Hospital clinicians' psychosocial well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic: Longitudinal study
Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Dokumenter
- Fulltext
Forlagets udgivne version, 188 KB, PDF-dokument
Background
Hospital clinicians report poor psychosocial well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Few studies have reported data at more than one time point.
Aims
To compare psychosocial well-being among hospital clinicians at two different time points during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.
Methods
Participants included doctors, nurses, midwives and allied health clinicians at a multi-site, public health service in Melbourne, Australia. Data were collected via two cross-sectional, online surveys: May to June (wave 1; n = 638) and October to December 2020 (wave 2; n = 358). The Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21) assessed psychological well-being in the past week. Investigator-devised questions assessed COVID-19 concerns and perceived work impacts. General linear models were used to assess impact of wave on psychological distress.
Results
There were no significant demographic differences between the two groups. Both positive (e.g. learning experience) and negative (e.g. risk of getting COVID-19) impacts were reported. In both waves, staff were most concerned about health risks to family members. Wave 2 respondents were significantly more likely than wave 1 respondents to indicate concerns about colleagues having COVID-19, increased workloads, leave cancellation and increased conflict at work (all P < 0.001). Adjusting for sex, age, self-rated health and discipline group, depression, anxiety and stress scores were significantly higher for respondents in the second than the first wave (all P < 0.001).
Conclusions
Psychological well-being of hospital clinicians was significantly worse during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic than the first. Sustained occupational and psychosocial support is recommended even when immediate COVID-19 concerns and impacts resolve.
Hospital clinicians report poor psychosocial well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Few studies have reported data at more than one time point.
Aims
To compare psychosocial well-being among hospital clinicians at two different time points during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.
Methods
Participants included doctors, nurses, midwives and allied health clinicians at a multi-site, public health service in Melbourne, Australia. Data were collected via two cross-sectional, online surveys: May to June (wave 1; n = 638) and October to December 2020 (wave 2; n = 358). The Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21) assessed psychological well-being in the past week. Investigator-devised questions assessed COVID-19 concerns and perceived work impacts. General linear models were used to assess impact of wave on psychological distress.
Results
There were no significant demographic differences between the two groups. Both positive (e.g. learning experience) and negative (e.g. risk of getting COVID-19) impacts were reported. In both waves, staff were most concerned about health risks to family members. Wave 2 respondents were significantly more likely than wave 1 respondents to indicate concerns about colleagues having COVID-19, increased workloads, leave cancellation and increased conflict at work (all P < 0.001). Adjusting for sex, age, self-rated health and discipline group, depression, anxiety and stress scores were significantly higher for respondents in the second than the first wave (all P < 0.001).
Conclusions
Psychological well-being of hospital clinicians was significantly worse during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic than the first. Sustained occupational and psychosocial support is recommended even when immediate COVID-19 concerns and impacts resolve.
Originalsprog | Engelsk |
---|---|
Tidsskrift | Occupational Medicine |
Vol/bind | 72 |
Udgave nummer | 3 |
Sider (fra-til) | 215-224 |
Antal sider | 10 |
ISSN | 0962-7480 |
DOI | |
Status | Udgivet - 2022 |
Bibliografisk note
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Occupational Medicine. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.
ID: 342964883