Of fear, burnout, and stress: Comparison of psychological distress levels among frontline medicine residents during different COVID-19 pandemic waves in Pakistan

Q3 Medicine Journal of Emergency Management Pub Date : 2023-06-27 DOI:10.5055/jem.0736
T. Ejaz, Syed Ahsan Ali, S. Saadia, Saad Bin Zafar Mahmood, Madiha Iqbal, A. Siddiqui
{"title":"Of fear, burnout, and stress: Comparison of psychological distress levels among frontline medicine residents during different COVID-19 pandemic waves in Pakistan","authors":"T. Ejaz, Syed Ahsan Ali, S. Saadia, Saad Bin Zafar Mahmood, Madiha Iqbal, A. Siddiqui","doi":"10.5055/jem.0736","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: While studies have evaluated the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the mental health of healthcare workers (HCW), to our knowledge, there are no studies in Pakistan, which have compared psychological distress levels during the first and second waves of the pandemic. This study was done to assess anxiety levels of Internal Medicine residents and identify risk factors for psychological distress. \nMethodology: Cross-sectional study was conducted in the Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi. A questionnaire comprising of demographic data and risk assessment tools, a seven-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7), and a nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) was used for data collection from Internal Medicine residents using nonprobability convenience sampling technique in May–June 2020 and April 2021. \nResults: A total of 88 responses were recorded. Response rate was 75.7 percent (56/74) and 43.2 percent (32/74) during the first and second waves, respectively. Mean age was 27.9 ± 3.2 years and mean clinical career in years was 3.2 ± 2.1. Majority, 51.8 percent (29/56) and 68.8 percent (22/32), were not satisfied with community prevention measures and 75 percent (42/56) and 65.6 percent (21/32) considered interventions necessary in case of psychological distress during pandemic, during the first and second waves, respectively. A higher number of HCW reported their family not supporting their frontline work during the first wave (16.1 percent vs 3.1 percent; p value 0.023). There was a statistically significant difference in psychological distress levels as median GAD-7 scores were 5(IQR 2–8) vs 9.5(IQR 3.25–13) (p value 0.009) and median PHQ-9 scores were 4(IQR 2–11) vs. 7(IQR 4–s17) (p value 0.056) during the first and second waves, respectively. \nConclusion: There was a significant difference in anxiety levels during the first and second waves of COVID-19, and family support for frontline work was higher during the second wave. Further studies are required to assess these differences.","PeriodicalId":38336,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Emergency Management","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Emergency Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5055/jem.0736","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: While studies have evaluated the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the mental health of healthcare workers (HCW), to our knowledge, there are no studies in Pakistan, which have compared psychological distress levels during the first and second waves of the pandemic. This study was done to assess anxiety levels of Internal Medicine residents and identify risk factors for psychological distress. Methodology: Cross-sectional study was conducted in the Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi. A questionnaire comprising of demographic data and risk assessment tools, a seven-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7), and a nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) was used for data collection from Internal Medicine residents using nonprobability convenience sampling technique in May–June 2020 and April 2021. Results: A total of 88 responses were recorded. Response rate was 75.7 percent (56/74) and 43.2 percent (32/74) during the first and second waves, respectively. Mean age was 27.9 ± 3.2 years and mean clinical career in years was 3.2 ± 2.1. Majority, 51.8 percent (29/56) and 68.8 percent (22/32), were not satisfied with community prevention measures and 75 percent (42/56) and 65.6 percent (21/32) considered interventions necessary in case of psychological distress during pandemic, during the first and second waves, respectively. A higher number of HCW reported their family not supporting their frontline work during the first wave (16.1 percent vs 3.1 percent; p value 0.023). There was a statistically significant difference in psychological distress levels as median GAD-7 scores were 5(IQR 2–8) vs 9.5(IQR 3.25–13) (p value 0.009) and median PHQ-9 scores were 4(IQR 2–11) vs. 7(IQR 4–s17) (p value 0.056) during the first and second waves, respectively. Conclusion: There was a significant difference in anxiety levels during the first and second waves of COVID-19, and family support for frontline work was higher during the second wave. Further studies are required to assess these differences.
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
恐惧、倦怠和压力:巴基斯坦不同COVID-19大流行期间一线医务人员心理困扰水平的比较
背景:虽然有研究评估了2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)对医护人员心理健康的影响,但据我们所知,巴基斯坦没有研究比较了第一波和第二波大流行期间的心理困扰水平。本研究旨在评估内科住院医师的焦虑程度,并找出造成心理困扰的危险因素。方法:横断面研究在卡拉奇阿迦汗大学医院进行。采用非概率便利抽样技术,于2020年5 - 6月和2021年4月对内科住院医师进行数据收集,问卷包括人口统计数据和风险评估工具、7项广泛性焦虑障碍量表(GAD-7)和9项患者健康问卷(PHQ)。结果:共记录88份问卷。第一波和第二波的有效率分别为75.7%(56/74)和43.2%(32/74)。平均年龄27.9±3.2岁,平均临床年龄3.2±2.1岁。大多数人(51.8%(29/56)和68.8%(22/32))对社区预防措施不满意,75%(42/56)和65.6%(21/32)分别认为,在大流行期间、在第一波和第二波期间,如果出现心理困扰,有必要采取干预措施。在第一波浪潮中,更多的HCW报告他们的家人不支持他们的一线工作(16.1%对3.1%;P值0.023)。两组患者的心理困扰水平差异有统计学意义,第一波和第二波患者的GAD-7中位数分别为5分(IQR 2-8)和9.5分(IQR 3.25-13) (p值0.009),PHQ-9中位数分别为4分(IQR 2-11)和7分(IQR 4 - s17) (p值0.056)。结论:第一波和第二波疫情期间,家庭焦虑水平存在显著差异,第二波疫情期间,家庭对一线工作的支持程度更高。需要进一步的研究来评估这些差异。
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
Journal of Emergency Management
Journal of Emergency Management Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
67
期刊最新文献
United front: Emergency management managers, public health, and infection prevention. What's next for the disaster profession? A study of the opinions of local and state emergency managers and their recommendations for a more resilient future. A case study of university mass casualty simulation with high school deaf students who sign. A qualitative analysis of the effects of the COVID-19 response on low-income residents in Cameron County, Texas: Lessons for future pandemic response. Beirut 2020 explosion and health system response: An alarm for the dangerous consequences of Natech incidents in industrial cities.
×
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