Anuradha Baminiwatta, Shamila De Silva, Aruni Hapangama, Kumarini Basnayake, Charani Abayaweera, Dinithi Kulasinghe, Dewmi Kaushalya, Shehan Williams
{"title":"Impact of COVID-19 on the mental health of frontline and non-frontline healthcare workers in Sri Lanka.","authors":"Anuradha Baminiwatta, Shamila De Silva, Aruni Hapangama, Kumarini Basnayake, Charani Abayaweera, Dinithi Kulasinghe, Dewmi Kaushalya, Shehan Williams","doi":"10.4038/cmj.v66i1.9351","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction\nHealthcare workers (HCWs) are at risk of mental health problems during a pandemic. Being stationed at the frontline or not may have implications on their mental health.\n\n\nObjectives\nThe aims of this study were to assess depression, anxiety and stress among HCWs, to explore differences between frontline and non-frontline workers, and to investigate associated factors.\n\n\nMethods\nIn this cross-sectional study, frontline and non-frontline HCWs were recruited from a COVID-19 screening hospital in Sri Lanka. Mental health impact was assessed using Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21). Sociodemographic data and perceptions of social and occupational circumstances were gathered. Categorical variables were analyzed using Chi square and logistic regression. Odds ratios were calculated for the effect of different perceptions on psychological morbidity.\n\n\nResults\nA total of 467 HCWs participated, comprising 244 (52.2%) frontline and 223 (47.8%) non-frontline workers, with female preponderance (n=341, 77%). Prevalence of depression, anxiety and stress among HCWs were 19.5%, 20.6%, 11.8%, respectively. Non-frontline group showed a higher prevalence of depression (27% vs. 11%, p<0.001), anxiety (27% vs. 14%, p=0.001) and stress (15% vs. 8%, p=0.026). Being married, having children, living with family and higher income were associated with better psychological outcomes. Perceived lack of personal protective equipment, inadequate support from hospital authorities, greater discrimination, and lack of training to cope with the situation predicted poor mental health outcomes, and non-frontline HCWs were more likely to hold such perceptions.\n\n\nConclusion\nAddressing factors leading to negative psychological outcomes in HCWs should be a key concern during this pandemic.","PeriodicalId":9777,"journal":{"name":"Ceylon Medical Journal","volume":"66 1","pages":"16-31"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ceylon Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4038/cmj.v66i1.9351","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
Abstract
Introduction
Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at risk of mental health problems during a pandemic. Being stationed at the frontline or not may have implications on their mental health.
Objectives
The aims of this study were to assess depression, anxiety and stress among HCWs, to explore differences between frontline and non-frontline workers, and to investigate associated factors.
Methods
In this cross-sectional study, frontline and non-frontline HCWs were recruited from a COVID-19 screening hospital in Sri Lanka. Mental health impact was assessed using Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21). Sociodemographic data and perceptions of social and occupational circumstances were gathered. Categorical variables were analyzed using Chi square and logistic regression. Odds ratios were calculated for the effect of different perceptions on psychological morbidity.
Results
A total of 467 HCWs participated, comprising 244 (52.2%) frontline and 223 (47.8%) non-frontline workers, with female preponderance (n=341, 77%). Prevalence of depression, anxiety and stress among HCWs were 19.5%, 20.6%, 11.8%, respectively. Non-frontline group showed a higher prevalence of depression (27% vs. 11%, p<0.001), anxiety (27% vs. 14%, p=0.001) and stress (15% vs. 8%, p=0.026). Being married, having children, living with family and higher income were associated with better psychological outcomes. Perceived lack of personal protective equipment, inadequate support from hospital authorities, greater discrimination, and lack of training to cope with the situation predicted poor mental health outcomes, and non-frontline HCWs were more likely to hold such perceptions.
Conclusion
Addressing factors leading to negative psychological outcomes in HCWs should be a key concern during this pandemic.
期刊介绍:
The Ceylon Medical Journal, is the oldest surviving medical journal in Australasia. It is the only medical journal in Sri Lanka that is listed in the Index Medicus. The CMJ started life way back in 1887 as the organ of the Ceylon Branch of the British Medical Association. Except for a brief period between 1893 and 1904 when it ceased publication, the CMJ or its forbear, the Journal of the Ceylon Branch of the British Medical Association, has been published without interruption up to now. The journal"s name changed to the CMJ in 1954.