Assessment of selected psychosocial risk factors: stress, job burnout, and bullying in the case of medical staff as part of workplace ergonomics during the COVID-19 pandemic-A prospective pilot study.

Background: The purpose of the pilot study conducted by the authors was to assess occupational risk in selected areas of psychosocial risk factors among health professions in a pilot study. Medical staff working in the healthcare sector experience stress, job burnout and bullying on a daily basis. Monitoring occupational risks in the above areas provides an opportunity to take appropriate preventive measures. Methods: The prospective online survey included 143 health care workers from various professional groups. Eighteen participants did not complete the survey, and the results of 125 participants were eventually included in the analysis. The study used health and safety questionnaires in the healthcare sector, which are not widely used as screening tools in Poland. Results: The following statistical methods were performed in the study: the Mann-Whitney test, Kruskal-Wallis test, Dunn's test. In addition, multivariate analysis was performed. The results obtained in the study indicate that the questionnaires used in the study can be widely used by employers or occupational medicine as screening tools. Conclusions: Our findings show that level of education attainment in healthcare is correlated with higher chance of experiencing stress and burnout. Among the surveyed professions, nurses reported a higher amount of stress and burnout. Paramedics reported the highest chance of being bullied at work. This can be explained by their nature of work which requires directly interacting with patients and their families. In addition, it should be noted that the tools used can be successfully applied in workplaces as elements of workplace ergonomics assessment in the context of cognitive ergonomics.

Does Mental Health Affect the Decision to Vaccinate Against SARS-CoV-2? A Cross-Sectional Nationwide Study Before the Vaccine Campaign.

The COVID-19 pandemic generated a sense of threat in the society, leading to social isolation and mental health deterioration. A great deal of hope for the development of herd immunity was placed in preventive vaccinations. The survey, performed before vaccine campaign between September 26-October 27, 2020, during the second wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Poland with the Computer Assisted Web Interviews method. The study was partly community based and partly open to the public. Participants were invited to complete the survey using Google forms via social media (Facebook, WhatsApp). The survey was also distributed 54 times at the request of interested persons via e-mail. Total 1,043 questionnaires were assessed for eligibility and 41 were excluded (13 because of the age under 18, and 28 due to refusal to participate: non-response after sending questionnaire via e-mail). Finally 1,001 questionnaires were included to the study and statistical analysis was performed on the basis of the 1,001 responses. The questionnaire consisted of three parts: a sociodemographic survey, a questionnaire assessing the knowledge of the SARS-CoV-2 and the General Health Questionnaire-28. Participants also determined their attitude toward being vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. The questionnaire was completed by a total of 1,001 participants: 243 people declared that they will not get vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. Majority of people declaring the willingness to vaccinate were representatives of medical professions, suffering from chronic diseases, with higher values on the total GHQ-28 scale and the subscales: anxiety and insomnia, social dysfunction and somatic dysfunction. Loss of income, difficult access to health care, recognizing the restrictions as excessive and knowledge about COVID-19 were found as significant positive determinants of the reluctance to vaccinate. Greater readiness to vaccinate can be associated with greater certainty about its effectiveness and a hypothetical collectivist attitude. Experiencing anxiety and psychopathological symptoms are risk factors for infection, but can also be conducive to reliance on information about vaccination presented in the media. Reluctance to vaccinate may result from greater awareness of the complexity of the disease, and thus less faith in the effectiveness of vaccines.

Unknown Enemy and Psychopathological Responses: A Cross-Sectional Nationwide Study Assessing the Knowledge About COVID-19.

There is evidence that a lack of appropriate knowledge regarding global changes might be associated with various psychopathological responses. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that knowledge about COVID-19 correlates with the severity of psychopathological symptoms as measured by standardized questionnaires. The questionnaires were obtained using the Computer Assisted Web Interviews (CAWI) method during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Poland using the original COVID-19 knowledge questionnaire and the General Health Questionnaire-28 (GHQ-28). A series of bivariate tests and linear regression analyses were performed with a p < 0.05. All analyses were performed in Statistica 13.3. We enrolled 1,002 respondents. The rate of correct answers in the original questionnaire ranged from 44.6 to 84.1%, and the average was 60.1%. Four hundred and twenty participants (42%) met the criterion for the presence of relevant psychopathological symptoms. A significant negative correlation was found between the number of points obtained in the COVID-19 knowledge questionnaire and the GHQ-28 scores, both in relation to the total score and all its subscales. The following factors in the linear regression model were correlated with severity of somatic symptoms: knowledge about the COVID-19 pandemic (B = -0.12, P = 0.000), sex (B = 0.12, P = 0.000), use of psychiatric or psychological care (B = 0.20, P < 0.000) and chronic diseases (B = 0.09, P = 0.002). In this study, we observed a negative correlation between the knowledge about the COVID-19 pandemic and the severity of psychopathological symptoms. The results clearly indicate that the complexity of the global problem of the current pandemic is related to the development of psychopathological symptoms. However, longitudinal studies are needed to identify the direction of causality.

Mental Health of Medical and Non-Medical Professionals during the Peak of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Nationwide Study.

BACKGROUND: The study aimed to compare psychopathological expressions during the COVID-19 (novel coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic, as declared on March 11th 2020 by the World Health Organization, with respect to which institutional variables might distinguish the impact of COVID-19 in medical and non-medical professionals. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed nationwide between 16th March and the 26th April 2020 in Poland. A total of 2039 respondents representing all healthcare providers (59.8%) as well as other professionals filled in the sociodemographic section, the General Health Questionnaire-28 and the author's questionnaire with questions related to exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, the availability of protective measures, quarantine, change of working hours and place of employment during the pandemic, as well as feelings associated with the state of the pandemic. RESULTS: Medical professionals more often presented with relevant psychopathological symptoms (GHQ-28 (General Health Questionnaire-28) total score >24) than the non-medical group (60.8% vs. 48.0%, respectively) such as anxiety, insomnia and somatic symptoms even after adjustment for potential confounding factors. Male sex, older age and appropriate protective equipment were associated with significantly lower GHQ-28 total scores in medical professionals, whereas among non-medical professionals, male sex was associated with significantly lower GHQ-28 total scores. CONCLUSIONS: Somatic and anxiety symptoms as well as insomnia are more prevalent among medical staff than workers in other professions. Targeting the determinants of these differences should be included in interventions aimed at restoring psychological well-being in this specific population. Apparently, there are present gender differences in psychological responses that are independent of profession.