Quality of Life of Health Care Professionals During COVID-19 Pandemic in India

Banipreet Kaur, Yash Aggarwal, N. Bhatnagar, S. Singla
{"title":"Quality of Life of Health Care Professionals During COVID-19 Pandemic in India","authors":"Banipreet Kaur, Yash Aggarwal, N. Bhatnagar, S. Singla","doi":"10.4103/mamcjms.mamcjms_134_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Nature of disease, poor working conditions, prolonged work duration, stigma, and discrimination in the community have worsened the well-being of health care professionals in COVID-19. This survey is conducted to understand the quality of life and its key determinants among health care workers (HCWs) during the COVID-19 pandemic in a low middle-income country like India. Methodology: A cross-sectional study using a Google form-based online questionnaire survey was planned at two COVID dedicated centers of New Delhi. A convenience sample of 300 HCWs involved in patient care at the study sites was studied using an SF-36 questionnaire for quality of life assessment and a self-made questionnaire (risk exposure assessment). Results: In the study, 61.0% were males and 40.72% were females across all specialties. The majority (77%) were single and 81.4% were from the age group of 20 to 30 years. 84% of the study subjects belonged to clinical specialties. Nearly 56% of study subjects reported being not satisfactory or uncomfortable in the personal protective equipment (PPE). Shortage of PPE was reported by 10% of study subjects. The majority (82.35%) of study subjects were satisfied with the quality of PPE. Satisfaction of the study subjects was less than satisfactory among food provided, accommodation, and transport facilities. Social isolation (70.5%) and lockdown restraints (57.6%) were reported by the majority of study subjects. The median score for the domain of general vitality was 55, for the emotional domain was 33, and for social was 62. The domains of quality of life were not significantly affected by place of work, discipline, age, sex, and type of work. Conclusion: The overall well-being of HCWs was affected during the pandemic mostly across mental, social, and general vitality domains. Social isolation was a key concern reported by the majority of HCWs.","PeriodicalId":32900,"journal":{"name":"MAMC Journal of Medical Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MAMC Journal of Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/mamcjms.mamcjms_134_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Nature of disease, poor working conditions, prolonged work duration, stigma, and discrimination in the community have worsened the well-being of health care professionals in COVID-19. This survey is conducted to understand the quality of life and its key determinants among health care workers (HCWs) during the COVID-19 pandemic in a low middle-income country like India. Methodology: A cross-sectional study using a Google form-based online questionnaire survey was planned at two COVID dedicated centers of New Delhi. A convenience sample of 300 HCWs involved in patient care at the study sites was studied using an SF-36 questionnaire for quality of life assessment and a self-made questionnaire (risk exposure assessment). Results: In the study, 61.0% were males and 40.72% were females across all specialties. The majority (77%) were single and 81.4% were from the age group of 20 to 30 years. 84% of the study subjects belonged to clinical specialties. Nearly 56% of study subjects reported being not satisfactory or uncomfortable in the personal protective equipment (PPE). Shortage of PPE was reported by 10% of study subjects. The majority (82.35%) of study subjects were satisfied with the quality of PPE. Satisfaction of the study subjects was less than satisfactory among food provided, accommodation, and transport facilities. Social isolation (70.5%) and lockdown restraints (57.6%) were reported by the majority of study subjects. The median score for the domain of general vitality was 55, for the emotional domain was 33, and for social was 62. The domains of quality of life were not significantly affected by place of work, discipline, age, sex, and type of work. Conclusion: The overall well-being of HCWs was affected during the pandemic mostly across mental, social, and general vitality domains. Social isolation was a key concern reported by the majority of HCWs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
COVID-19大流行期间印度医护人员的生活质量
简介:疾病的性质、恶劣的工作条件、延长的工作时间、污名化和社区歧视恶化了新冠肺炎医疗保健专业人员的福祉。这项调查旨在了解新冠肺炎大流行期间,印度等中低收入国家医护人员的生活质量及其关键决定因素。方法:计划在新德里的两个新冠肺炎专门中心进行一项横断面研究,使用基于谷歌表格的在线问卷调查。使用SF-36生活质量评估问卷和自制问卷(风险暴露评估),对研究地点300名参与患者护理的HCW的便利样本进行了研究。结果:在本研究中,61.0%为男性,40.72%为女性。大多数(77%)是单身,81.4%来自20至30岁的年龄组。84%的研究对象属于临床专业。近56%的受试者表示对个人防护装备不满意或不舒服。10%的受试者报告个人防护用品短缺。大多数(82.35%)受试者对PPE的质量感到满意。受试者对所提供的食物、住宿和交通设施的满意度不太令人满意。大多数研究受试者报告了社交隔离(70.5%)和封锁限制(57.6%)。一般活力领域的中位得分为55,情感领域为33,社交领域为62。生活质量领域没有受到工作地点、纪律、年龄、性别和工作类型的显著影响。结论:在疫情期间,HCW的整体幸福感主要受到心理、社会和一般活力领域的影响。社会孤立是大多数HCW报告的一个主要问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
The clinical, sociodemographic, and pharmacotherapeutic characteristics influencing quality of life in patients with epilepsy Should planning of cervical pedicle screws be race specific? Computed tomography–based morphometric analysis A Prospective Clinical Evaluation of Adhesive Small Bowel Obstruction in Infants and Children A randomized controlled study to compare the dose requirement of oxytocin for management of uterine atony in patients receiving prophylactic phenylephrine during caesarean delivery Artificial intelligence and healthcare
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1