Factors Influencing Anxiety of Health Care Workers in the Radiology Department with High Exposure Risk to COVID-19

Huang, Lei; Wang, Yun; Liu, Juan; Ye, Pengfei; Chen, Xijian; Xu, Huayan; Qu, Haibo; Ning, Gang

doi:10.12659/msm.926008

Cited by 58 publications

(75 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We retrieved 1,640 records from the electronic databases (after removal of duplicates) and 355 from the additional searches. After screening of title and/or abstract, we assessed 417 full texts for eligibility, of which 331 were excluded for a variety of reasons (e.g., mismatch with inclusion criteria, mixed population, wrong focus), and 86 [ 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 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 , 95 , 96 , 97 , 98 , 99 , 100 , 101 , 102 , 103 , 104 , 105 , 106 , …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The primary studies on H1N1 were published in New Zealand [ 58 ] and Japan [ 59 ], the studies on Ebola in Germany [ 60 ] and Libera [ 61 ], and the articles on MERS covered the outbreaks in South Korea [ 63 , 64 , 65 ] and Saudi Arabia [ 62 ]. The majority of the studies on COVID-19 were published in China ( n = 32) [ 67 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 84 , 85 , 86 , 88 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 95 , 96 , 97 , 99 , 101 , 102 , 107 , 110 , 113 , 114 , 116 , 117 , 118 , 119 , 121 , 122 , 123 , 124 , 125 , 126 ] and Italy ( n = 6) [ 71 , 72 , 78 , 79 , 83 , 103 ]. Other studies were conducted in the United States [ 68 , 89 , 106 ], Iran [ 100 , 105 , 112 ], Turkey [ 80 , 104 , 111 ], Germany [ 90 , 120 ], Pakistan [ 66 , 87 ], Poland [ 115 ], India [ 108 ], Egypt [ 81 ], Brazil [ 77 ], France [ 70...…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most of the 86 studies applying a cross-sectional study design assessed the psychological impact at a single point in time. Namely, 29 studies performed data collection in earlier phases of the outbreak in the respective country [ 64 , 65 , 66 , 77 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 84 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 , 91 , 96 , 98 , 100 , 103 , 105 , 106 , 108 , 109 , 111 , 112 , 113 , 114 , 115 , 120 , 126 ], nine during the outbreak [ 69 , 73 , 82 , 95 , 97 , 101 , 110 , 118 , 125 ], 32 in later phases [ 41 , 42 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 50 , 53 , 54 , 56 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 67 , 68 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 74 , 78 , 83 , 90 , 92 , 93 , 94 , 102 , 104 , 107 , 117 , 119 ,…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

What We Have Learned from Two Decades of Epidemics and Pandemics: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Psychological Burden of Frontline Healthcare Workers

Busch

Moretti

Mazzi

et al. 2021

Psychother Psychosom

142

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In light of the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and potential future infectious disease outbreaks, a comprehensive understanding of the negative effects of epidemics and pandemics on healthcare workers’ mental health could inform appropriate support interventions. Thus, we aimed to synthesize and quantify the psychological and psychosomatic symptoms among frontline medical staff. We searched four databases up to March 19, 2020 and additional literature, with daily search alerts set up until October 26, 2020. Studies reporting psychological and/or psychosomatic symptoms of healthcare workers caring for patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome, H1N1, Ebola, Middle East respiratory syndrome, or COVID-19 were eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers independently conducted the search, study selection, quality appraisal, data extraction, and synthesis and involved a third reviewer in case of disagreement. We used random effects modeling to estimate the overall prevalence rates of psychological/psychosomatic symptoms and the <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> statistic. We included 86 studies, reporting data from 75,991 participants. Frontline staff showed a wide range of symptoms, including concern about transmitting the virus to the family (60.39%, 95% CI 42.53–76.96), perceived stress (56.77%, 95% CI 34.21–77.95), concerns about own health (45.97%, 95% CI 31.08–61.23), sleeping difficulties (39.88%, 95% CI 27.70–52.72), burnout (31.81%, 95% CI 13.32–53.89), symptoms of depression (25.72%, 95% CI 18.34–33.86), symptoms of anxiety (25.36%, 95% CI 17.90–33.64), symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (24.51%, 95% CI 18.16–31.46), mental health issues (23.11%, 95% CI 15.98–31.10), and symptoms of somatization (14.68%, 95% CI 10.67–19.18). We found consistent evidence for the pervasive and profound impact of large-scale outbreaks on the mental health of frontline healthcare workers. As the COVID-19 crisis continues to unfold, guaranteeing easy access to support structures for the entire healthcare workforce is vitally important.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What We Have Learned from Two Decades of Epidemics and Pandemics: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Psychological Burden of Frontline Healthcare Workers

Busch

Moretti

Mazzi

et al. 2021

Psychother Psychosom

142

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The psychological tools that measured the highest pooled prevalence of depression of 47.02% using 9 studies [2,31,46,53,57,65,85,87,90], anxiety of 58.06% using 9 studies [2,31,46,53,57,65,85,87,90], stress of 69.46% using 5 studies [24,69,86,100,103], and insomnia of 46.58% using 16 studies [8,24,27,32,33,50,53,54,56,60,86,88,90,91,95] were HADS, HADS, PSS and ISI respectively. On the contrary, HAMD, SAS, PTSD, and PSQI tools were used to measure the lowest pooled prevalence of depression of 20.10% using one studies [49], anxiety of 19.39% using 8 studies [45,55,61,71,72,93,98,101], stress of 26.43% using 2 s...…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The global prevalence of depression, anxiety, stress, and, insomnia and its changes among health professionals during COVID-19 pandemic: A rapid systematic review and meta-analysis

Mahmud

Hossain

Muyeed

et al. 2021

Heliyon

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented risks to mental health among health workers globally. The prevalence of mental health disorder namely depression, anxiety, stress, and insomnia were significantly increased over the time from January 2020 to September 2020 among the teams working closer to infected patients. Comparatively higher prevalence of depression, anxiety, stress, and insomnia were observed from previous studies on medical health professionals during COVID-19 pandemic.It is an emergency to develop psychological interventions that can protect the mental health of vulnerable groups like health professionals.

show abstract

“…In a study involving all healthcare professionals (doctor, nurse, technician) during the Covid 19 pandemic, a higher level of personal anxiety and anxiety was found (14). This situation can be expressed as the radiology specialists mostly working in the reporting part, and the employees who come into close contact with the patient are technicians and nurses (15).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect Of COVID-19 Pandemic on The Anxiety Levels of Radiology Experts And Clinical Functioning

Altaş

Bostan

2021

Middle Black Sea Journal of Health Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a novel human corona virus rapidly spread all over the world and caused Corona Virus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Radiology clinics were reorganised according to the changes in health system in order to combat with this epidemic. We aimed to detect the changes in the functioning of radiology clinics and to state anxiety levels and relevant factors that induced anxiety in radiologists. Methods: The research is a descriptive study, population constitudes, radiology residents, specialists and scholars actively working in Turkey during COVID-19 pandemic. The data of the study were collected digitally, through the clinical activity scale and Back anxiety scale questionnaires created over the internet. The data collection period started on 18.04.2020 and ended on 8.6.2020. Results: Eightysix radiologists completed the survey. It was understood that the radiologists working during the pandemic had a high level of personal anxiety and worked under stress (3,74). A weak linear relationship was found between the changes in the functioning of radiology clinics and the personal concerns of radiology physicians at the p=0.05 error level (0.224). They stated that unnecessary thorax computed tomography (CT) demands increased (4,51) and they made the most thorax CT evaluation in the daily routine (4,42). Conclusion:In our study, it was shown that there were significant changes in the functioning of radiology clinics especially related with increased thorax CT scans at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic and that the anxiety levels of radiologists increased due to the pandemic.

show abstract

Factors Influencing Anxiety of Health Care Workers in the Radiology Department with High Exposure Risk to COVID-19

Cited by 58 publications

References 41 publications

What We Have Learned from Two Decades of Epidemics and Pandemics: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Psychological Burden of Frontline Healthcare Workers

What We Have Learned from Two Decades of Epidemics and Pandemics: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Psychological Burden of Frontline Healthcare Workers

The global prevalence of depression, anxiety, stress, and, insomnia and its changes among health professionals during COVID-19 pandemic: A rapid systematic review and meta-analysis

The Effect Of COVID-19 Pandemic on The Anxiety Levels of Radiology Experts And Clinical Functioning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About