METHODS: Data were collected using a population based survey among 308 employees in the state of Selangor, Malaysia. Participants were approached at home during the weekend or on days off from work. Only one participant was selected per household. Structural equation modelling was used to analyse the data. Nearly 54% of respondents agreed that they need to work harder, 25% agreed that their job was not secure and 24% thought they had lost power and control on the job due to global trade competition.
RESULTS: Consistent with our predictions, demands mediated the globalization to burnout relationship, and resources mediated the globalization to job satisfaction relationship.
CONCLUSIONS: Together, these results support the idea that external factors influence work conditions and in turn employee health and job satisfaction. We conclude that the jobs demands-resources framework is applicable in an Eastern setting and that globalization is a key antecedent of working environments.
METHODS: Participants were invited to an online cross-sectional survey from Aug-Sep 2020. The study assessed psychological distress using the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale, level of fear using the Fear of COVID-19 Scale, and coping strategies using the Brief Resilient Coping Scale. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to adjust for potential confounders.
RESULTS: The mean age (±SD) of the participants (N = 720) was 31.7 (±11.5) years, and most of them were females (67.1%). Half of the participants had an income source, while 216 (30%) identified themselves as frontline health or essential service workers. People whose financial situation was impacted due to COVID-19 (AOR 2.16, 95% CIs 1.54-3.03), people who drank alcohol in the last four weeks (3.43, 1.45-8.10), people who were a patient (2.02, 1.39-2.93), and had higher levels of fear of COVID-19 (2.55, 1.70-3.80) were more likely to have higher levels of psychological distress. Participants who self-isolated due to exposure to COVID-19 (3.12, 1.04-9.32) and who had moderate to very high levels of psychological distress (2.56, 1.71-3.83) had higher levels of fear. Participants who provided care to a family member/patient with a suspected case of COVID-19 were more likely to be moderately to highly resilient compared to those who did not.
CONCLUSION: Vulnerable groups of individuals such as patients and those impacted financially during COVID-19 should be supported for their mental wellbeing. Behavioural interventions should be targeted to reduce the impact of alcohol drinking during such crisis period.
METHODS: A self-administered questionnaire was developed based on a conceptual framework of mental health and well-being model. Two aspects were assessed, namely the physiological (two domains) and the psychological (six domains). Participants were asked to rate their experiences of the aforementioned aspects using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from all the time to never.
RESULTS: The response rate was 81%. Most of the dentists (61.7%) perceived having positive mental well-being. Under the physiological aspect, most respondents reported that they were 'generally happy' (93.3%), but about 30% stated they were 'stressed physically and emotionally'. Of the six domains under the psychological aspect, positive well-being was observed in the 'sense of coherence' and 'behavioural stress' domains. Participants who were above 40 years old, married and had children reported having a more positive mental well-being when compared with their counterparts.
CONCLUSION: Overall, most Malaysian dentists perceived having a positive mental well-being. It is crucial, however, to closely monitor and initiate early interventions for those with negative symptoms to ensure the safe practice of dentistry.
METHOD: Data for this study, consisting of 324 earthquake survivors, were obtained from a population-based cross-sectional survey conducted in Iran, 2015. The long-term effect of earthquake was assessed using the Mental Health Continuum-Short Form questionnaire. A one-way multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) using SPSS (version 22) was used in data analysis.
RESULTS: Older adults scored significantly a higher level of overall positive mental health (mean [M]=34.31, standard deviation [SD]=10.52) than younger age group (M=27.48, SD=10.56, t=-4.41; P<0.001). Results of MANCOVA revealed a statistically significant difference between older and young adults on the combined positive mental health subscales (F(3,317)=6.95; P<0.001), after controlling for marital status, sex, and employment status.
CONCLUSION: The present findings showing a higher level of positive mental health among elderly earthquake survivors compared with their younger counterparts in the wake of natural disasters suggest that advancing age per se does not contribute to increasing vulnerability.
METHODS: We conducted a nationally representative survey among 1925 adults aged 18-79 years of Chinese, Malay, Indian or other ethnicity. Participants reported socio-demographic characteristics and completed the PMH-I along with measures of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and psychological distress. Construct validity of the PMH-I was assessed using confirmatory factor analysis and concurrent validity was tested through correlation with other psychological measures. Normative PMH values and differences in population subgroups were estimated.
RESULTS: The six-factor-higher-order structure of the PMH-I comprising six subscales of general coping, emotional support, spirituality, interpersonal skills, personal growth and autonomy and global affect was confirmed. Concurrent validity was shown through significant positive correlation of the total PMH score and its subscales with HRQoL and an inverse correlation with psychological distress. Weighted age, gender and ethnicity-specific norms were derived for the Singapore population. Total PMH was significantly higher in participants aged over 40 years as compared with 18-29 year olds and in non-Chinese ethnic groups as compared with Chinese. These differences were observed for all PMH-I subscales, with the exception of emotional support and interpersonal skills score differences by age. In contrast, gender, marital status, and education level were significantly associated with some of the subscales, but not with total PMH.
CONCLUSIONS: These results support the psychometric properties of the PMH-I in a multi-ethnic Asian population sample. The generalizable population-based norms support the application of the PMH-I for measuring mental health and assessing its determinants within the Singapore general population.
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.
METHODS: A cross sectional study was conducted in three districts in Selangor, from 11th June to 30th December 2012. The sampling frame was obtained from the Department of Statistics Malaysia (DOS) in May 2012, using the National Population and Housing Census 2010. Adults aged 18 years and above, living in the selected living quarters were approached to participate in the study and requested to complete a set of questionnaires.
RESULTS: A total of 1,556 out of 2,152 participants participated in this study, giving an overall study response rate of 61.90%. Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9) was used to determine the presence of depression. The prevalence of depression was 10.3%, based on the PHQ-9 cut off point of 10 and above. Based on multiple logistic regression analysis, the predictors of depression were presence of anxiety, serious problems at work, unhappy relationship with children, high perceived stress, domestic violence, unhappy relationship with spouse, low self-esteem, unhappy relationship with family, serious financial constraint and presence of chronic diseases. When reanalyzed after removing anxiety, high perceived stress and low self-esteem, additional predictors of depression were found to be serious marital problems and religiosity.
CONCLUSION: The prevalence of depression in this study is similar to that found in other studies. Findings from this study are being used as baseline data to develop an effective program to assist in the management of common mental health disorders in the community, in particular depression. The identification of predictors of depression in the community is important to identify the target population for the program.