“…The average score for resilience level was 63.42, which corresponds with previous studies [ 10 , 22 , 30 ]. The resilience score of those with a religious affiliation was significantly lower than those without, which may be related to negative sentiments against a religious group, Shincheonji—the epicenter of the outbreak in the Daegu area [ 6 ].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Measures against COVID-19 have altered everyday life, increased the fear of infection, and negatively influenced psychological well-being [ 2 , 3 , 8 ]. These measures have especially affected patients, self-quarantined individuals, and healthcare providers [ 9 , 10 , 11 ]. Negative psychological impacts may appear in the form of anxiety, frustration, boredom, and loneliness.…”
The restriction of an individual’s daily life due to the strengthening of quarantine and lockdown increases psychosocial stress. This study aimed to determine the factors that influence psychosocial stress during a period of strict quarantine and lockdown to curb the COVID-19 pandemic in Korea. A total of 338 adults participated in a cross-sectional online survey conducted from 19–25 May 2020, which measured knowledge of COVID-19, health belief, resilience, and psychosocial stress. According to the results, there was no difference between the participants’ scores from the Daegu area (with concentrated confirmed COVID-19 cases) and the non-Daegu area except for health belief. Eighty-two percent of participants constituted the high-risk group for psychosocial stress. Individual resilience was positively correlated with health belief and negatively correlated with psychosocial stress (p < 0.001). Further, the following factors affected the level of psychosocial stress: resilience, subjective health status, and monthly household income, with an explanatory power of 39.8%. Therefore, those with higher subjective health and higher monthly household income experienced higher psychosocial stress, whereas higher resilience indicated lower psychosocial stress.
“…The average score for resilience level was 63.42, which corresponds with previous studies [ 10 , 22 , 30 ]. The resilience score of those with a religious affiliation was significantly lower than those without, which may be related to negative sentiments against a religious group, Shincheonji—the epicenter of the outbreak in the Daegu area [ 6 ].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Measures against COVID-19 have altered everyday life, increased the fear of infection, and negatively influenced psychological well-being [ 2 , 3 , 8 ]. These measures have especially affected patients, self-quarantined individuals, and healthcare providers [ 9 , 10 , 11 ]. Negative psychological impacts may appear in the form of anxiety, frustration, boredom, and loneliness.…”
The restriction of an individual’s daily life due to the strengthening of quarantine and lockdown increases psychosocial stress. This study aimed to determine the factors that influence psychosocial stress during a period of strict quarantine and lockdown to curb the COVID-19 pandemic in Korea. A total of 338 adults participated in a cross-sectional online survey conducted from 19–25 May 2020, which measured knowledge of COVID-19, health belief, resilience, and psychosocial stress. According to the results, there was no difference between the participants’ scores from the Daegu area (with concentrated confirmed COVID-19 cases) and the non-Daegu area except for health belief. Eighty-two percent of participants constituted the high-risk group for psychosocial stress. Individual resilience was positively correlated with health belief and negatively correlated with psychosocial stress (p < 0.001). Further, the following factors affected the level of psychosocial stress: resilience, subjective health status, and monthly household income, with an explanatory power of 39.8%. Therefore, those with higher subjective health and higher monthly household income experienced higher psychosocial stress, whereas higher resilience indicated lower psychosocial stress.
“…Population difference could also played a role as our studies included GPs specifically while other studies included all health-care workers, including specialist physicians, nurses, and others. 19,21,22 A study comparing mental health between physicians, nurses, and dentists previously reported lower level of anxiety for physicians, 23 which may help explain the low level of mental health problems found in our survey which only included GPs. Risk factors for adverse mental health condition were similar to previously known risk factors.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 68%
“…Closer reading of included studies in previous systematic reviews showed that earlier studies, with data collected earlier in the pandemic, reported higher prevalence of mental health problems. 6,19 Meanwhile, previous studies in Indonesia were conducted in Java 21,22 and Borneo 20 which experienced a heavier burden of COVID-19 cases during the time of their respective surveys compared to that experienced in Bali during the course of ours. These studies also use nonprobability online-survey-based data collection method which imply comparability with our results.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 82%
“…6,19 Similar studies from Indonesia, which generally included all health-care workers, reported prevalence of depression ranging from 22.8% to 52.1% 20,21 while reported prevalence of anxiety ranged from 28.1% to 57.6%. [20][21][22] No studies reported prevalence of stress. However, some studies reported prevalence of burnout (26.8%) 21 and insomniac symptoms (47.9%).…”
Purpose: We aim to study the level of mental health distress and COVID-19 prevention in practice behaviors among general practitioners (GPs) in Bali, Indonesia, as well as their determinants. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey. Survey recruitment material was disseminated by purposive snowballing through regional professional association as well as research team's personal acquaintances. The survey measured mental health status by DASS-21 questionnaire and practice behavior by a questionnaire based on WHO recommendations for hand hygiene and PPE use during the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted multivariate analyses to identify independent determinants for mental health and practice behavior. Results: Analyses included 635 (41.75%) of GPs in Bali. Mental health status was relatively good with prevalence of depression, anxiety, and stress of 13.2%, 19.7%, and 11% respectively, lower than previous studies in Indonesia and elsewhere. Practice behavior, however, was not considerably lower with only 65.4% and 32.1% reported consistent hand hygiene and recommended PPE use respectively. Routine optional PPE use was reported by 23.6% of respondents. Long working hours and fear of COVID-19 was identified as detrimental to mental health while consistent hand hygiene improved it. Meanwhile, workplace, work setting, and fear of COVID-19, were identified as determinants for PPE use. GPs working in primary health centers and private hospitals were also found to have less adherence to hand hygiene protocols. Conclusion: Our results showed relatively good mental health status along with inadequate infection prevention in practice behavior of GPs in Bali, Indonesia. Intervention should be made to improve practice behavior. Determinants of practice behavior identified in this study could help to pinpoint intervention targets.
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.