METHODS: Higher education students from China, Ireland, Malaysia, South Korea, Taiwan, the Netherlands, and the United States were enrolled in a cross-sectional study from April to May 2020, which was during the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic for most participants. An online survey, using validated tools, was distributed to assess perceived stress, dietary behaviors, alcohol misuse, sleep quality and duration, and resilience.
RESULTS: 2254 students completed the study. Results indicated that sleep quality mediated the relationship between perceived stress and dietary behaviors as well as the relationship between perceived stress and alcohol misuse. Further, increased resilience reduced the strength of the relationship between perceived stress and dietary behaviors but not alcohol misuse.
CONCLUSION: Based on these results, higher education students are likely to benefit from sleep education and resilience training, especially during stressful events.
METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a single-blind RCT (October 2017 -May 2019) with Chin (39.3%), Kachin (15.7%), and Rohingya (45%) refugees living in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The trial included 170 participants receiving six 45-minute weekly sessions of IAT (97.6% retention, 4 lost to follow-up) and 161 receiving a multicomponent CBT also involving six 45-minute weekly sessions (96.8% retention, 5 lost to follow-up). Participants (mean age: 30.8 years, SD = 9.6) had experienced and/or witnessed an average 10.1 types (SD = 5.9, range = 1-27) of traumatic events. We applied a single-blind design in which independent assessors of pre- and posttreatment indices were masked in relation to participants' treatment allocation status. Primary outcomes were symptom scores of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Complex PTSD (CPTSD), Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), the 5 scales of the Adaptive Stress Index (ASI), and a measure of resilience (the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale [CDRS]). Compared to CBT, an intention-to-treat analysis (n = 331) at 6-week posttreatment follow-up demonstrated greater reductions in the IAT arm for all common mental disorder (CMD) symptoms and ASI domains except for ASI-3 (injustice), as well as increases in the resilience scores. Adjusted average treatment effects assessing the differences in posttreatment scores between IAT and CBT (with baseline scores as covariates) were -0.08 (95% CI: -0.14 to -0.02, p = 0.012) for PTSD, -0.07 (95% CI: -0.14 to -0.01) for CPTSD, -0.07 for MDD (95% CI: -0.13 to -0.01, p = 0.025), 0.16 for CDRS (95% CI: 0.06-0.026, p ≤ 0.001), -0.12 (95% CI: -0.20 to -0.03, p ≤ 0.001) for ASI-1 (safety/security), -0.10 for ASI-2 (traumatic losses; 95% CI: -0.18 to -0.02, p = 0.02), -0.03 for ASI-3 (injustice; (95% CI: -0.11 to 0.06, p = 0.513), -0.12 for ASI-4 (role/identity disruptions; 95% CI: -0.21 to -0.04, p ≤ 0.001), and -0.18 for ASI-5 (existential meaning; 95% CI: -0.19 to -0.05, p ≤ 0.001). Compared to CBT, the IAT group had larger effect sizes for all indices (except for resilience) including PTSD (IAT, d = 0.93 versus CBT, d = 0.87), CPTSD (d = 1.27 versus d = 1.02), MDD (d = 1.4 versus d = 1.11), ASI-1 (d = 1.1 versus d = 0.85), ASI-2 (d = 0.81 versus d = 0.66), ASI-3 (d = 0.49 versus d = 0.42), ASI-4 (d = 0.86 versus d = 0.67), and ASI-5 (d = 0.72 versus d = 0.53). No adverse events were recorded for either therapy. Limitations include a possible allegiance effect (the authors inadvertently conveying disproportionate enthusiasm for IAT in training and supervision), cross-over effects (counsellors applying elements of one therapy in delivering the other), and the brief period of follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared to CBT, IAT showed superiority in improving mental health symptoms and adaptative stress from baseline to 6-week posttreatment. The differences in scores between IAT and CBT were modest and future studies conducted by independent research teams need to confirm the findings.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered under Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) (http://www.anzctr.org.au/). The trial registration number is: ACTRN12617001452381.
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.
METHOD: A prospective test-retest design was employed on Malaysian women with early breast cancer (N = 105). Data were analyzed using SPSS version 24.
RESULTS: The results showed overall Cronbach alpha values were .92 and .93 for test-retest, respectively. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) values ranged between .62 and .75. This study accepted three factors and two factors for test-retest, respectively. Individual factors showed Cronbach alpha average ranged from .71 to .91.
CONCLUSION: The Malay version RS-14 tool was found to be statistically valid, reliable, and reproducible. It was able to measure resilience level in those women under study.
METHODS: We collected data from 1583 citizens from four countries via an online survey between October 14 and November 2, 2020. We gathered demographic data and measured mental distress (depression, anxiety, and stress) and fear of COVID-19. Data on sense of control, ego-resilience, grit, self-compassion, and resilience indicators were also collected.
RESULTS: Sense of control was negatively associated with mental distress in all four countries. Self-compassion was negatively associated with mental distress in the samples from Japan, China, and the U.S. We also found an interaction effect for sense of control: the lower the sense of control, the stronger the deterioration of mental distress when the fear of COVID-19 was high.
LIMITATIONS: This study's cross-sectional design precludes causal inferences. Further, lack of data from people who were actually infected with the virus limits comparisons of people who were and were not infected. Finally, as this study only compared data from four countries, comparisons with more countries are needed.
CONCLUSIONS: A sense of control and self-compassion may help buffer against mental health deterioration during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sense of control was consistently associated with mental health across cultures.
METHODS: This study employed a quasi-experimental design with pre- and post-testing. It involved the training of course coordinators in implementing the SAR framework and its integration into the daily learning activities. Fourth-year medical students were assessed before and after the intervention using standardized measures of resilience, anxiety, depression, burnout, and academic stress. Data were analyzed using quantitative methods and thematic analysis for qualitative feedback.
RESULTS: Post-intervention, students demonstrated a significant increase in resilience scores (p 0.05). Qualitative feedback of the course coordinators highlighted an improved learning environment, increased coping strategies, and a more supportive academic culture.
CONCLUSION: The SAR framework significantly contributes to enhancing medical students' resilience and reducing psychological distress. Its implementation suggests a promising approach to fostering a supportive educational environment that not only addresses the psychological challenges faced by medical students but also enhances their academic performance and overall well-being. Further research is warranted to explore the long-term impacts of SAR across different medical education contexts.