Alexander Niecke, Michaela Henning, Martin Hellmich, Yesim Erim, Eva Morawa, Petra Beschoner, Lucia Jerg-Bretzke, Franziska Geiser, Andreas M Baranowski, Kerstin Weidner, Sabine Mogwitz, Christian Albus
{"title":"[德国重症监护人员在 COVID-19 大流行期间的心理压力。VOICE研究结果]。","authors":"Alexander Niecke, Michaela Henning, Martin Hellmich, Yesim Erim, Eva Morawa, Petra Beschoner, Lucia Jerg-Bretzke, Franziska Geiser, Andreas M Baranowski, Kerstin Weidner, Sabine Mogwitz, Christian Albus","doi":"10.1007/s00063-024-01164-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic posed major challenges to the healthcare system worldwide and led to particular stress among healthcare workers. The aim of this analysis was to investigate the level of global mental stress of direct healthcare workers in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this prospective cross-sectional study with four measurement points (T1: 4-5/2020, T2:11/2020-1/2021, 5-7/2021, 2-5/2022), psychological distress symptoms were recorded in an online survey with the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-4) among hospital staff working in direct patient care (N = 5408 datasets). The total dataset was exploratively analyzed according to field of activity, gender, and professional group affiliation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Clinically relevant psychological distress (PHQ-4 ≥ 5) was present in 29.3% (n = 419/1429) of intensive care staff. A comparison of the four cross-sectional surveys showed a significant increase in the rate of clinically relevant mental distress in the first pandemic year (23.2% at T1 vs. 30.6% at T2; p < 0.01), which stabilized at a high level in the second pandemic year (33.6% at T3 and 32.0% at T4). Women did not differ from men in this respect (n = 280/919, 30.4% vs. n = 139/508, 27.4%; p = 0.74). Nursing staff were significantly more often psychologically stressed than physicians (n = 339/1105, 30.7% vs. n = 80/324, 24.7%; p = 0.03). Intensive care staff did not show significantly higher stress than staff working in nonintensive care areas (n = 419/1429, 29.3% vs. n = 1149/3979, 28.7%, p = 0.21).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>German healthcare workers reported high levels of mental distress during the pandemic, which increased during the course of the pandemic, but no significant difference was found between intensive care and nonintensive care staff in our sample. This may be due to the fact that the pandemic in Germany was comparatively moderate internationally and neither a collapse of the healthcare system in general nor a collapse of intensive care structures in particular took place.</p>","PeriodicalId":49019,"journal":{"name":"Medizinische Klinik-Intensivmedizin Und Notfallmedizin","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Mental distress of intensive care staff in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results from the VOICE study].\",\"authors\":\"Alexander Niecke, Michaela Henning, Martin Hellmich, Yesim Erim, Eva Morawa, Petra Beschoner, Lucia Jerg-Bretzke, Franziska Geiser, Andreas M Baranowski, Kerstin Weidner, Sabine Mogwitz, Christian Albus\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00063-024-01164-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic posed major challenges to the healthcare system worldwide and led to particular stress among healthcare workers. The aim of this analysis was to investigate the level of global mental stress of direct healthcare workers in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this prospective cross-sectional study with four measurement points (T1: 4-5/2020, T2:11/2020-1/2021, 5-7/2021, 2-5/2022), psychological distress symptoms were recorded in an online survey with the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-4) among hospital staff working in direct patient care (N = 5408 datasets). The total dataset was exploratively analyzed according to field of activity, gender, and professional group affiliation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Clinically relevant psychological distress (PHQ-4 ≥ 5) was present in 29.3% (n = 419/1429) of intensive care staff. A comparison of the four cross-sectional surveys showed a significant increase in the rate of clinically relevant mental distress in the first pandemic year (23.2% at T1 vs. 30.6% at T2; p < 0.01), which stabilized at a high level in the second pandemic year (33.6% at T3 and 32.0% at T4). Women did not differ from men in this respect (n = 280/919, 30.4% vs. n = 139/508, 27.4%; p = 0.74). Nursing staff were significantly more often psychologically stressed than physicians (n = 339/1105, 30.7% vs. n = 80/324, 24.7%; p = 0.03). Intensive care staff did not show significantly higher stress than staff working in nonintensive care areas (n = 419/1429, 29.3% vs. n = 1149/3979, 28.7%, p = 0.21).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>German healthcare workers reported high levels of mental distress during the pandemic, which increased during the course of the pandemic, but no significant difference was found between intensive care and nonintensive care staff in our sample. This may be due to the fact that the pandemic in Germany was comparatively moderate internationally and neither a collapse of the healthcare system in general nor a collapse of intensive care structures in particular took place.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49019,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medizinische Klinik-Intensivmedizin Und Notfallmedizin\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medizinische Klinik-Intensivmedizin Und Notfallmedizin\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00063-024-01164-6\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medizinische Klinik-Intensivmedizin Und Notfallmedizin","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00063-024-01164-6","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
[Mental distress of intensive care staff in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results from the VOICE study].
Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic posed major challenges to the healthcare system worldwide and led to particular stress among healthcare workers. The aim of this analysis was to investigate the level of global mental stress of direct healthcare workers in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Methods: In this prospective cross-sectional study with four measurement points (T1: 4-5/2020, T2:11/2020-1/2021, 5-7/2021, 2-5/2022), psychological distress symptoms were recorded in an online survey with the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-4) among hospital staff working in direct patient care (N = 5408 datasets). The total dataset was exploratively analyzed according to field of activity, gender, and professional group affiliation.
Results: Clinically relevant psychological distress (PHQ-4 ≥ 5) was present in 29.3% (n = 419/1429) of intensive care staff. A comparison of the four cross-sectional surveys showed a significant increase in the rate of clinically relevant mental distress in the first pandemic year (23.2% at T1 vs. 30.6% at T2; p < 0.01), which stabilized at a high level in the second pandemic year (33.6% at T3 and 32.0% at T4). Women did not differ from men in this respect (n = 280/919, 30.4% vs. n = 139/508, 27.4%; p = 0.74). Nursing staff were significantly more often psychologically stressed than physicians (n = 339/1105, 30.7% vs. n = 80/324, 24.7%; p = 0.03). Intensive care staff did not show significantly higher stress than staff working in nonintensive care areas (n = 419/1429, 29.3% vs. n = 1149/3979, 28.7%, p = 0.21).
Conclusion: German healthcare workers reported high levels of mental distress during the pandemic, which increased during the course of the pandemic, but no significant difference was found between intensive care and nonintensive care staff in our sample. This may be due to the fact that the pandemic in Germany was comparatively moderate internationally and neither a collapse of the healthcare system in general nor a collapse of intensive care structures in particular took place.
期刊介绍：
Medizinische Klinik – Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin is an internationally respected interdisciplinary journal. It is intended for physicians, nurses, respiratory and physical therapists active in intensive care and accident/emergency units, but also for internists, anesthesiologists, surgeons, neurologists, and pediatricians with special interest in intensive care medicine.
Comprehensive reviews describe the most recent advances in the field of internal medicine with special focus on intensive care problems. Freely submitted original articles present important studies in this discipline and promote scientific exchange, while articles in the category Photo essay feature interesting cases and aim at optimizing diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. In the rubric journal club well-respected experts comment on outstanding international publications. Review articles under the rubric "Continuing Medical Education" present verified results of scientific research and their integration into daily practice. The rubrics "Nursing practice" and "Physical therapy" round out the information.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
