COVID-19大流行期间初级和三级卫生保健工作条件:一项比较横断面研究

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Ida Aulanko, Enni Sanmark, Lotta Oksanen, Sampo Oksanen, Laura Lahdentausta, Anne Kivimäki, Susanna Paju, Milla Pietiäinen, Pirkko Pussinen, Ahmed Geneid
{"title":"COVID-19大流行期间初级和三级卫生保健工作条件:一项比较横断面研究","authors":"Ida Aulanko,&nbsp;Enni Sanmark,&nbsp;Lotta Oksanen,&nbsp;Sampo Oksanen,&nbsp;Laura Lahdentausta,&nbsp;Anne Kivimäki,&nbsp;Susanna Paju,&nbsp;Milla Pietiäinen,&nbsp;Pirkko Pussinen,&nbsp;Ahmed Geneid","doi":"10.13075/ijomeh.1896.01944","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic has globally affected healthcare workers' (HCWs) health and wellbeing. Most studies on COVID-19 have focused on tertiary healthcare. The aim of this study was to increase the knowledge on the effects of the pandemic on working conditions in tertiary and primary healthcare.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>The comparative cross-sectional study consisted of an online questionnaire sent to HCWs of the City of Helsinki (primary healthcare) and Helsinki University Hospital (tertiary healthcare). Altogether 1580 HCWs with direct patient contact participated in the study: 895 from tertiary and 685 from primary healthcare. Statistical analysis used SPSS 25 from IBM. The tests used were the χ2 test, Fisher's exact test, and binary logistic regression analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Primary HCWs were less likely to treat COVID-19 patients (OR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.37-0.56). However, both groups reported a similar number of COVID-19 infections, primary HCWs 4.9% and tertiary HCWs 5.0%, and workrelated quarantine was significantly more prevalent (OR = 1.96, 95% CI: 1.38-2.79) among primary HCWs. In addition, work-related wellbeing was poorer among primary HCWs than tertiary HCWs in terms of feeling more stressed at work (OR = 3.20, 95% CI: 2.55-4.02), not recovering from work (OR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.39-0.62), reported mental wellbeing below normal levels (OR: 1.59, 95% CI: 1.26-2.00), and increased working hours (OR = 1.63, 95% CI: 1.25-2.12).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study demonstrates how the pandemic has affected the wellbeing and working conditions of not only tertiary but also less studied primary HCWs. The authors' findings suggest that the challenges identified during the COVID-19 pandemic in the health and wellbeing of healthcare workers are even greater in primary care than in tertiary care. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2023;36(1):139-50.</p>","PeriodicalId":14173,"journal":{"name":"International journal of occupational medicine and environmental health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/63/e0/ijomeh-36-139.PMC10464802.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Working conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic in primary and tertiary healthcare: a comparative cross-sectional study.\",\"authors\":\"Ida Aulanko,&nbsp;Enni Sanmark,&nbsp;Lotta Oksanen,&nbsp;Sampo Oksanen,&nbsp;Laura Lahdentausta,&nbsp;Anne Kivimäki,&nbsp;Susanna Paju,&nbsp;Milla Pietiäinen,&nbsp;Pirkko Pussinen,&nbsp;Ahmed Geneid\",\"doi\":\"10.13075/ijomeh.1896.01944\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic has globally affected healthcare workers' (HCWs) health and wellbeing. Most studies on COVID-19 have focused on tertiary healthcare. The aim of this study was to increase the knowledge on the effects of the pandemic on working conditions in tertiary and primary healthcare.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>The comparative cross-sectional study consisted of an online questionnaire sent to HCWs of the City of Helsinki (primary healthcare) and Helsinki University Hospital (tertiary healthcare). Altogether 1580 HCWs with direct patient contact participated in the study: 895 from tertiary and 685 from primary healthcare. Statistical analysis used SPSS 25 from IBM. The tests used were the χ2 test, Fisher's exact test, and binary logistic regression analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Primary HCWs were less likely to treat COVID-19 patients (OR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.37-0.56). However, both groups reported a similar number of COVID-19 infections, primary HCWs 4.9% and tertiary HCWs 5.0%, and workrelated quarantine was significantly more prevalent (OR = 1.96, 95% CI: 1.38-2.79) among primary HCWs. In addition, work-related wellbeing was poorer among primary HCWs than tertiary HCWs in terms of feeling more stressed at work (OR = 3.20, 95% CI: 2.55-4.02), not recovering from work (OR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.39-0.62), reported mental wellbeing below normal levels (OR: 1.59, 95% CI: 1.26-2.00), and increased working hours (OR = 1.63, 95% CI: 1.25-2.12).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study demonstrates how the pandemic has affected the wellbeing and working conditions of not only tertiary but also less studied primary HCWs. The authors' findings suggest that the challenges identified during the COVID-19 pandemic in the health and wellbeing of healthcare workers are even greater in primary care than in tertiary care. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2023;36(1):139-50.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14173,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of occupational medicine and environmental health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/63/e0/ijomeh-36-139.PMC10464802.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of occupational medicine and environmental health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.13075/ijomeh.1896.01944\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of occupational medicine and environmental health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13075/ijomeh.1896.01944","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

目标:2019冠状病毒病大流行在全球范围内影响了卫生保健工作者的健康和福祉。大多数关于COVID-19的研究都集中在三级医疗保健上。这项研究的目的是增加对大流行病对三级和初级保健工作条件影响的认识。材料和方法:比较横断面研究包括向赫尔基基市(初级卫生保健)和赫尔辛基大学医院(三级卫生保健)的卫生保健工作者发送在线问卷。共有1580名与患者有直接接触的医护人员参与了这项研究:895名来自三级医疗机构,685名来自初级医疗机构。统计学分析采用IBM SPSS 25软件。采用χ2检验、Fisher精确检验和二元logistic回归分析。结果:初级卫生保健员治疗COVID-19患者的可能性较小(OR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.37-0.56)。然而,两组报告的COVID-19感染人数相似,初级卫生保健人员为4.9%,三级卫生保健人员为5.0%,初级卫生保健人员中与工作相关的隔离更为普遍(OR = 1.96, 95% CI: 1.38-2.79)。此外,与三级医护人员相比,初级医护人员在工作压力更大(OR = 3.20, 95% CI: 2.55-4.02)、无法从工作中恢复(OR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.39-0.62)、报告的心理健康低于正常水平(OR: 1.59, 95% CI: 1.26-2.00)、工作时间增加(OR = 1.63, 95% CI: 1.25-2.12)等方面的工作幸福感较差。结论:该研究表明,大流行不仅影响了三级卫生保健工作者的福利和工作条件,而且还影响了研究较少的初级卫生保健工作者。作者的研究结果表明,在COVID-19大流行期间,初级保健所面临的卫生保健工作者健康和福祉方面的挑战甚至比三级保健更大。中华医学杂志,2009;36(1):139- 139。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Working conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic in primary and tertiary healthcare: a comparative cross-sectional study.

Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic has globally affected healthcare workers' (HCWs) health and wellbeing. Most studies on COVID-19 have focused on tertiary healthcare. The aim of this study was to increase the knowledge on the effects of the pandemic on working conditions in tertiary and primary healthcare.

Material and methods: The comparative cross-sectional study consisted of an online questionnaire sent to HCWs of the City of Helsinki (primary healthcare) and Helsinki University Hospital (tertiary healthcare). Altogether 1580 HCWs with direct patient contact participated in the study: 895 from tertiary and 685 from primary healthcare. Statistical analysis used SPSS 25 from IBM. The tests used were the χ2 test, Fisher's exact test, and binary logistic regression analysis.

Results: Primary HCWs were less likely to treat COVID-19 patients (OR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.37-0.56). However, both groups reported a similar number of COVID-19 infections, primary HCWs 4.9% and tertiary HCWs 5.0%, and workrelated quarantine was significantly more prevalent (OR = 1.96, 95% CI: 1.38-2.79) among primary HCWs. In addition, work-related wellbeing was poorer among primary HCWs than tertiary HCWs in terms of feeling more stressed at work (OR = 3.20, 95% CI: 2.55-4.02), not recovering from work (OR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.39-0.62), reported mental wellbeing below normal levels (OR: 1.59, 95% CI: 1.26-2.00), and increased working hours (OR = 1.63, 95% CI: 1.25-2.12).

Conclusions: The study demonstrates how the pandemic has affected the wellbeing and working conditions of not only tertiary but also less studied primary HCWs. The authors' findings suggest that the challenges identified during the COVID-19 pandemic in the health and wellbeing of healthcare workers are even greater in primary care than in tertiary care. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2023;36(1):139-50.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
52
审稿时长
7.5 months
期刊介绍: The Journal is dedicated to present the contemporary research in occupational and environmental health from all over the world. It publishes works concerning: occupational and environmental: medicine, epidemiology, hygiene and toxicology; work physiology and ergonomics, musculoskeletal problems; psychosocial factors at work, work-related mental problems, aging, work ability and return to work; working hours, shift work; reproductive factors and endocrine disruptors; radiation, ionizing and non-ionizing health effects; agricultural hazards; work safety and injury and occupational health service; climate change and its effects on health; omics, genetics and epigenetics in occupational and environmental health; health effects of exposure to nanoparticles and nanotechnology products; human biomarkers in occupational and environmental health, intervention studies, clinical sciences’ achievements with potential to improve occupational and environmental health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信