一线心理复原力:从大流行经验中吸取的教训。

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Pooja Khurana, Raja Zirwatul Aida Binti Raja Ibrahim, Khatijah Omar, Azlinzuraini Binti Ahmad
{"title":"一线心理复原力:从大流行经验中吸取的教训。","authors":"Pooja Khurana, Raja Zirwatul Aida Binti Raja Ibrahim, Khatijah Omar, Azlinzuraini Binti Ahmad","doi":"10.1016/j.auec.2025.09.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic affected frontline Healthcare Workers (HCWs) immensely, subjecting them to extreme psychological distress. The current study assesses the burnout, anxiety, depression, PTSD, and resilience levels among HCWs and analyses the efficacy of institutional mental health interventions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional longitudinal study design that combined quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews was employed. There were 500 HCWs from public hospitals, private hospitals, primary healthcare centres, and emergency response teams who took part. Validated measures included the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), PTSD Checklist (PCL-5), and Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC). Descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, t-tests, and logistic regression were used in data analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Psychological distress was common, with 42.5 % burnout, 35.2 % anxiety, 29.8 % depression, and 21.4 % PTSD. Long hours (OR = 1.85, p < 0.001), high patient volume (OR = 1.67, p < 0.001), and absence of PPE (OR = 1.52, p = 0.002) were major contributors, and robust workplace support (OR = 0.75, p = 0.037) was protective. Qualitative interviews revealed key themes, including persistent sleep disturbances, Mental Health Support, Emotional and Social consequences, Impact on relationships and fear of infecting family members.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>HCWs experienced extreme psychological distress throughout the pandemic, which requires additional mental health policies, organizational support, and greater access to digital interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":55979,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Emergency Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Frontline mental resilience: Lessons learned from the pandemic experience.\",\"authors\":\"Pooja Khurana, Raja Zirwatul Aida Binti Raja Ibrahim, Khatijah Omar, Azlinzuraini Binti Ahmad\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.auec.2025.09.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic affected frontline Healthcare Workers (HCWs) immensely, subjecting them to extreme psychological distress. The current study assesses the burnout, anxiety, depression, PTSD, and resilience levels among HCWs and analyses the efficacy of institutional mental health interventions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional longitudinal study design that combined quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews was employed. There were 500 HCWs from public hospitals, private hospitals, primary healthcare centres, and emergency response teams who took part. Validated measures included the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), PTSD Checklist (PCL-5), and Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC). Descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, t-tests, and logistic regression were used in data analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Psychological distress was common, with 42.5 % burnout, 35.2 % anxiety, 29.8 % depression, and 21.4 % PTSD. Long hours (OR = 1.85, p < 0.001), high patient volume (OR = 1.67, p < 0.001), and absence of PPE (OR = 1.52, p = 0.002) were major contributors, and robust workplace support (OR = 0.75, p = 0.037) was protective. Qualitative interviews revealed key themes, including persistent sleep disturbances, Mental Health Support, Emotional and Social consequences, Impact on relationships and fear of infecting family members.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>HCWs experienced extreme psychological distress throughout the pandemic, which requires additional mental health policies, organizational support, and greater access to digital interventions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55979,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australasian Emergency Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australasian Emergency Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.auec.2025.09.002\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australasian Emergency Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.auec.2025.09.002","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:2019冠状病毒病大流行对一线医护人员造成了巨大影响,使他们遭受了极大的心理困扰。本研究评估了医护人员的倦怠、焦虑、抑郁、创伤后应激障碍和恢复力水平,并分析了机构心理健康干预的效果。方法:采用定量调查与定性访谈相结合的横断面纵向研究设计。共有500名来自公立医院、私家医院、初级保健中心和紧急应变队的医护人员参加。经验证的测量方法包括Maslach倦怠量表(MBI)、广泛性焦虑障碍量表-7 (GAD-7)、患者健康问卷-9 (PHQ-9)、PTSD检查表(PCL-5)和Connor-Davidson弹性量表(CD-RISC)。资料分析采用描述性统计、卡方检验、t检验和逻辑回归。结果:心理困扰普遍存在,倦怠率为42.5% %,焦虑率为35.2% %,抑郁率为29.8% %,PTSD为21.4% %。结论:在整个大流行期间,卫生保健工作者经历了极度的心理困扰,这需要额外的精神卫生政策、组织支持和更多的数字干预措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Frontline mental resilience: Lessons learned from the pandemic experience.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic affected frontline Healthcare Workers (HCWs) immensely, subjecting them to extreme psychological distress. The current study assesses the burnout, anxiety, depression, PTSD, and resilience levels among HCWs and analyses the efficacy of institutional mental health interventions.

Methods: A cross-sectional longitudinal study design that combined quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews was employed. There were 500 HCWs from public hospitals, private hospitals, primary healthcare centres, and emergency response teams who took part. Validated measures included the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), PTSD Checklist (PCL-5), and Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC). Descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, t-tests, and logistic regression were used in data analysis.

Results: Psychological distress was common, with 42.5 % burnout, 35.2 % anxiety, 29.8 % depression, and 21.4 % PTSD. Long hours (OR = 1.85, p < 0.001), high patient volume (OR = 1.67, p < 0.001), and absence of PPE (OR = 1.52, p = 0.002) were major contributors, and robust workplace support (OR = 0.75, p = 0.037) was protective. Qualitative interviews revealed key themes, including persistent sleep disturbances, Mental Health Support, Emotional and Social consequences, Impact on relationships and fear of infecting family members.

Conclusion: HCWs experienced extreme psychological distress throughout the pandemic, which requires additional mental health policies, organizational support, and greater access to digital interventions.

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
Australasian Emergency Care
Australasian Emergency Care Nursing-Emergency Nursing
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.60%
发文量
82
审稿时长
37 days
期刊介绍: Australasian Emergency Care is an international peer-reviewed journal dedicated to supporting emergency nurses, physicians, paramedics and other professionals in advancing the science and practice of emergency care, wherever it is delivered. As the official journal of the College of Emergency Nursing Australasia (CENA), Australasian Emergency Care is a conduit for clinical, applied, and theoretical research and knowledge that advances the science and practice of emergency care in original, innovative and challenging ways. The journal serves as a leading voice for the emergency care community, reflecting its inter-professional diversity, and the importance of collaboration and shared decision-making to achieve quality patient outcomes. It is strongly focussed on advancing the patient experience and quality of care across the emergency care continuum, spanning the pre-hospital, hospital and post-hospital settings within Australasia and beyond.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信