Factors associated with the psychological well‐being among front‐line nurses exposed to COVID‐2019 in China: A predictive study

Abstract

Aims To evaluate psychological well‐being and factors associated with post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among front‐line nurses during the coronavirus disease‐2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic. Background Coronavirus disease‐2019 is a pandemic that has posed a public health emergency of international concern. Psychological well‐being of front‐line nurses is a big concern during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Methods With a predictive study design, a same survey was sent separately at two time points (i.e. before and after nurses worked at COVID‐19 units) between January and March 2020 among 356 front‐line nurses in First Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical College, Anhui, China. Results Of a total 356 front‐line nurses, stress level and the prevalence of PTSD were significantly increased after they worked at COVID‐19 units. Nurses who had work experience less than 2 years were significantly associated with a high risk of developing PTSD. Nurses who worked in COVID‐19 inpatients wards had significantly higher odds of being PTSD (odds ratio [OR] = 21.9, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.08; 94.5) than those who worked in other COVID‐19‐related units. Resilience was negatively associated with PTSD (OR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.93; 0.99). Conclusion Nurses had significantly increased risk to develop PTSD during COVID‐19 pandemic. Implications for nursing management Clinical and policy strategies to support front‐line nurses’ psychological well‐being, particularly young nurses, in response to COVID‐19 crisis are urgently needed.

Prevalence of stress, depression, anxiety and sleep disturbance among nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis

“…Stress was estimated in 40 studies [ 18 , 20 , 25 , 27 , 29 , 33 , 35 , 36 , [39] , [40] , [41] , [42] , [43] , [44] , [45] , [46] , [47] , [48] , [49] , [50] , [51] , [52] , [53] , [54] , [55] , [56] , [57] , [58] , [59] , [60] , [61] , [62] , [63] , [64] , [65] , [66] , [67] , [68] , [69] , [70] ]. The overall pooled point estimates of prevalence for stress varied between 10% and 84% ( Fig.…”

“…The pooled prevalence according to the month of data collected was as follows: February: 32% ( n = 14; 95% CI 25–41; I2 = 98), March: 45% (n = 6; 95% CI 37–53; I2 = 96) and April: 50% ( n = 13; 95% CI 35–66; I2 = 98). Seventeen studies [ 20 , 35 , 36 , 39 , 43 , 44 , 46 , 54 , [57] , [58] , [59] , [60] , [61] , [62] , [63] , 67 , 69 ] involving nurses who were working on the frontline showed stress prevalence at 46% (95% CI = 39–54; I 2 = 97), whereas 20 studies including mixed nurses working in the frontline and second line showed the stress prevalence was 42% (95% CI = 31–53, I 2 = 99). Thirteen studies that used the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) showed a pooled prevalence of stress at 50% (95% CI = 41–59, I 2 = 98), whereas eight studies [ 35 , 45 , [54] , [55] , [56] , 63 , 64 , 67 ] using the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) had a pooled prevalence of 50% (95% CI = 37–63, I 2 = 99).…”

Psychological resilience, coping behaviours, and social support among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review of quantitative studies

“…Sociodemographic factors included younger age (Serrano-Ripoll et al ., 2020), female sex (Sahin et al ., 2020; Serrano-Ripoll et al ., 2020), being in the nursing profession (Vizhen et al ., 2020; Shaukat et al ., 2020), a history of psychiatric illness, and a history of requiring psychiatric support (Sahin et al ., 2020). Organizational factors that contributed to poorer mental health included assignment in high-risk units or wards, absence of structured trainings or updates related to coronavirus, and inadequate supplies and equipment needed to protect against the infection (Vizhen et al ., 2020; Alshekaili et al ., 2020).…”

One Year of Evidence on Mental Health Disorders in China during the COVID-19 Crisis - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…We also emailed the authors of 43 articles that missed critical information and were able to get the information to include 10 additional studies. Altogether, the process generated 131 articles for this meta-analysis (An et al, 2020; Ben-Ezra et al; Cai et al; Cao et al, 2020; Chen et al; Chen et al; Chen et al; Chen et al; Chen et al, 2020; Cheng et al; Choi et al; Dai, 2020; Dong et al, 2020; Du et al, 2020; Elhai et al, 2020; Fang et al, 2020; Feng et al, 2020; Fong et al, 2020; Fu et al, 2020; Gao, 2020; Guo et al, 2020; Guo, 2020; Han et al, 2020; Hong et al, 2020; Hou et al, 2020; Hu et al, 2020a; Hu et al, 2020b; Huang et al, 2020a; Huang et al, 2020c; Huang et al, 2020d; Jin et al, 2020; Juan et al, 2020; Lai et al, 2020; Lam et al, 2020; Lei et al, 2020; Leng et al, 2020; Li; Li et al, 2020a; Li et al, 2020b; Li et al, 2020c; Li, 2020a; Li et al, 2020d; Li et al, 2020e; Li, 2020b; Li et al, 2020f; Li et al, 2020g; Liang et al, 2020; Lin et al, 2020a; Lin et al, 2020b; Liu, 2020; Liu, in press; Liu et al, 2020a; Liu et al, 2020b; Liu et al, 2020c; Liu et al, 2020d; Liu et al, 2020e; Liu et al, 2020f; Lu et al, 2020a; Lu et al, 2020b; Lu et al, 2020c; Mi et al, 2020; Ni et al, 2020a; Ni et al, 2020b; Ning et al, 2020; Pan et al, 2020a; Pan et al, 2020b; Qi, 2020; Qian et al, 2020; Qian, 2020; Qiu et al, 2020; Que et al, 2020; Ren et al, 2020b; Shi et al, 2020; Si et al, 2020; Song et al, 2020; Song, 2020; Su et al, 2020; Sun et al, 2020a; Sun, 2020; Sun et al, 2020b; Sun et al, 2020c; Tan et al, 2020; Teng et al, 2020; Tu et al, 2020; Wang et al, 2020a;…”