Prevalence and correlates of psychological distress in the front-line anti-epidemic medical staff during the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Since the outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), medical staff and affiliated healthcare staff are under both physical and psychological pressures. Due to this serious situation, it is extremely important to assess the prevalence and possible predictors of psychological distress in front-line, anti-epidemic medical staff. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted through the use of the network crowdsourcing platform (which provides functions equivalent to Amazon Mechanical Turk) in Jilin, China. A total of 725 Jilin medical staff who had returned from Wuhan participated in the survey. The collected data included demographics and psychological responses to COVID-19, and the following tests were used to measure the data (I) the Social Support Rate Scale (SSRS) was used to measure the types and levels of social support that were received by the medical staff; (II) the Stanford Acute Stress Reaction Questionnaire (SASRQ) was used to evaluate anxiety and dissociation symptoms in the aftermath of traumatic events; (III) the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) was used to measure sleep quality; and (IV) the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) was used to evaluate nonspecific psychological distress. The χ2 test, Kruskal-Wallis test, ANOVA test and binary logistic regression were used to identify the factors that were correlated with psychological distress. RESULTS: In our study, 475 (65.5%) participants reported low psychological distress, and 72 (10%) participants reported high psychological distress. The results of the binary logistic regression analysis identified that the performance of physical activity in Wuhan (ß=-0.585; P<0.001; OR =0.557) and years of work experience (in contrast to approximately 0-5 years, approximately 6-15 years ß=-1.258; P=0.008; OR =0.284, >15 years ß=-0.562; P=0.016; OR =0.570) were protective factors for the possibility of having a mental disorder, whereas a high PSQI score (ß=0.106; P=0.024; OR =1.112) and a high SASRQ score (ß=0.242; P<0.001; OR =1.274) were risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: The high psychological distress (10%) of Jilin medical staff who returned from the front-line areas of Wuhan was higher than that in other studies. Medical staff with less physical activity and work experience in Wuhan, as well as high PSQI and SASRQ scores, had higher psychological distress.