Dataset Information

Psychosocial interventions for healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: rapid review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: This rapid review was conducted by following a predefined protocol developed by the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group. A total of 172 potential reviews and 167 primary studies of interest were found. AMSTAR II was used to assess the quality of the included reviews and the JBI Checklist for Randomized Controlled Trials for primary studies. Overall, four studies were included in this review. The study quality ranged from 5 to 12 out of 13 possible stars. No robust evidence was found that psychosocial interventions can reduce psychological distress. No significant effect could be found regarding post-traumatic stress. Two studies on anxiety were identified, one which showed an effect and another which did not. The psychosocial intervention had no beneficial effect on burnout and depression, whereas providing a mindfulness- or relaxation-based intervention resulted in a significant improvement in sleep quality. By considering the secondary results and results of previous reviews, a combination of training and mindfulness seems to be beneficial for decreasing anxiety and stress in home care workers. In summary, the evidence-based recommendations are still limited and, therefore, more evidence is needed to make a general statement of high certainty about the effects.

SUBMITTER: Hoedl M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10185947 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Psychosocial interventions for healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: rapid review and meta-analysis.

Hoedl Manuela M Osmancevic Selvedina S Thonhofer Nina N Reiter Lea L Schoberer Daniela D

Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) 20230516 3-4

This rapid review was conducted by following a predefined protocol developed by the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group. A total of 172 potential reviews and 167 primary studies of interest were found. AMSTAR II was used to assess the quality of the included reviews and the JBI Checklist for Randomized Controlled Trials for primary studies. Overall, four studies were included in this review. The study quality ranged from 5 to 12 out of 13 possible stars. No robust evidence was found that psycho ...[more]

PMID: 37191933

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objectives: The corona virus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic spread globally, and we aimed to investigate the psychosocial impact on healthcare workers (HWs) in China during the pandemic. Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched seven electronic databases for cross-sectional studies on psychosocial impact on HWs in relation to COVID-19 from January 1, 2020 to October 7, 2020. We included primary studies involving Chinese HWs during the pandemic, and data were extracted from the published articles. Our primary outcome was prevalence of anxiety, depression, and stress disorders. We pooled prevalence value with their 95% confidence interval using random effect models and assessed study quality on the basis of an 11-item checklist recommended by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020195843). Results: We identified 25 articles comprising a total of 30,841 completed questionnaires and 22 studies for meta-analysis. The prevalence of anxiety, depression, and stress disorders was 34.4% (29.5-39.4%), 31.1% (24.5-37.7%), and 29.1% (24.3-33.8%) for HWs. The pooled prevalence of anxiety disorders for HWs from late January to early February was 46.4% (42.9-49.9%), significantly higher than those in mid-term February (28.0%, 23.9-32.1%) and after late February (27.6%, 16.0-39.2%). The pooled prevalence of depression disorders for HWs from late January to early February was 46.5% (38.8-54.2%), significantly higher than those in mid-term February (27.1%, 19.8-34.5%) and after late February (32.9%, 16.2-49.5%). HWs working in Hubei Province had a higher prevalence of anxiety (37.9 vs. 30.8%) and a lower prevalence of depression (27.5 vs. 34.7%) than those working in other regions. Nurses had a higher prevalence of anxiety (44.1 vs. 29.0%) and depression (34.1 vs. 29.2%) than other HWs. Conclusions: About one-third of HWs in China suffered anxiety, depression, and stress at the early epidemic of COVID-19. HWs in Hubei Province, especially nurses, had a higher prevalence of psychological disorders. During the pandemic, a negative psychological state may persist in a proportion of Chinese HWs, fluctuating with the control of the pandemic. The long-term impact should continue to be observed. Attention should be paid to HWs for their psychological impact due to the pandemic. Systematic Review Registration: The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020195843).

Project description:Intensive care unit healthcare workers (ICU HCW) are at risk of mental health issues during emerging disease outbreaks. A study of ICU HCW from France revealed symptoms of anxiety and depression in 50.4% and 30.4% of workers at the peak of the first wave of the pandemic. The level of COVID-19 exposure of these ICU HCW was very high. In Canada, ICU HCW experienced variable exposure to COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic, with some hospitals seeing large numbers of patients while others saw few or none. In this study we examined the relationship between COVID-19 exposure and mental health in Canadian ICU HCW. We conducted a cross-sectional cohort study of Canadian ICU HCW in April 2020, during the acceleration phase of the first wave of the pandemic. Psychosocial distress was assessed using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). Participants were asked about sources of stress as well as about exposure to COVID-19 patients and availability of personal protective equipment (PPE). Factors associated with clinically-relevant psychosocial distress were identified. Responses were received from 310 Canadian ICU HCW affiliated with more than 30 institutions. Of these, 64.5% scored ≥ 3 points on the GHQ-12 questionnaire, indicating clinically-relevant psychosocial distress. The frequency of psychosocial distress was highest amongst registered nurses (75.7%) and lowest amongst physicians (49.4%). It was also higher amongst females (64.9%) than males (47.6%). Although PPE availability was good (> 80% of participants reported adequate availability), there was significant anxiety with respect to PPE availability, with respect to the risk of being infected with COVID-19, and with respect to the risk of transmitting COVID-19 to others. In multivariable regression analysis, Anxiety with respect to being infected with COVID-19 (OR 1.53, CI 1.31-1.81) was the strongest positive predictor of clinically-relevant psychosocial distress while the Number of shifts with COVID-19 exposure (OR 0.86, CI 0.75-0.95) was the strongest negative predictor. In summary, clinically-relevant psychosocial distress was identified amongst a majority of ICU HCW during the acceleration phase of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, including those with minimal or no exposure to COVID-19. Strategies to support mental health amongst ICU HCW are required across the entire healthcare system.

Project description:ObjectiveAnti-epidemic work against coronavirus disease (COVID) has become routine work in China. Our study was intended to investigate the emotional and psychological state of healthcare workers and look for the association between sociodemographic factors/profession-related condition and emotional state.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted online among healthcare workers from various backgrounds. Symptoms of anxiety and depression were assessed by the Chinese versions of the seven-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) and the nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), respectively. Supplementary questions (Supplementary Material) were recorded to describe the participants' information about workplace violence, profession, and attitude related to the COVID pandemic. Wherever suitable, independent t-test, and one-way ANOVA were performed to detect group differences of GAD-7 and PHQ-9 total scores after grouping by sociodemographic variables, respectively, such as age, gender, marital status, educational level, after-tax income, department category, job title, experience of workplace violence, and anti-epidemic participation. Multiple linear regression analyses (stepwise method) were utilized in order to look for the potential associated factors of GAD-7 and PHQ-9 total scores.ResultsA total of 2,139 questionnaires with valid response were completed. Approximately 86.44% of participants had minimal symptoms of anxiety, 11.08% mild, 1.59% moderate, and 0.89% severe. Meanwhile, 81.34% had minimal symptoms of depression, 14.07% mild, 2.90% moderate, 1.17% moderately severe, and 0.51% severe. Student's t-test showed that participants with female gender, with experience of workplace violence scored higher on both GAD-7 and PHQ-9, and participants with experience of anti-epidemic front-line work during pandemic scored lower on both GAD-7 and PHQ-9. ANOVA showed that participants aging from 31 to 40, with higher educational level, with middle level of annual after-tax income, with department of internal medicine or surgery, or with middle level of job title scored higher on both GAD-7 and PHQ-9. Regression analyses showed that female gender, high job title, and the experience of workplace violence positively were associated with anxiety or depression. Doctoral education, department (other vs. psychiatry), job enthusiasm, and professional self-identity were negatively associated with anxiety or depression. Additionally, psychological support was negatively associated with depression.ConclusionAs the epidemic prevention and control against COVID-19 become normalized in China, emotional state of healthcare workers deserves extensive attention. Our study revealed that gender, educational level, department category, job title, the experience of workplace violence, job enthusiasm, and professional self-identity are the most important influencing factors of physician's anxiety and depression. Self-tailored psychological intervention should be based on the predisposing factors above to mentally prepare healthcare workers for this long-lasting battle against COVID-19.

Dataset Information

Psychosocial interventions for healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: rapid review and meta-analysis.

Publications

Psychosocial interventions for healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: rapid review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets