenience sample used in this study consisted of 2,827 adults. Participants voluntarily provided sociodemographic data and completed the following scales: the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale (IUS-12), the Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S), and the Brief Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) Depression Scale. RESULTS: Participants appeared to be moderately depressed [M = 14.75, SD = 4.52]. There was a significant indirect effect of IU to depressive symptoms ((.058), CI (0.051-0.066)). FCV-19S was tested as a mediator in the relationship between IUS-12 (independent variable) and PHQ-9 (dependent variable). Partial mediation of fear of COVID-19 was supported ((.54) (.41) = 13, CI (0.051-0.066), Sobel z-value = 14.93). CONCLUSIONS: Depressive symptomatology affected study participants at a moderate level. IU was shown to be a significant predictor of depressive symptomatology with higher levels of IU being associated with more severe depressive symptoms. Fear of COVID-19 partially mediated this association. The mediation effect may be explained by the uncertainty around COVID-19-related health issues, which are reflected in the FCV-19S and cause worry and/or anxiety. Uncertainty related with other factors, such as the impact on the economy and education, not assessed by the FCV-19S, may explain part of the relationship between IU and depressive symptoms that is not mediated by FCV-19S. PRACTITIONER POINTS: Intolerance of uncertainty is related to depressive symptomatology, and fear of COVID-19 explains part of the relation. Fear of COVID-19 indicates worry and anxiety related to health issues. Psychotherapeutic interventions enhancing individuals' capacity to endure uncertainty could be beneficial. Provision of simple and clear information by the authorities should be a priority issue.

Developing and testing a nurse-led intervention to support bereavement in relatives in the intensive care (BRIC study): a protocol of a pre-post intervention study.

BACKGROUND: When a patient is approaching death in the intensive care unit (ICU), patients' relatives must make a rapid transition from focusing on their beloved one's recovery to preparation for their unavoidable death. Bereaved relatives may develop complicated grief as a consequence of this burdensome situation; however, little is known about appropriate options in quality care supporting bereaved relatives and the prevalence and predictors of complicated grief in bereaved relatives of deceased ICU patients in the Netherlands. The aim of this study is to develop and implement a multicomponent bereavement support intervention for relatives of deceased ICU patients and to evaluate the effectiveness of this intervention on complicated grief, anxiety, depression and posttraumatic stress in bereaved relatives. METHODS: The study will use a cross-sectional pre-post design in a 38-bed ICU in a university hospital in the Netherlands. Cohort 1 includes all reported first and second contact persons of patients who died in the ICU in 2018, which will serve as a pre-intervention baseline measurement. Based on existing policies, facilities and evidence-based practices, a nurse-led intervention will be developed and implemented during the study period. This intervention is expected to use 1) communication strategies, 2) materials to make a keepsake, and 3) a nurse-led follow-up service. Cohort 2, including all bereaved relatives in the ICU from October 2019 until March 2020, will serve as a post-intervention follow-up measurement. Both cohorts will be performed in study samples of 200 relatives per group, all participants will be invited to complete questionnaires measuring complicated grief, anxiety, depression and posttraumatic stress. Differences between the baseline and follow-up measurements will be calculated and adjusted using regression analyses. Exploratory subgroup analyses (e.g., gender, ethnicity, risk profiles, relationship with patient, length of stay) and exploratory dose response analyses will be conducted. DISCUSSION: The newly developed intervention has the potential to improve the bereavement process of the relatives of deceased ICU patients. Therefore, symptoms of grief and mental health problems such as depression, anxiety and posttraumatic stress, might decrease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register Registered on 27/07/2019 as NL 7875, www.trialregister.nl.

Design and Psychometric Analysis of the COVID-19 Prevention, Recognition and Home-Management Self-Efficacy Scale.

In order to control the spread of COVID-19, people must adopt preventive behaviours that can affect their day-to-day life. People's self-efficacy to adopt preventive behaviours to avoid COVID-19 contagion and spread should be studied. The aim of this study was to develop and psychometrically test the COVID-19 prevention, detection, and home-management self-efficacy scale (COVID-19-SES). We conducted an observational cross-sectional study. Six-hundred and seventy-eight people participated in the study. Data were collected between March and May 2020. The COVID-19-SES' validity (content, criterion, and construct), reliability (internal consistency and test-retest reliability), and legibility were studied. The COVID-19-SES' reliability was high (Cronbach's alpha = 0.906; intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.754). The COVID-19-SES showed good content validity (scale's content validity index = 0.92) and good criterion validity when the participants' results on the COVID-19-SES were compared to their general self-efficacy (r = 0.38; p < 0.001). Construct validity analysis revealed that the COVID-19-SES' three-factor structure explained 52.12% of the variance found and it was congruent with the World Health Organisation's recommendations to prevent COVID-19 contagion and spread. Legibility analysis showed that the COVID-19-SES is easy to read and understand by laypeople. The COVID-19-SES is a psychometrically robust instrument that allows for a valid and reliable assessment of people's self-efficacy in preventing, detecting symptoms, and home-managing COVID-19.