Context:
Health-care professionals who are involved in treating COVID patients use multiple coping strategies to overcome stress. Studies have shown that individuals having poor coping strategies and resilience are more prone toward psychological symptoms.
Aims:
The study was conducted to assess the coping strategies and resilience and its association with psychological symptoms of frontline doctors working in a COVID care center.
Settings and Design:
It was a cross-sectional study using convenient sampling conducted among 150 frontline doctors working in a COVID care center.
Materials and Methods:
The study tools included were sociodemographic questionnaire, Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale 21, Brief-COPE Scale, and Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale which was sent using Google Forms to participants after obtaining informed consent.
Statistical Analysis Used:
Statistical analysis was conducted using Chi-square test for categorical variables, t-test for continuous variables, and Mann–Whitney U test for ordinal data, Spearman correlation for correlations, and backward multiple linear regression to predict psychological symptoms.
Results:
Doctors with severe stress had higher dysfunctional coping and lower resilience scores (P = 0.001). There was a positive correlation of stress, anxiety, and depression with problem-focused, emotional-focused, and dysfunctional coping, and there was a negative correlation between total resilience scores with stress and depression. Stress and anxiety were predicted by dysfunctional coping and resilience. Depression was predicted by dysfunctional coping (β = 1.25, P < 0.001), resilience (β = −0.08, P = 0.005), and duration of working hours per month (β = −0.008, P = 0.05).
Conclusions:
There is an urgent need to look at therapeutic strategies and factors which enhance resilience and promote better coping in this population.
Context:
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has led to several psychological symptoms among frontline doctors of which sleep disturbances are common. Stress due to isolation and disease-related factors are known to be associated with sleep disturbances.
Aim:
The aim of this study is to establish the prevalence of poor sleep and its association with psychological symptoms among doctors working in COVID-19 tertiary hospital.
Settings and Design:
A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among 150 doctors who were treating COVID-19 patients.
Materials and Methods:
The survey contained a semi-structured questionnaire including sociodemographic details, Depression Anxiety Stress Scale 21, and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index scale. Analysis was done using the SPSS v20.
Results:
Of 150 doctors, we found 67 (44.67%) and 83 (55.33%) doctors were poor sleepers and good sleepers, respectively. Those who were married (
P
= 0.001), had higher working hours per month (
P
= 0.001), the presence of family history of psychiatric illness (
P
= 0.008), and history of substance use (
P
= 0.007) were associated with poor sleep. Furthermore, poor sleep was associated with higher stress (
P
= 0.001), anxiety (
P
= 0.001), and depression (
P
= 0.001). A multiple logistic regression revealed that family history of psychiatric illness (odds ratio [OR]-5.44,
P
= 0.01) and the presence of substance use (OR-7.77,
P
= 0.01) predicted poor sleep.
Conclusion:
Sleep pattern abnormalities were present in 45% of the frontline COVID-19 doctors studied. Family history of psychiatric illness and substance use was associated with higher chances of having poor sleep. It is important to recognize and manage sleep abnormalities as these could be initial signs of a psychiatric disorder or manifestations of underlying stress, especially in the vulnerable population.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.