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: This was a mixed-methods study. Gastroenterologists were surveyed electronically between September 1 and December 7, 2020, via gastroenterology and endoscopy societies of Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected. The 22-item Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Services Survey (MBI-HSS) was used to detect burnout. Quantitative data were non-parametric; non-parametric methods were used for statistical comparisons. Logistic regression was used to determine risk factors for burnout. Content analysis method was used to analyze qualitative data. Ethical approval was obtained.
RESULTS: A total of 73.0% reported that they were still significantly affected by the pandemic. Of these, 40.5% reported increased workload and 59.5% decreased workload. Statistically significant differences in weekly working hours, endoscopy, and inpatient volumes were present. No differences were observed in outpatient volumes, likely because of telemedicine. Burnout was common; however, 50.1% of gastroenterologists were unaware of or did not have access to mental health support. This, as well as depression, being a trainee, and public sector work, increased burnout risk significantly.
CONCLUSION: The effects of the pandemic are multifaceted, and burnout is common among Southeast Asian gastroenterologists. Safeguards for mental health are suboptimal, and improvements are urgently needed.
METHODS: The literature relating to MEs in Southeast Asian countries was systematically reviewed in December 2014 by using; Embase, Medline, Pubmed, ProQuest Central and the CINAHL. Inclusion criteria were studies (in any languages) that investigated the incidence and the contributing factors of ME in patients of all ages.
RESULTS: The 17 included studies reported data from six of the eleven Southeast Asian countries: five studies in Singapore, four in Malaysia, three in Thailand, three in Vietnam, one in the Philippines and one in Indonesia. There was no data on MEs in Brunei, Laos, Cambodia, Myanmar and Timor. Of the seventeen included studies, eleven measured administration errors, four focused on prescribing errors, three were done on preparation errors, three on dispensing errors and two on transcribing errors. There was only one study of reconciliation error. Three studies were interventional.
DISCUSSION: The most frequently reported types of administration error were incorrect time, omission error and incorrect dose. Staff shortages, and hence heavy workload for nurses, doctor/nurse distraction, and misinterpretation of the prescription/medication chart, were identified as contributing factors of ME. There is a serious lack of studies on this topic in this region which needs to be addressed if the issue of ME is to be fully understood and addressed.
OBJECTIVE: The broad objective of this study was to investigate the direct and indirect effects of behavioral factors on the psychological and physiological health of workers.
METHODS: The latest, second generation technique, which is structural equation modeling, is used to identify the relationships between behavioral antecedents and health outcomes. A total of 277 technical workers participated, aged between 20 and 49 and were healthy in all aspects.
RESULTS: The study results showed quantitative demands, emotional demands, work-family conflict, and job insecurity were significantly associated with both psychological (stress) and physiological (Body Mass Index) factors. The social support of colleagues produced mixed findings with direct and indirect paths. Stress also significantly mediates the psychosocial factors and burnout of the workers.
CONCLUSION: The study concluded that workers were physically available, but they experienced distractions as members of social systems, affecting their physiological and psychological health.
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 burnout types were also statistically different (p burnout (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.