Objective The aim of this cross-sectional web-based study was to examine self-reported mental distress, psychosocial burdens, working conditions and potential risk and protective factors for depressive and anxiety symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic in health care workers (HCW). Methods In the largest survey on mental health of HCW conducted during the first wave of COVID-19 in Europe (N = 8071 HCW), we investigated depressive (Patient Health Questionnaire-2, PHQ-2), and anxiety symptoms (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-2, GAD-2), working conditions, and psychosocial burden of 3678 HCW of three health care professions in hospitals: physicians (n = 1061), nurses (n = 1275), and medical technical assistants (MTA, n = 1342). Results The prevalence of clinically significant levels of depressive and anxiety symptoms was 17.4% and 17.8% for physicians, 21.6% and 19.0% for nurses, and 23.0% and 20.1% for MTA, respectively. All three professions demonstrated significantly elevated PHQ-2 and GAD-2 scores, when compared with general German population before the pandemic, but lower scores in relation to that during the pandemic. Multiple linear regression analyses revealed that higher levels of depressive symptoms were associated with insufficient recovery during leisure time, increased alcohol consumption, and less trust in colleagues in difficult situations. In addition, elevated anxiety scores were related to increased fear of becoming infected with COVID-19. Conclusion During the pandemic HCW demonstrated a lower burden of mental distress compared to the general population. Nevertheless, a high percentage of HCW demonstrates psychosocial distress, so that the establishment of regular mental health screening and prevention programmes for HCW is indicated.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic is impacting mental health worldwide, particularly among healthcare workers (HCWs). Risk and protective factors for depression and generalized anxiety in healthcare workers need to be identified to protect their health and ability to work. Social support and optimism are known protective psychosocial resources, but have not been adequately studied in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic among healthcare workers in Germany. Methods: Within the first wave of the VOICE study (n = 7765), a longitudinal web-based survey study among healthcare workers in Germany, we assessed symptoms of depression (PHQ-2) and generalized anxiety (GAD-2), social support (ENRICHD Social Support Inventory; ESSI), and generalized optimism as well as sociodemographic, occupational, and COVID-19 related variables. Multiple linear regression analyses were conducted to examine associations between the constructs. Results: The analyses revealed that higher levels of social support and optimism were associated with lower levels of depression and generalized anxiety. They showed a higher association with depression and generalized anxiety than demographic or occupational risk factors such as female gender and direct contact with infected individuals. Conclusion: Psychosocial resources such as social support and optimism appear to contribute to successful coping with the COVID-19 pandemic and should be considered in future studies.

Background: Sick leave and turnover of nurses exacerbate an already existing nursing shortage during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany and other countries. Frequency and associated factors of sick leave and intention to quit among nurses need to be examined to maintain healthcare. Methods: An online survey among nursing staff (N = 757) in German hospitals was conducted between May and July 2021. Sick leave days, intention to quit, working conditions, depression, anxiety and sleep disorder symptoms, effort-reward imbalance (ERI), COVID-19-related and sociodemographic variables were measured. Regression analyses were performed. Results: The intention to quit was present in 18.9%. One third (32.5%) reported sick leave of ≥10 and 12.3% more than 25 days in 12 months. Significant predictors for ≥10 sick leave days were infection with SARS-CoV-2, a pre-existing illness, exhaustion, trust in colleagues and fear of becoming infected. Higher ERI reward levels, perception of sufficient staff and contact with infected patients were associated with lower odds for ≥10 sick leave days. Lower reward levels, having changed work departments during the pandemic, working part-time and higher depression levels significantly predicted turnover intention. Conclusion: Alarmingly, many nurses intend to quit working in healthcare. Perceived reward seems to buffer both sick leave and turnover intention. Enhancing protection from COVID-19 and reducing workload might also prevent sick leave. Depression prevention, improved change management and support of part-time workers could contribute to reducing turnover intention among nurses.

Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in severe detrimental effects on the mental well-being of health care workers (HCW). Consequently, there has been a need to identify health-promoting resources in order to mitigate the psychological impact of the pandemic on HCW. Objective Our objective was to investigate the association of sense of coherence (SOC), social support and religiosity with self-reported mental symptoms and increase of subjective burden during the COVID-19 pandemic in HCW. Methods Our sample comprised 4324 HCW of four professions (physicians, nurses, medical technical assistants (MTA) and pastoral workers) who completed an online survey from 20 April to 5 July 2020. Health-promoting resources were assessed using the Sense of Coherence Scale Short Form (SOC-3), the ENRICHD Social Support Inventory (ESSI) and one item on religiosity derived from the Scale of Transpersonal Trust (TPV). Anxiety and depression symptoms were measured with the PHQ-2 and GAD-2. The increase of subjective burden due to the pandemic was assessed as the retrospective difference between burden during the pandemic and before the pandemic. Results In multiple regressions, higher SOC was strongly associated with fewer anxiety and depression symptoms. Higher social support was also related to less severe mental symptoms, but with a smaller effect size, while religiosity showed minimal to no correlation with anxiety or depression. In professional group analysis, SOC was negatively associated with mental symptoms in all groups, while social support only correlated significantly with mental health outcomes in physicians and MTA. In the total sample and among subgroups, an increase of subjective burden was meaningfully associated only with a weaker SOC. Conclusion Perceived social support and especially higher SOC appeared to be beneficial for mental health of HCW during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the different importance of the resources in the respective occupations requires further research to identify possible reasons.

Objective: The present study aimed to investigate the correlation between moral distress and mental health symptoms, socio-demographic, occupational, and COVID-19-related variables, and to determine differences in healthcare workers’ (HCW) moral distress during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.Method: Data from 3,293 HCW from a web-based survey conducted between the 20th of April and the 5th of July 2020 were analyzed. We focused on moral distress (Moral Distress Thermometer, MDT), depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-2, PHQ-2), anxiety symptoms (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-2, GAD-2), and increased general distress of nurses, physicians, medical-technical assistants (MTA), psychologists/psychotherapists, and pastoral counselors working in German hospitals.Results: The strongest correlations for moral distress were found with depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, occupancy rate at current work section, and contact with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Nurses and MTA experienced significantly higher moral distress than physicians, psychologists/psychotherapists, and pastoral counselors. The average level of moral distress reported by nurses from all work areas was similar to levels which before the pandemic were only experienced by nurses in intensive or critical care units.Conclusion: Results indicate that moral distress is a relevant phenomenon among HCW in hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic, regardless of whether they work at the frontline or not and requires urgent attention.

Background In times of the global corona pandemic health care workers (HCWs) fight the disease at the frontline of healthcare services and are confronted with an exacerbated load of pandemic burden. Psychosocial resources are thought to buffer adverse effects of pandemic stressors on mental health. This rapid review summarizes evidence on the specific interplay of pandemic burden and psychosocial resources with regard to the mental health of HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic. The goal was to derive potential starting points for supportive interventions. Methods We conducted a rapid systematic review following the recommendations of the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group. We searched 7 databases in February 2021 and included peer-reviewed quantitative studies, that reported related data on pandemic stressors, psychosocial resources, and mental health of HCWs. Results 46 reports were finally included in the review and reported data on all three outcomes at hand. Most studies (n = 41) applied a cross-sectional design. Our results suggest that there are several statistically significant pandemic risk factors for mental health problems in HCWs such as high risk and fear of infection, while resilience, active and emotion-focused coping strategies as well as social support can be considered beneficial when protecting different aspects of mental health in HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Evidence for patterns of interaction between outcomes were found in the context of coping style when facing specific pandemic stressors. Conclusions Our results indicate that several psychosocial resources may play an important role in buffering adverse effects of pandemic burden on the mental health of HCWs in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Nevertheless, causal interpretations of mentioned associations are inadequate due to the overall low study quality and the dominance of cross-sectional study designs. Prospective longitudinal studies are required to elucidate the missing links.

Purpose: This article aims to identify how the term “resilience” is addressed in adult health science due to ongoing criticism about the lack of consistency in its conceptualization.Method: Two databases (PubMed and PsycArticles) were searched to retrieve reviews published from 2015 up until 2020 on the general conceptualization of resilience. All reviews had to meet specific inclusion criteria, which resulted in the inclusion of 18 articles. After discussing different conceptualizations regarding the process-oriented approach of resilience in adult health research, we will highlight some mechanisms that are supposed to be involved in the resilience process.Results: Research on resilience in health sciences confronts three core difficulties: defining positive outcome for a processual construct, describing different trajectories within the process, and identifying mechanisms that mediate resilience.Conclusion: The definition of resilience in mental health research as a multidimensional adaptation process is widely accepted, and multiple research paradigms have contributed to a better understanding of the concept. However, the definition of a processual construct in a way that allows for high expert consensus and a valid operationalization for empirical studies remains a challenge. Future research should focus on the assessment of multiple cross-domain outcomes and international and interdisciplinary prospective mixed-method longitudinal designs to fill in the missing links.

Introduction: Epidemics lead to an increase in occupational stress and psychological strain among healthcare workers. However, the impact of a pandemic outbreak on healthcare systems is yet to be clearly defined. Therefore, this work aims to describe and analyze specific areas of workload among different groups of healthcare workers during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A sample of N = 8088 persons working in the German-speaking healthcare sector participated in the VOICE/egePan online survey, which addressed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic during the second quarter of 2020. We used 15 self-constructed items, based on the work of Matsuishi et al. (2012), to identify potential COVID-19-specific topics. Results: N = 7542 records of healthcare workers were analyzed. Of these, 60.80% reported, retrospectively, an increase in stress since the outbreak of the pandemic. Problem areas tended to be indicated more frequently by the women surveyed than by the men. Nurses, paramedics and medical technicians reported the highest fear of infecting others while physicians reported the highest fear of physical or mental exhaustion. With respect to age, older respondents indicated less fear and felt more protected. Men and people living alone were more likely to use dysfunctional coping strategies. Migrants reported a higher fear of becoming infected or infecting others as well as they reported about increased levels of smoking. Discussion: Retrospectively, the COVID-19 pandemic led to an increase in stress among healthcare workers. Problem areas have different focuses with regard to different living situations, environmental conditions and professions. In order to lay the best basis for healthy and efficient work, it seems necessary to take measures especially tailored to the needs of different groups of healthcare workers.