Psychological and occupational impact on healthcare workers and its associated factors during the COVID-19 outbreak in China
Xiaodan Zhang,Ye Jiang,Hu Yu,Yafen Jiang,Qiongfeng Guan,Weihe Zhao,Yingying Mao,Danfeng Huang,Wenke Hong,Da Li
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-021-01657-3
Abstract:Purpose: China was affected by an outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in 2019-2020. Research data are needed to develop evidence-driven strategies to reduce the adverse psychological and occupational impacts on healthcare workers (HCWs). Methods: From March 1, 2020, to March 8, 2020, 946 HCWs in China completed a survey consist of sociodemographic data, precautionary measures against COVID-19, and concerns about COVID-19. Self-administered questionnaire were collected to assess psychological and occupational adverse outcomes of HCWs. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with the outcomes. Results: A total of 55.0%, 56.0% and 48.3% of the HCWs experienced burnout, psychological distress and posttraumatic stress, respectively. A total of seven factors were independently associated with burnout: good health status (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.36-0.71), fear of contagion (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.003-1.79), avoiding contact with children (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.03-1.91), enough staff support at the workplace (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38-0.92), having to work overtime (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.03-1.83), maladaptive coping (OR 3.28, 95% CI 2.42-4.45) and adaptive coping (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.35-0.62). A total of 11 factors were independently associated with high psychological distress: having one child (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.38-0.77), good health status (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.39-0.83), alcohol abuse (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.02-2.25), thinking the epidemic would continue for quite a long time (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.08-2.34), wearing extra-work clothes (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.06-2.15),effective protective equipment (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.22-0.90), enough staff support at the workplace (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.34-0.89), unable to take care of families (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.42-2.78), economic losses (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.14-2.31), maladaptive coping (OR 6.88, 95% CI 4.75-9.97),and adaptive coping (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.21-0.41). These factors were independently associated with posttraumatic stress: living with the elderly (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.04-2.05), alcohol abuse (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.002-1.98), working at a 3A hospital(OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.49-0.88), acquaintances confirmed COVID-19 (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.20-3.84), fear of contagion (OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.40-2.50), believing they would survive if infected (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.46-0.86), self-disinfected after arriving home (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.01-2.02), interpersonal isolation (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.21-2.26), unable to take care of families (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.05-1.88) and maladaptive coping (OR 3.09, 95% CI 2.32-4.11). Conclusion: The variance in adverse outcomes was explained by the effect of various factors, which will help policymakers better prepare for subsequent potential outbreaks of COVID-19.