OBJECTIVE: The study examined the impact of job stressors (time pressure, role ambiguity, role conflict) on employee well-being and turnover intentions. The study also investigated the mediating role of employee well-being between job stressors and turnover intention based on the conservation of resources (COR) theory.
METHODS: Data from 396 IT executives in Malaysian IT firms were analyzed using the Partial Least Squares - Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) technique.
RESULTS: Results confirmed a significant negative correlation between time pressure (-0.296), role ambiguity (-0.423), role conflict (-0.104), and employee well-being. Similarly, employee well-being showed a significant negative relationship with turnover intentions (-0.410). The mediation analysis revealed that employee well-being mediates the relationship between time pressure (0.121), role ambiguity (0.173), role conflict (0.043), and turnover intentions.
CONCLUSION: This paper aims to manifest the importance of designing employee well-being policies by firms to retain employees. Findings reflect the role of the managerial approach towards ensuring employee well-being for employee retention, thereby reducing recruitment and re-training costs.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The COVID-19 pandemic has extensively impacted global healthcare systems. We hypothesized that the degree of psychological impact would be higher for surgical providers deployed for COVID-19 work, certain surgical specialties, and for those who knew of someone diagnosed with, or who died, of COVID-19.
METHODS: We conducted a global web-based survey to investigate the psychological impact of COVID-19. The primary outcomes were the depression anxiety stress scale-21 and Impact of Event Scale-Revised scores.
RESULTS: A total of 4283 participants from 101 countries responded. 32.8%, 30.8%, 25.9%, and 24.0% screened positive for depression, anxiety, stress, and PTSD respectively. Respondents who knew someone who died of COVID-19 were more likely to screen positive for depression, anxiety, stress, and PTSD (OR 1.3, 1.6, 1.4, 1.7 respectively, all P < 0.05). Respondents who knew of someone diagnosed with COVID-19 were more likely to screen positive for depression, stress, and PTSD (OR 1.2, 1.2, and 1.3 respectively, all P < 0.05). Surgical specialties that operated in the head and neck region had higher psychological distress among its surgeons. Deployment for COVID- 19-related work was not associated with increased psychological distress.
CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic may have a mental health legacy outlasting its course. The long-term impact of this ongoing traumatic event underscores the importance of longitudinal mental health care for healthcare personnel, with particular attention to those who know of someone diagnosed with, or who died of COVID-19.
METHODS: An online questionnaire was distributed randomly to 1,050 HCWs from the Ministry of Health facilities in the Klang Valley who were involved directly in managing or screening COVID-19 cases from May to August 2020. The questionnaire was divided into five domains, which were concerns, impact on life and work, practice, perceived adequacy of preventive measures, and Revised Impact of Event Scale (IES-R). Logistic regression was used to identify sociodemographic predictors of the five domains.
RESULTS: A total of 907 respondents (86.4%) participated in this survey. Approximately half of the respondents had a low concern (50.5%), most of them had a good practice (85.1%), with 67.5% perceiving there were adequate preventive measures, and they perceived the outbreak had a low impact (92%) on their life and work. From the IES-R domain, 18.6% of respondents potentially suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
CONCLUSION: During the second wave of the COVID-19 outbreak in Malaysia, HCWs practiced high levels of precautions and preventive measures because they were aware of the risk of infection as an occupational hazard. With the adequate implementation of policy and control measures, the psychological wellbeing of the majority HCWs remained well and adequately supported.
METHODS: This web-based, cross-sectional study was conducted among HCWs (N = 398) from Punjab Province of Pakistan. The generalized anxiety scale (GAD-7), patient health questionnaire (PHQ-9), and Brief-COPE were used to assess anxiety, depression, and coping strategies, respectively.
RESULTS: The average age of respondents was 28.67 years (SD = 4.15), with the majority being medical doctors (52%). Prevalences of anxiety and depression were 21.4% and 21.9%, respectively. There was no significant difference in anxiety and depression scores among doctors, nurses, and pharmacists. Females had significantly higher anxiety (P = 0.003) and depression (P = 0.001) scores than males. Moreover, frontline HCWs had significantly higher depression scores (P = 0.010) than others. The depression, not anxiety, score was significantly higher among those who did not receive the infection prevention training (P = 0.004). The most frequently adopted coping strategies were religious coping (M = 5.98, SD = 1.73), acceptance (M = 5.59, SD = 1.55), and coping planning (M = 4.91, SD = 1.85).
CONCLUSION: A considerable proportion of HCWs are having generalized anxiety and depression during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings call for interventions to mitigate mental health risks in HCWs.
METHOD: This cross-sectional study was conducted between February 15, 2022 and March 15, 2022, among 394 healthcare workers from Putrajaya and Selangor hospitals, Malaysia. Maslach Burnout Inventory, World Health Organization Quality of Life-BREF 26 inventory, and Brief Resilience Scale were utilized to capture information on burnout, quality of life, and resilience, respectively.
RESULTS: The mean score of physical health of participants who work more than 10 h (11.38) is lower than participants who work from 8 to 10 h (13.00) and participants who work 7 h daily (13.03), p-value < 0.001. Similarly, the mean score of psychological health of participants who work more than 10 h (12.35) is lower than participants who work from 8 to 10 h (13.72) and participants who work 7 h daily (13.68), p-value = 0.001. Higher income levels were associated with high resilience and quality of life.
CONCLUSION: It is imperative that healthcare practitioners and policy makers adopt and implement interventions to promote a healthy workplace environment, address ethical concerns, and prevent burnout among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Managing the issue of long working hours could possibly result in improved resilience, burnout, and quality of life among healthcare workers. Despite this study able to tickle out some policy specific areas where interventions are needed, identifying effective solutions and evaluating their efficiency will require larger and interventional studies.
METHOD: A total of 394 healthcare workers reported their responses on Maslach Burnout Inventory questionnaire, World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL)-BREF, and Brief Resilience Scale. Respondents were contacted through convenience sampling method and targeted population constituted Malaysian healthcare workers aged 18 years and above.
RESULTS: For occupational exhaustion, about 50.5% of participants have moderate degree, 40.6% have high degree, and 8.9% have low degree of burnout. Health workers from age 25 to 35 years have lower physical health compared to health workers aged <25 years (coefficient = -0.77, p = 0.021). Similarly, healthcare workers who were working more than 10 h every day were more likely to report poor psychological health (coefficient = -2.49, p = 0.06). Positive correlation between physical and psychological health was observed. Further, a negative correlation was found between occupational exhaustion and the quality of life.
CONCLUSION: It is important to target physical as well as psychological wellbeing of the healthcare workers. Also, it is important to understand the contribution of long working hours in declining the quality of life of the healthcare workers. Thus, allocating fixed working hours for healthcare workers would bring a much-required change.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A cross-sectional survey using an online questionnaire was conducted between January 3 to 25, 2021, among HCPs (n = 834) in Bangladesh.
RESULTS: Less than 50% of HCPs would receive the vaccine against COVID-19 if available and 54% were willing to take the vaccine at some stage in the future. Female participants (OR:1.64;95%CI:1.172-2.297), respondents between 18-34 years old (OR:2.42; 95% CI:1.314-4.463), HCPs in the public sector (OR:2.09; 95% CI:1.521-2.878), and those who did not receive a flu vaccine in the previous year (OR:3.1; 95% CI:1.552-6.001) were more likely to delay vaccination.
CONCLUSIONS: The study revealed that, if available, less than half of the HCPs would accept a COVID-19 vaccine in Bangladesh. To ensure the broader success of the vaccination drive, tailored strategies and vaccine promotion campaigns targeting HCPs and the general population are needed.
AIM: This study aimed to explore the views of Palestinian women and healthcare providers regarding factors contributing to the mistreatment of women during childbirth at childbirth facilities in the West Bank, Palestine.
METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted in the West Bank, Palestine, from February 2019 to April 2019. In-depth interviews were conducted with six Palestinian women and five healthcare providers. Consent was obtained individually from each participant, and the interviews ranged from 40 to 50min. Data collection was continued until thematic saturation was reached. Open-ended questions were asked during interviews. Thematic analysis was used to interpret the data collected from the interviews.
RESULTS: Four themes were identified with regards to the women and healthcare providers' views about factors contributing to the mistreatment of women during childbirth in the West Bank, Palestine: limitation in childbirth facilities, factors within the healthcare providers, the women themselves, and barriers within the community.
DISCUSSION: Mistreatment of women during childbirth may occur due to the limitations of resources and staff in childbirth facilities. Some women also justified the mistreatment, and certain characteristics of the women were believed to be the factors for mistreatment.
CONCLUSION: As the first known study of its kind in West Bank, the identified contributing factors especially the limitations of resources and staff are essential to provide good quality and respectful care at childbirth facilities.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the psychological impact of COVID-19 on emergency HCWs and to understand how they are dealing with COVID-19 pandemic, their stress coping strategies or protective factors, and challenges while dealing with COVID-19 patients.
METHODS: Using a framework thematic analysis approach, 15 frontline emergency HCWs directly dealing with COVID-19 patients from April 2, 2020 to April 25, 2020. The semi-structured interviews were conducted face-to-face or by telephone. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Findings highlighted first major theme of stress coping, including, limiting media exposure, limited sharing of Covid-19 duty details, religious coping, just another emergency approach, altruism, and second major theme of Challenges includes, psychological response and noncompliance of public/denial by religious scholar.
CONCLUSIONS: Participants practiced and recommended various coping strategies to deal with stress and anxiety emerging from COVID-19 pandemic. Media was reported to be a principal source of raising stress and anxiety among the public. Religious coping as well as their passion to serve humanity and country were the commonly employed coping strategies.
METHODS: This study consisted of 3 steps; the formulation of ASMaQ draft, content validation and construct validity. A total of 110 questions were drafted with 5-point Likert scale answers. From the list, 31 were selected and subsequently tested on 158 participants. The results were analysed and validated using exploratory factor analysis on SPSS. Components were extracted and questions with low factor loading were removed. The internal consistency was then measured with Cronbach's alpha.
RESULTS: Following analysis, 3 components were extracted and named as general stroke knowledge, hyperacute stroke care and advanced stroke management. Two items were deleted leaving 29 out of 31 questions for the final validated ASMaQ. Internal consistency showed high reliability with Cronbach's alpha of 0.82. Our respondents scored a total cumulative mean of 113.62 marks or 66.6%. A sub analysis by occupation showed that medical assistants scored the lowest in the group with a score of 57% whilst specialists including neurologists scored the highest at 79.4%.
CONCLUSION: The ASMaQ is a newly developed and validated questionnaire consisting of 29 questions testing the respondents' acute stroke management knowledge.
OBJECTIVE: This survey aims to assess differences in mental health, knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) of preventive measures for COVID-19 amongst healthcare professionals (HCP) and non-healthcare professionals.
DESIGN: Multi-national cross-sectional study was carried out using electronic surveys between May-June 2020.
SETTING: Multi-national survey was distributed across 36 countries through social media, word-of-mouth, and electronic mail.
PARTICIPANTS: Participants ≥21 years working in healthcare and non-healthcare related professions.
MAIN OUTCOME: Risk factors determining the difference in KAP towards personal hygiene and social distancing measures during COVID-19 amongst HCP and non-HCP.
RESULTS: HCP were significantly more knowledgeable on personal hygiene (AdjOR 1.45, 95% CI -1.14 to 1.83) and social distancing (AdjOR 1.31, 95% CI -1.06 to 1.61) compared to non-HCP. They were more likely to have a positive attitude towards personal hygiene and 1.5 times more willing to participate in the contact tracing app. There was high compliance towards personal hygiene and social distancing measures amongst HCP. HCP with high compliance were 1.8 times more likely to flourish and more likely to have a high sense of emotional (AdjOR 1.94, 95% CI (1.44 to 2.61), social (AdjOR 2.07, 95% CI -1.55 to 2.78), and psychological (AdjOR 2.13, 95% CI (1.59-2.85) well-being.
CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: While healthcare professionals were more knowledgeable, had more positive attitudes, their higher sense of total well-being was seen to be more critical to enhance compliance. Therefore, focusing on the well-being of the general population would help to enhance their compliance towards the preventive measures for COVID-19.
METHODS: A comparative cross-sectional study was conducted in two government hospitals managing COVID-19-related cases in Kelantan, Malaysia from May to July 2020 to identify and compared depressive symptoms levels of frontline and non-frontline healthcare providers. Convenient sampling was applied in the selection of eligible participants and those diagnosed as having any psychiatric illnesses were excluded. The self-administered questionnaires for the Malay versions of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale to measure depressive symptoms score and the Medical Outcome Study Social Support Survey to measure social support score as an important confounder. A descriptive analysis, independent t-test and ANCOVA were performed using SPSS version 26.
RESULTS: A total of 306 respondents from healthcare providers were recruited which 160 were frontline healthcare providers and 146 were non-frontline healthcare providers. The level of depressive symptoms (HADS score >8) was 27.5% for the frontline healthcare providers and 37.7% for the non-frontline healthcare providers. The mean depressive symptoms score for the non-frontline healthcare providers was 0.75 points higher than that of the frontline healthcare providers after adjusting for gender, duration of employment and social support.
CONCLUSION: Non-frontline healthcare providers are also experiencing psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic even though they do not have direct contact with COVID-19 patients.
METHODS: The Noor Evidence-Based Medicine Questionnaire was tested among physicians in a government hospital between July and August 2018. Exploratory factor analysis and internal consistency reliability-based Cronbach's alpha statistic were conducted.
RESULTS: The questionnaire was distributed among 94 physicians, and 90 responded (response rate of 95.7%). The initial number of items in the KAP domains of the Noor Evidence-Based Medicine Questionnaire were 15, 17, and 13, respectively; however, two items in the practice domain with communalities <0.25 and factor loadings <0.4 were removed. The factor structure accounted for 52.33%, 66.29%, and 55.39% of data variance in the KAP domains, respectively. Cronbach's alpha values were 0.81, 0.81, and 0.84 for KAP domains, respectively, indicating high reliability.
CONCLUSIONS: This questionnaire can be used to evaluate the knowledge, attitudes, and behaviour of healthcare professionals toward EBM. Future testing of this questionnaire among other medical personnel groups will help expand the scope of this tool.
METHODS: A review protocol constructed by a panel of experienced academic reviewers was used to formulate the methodology, research design, search strategy and selection criteria. An extensive literature search was conducted between March-June 2020 in various major electronic biomedical databases including PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE and ScienceDirect. A systematic review and meta-analysis (PRISMA) were selected as the preferred item reporting method.
RESULTS: Out of a total of 34 peer-reviewed dengue-related KAP studies that were identified, 15 published from 2000 to April 2020 met the inclusion criteria. Based on the meta-analysis, a poor mean score was obtained for each of knowledge (68.89), attitude (49.86) and preventive practice (64.69). Most respondents were equipped with a good knowledge of the major clinical signs of dengue. Worryingly, 95% of respondents showed several negative attitudes towards dengue prevention, claiming that this was not possible and that enacting preventive practices was not their responsibility. Interestingly, television or radio was claimed as the main source of gaining dengue information (range 50-95%). Lastly, only five articles (33.3%) piloted or pretested their questionnaire before surveying, of which three reported Cronbach's alpha coefficient (range 0.70 to 0.90).
CONCLUSION: This review indicates that to combat the growing public health threat of dengue to the Philippines, we need the active participation of resident communities, full engagement of healthcare personnel, promotion of awareness campaigns, and access to safe complementary and alternative medicines. Importantly, the psychometric properties of each questionnaire should be assessed rigorously.
METHODS: A total of 613 patients were recruited for the study from the dental clinic at the Faculty of Dentistry, Najran University, Saudi Arabia. The data collection was done in three parts from the patients who visited the hospital to receive dental treatment. The first part included the socio-demographic characteristics of the patients and the COVID-19 swab tests performed within the past 14 days. The second part was the clinical examination, and the third part was a confirmation of the swab test taken by the patient by checking the Hesen website using the patient ID. After data collection, statistical analysis was carried out using SPSS 26.0. Descriptive analysis was done and expressed as mean, standard deviation, frequency, and percentage (%). A cross-tabulation, also described as a contingency table, was used to identify trends and patterns across data and explain the correlation between different variables.
RESULTS: It was seen from the status of the swab test within 14 days of the patient's arrival at the hospital for the dental treatment that 18 (2.9%) patients lied about the pre-treatment swab test within 14 days, and 595 (97.1%) were truthful. The observed and expected counts showed across genders and diagnosis a statistically significant difference (p
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed literature search using 4 databases from Medline, Cinahl, PubMed and Scopus from inception up to March 15, 2021 and selected relevant cross-sectional studies. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plot. Random effects model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence while risk factors were reported in odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI.
RESULTS: We included 148 studies with 159,194 HCPs and the pooled prevalence for depression was 37.5% (95%CI: 33.8-41.3), anxiety 39.7(95%CI: 34.3-45.1), stress 36.4% (95%CI: 23.2-49.7), fear 71.3% (95%CI: 54.6-88.0), burnout 68.3% (95%CI: 54.0-82.5), and low resilience was 16.1% (95%CI: 12.8-19.4), respectively. The heterogeneity was high (I2>99.4%). Meta-analysis reported that both females (OR = 1.48; 95% CI = 1.30-1.68) and nurses (OR = 1.21; 95%CI = 1.02-1.45) were at increased risk of having depression and anxiety [(Female: OR = 1.66; 95% CI = 1.49-1.85), (Nurse: OR = 1.36; 95%CI = 1.16-1.58)]. Females were at increased risk of getting stress (OR = 1.59; 95%CI = 1.28-1.97).
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, one third of HCPs suffered from depression, anxiety and stress and more than two third of HCPs suffered from fear and burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic in Asia.
METHODS: In this research work, the systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression approaches are used to approximate the prevalence of stress, anxiety and depression within front-line healthcare workers caring for COVID-19 patients. The keywords of prevalence, anxiety, stress, depression, psychopathy, mental illness, mental disorder, doctor, physician, nurse, hospital staff, 2019-nCoV, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2 and Coronaviruses were used for searching the SID, MagIran, IranMedex, IranDoc, ScienceDirect, Embase, Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science (ISI) and Google Scholar databases. The search process was conducted in December 2019 to June 2020. In order to amalgamate and analyze the reported results within the collected studies, the random effects model is used. The heterogeneity of the studies is assessed using the I2 index. Lastly, the data analysis is performed within the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software.
RESULTS: Of the 29 studies with a total sample size of 22,380, 21 papers have reported the prevalence of depression, 23 have reported the prevalence of anxiety, and 9 studies have reported the prevalence of stress. The prevalence of depression is 24.3% (18% CI 18.2-31.6%), the prevalence of anxiety is 25.8% (95% CI 20.5-31.9%), and the prevalence of stress is 45% (95% CI 24.3-67.5%) among the hospitals' Hospital staff caring for the COVID-19 patients. According to the results of meta-regression analysis, with increasing the sample size, the prevalence of depression and anxiety decreased, and this was statistically significant (P health policy-makers should take measures to control and prevent mental disorders in the Hospital staff.