The COVID Psychosocial Impacts Scale: A Reliable and Valid Tool to Examine the Psychosocial Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

This paper reports on the development and validation of the COVID Psychosocial Impacts Scale (CPIS), a self-report measure that comprehensively examines both positive and negative psychosocial impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic. This is the first part of the program of work in which the CPIS was administered and compared with a measure of psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale, K-10) and wellbeing (World Health Organization Well-Being Index, WHO-5). The data were obtained online in 2020 and 2022 at two distinct time points to capture different exposures to the pandemic in the New Zealand population to a non-representative sample of 663 and 687 adults, respectively. Two hundred seventy-one participants took part in both surveys. Findings indicate a unidimensional structure within CPIS subscales and inter-relatedness among CPIS stress-related subscales. The scatter plots and correlation matrix indicate CPIS having a positive moderate correlation with K10 and a negative moderate correlation with WHO-5, indicative of construct validity. The paper outlines contextual factors surrounding CPIS development and makes suggestions for future iterations of CPIS. Further work will examine its psychometric properties across cultures.

The influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the psychological well-being of college students: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: Even before the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, concerns regarding college students' mental health were on the rise due to the increasing number of students afflicted with mental health issues. Exposure to numerous pandemic-related measures exacerbated existing issues with anxiety, depression, and stress. This study aimed to assess depression, anxiety, and stress levels among university students in the Aseer region in Saudi Arabia. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Data were collected from eligible individuals using a web-based, self-administered DASS-21 questionnaire. This questionnaire consists of 21 questions with a rating scale of 0-3. Each of the psychological factors of depression, anxiety, and stress was categorized as normal, mild, moderate, severe, and extremely severe. Results were expressed using descriptive statistics as proportions, and the Mann-Whitney/Kruskal-Wallis' test was used to evaluate the presence of a significant difference between each of the socio-demographic factors of the respondents and the psychological outcomes. RESULTS: Respondents aged between 18-24 years reported higher rates of extremely severe depression than other age groups. Females had higher rates of depression, especially severe and extremely severe forms. Extremely severe anxiety had a relatively high prevalence across all age groups. Extremely severe stress was more common among respondents aged between 18-24 years, while respondents older than 34 years reported the highest prevalence of severe stress. The Mann-Whitney/Kruskal-Wallis' tests showed statistically significant differences between participants in the different groups. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic had a high psychological impact on university students, which indicates that a psychological support program should be implemented to reduce this impact.

Maternal distress and parenting during COVID-19: differential effects related to pre-pandemic distress?

BACKGROUND: Distinguishing whether and how pre-existing characteristics impact maternal responses to adversity is difficult: Does prior well-being decrease the likelihood of encountering stressful experiences? Does it protect against adversity's negative effects? We examine whether the interaction between relatively uniformly experienced adversity (due to COVID-19 experience) and individual variation in pre-existing (i.e., pre-pandemic onset) distress predicted mothers' pandemic levels of distress and insensitive caregiving within a country reporting low COVID-19 death rates, and strict nationwide regulations. METHOD: Fifty-one Singaporean mothers and their preschool-aged children provided data across two waves. Pre- pandemic onset maternal distress (i.e., psychological distress, anxiety, and parenting stress) was captured via self-reports and maternal sensitivity was coded from videos. Measures were repeated after the pandemic's onset along with questionnaires concerning perceived COVID-19 adversity (e.g., COVID-19's impact upon stress caring for children, housework, job demands, etc.) and pandemic-related objective experiences (e.g., income, COVID-19 diagnoses, etc.). Regression analyses (SPSS v28) considered pre-pandemic onset maternal distress, COVID-19 stress, and their interaction upon post-pandemic onset maternal distress. Models were re-run with appropriate covariates (e.g., objective experience) when significant findings were observed. To rule out alternative models, follow up analyses (PROCESS Model) considered whether COVID-19 stress mediated pre- and post-pandemic onset associations. Models involving maternal sensitivity followed a similar data analytic plan. RESULTS: Pre-pandemic maternal distress moderated the association between COVID-19 perceived stress and pandemic levels of maternal distress (ß = 0.22, p < 0.01) but not pandemic assessed maternal sensitivity. Perceived COVID-19 stress significantly contributed to post-pandemic onset maternal distress for mothers with pre-pandemic onset distress scores above (ß = 0.30, p = 0.05), but not below (ß = 0.25, p = 0.24), the median. Objective COVID-19 adversity did not account for findings. Post-hoc analyses did not suggest mediation via COVID-19 stress from pre-pandemic to pandemic maternal distress. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-existing risk may interact with subsequent perceptions of adversity to impact well-being. In combination with existing research, this small study suggests prevention programs should focus upon managing concurrent mental health and may highlight the importance of enhanced screening and proactive coping programs for people entering high stress fields and/or phases of life.

The impact of perceived social support and coping on distress in a sample of Atlantic Canadian health professional students during COVID-19 compared to pre-COVID peers.

PURPOSE: Students pursuing higher education and health professional (HP) programs (e.g., nursing, pharmacy, social work, medicine) experience stressors including academic pressures, workload, developing professional competencies, professional socialization, the hidden curriculum, entering clinical practice and navigating relationships with colleagues. Such stress can have detrimental effects on HP students physical and psychological functioning and can adversely affect patient care. This study examined the role of perceived social support and resilience in predicting distress of Atlantic Canadian HP students during the COVID-19 pandemic and compared the findings to a pre-COVID population of age and sex matched Canadians. METHOD: Second year HP students (N = 93) completed a survey assessing distress, perceived social support, and resilience and open-ended questions on student awareness of supports and counselling available to them, their use/barriers to the services, and the impact of COVID-19 on their personal functioning. HP student responses were also compared with age and sex matched Canadian peers from data collected prior to COVID-19. RESULTS: It was found that HP students reported moderate to severe psychological distress, and while they reported high levels of social support on a measure of perceived social support they also reported that the COVID-19 pandemic made them feel isolated and that they lacked social support. It was found that the sample of HP students reported significantly higher psychological distress than the mean scores of the age and sex matched sample of Canadian peers. CONCLUSIONS: These findings call for creation of more tailored interventions and supports for HP students.

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on mental burden and quality of life in medical students - results of an online survey.

Objectives: Changes in academic conditions due to the COVID-19 pandemic are potential stressors for medical students and can make them vulnerable for the development of psychiatric disorders.Previous pandemics had a negative impairment on well-being due to social isolation and the perceived threat, an increase in fear, anger and frustration and an increase in post-traumatic stress disorder among health professionals. Therefore, this study examines the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on medical students' mental health and possible psychological consequences. Methods: In this anonymous online survey (online 12/01/2021-03/31/2022), we examined the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on mental health of 561 German medical students aged between 18 und 45 years. Perceived anxiety and burden were assessed retrospectively from spring 2020 to autumn 2021. Changes in symptoms of anxiety and depression were assessed using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), quality of life was assessed using the WHO Quality of Life Questionnaire (WHOQOL BREF). Results: Anxiety and burden showed wavelike courses with higher scores in autumn, winter and spring. The scores for depression and anxiety increased after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the time before (p<.001). Results of a multifactorial ANOVA showed, that previous psychiatric illness (p<.001), being in the first two years of studies (p=.006), higher burden (p=.013) and greater differences in symptoms of depression (p<.001) were associated with a decreased quality of life in medical students. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic has a negative impact on mental health of medical students and their actual quality of life. Therefore, medical faculties should establish specific support to prevent the development of psychiatric sequelae probably resulting in long-term medical leaves.

An exploratory cross-sectional study of the effects of ongoing relationships with accompanying patients on cancer care experience, self-efficacy, and psychological distress.

BACKGROUND: Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal in Canada introduced accompanying patients (APs) into the breast cancer care trajectory. APs are patients who have been treated for breast cancer and have been integrated into the clinical team to expand the services offered to people affected by cancer. This study describes the profiles of the people who received the support and explores whether one-offs vs ongoing encounters with APs influence their experience of care, on self-efficacy in coping with cancer, and on their level of psychological distress. METHODS: An exploratory cross-sectional study was carried out among patients to compare patients who had one encounter with an AP (G1) with those who had had several encounters (G2). Five questionnaires were administered on socio-demographic characteristics, care pathway, evaluation of the support experience, self-efficacy in coping with cancer, and level of psychological distress. Logbooks, completed by the APs, determined the number of encounters. Linear regression models were used to evaluate the associations between the number of encounters, patient characteristics, care pathway, number of topics discussed, self-efficacy measures in coping with cancer, and level of psychological distress. RESULTS: Between April 2020 and December 2021, 60% of 535 patients who were offered support from an AP accepted. Of these, one hundred and twenty-four patients participated in the study. The study aimed to recruit a minimum of 70 patients with the expectation of obtaining at least 50 participants, assuming a response rate of 70%. There were no differences between G1 and G2 in terms of sociodemographic data and care pathways. Statistical differences were found between G1 and G2 for impacts on and the return to daily life (p = 0.000), the return to the work and impacts on professional life (p = 0.044), announcement of a diagnosis to family and friends (p = 0.033), and strategies for living with treatment under the best conditions (p = 0.000). Significant differences were found on the topics of cancer (p = 0.000), genetic testing (p = 0.023), therapeutic options (p = 0.000), fatigue following treatment (p = 0.005), pain and discomfort after treatment or surgery (p = 0.000), potential emotions and their management (p = 0.000) and the decision-making processes (p = 0.011). A significant relationship was found between the two groups for patients' ability to cope with cancer (p = 0.038), and their level of psychological distress at different stages of the care pathway (p = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows differences between one-time and ongoing support for cancer patients. It highlights the potential for APs to help patients develop self-efficacy and cope with the challenges of cancer treatment.

Perceived stress, coping strategies, and mental health status among adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic in Switzerland: a longitudinal study.

This longitudinal, prospective study investigated associations between perceived COVID-19-related stress, coping strategies, and mental health status among adolescents during the first lockdown of the COVID-19 pandemic and one year after the lockdown in Switzerland within a large, national sample. A self-report on-line survey was completed by 553 adolescents (age-range 12-18 years in 2021) in the summers of 2020 and 2021, assessing symptoms of various mental health problems, perceived COVID-19-related stressors, and coping strategies. Overall, participants reported less COVID-19 related stress one year after the lockdown, though mental health status remained stable. 'Challenges at home or with others' were significantly associated with mental health problems in both genders, whereas 'trouble getting medical care or mental health services 'was associated with mental health problems in girls. Perceived stress and pre-existing psychiatric problem were significantly linked to all mental health outcomes at both time points. Parents' poor relationships with partners during the lockdown was associated with increased anxiety symptoms in their children. Using cognitive restructuring to cope with stress was associated with less, while negative coping was associated with more anxiety, depression, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms one year post lockdown. Girls appear to have been more affected by the pandemic than boys, with youths with pre-existing psychiatric problems especially vulnerable to its detrimental effects. Healthcare and school professionals should support to identify high-risk adolescents with negative and avoidant coping strategies and train youths to use positive coping strategies.

[Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of residents of three specialty medical programs]. / Impacto en la salud mental en residentes de tres programas de especialización médica de la Universidad de Valparaíso durante la pandemia por COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pandemic disturbed mental health of healthcare personnel. Residents of the specialization programs could be at risk, since they were reassigned in their functions. AIM: To describe the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on symptoms of depression, stress, anxiety and resilient coping in residents of Anesthesiology, Internal Medicine and Emergency Medicine Material and Methods: Residents were invited to answer an online survey containing the DASS-21 scale for anxiety, stress and depression symptoms and the Brief Resilient Coping Scale (BRCS) for resilience skills. RESULTS: Fifty four out of 90 residents answered the survey. Eighteen to 24% of respondents had symptoms of depression, anxiety and stress at severe and extremely severe levels. Those with severe and extremely severe symptoms had also the lowest score on the BRCS resilience scale. We did not find an association between severity of symptoms and gender. DISCUSSION: A proportion of respondent residents had severe psychological symptoms and lower resilience scores during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Parent-child relationships and psychological distress: survey of parents from low-income families after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Introduction: This study aims to shed light on parent-child relationships and the psychological health of parents from low-income families after the easing of the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions. Methods: This cross-sectional study recruited 553 parents of children aged 13-24 years in low-income community settings. The Parent-Child Conflict scale of the Parental Environment Questionnaire (PEQ) was used to measure parent-child conflict. Psychological distress was assessed using the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale short form (DASS-21). Results: The study revealed a low level of parent-child conflict in the overall study population, with a median PEQ of 48.0 (interquartile range [IQR] 36 to 48). Concerning demographics, married parents reported a likelihood of having a higher level of parent-child conflict over 3 times higher than single parents (OR = 3.18 95%, CI 1.30-7.75). More parent-child conflicts were also found in parents aged 60-72 years old who were unemployed, retired, or housewives and from lower-income groups. In regard to lifestyle factors, a higher level of physical activity and having enough sleep were associated with lower levels of parent-child conflict. Only approximately 1% of the participants reported symptoms of depression, anxiety, or stress. Discussion: Low risk exists for parent-child conflict and psychological sequelae following the easing of the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, which could be due to various support measures implemented by the government. Vulnerable parents identified as being at risk of parent-child conflict warrant attention in future advocacy efforts.

The social psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on medical staff in China: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 outbreak required the significantly increased working time and intensity for health professionals in China, which may cause stress signs. METHODS: From March 2-13 of 2020, 4,618 health professionals in China were included in an anonymous, self-rated online survey regarding their concerns on exposure to the COVID-19 outbreak. The questionnaires consisted of five parts: basic demographic information and epidemiological exposure; occupational and psychological impact; concerns during the episode; coping strategies; and the Huaxi Emotional-Distress Index (HEI). RESULTS: About 24.2% of respondents experienced high levels of anxiety or/and depressive symptoms since the COVID-19 outbreak. Respondents who worried about their physical health and those who had COVID-19 infected friends or close relatives were more likely to have high HEI levels, than those without these characteristics. Further, family relationship was found to have an independent protective effect against high HEI levels. Their main concerns were that their families would not be cared for and that they would not be able to work properly. Compared to respondents with clear emotional problems, those with somewhat hidden emotional issues adopted more positive coping measures. CONCLUSIONS: About a quarter of medical staff experienced psychological problems during the pandemic of COVID-19. The psychological impact of stressful events was related to worrying about their physical health, having close COVID-19 infected acquaintances and family relationship issues. Therefore, the psychological supprot for medical staff fighting in the COVID-19 pandemic may be needed.

Initial Psychological Reactions to COVID-19 of Middle Adolescents in Portugal.

In its early stage, the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent public health measures brought several challenges to people in general, with adolescents being one of the most affected groups. To assess the psychological reactions of Portuguese adolescents in that early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, we conducted an online survey that was filled by a sample of 340 (67.6% female and 32.4% male) middle adolescents (aged 16 and 17 years). Using the Impact Event Scale-Revised and the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale, we found that most participants reported a normal score for depression, anxiety, and stress. However, 47.1% reported some level of pandemic-related traumatic distress, and 25.6% reported high severity values. The girls' levels of depression, anxiety, stress, and traumatic distress were significantly higher than those of the boys. Regression models showed that gender, number of symptoms experienced in the past days, self-reported health status, and concern with family were significant predictors of these mental health indicators. Our findings underscore the need for future research on the long-term traumatic psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in adolescents, and on the gender differences in this group. This will allow the development of strategies to identify and address at-risk adolescents, since the promotion of mental health and the prevention of pathology are imperative for the health of current and future generations.

Stress, coping, and quality of life in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic.

While research has widely explored stress, coping, and quality of life (QOL) individually and the potential links between them, a critical dearth exists in the literature regarding these constructs in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our study aims to identify the salient stressors experienced, describe the coping strategies used, and examine the relationships between stressors, coping, and QOL among individuals during the pandemic. Data are from a sample of 1,004 respondents who completed an online survey. Key measures included stressful life events (SLEs), coping strategies, and the physical and psychological health domains of QOL. Staged multivariate linear regression analyses examined the relationships between SLEs and the two QOL domains, controlling for sociodemographic and pre-existing health conditions and testing for the effects of coping strategies on these relationships. The most common SLEs experienced during the pandemic were a decrease in financial status, personal injury or illness, and change in living conditions. Problem-focused coping (ß = 0.42, σ = 0.13, p < 0.001 for physical QOL; ß = 0.57, σ = 0.12, p < 0.001 for psychological QOL) and emotion-focused coping (ß = 0.86, σ = 0.13, p < 0.001 for psychological QOL) were significantly related to higher levels of QOL, whereas avoidant coping (ß = -0.93, σ = 0.13, p < 0.001 for physical QOL; ß = -1.33, σ = 0.12, p < 0.001 for psychological QOL) was associated with lower QOL. Avoidant coping partially mediated the relationships between experiencing SLEs and lower physical and psychological QOL. Our study informs clinical interventions to help individuals adopt healthy behaviors to effectively manage stressors, especially large-scale, stressful events like the pandemic. Our findings also call for public health and clinical interventions to address the long-term impacts of the most prevalent stressors experienced during the pandemic among vulnerable groups.

Anxiety and depression among nursing students during the COVID-19 lockdown: A cross-sectional correlational study.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence and levels of anxiety and depression symptoms among nursing students during the coronavirus lockdown, and to examine factors associated with higher levels of anxiety and depression on this population. BACKGROUND: Nursing students deal with diverse stressors during their university lives. Confinement measures during COVID-19 outbreak may have influenced students' mental health and well-being. Anxiety and depression are common among nursing students due to different factors. Evidence relating to anxiety and depression in nursing student population during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is limited. DESIGN: A cross-sectional descriptive co-relational study during the lockdown due to the coronavirus outbreak in Spain was conducted. METHODS: An online questionnaire was developed by using google forms. Sociodemographic characteristics form, and the Spanish version of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) were used. Spanish nursing students across the country were enrolled. Data collection was performed between 4 April 2020 and 21 April 2020. A multivariate analysis was performed to determine the association between sociodemographic variables, COVID-19 and HADS scores. RESULTS: 1319 participants were enrolled. The sample was formed by 87.1% female students with a mean age of 22 years (SD ± 5.677). We found a mean score of 8.47 ± 4.104 on Scale HADS-Anxiety and 6.80 ± 2.988 on HADS-Depression. 31.6% students presented abnormal scores of anxiety symptoms, and only 11.4% participants revealed abnormal scores on HADS-Depression. CONCLUSIONS: The reported prevalence of anxiety and depression symptoms on nursing students during the COVID-19 lockdown is 56.4% and 38.2%, respectively. 43.6% of the sample scored normal anxiety levels, and 61.8% obtained normal depression levels. Higher anxiety and depression levels were statistically associated with being a first-year student, being a smoker, feeling fear, feeling stress and having any close family member infected. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: These data should be valuable for detection and for further treatment decision of this disorders at the initial stage and could be important to prevent further damages to mental health and promote physical, psychological and well-being among this population.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental and physical health and overall wellbeing of university students in Portugal.

Throughout the pandemic of COVID-19 caused by SARS-CoV-2, university students were considered a vulnerable risk group for mental health impairment and wellbeing deterioration. This study aimed at evaluating the pandemic's impact on the physical and mental health and wellbeing among students of a Portuguese university. This cross-sectional study included 913 participants and ran from June to October 2020. Data collected included sociodemographics, three mental health self-report questionnaires (Depression Anxiety Stress Scale, Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire and Brief COPE) and lifestyle practices (eating and sleeping patterns, media, and entertainment habits) during the first months of the pandemic, which included a 72-day full national lockdown. Descriptive and correlational statistical analysis were conducted. Students' food habits changed during the pandemic, namely on the consumption of snacks and fast food and, overall, less balanced meals became more prevalent. Additionally, almost 70% of the students reported Body Mass Index changes, while 59% went through sleep pattern changes-these were more pronounced in women and younger students. Over half (67%) of the inquirees exhibited an increase in their stress, depression, and generalized anxiety symptoms. Also, the study demonstrates that students' lifestyles trended negatively during the pandemic and highlights how important regular psychological, health monitoring and emotional support is, amongst this somehow overlooked population throughout the pandemic. Universities should provide support to overcome challenges in future stressful situations. This study might have an impact on how universities and higher education systems approach their students in terms of mental and physical health monitoring and promotion in future situations, non-related with COVID. Moreover, it has a large sample of students well characterized in terms of mental and physical health, which might be of interest for future comparison with other worldwide group of students throughout stressful situations, such as tragic events, wars, pandemics.

Comparing the effectiveness of virtual and semi-attendance Stress Inoculation Training [SIT] techniques in improving the symptoms of anxiety, depression, and stress of pregnant women with psychological distress: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Some studies indicate that more than 10% of pregnant women are affected by psychological problems. The current COVID-19 pandemic has increased mental health problems in more than half of pregnant women. The present study compared the effectiveness of virtual (VSIT) and semi-attendance Stress Inoculation Training (SIT) techniques on the improvement of the symptoms of anxiety, depression, and stress of pregnant women with psychological distress. METHODS: This study was conducted on 96 pregnant women with psychological distress in a 2-arm parallel-group, randomized control trial between November 2020 and January 2022. The semi-attendance SIT received treatment for six sessions, sessions 1, 3 and 5 as individual face-to-face and sessions 2, 4 and 6 as virtual once a week for 60 min continuously [n = 48], and the virtual SIT received six sessions simultaneously once a week for 60 min (n = 48) in pregnant women of 14-32 weeks' gestation referred to two selected hospitals. The primary outcome of this study was BSI-18 [Brief Symptom Inventory] and NuPDQ-17 [Prenatal Distress Questionnaire]. The secondary outcomes were the PSS-14 [Cohen's General Perceived Stress Scale]. Both groups completed questionnaires measuring anxiety, depression, pregnancy-specific stress, and generally perceived stress questionnaires before and after the treatment. RESULTS: The post-intervention results showed that the stress inoculation training technique in both VSIT and SIT interventions effectively reduced anxiety, depression, psychological distress, pregnancy-specific stress and general perceived stress [P < 0.01]. Also, the SIT interventions on decreasing anxiety [P < 0.001, η2 = 0.40], depression [P < 0.001, η2 = 0.52] and psychological distress [P < 0.001, η2 = 0.41] were more considerable than that of VSIT. However, There was no significant difference between SIT and VSIT intervention in terms of their effects on pregnancy-specific stress [P < 0.38, η2 = 0.01] and general stress [P < 0.42, η2 = 0.008]. CONCLUSION: The semi-attendance SIT group has been a more effective and practical model than the VSIT group, for reducing psychological distress. Therefore, semi-attendance SIT is recommended for pregnant women.

Critical Care Providers' Moral Distress: Frequency, Burden, and Potential Resources.

BACKGROUND: Critical Care Providers (CCPs) experience situations that challenge their ethics and professional standards and may entail moral distress (MD). AIM: To analyze MD perceived by CCPs in intensive care units (ICUs) or emergency departments (EDs) and further clarify whether CCPs who rely on spiritual resources differ in their perception of MD from those who do not utilize these resources. METHODS: A cross-sectional anonymous survey was administered using a modified version of the German language version of the Moral Distress Scale (MDS) with 2 × 12 items to assess the frequency and the respective perceived burden of specific situations by applying a 5-point Likert scale. Explorative factor analysis was performed and the sub-constructs of the respective items regarding MD frequency and burden were identified. Job burden and professional satisfaction were measured using visual analogue scales (VAS) and a four-point Likert scale, respectively. The 15-item SpREUK questionnaire was applied to measure spiritual attitudes and behaviours and to differentiate between religious and spiritual persons. Data from 385 German-speaking CCPs were included (55% physicians, 45% nurses). RESULTS: Conflict situations are similar for physicians and nurses although they are perceived as more burdensome by nurses. Among physicians, the MDS factor Looking away/Resignation scores highest for assistant physician residents, whereas distress caused by looking away is more often perceived by specialist physicians without a managerial position. Work satisfaction is inversely associated with MD and emotional exhaustion is positively associated with it. Participants' spirituality is marginally associated with MD. The best predictors of both MD frequency and burden are emotional exhaustion with further influences of work satisfaction, being a nurse, and being a non-believer on the frequency of MD perception. Being a nurse, participants' experience in ICU/ED, and being of the male gender are further predictors of MD burden. CONCLUSIONS: MD is experienced differently by different groups of CCPs depending on their place in the hierarchy of responsibility. As MD perception is best predicted by emotional exhaustion, these situations should be avoided. Although some CCPs may rely on spiritual resources, all need individual and team support to cope with MD.

Cumulative effects of pre-pandemic vulnerabilities and pandemic-related hardship on psychological distress among pregnant individuals.

OBJECTIVE: Our primary objective was to determine whether pre-existing vulnerabilities and resilience factors combined with objective hardship resulted in cumulative (i.e., additive) effects on psychological distress in pregnant individuals during the COVID-19 pandemic. A secondary objective was to determine whether any of the effects of pandemic-related hardship were compounded (i.e., multiplicative) by pre-existing vulnerabilities. METHOD: Data are from a prospective pregnancy cohort study, the Pregnancy During the COVID-19 Pandemic study (PdP). This cross-sectional report is based upon the initial survey collected at recruitment between April 5, 2020 and April 30, 2021. Logistic regressions were used to evaluate our objectives. RESULTS: Pandemic-related hardship substantially increased the odds of scoring above the clinical cut-off on measures of anxiety and depression symptoms. Pre-existing vulnerabilities had cumulative (i.e., additive) effects on the odds of scoring above the clinical cut-off on measures of anxiety and depression symptoms. There was no evidence of compounding (i.e., multiplicative) effects. Social support had a protective effect on anxiety and depression symptoms, but government financial aid did not. CONCLUSION: Pre-pandemic vulnerability and pandemic-related hardship had cumulative effects on psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic. Adequate and equitable responses to pandemics and disasters may require more intensive supports for those with multiple vulnerabilities.

Characteristics of long working hours and subsequent psychological and physical responses: JNIOSH cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to examine the prospective association among objectively measured average working hours (AWHs), frequency of long working hours (FLWHs; defined as ≥205 working hours/month (≥45 hours/week)) for 6 months, and workers' self-reported psychological and physical health. METHODS: The study included 15 143 workers from 5 Japanese companies. We collected monthly attendance records over 6 months before distributing a questionnaire survey on psychological/physical stress responses and work-related demographics. We then evaluated the associations of those attendance records with psychological/physical measures using analysis of covariance adjusted for sex, age, employment, job type, working conditions, work site and experience of emergency state due to COVID-19. RESULTS: Irritability, anxiety and depression were significantly greater at ≥180 hours (≥45 hours/week), and fatigue and lack of vigour were greater at ≥205 hours than those of the normal working-hour group (140-180 hours/month [35-45 hours/week]). Psychological indices increased significantly with FLWH, with ≥3 times for irritability, depression and fatigue; ≥2 times for lack of vigour; and ≥1 time for anxiety when compared with no long working hours. No significant associations were observed between AWH or FLWH and physical stress responses. CONCLUSIONS: Longer AWH was associated with higher levels of psychological stress responses. The effects of FLWH in the past 6 months varied among the psychological stress responses and did not occur for physical complaints. Under circumstances requiring long hours, workers' mental health should be protected through minimising the frequency of long work hours.

Mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: Stress and strain profiles in the German population.

Clinical observations indicate that people frequently display stress-related behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although numerous studies have been published concerning pandemic-related psychological distress, systematic data on the interrelationships between stress sensitivity, personality, and behavioral characteristics of people are still lacking. In the present cross-sectional online survey study, we applied a German version of the COVID Stress Scales (CSS) and standard psychological questionnaires to systematically identify the complex interplay between stress sensitivity, gender, and personality in the modulation of quality of life and mental health in the German population (N = 1774; age ≥ 16 years). A CSS-based cluster analysis revealed two clusters characterized by higher and lower stress levels. Study participants in each cluster differed significantly with respect to neuroticism, extraversion, agreeableness, quality of life, depression, and anxiety. Females were significantly overrepresented in the higher stress cluster, while there was an overrepresentation of males in the lower stress cluster. Neuroticism was identified as a risk factor and extraversion as a protective factor for enhanced pandemic-related stress responses. For the first time our data show a taxonomy of factors, which modulate pandemic-related stress sensitivity and warrant consideration as key indicators of quality of life and psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic. We suggest that our data may advise governmental regulation of pandemic-related public health measures, to optimize quality of life and psychological health in different groups of the population.