COVID-19大流行期间卫生保健专业人员的工作场所支持与心理健康、福祉和倦怠:一项队列分析

CMAJ open Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.9778/cmajo.20220191
Imrana Siddiqui, Jaya Gupta, George Collett, Iris McIntosh, Christina Komodromos, Thomas Godec, Sher Ng, Carmela Maniero, Sotiris Antoniou, Rehan Khan, Vikas Kapil, Mohammed Y Khanji, Ajay K Gupta
{"title":"COVID-19大流行期间卫生保健专业人员的工作场所支持与心理健康、福祉和倦怠:一项队列分析","authors":"Imrana Siddiqui,&nbsp;Jaya Gupta,&nbsp;George Collett,&nbsp;Iris McIntosh,&nbsp;Christina Komodromos,&nbsp;Thomas Godec,&nbsp;Sher Ng,&nbsp;Carmela Maniero,&nbsp;Sotiris Antoniou,&nbsp;Rehan Khan,&nbsp;Vikas Kapil,&nbsp;Mohammed Y Khanji,&nbsp;Ajay K Gupta","doi":"10.9778/cmajo.20220191","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Little is known about the relationship between workplace support and mental health and burnout among health care professionals (HCPs) during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this cohort study, we sought to evaluate the association between perceived level of (and changes to) workplace support and mental health and burnout among HCPs, and to identify what constitutes perceived effective workplace support.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Online surveys at baseline (July-September 2020) and follow-up 4 months later assessed the presence of generalized anxiety disorder (using the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale [GAD-7]), clinical insomnia, major depressive disorder (using the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire), burnout (emotional exhaustion and depersonalization) and mental well-being (using the Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Score). Both surveys assessed self-reported level of workplace support (single-item Likert scale). For baseline and follow-up, independently, we developed separate logistic regression models to evaluate the association of the level of workplace support (tricohotomized as unsupported, neither supported nor unsupported and supported) with mental health and burnout. We also developed linear regression models to evaluate the association between the change in perceived level of workplace support and the change in mental health scores from baseline and follow-up. We used thematic analyses on free-text entries of the baseline survey to evaluate what constitutes effective support.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At baseline (<i>n</i> = 1422) and follow-up (<i>n</i> = 681), HCPs who felt supported had reduced risk of anxiety, depression, clinical insomnia, emotional exhaustion and depersonalization, compared with those who felt unsupported. Among those who responded to both surveys (<i>n</i> = 681), improved perceived level of workplace support over time was associated with significantly improved scores on measures of anxiety (adjusted β -0.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.25 to -0.01), depression (adjusted β -0.17, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.04) and mental well-being (adjusted β 0.19, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.29), independent of baseline level of support. We identified 5 themes constituting effective workplace support, namely concern or understanding for welfare, information, tangible qualities of the workplace, leadership and peer support.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>We found a significant association between perceived level of (and changes in) workplace support and mental health and burnout of HCPs, and identified potential themes that constitute perceived workplace support. Collectively, these findings can inform changes in guidance and national policies to improve mental health and burnout among HCPs. <b>Trial registration:</b> ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT04433260.</p>","PeriodicalId":10432,"journal":{"name":"CMAJ open","volume":"11 1","pages":"E191-E200"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/d7/13/cmajo.20220191.PMC9981163.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perceived workplace support and mental health, well-being and burnout among health care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cohort analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Imrana Siddiqui,&nbsp;Jaya Gupta,&nbsp;George Collett,&nbsp;Iris McIntosh,&nbsp;Christina Komodromos,&nbsp;Thomas Godec,&nbsp;Sher Ng,&nbsp;Carmela Maniero,&nbsp;Sotiris Antoniou,&nbsp;Rehan Khan,&nbsp;Vikas Kapil,&nbsp;Mohammed Y Khanji,&nbsp;Ajay K Gupta\",\"doi\":\"10.9778/cmajo.20220191\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Little is known about the relationship between workplace support and mental health and burnout among health care professionals (HCPs) during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this cohort study, we sought to evaluate the association between perceived level of (and changes to) workplace support and mental health and burnout among HCPs, and to identify what constitutes perceived effective workplace support.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Online surveys at baseline (July-September 2020) and follow-up 4 months later assessed the presence of generalized anxiety disorder (using the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale [GAD-7]), clinical insomnia, major depressive disorder (using the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire), burnout (emotional exhaustion and depersonalization) and mental well-being (using the Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Score). Both surveys assessed self-reported level of workplace support (single-item Likert scale). For baseline and follow-up, independently, we developed separate logistic regression models to evaluate the association of the level of workplace support (tricohotomized as unsupported, neither supported nor unsupported and supported) with mental health and burnout. We also developed linear regression models to evaluate the association between the change in perceived level of workplace support and the change in mental health scores from baseline and follow-up. We used thematic analyses on free-text entries of the baseline survey to evaluate what constitutes effective support.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At baseline (<i>n</i> = 1422) and follow-up (<i>n</i> = 681), HCPs who felt supported had reduced risk of anxiety, depression, clinical insomnia, emotional exhaustion and depersonalization, compared with those who felt unsupported. Among those who responded to both surveys (<i>n</i> = 681), improved perceived level of workplace support over time was associated with significantly improved scores on measures of anxiety (adjusted β -0.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.25 to -0.01), depression (adjusted β -0.17, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.04) and mental well-being (adjusted β 0.19, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.29), independent of baseline level of support. We identified 5 themes constituting effective workplace support, namely concern or understanding for welfare, information, tangible qualities of the workplace, leadership and peer support.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>We found a significant association between perceived level of (and changes in) workplace support and mental health and burnout of HCPs, and identified potential themes that constitute perceived workplace support. Collectively, these findings can inform changes in guidance and national policies to improve mental health and burnout among HCPs. <b>Trial registration:</b> ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT04433260.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10432,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CMAJ open\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"E191-E200\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/d7/13/cmajo.20220191.PMC9981163.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CMAJ open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.9778/cmajo.20220191\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CMAJ open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.9778/cmajo.20220191","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在COVID-19大流行期间,工作场所支持与卫生保健专业人员(HCPs)的心理健康和倦怠之间的关系知之甚少。在这项队列研究中,我们试图评估HCPs感知到的工作场所支持水平(和变化)与心理健康和倦怠之间的关系,并确定构成感知到的有效工作场所支持的因素。方法:在基线(2020年7月至9月)进行在线调查,并在4个月后进行随访,评估广泛性焦虑障碍(使用7项广泛性焦虑障碍量表[GAD-7])、临床失眠、重度抑郁症(使用9项患者健康问卷)、倦怠(情绪耗竭和去人格化)和心理健康(使用肖特沃里克-爱丁堡心理健康评分)的存在。两项调查都评估了自我报告的工作场所支持水平(单项李克特量表)。对于基线和随访,独立地,我们开发了单独的逻辑回归模型来评估工作场所支持水平(三分类为不支持,既不支持也不支持和支持)与心理健康和倦怠的关系。我们还建立了线性回归模型来评估工作场所支持感知水平的变化与基线和随访期间心理健康评分的变化之间的关系。我们对基线调查的自由文本条目进行专题分析,以评估是什么构成了有效的支持。结果:在基线(n = 1422)和随访(n = 681)时,感觉得到支持的HCPs与感觉没有得到支持的HCPs相比,焦虑、抑郁、临床失眠、情绪衰竭和人格解体的风险降低。在对两项调查均有回应的受访者中(n = 681),随着时间的推移,工作场所支持水平的提高与焦虑(调整后的β -0.13, 95%置信区间[CI] -0.25至-0.01)、抑郁(调整后的β -0.17, 95% CI -0.29至-0.04)和心理健康(调整后的β 0.19, 95% CI 0.10至0.29)的显著改善得分相关,与基线支持水平无关。我们确定了5个构成有效工作场所支持的主题,即关心或理解福利、信息、工作场所的有形品质、领导力和同伴支持。解释:我们发现工作场所支持的感知水平(和变化)与医护人员的心理健康和倦怠之间存在显著关联,并确定了构成感知工作场所支持的潜在主题。总的来说,这些发现可以为指导和国家政策的改变提供信息,以改善医务人员的心理健康和职业倦怠。试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov,编号:NCT04433260。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Perceived workplace support and mental health, well-being and burnout among health care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cohort analysis.

Background: Little is known about the relationship between workplace support and mental health and burnout among health care professionals (HCPs) during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this cohort study, we sought to evaluate the association between perceived level of (and changes to) workplace support and mental health and burnout among HCPs, and to identify what constitutes perceived effective workplace support.

Methods: Online surveys at baseline (July-September 2020) and follow-up 4 months later assessed the presence of generalized anxiety disorder (using the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale [GAD-7]), clinical insomnia, major depressive disorder (using the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire), burnout (emotional exhaustion and depersonalization) and mental well-being (using the Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Score). Both surveys assessed self-reported level of workplace support (single-item Likert scale). For baseline and follow-up, independently, we developed separate logistic regression models to evaluate the association of the level of workplace support (tricohotomized as unsupported, neither supported nor unsupported and supported) with mental health and burnout. We also developed linear regression models to evaluate the association between the change in perceived level of workplace support and the change in mental health scores from baseline and follow-up. We used thematic analyses on free-text entries of the baseline survey to evaluate what constitutes effective support.

Results: At baseline (n = 1422) and follow-up (n = 681), HCPs who felt supported had reduced risk of anxiety, depression, clinical insomnia, emotional exhaustion and depersonalization, compared with those who felt unsupported. Among those who responded to both surveys (n = 681), improved perceived level of workplace support over time was associated with significantly improved scores on measures of anxiety (adjusted β -0.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.25 to -0.01), depression (adjusted β -0.17, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.04) and mental well-being (adjusted β 0.19, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.29), independent of baseline level of support. We identified 5 themes constituting effective workplace support, namely concern or understanding for welfare, information, tangible qualities of the workplace, leadership and peer support.

Interpretation: We found a significant association between perceived level of (and changes in) workplace support and mental health and burnout of HCPs, and identified potential themes that constitute perceived workplace support. Collectively, these findings can inform changes in guidance and national policies to improve mental health and burnout among HCPs. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT04433260.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Validity of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Canadian administrative health data: a multiprovince, population-based cohort study. Trends in attachment to a primary care provider in Ontario, 2008-2018: an interrupted time-series analysis. Identifying clusters of coexisting conditions and outcomes among adults admitted to hospital with community-acquired pneumonia: a multicentre cohort study. Is the number of ideal cardiovascular health metrics in midlife associated with lower risk of cancer? Evidence from 3 European prospective cohorts. Trends in antihypertensive drug utilization in British Columbia, 2004-2019: a descriptive study.
×
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