The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Psychological Well-being of Healthcare Workers in Obstetrics and Gynaecology: An Observational Study at an Apex Institute

Jyoti Meena,Soniya Dhiman,Renu Sharma,Kamlesh Kumari,Seema Singhal,Vidushi Kulshrestha,Richa Vatsa,Vanamail Perumal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.24040

2022-04-11

Cureus

Abstract:Background and objective The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected the health, social, and economic sectors all over the world. With a view to assessing the impact of COVID-19 on the mental health of healthcare workers (HCWs), we conducted a study to find out the incidence and severity of depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among HCWs. Material and methods This was an observational cross-sectional study conducted in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology in collaboration with the Department of Psychiatry at AIIMS, New Delhi from March 2021 to June 2021. One hundred HCWs working in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology were surveyed using a set of semi-structured interview schedules and structured questionnaires distributed via email or manually. The structured questionnaire included the demographic profile; other baseline information; the 42-item Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-42); and the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) instrument. Data analysis was carried out using the statistical package STATA version 14.0 (StataCorp LLC, College Station, TX). Results A total of 100 HCWs participated in the study, out of which 39 (39%), 45 (45%), and 16 (16%) were doctors, nursing staff, and supporting staff, respectively. Overall, 92 (92%) of the participants were women, and the mean age of the participants was 29.87 ±4.85 years. Out of the 100 participants, 17 (17%), 25 (25%), 13 (13%), and two (2%) participants had depression, anxiety, stress, and PTSD, respectively. Occupation-wise, among the nursing staff, doctors, and supporting staff, the incidence of depression was 24.4%, 15.4%, 0.0%, respectively; the anxiety rate was 33.3%, 25.6%, and 0.0%, respectively; and the rate of stress was 17.8%, 12.8%, and 0.0%, respectively. The IES-R score was significantly higher among unmarried as compared to married participants (2.70 ±7.935 vs. 1.60 ±3.583, p=0.000). Participants living in joint families had a higher DASS-42 score (DASS-D: 4.00 ±5.299 vs. 3.77 ±7.727, p=0.889; DASS-A: 4.31 ±4.398 vs. 4.12 ±7.496, p=0.905; DASS-S: 4.08 ±4.816 vs. 3.88 ±7.567, p=0.016) and lower IES-R score (1.31 ±4.922 vs. 2.66 ±9.947, p=0.752) as compared to those living in nuclear families. Depression (4.86 ±8.165 vs. 2.00 ±4.388, p=0.054), anxiety (5.31 ±7.538 vs. 2.14 ±4.704, p=0.024), stress (5.20 ±7.651 vs. 1.67 ±4.733, p=0.014) and PTSD (3.61 ±10.900 vs. 1.44 ±2.634, p=0.245) were all higher among HCWs having exposure to COVID-19 more than 10 hours per week compared to participants with an exposure of less than 10 hours per week. The participants having psychiatric illness in the family showed significantly higher mean values for DASS-42 (DASS-D: 20.00 ±26.870 vs. 3.50 ±6.264, p=0.001; DASS-A: 18.50 ±20.506 vs. 3.88 ±6.215, p=0.002; DASS-S: 18.00 ±21.213 vs. 3.64 ±6.346, p=0.003) as compared to those without any psychiatric illness in the family. Conclusion Based on our findings, occupational and environmental factors at the workplace play a key role in mental health outcomes, and COVID-19 has had a significant impact on the mental health of HCWs. Furthermore, we have also observed that effective planning can significantly reduce mental stress.