Predictors of violence against health professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil: A cross-sectional study

Abstract

Background The increase in violence against health professionals in the COVID-19 pandemic makes it necessary to identify the predictors of violence, in order to prevent these events from happening. Objective Evaluating the prevalence and analyzing the variables involved in the occurrence of violence against health professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil. Method This is a cross-sectional study conducted online involving Brazilian health professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic. The data were collected through a structured questionnaire (Google Online Form) sent to health professionals on social networks and analyzed through logistic regression by using sociodemographic variables. The set of grouped variables was assigned to the final model when p <0.05. A network was built using the Mixed Graph Models (MGM) approach. A centrality measurement chart was constructed to determine which nodes have the greatest influence, strength and connectivity between the nodes around them. Results The predictors of violence in the adjusted regression model were the following: being a nursing technician / assistant; having been working for less than 20 years; working for over 37 hours a week; having suffered violence before the pandemic; having been contaminated with COVID-19; working in direct contact with patients infected by the virus; and having family members who have suffered violence. The network created with professionals who suffered violence demonstrated that the aggressions occurred mainly in the workplace, with an indication of psycho-verbal violence. In cases in which the aggressors were close people, aggressions were non-verbal and happened both in public and private places. The assaults practiced by strangers occurred in public places. Conclusions Violence against health professionals occurs implicitly and explicitly, with consequences that can affect both their psychosocial well-being and the assistance given to their patients and families.

Prevalence of Workplace Violence Against Healthcare Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…Their sample size was within the range of 67–10,516, and the largest sample size was in the study by Xie et al ( 2021 ). Three studies had a sample size of over 1,000 (Bitencourt et al, 2021b ; Xie et al, 2021 ; Yang et al, 2021 ). Nine studies were conducted in Asia (China, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Jordan, and Turkey), five studies were conducted in the Americas (USA, Mexico, Brazil, and Peru), one study was conducted in Egypt, and one study was performed in Belgium.…”

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Mental Health of Healthcare Workers in Italy: Analyzing the Role of Individual and Workplace-Level Factors in the Reopening Phase After Lockdown

“…Among the individual-level factors examined, feeling stigmatized or discriminated against as a healthcare worker due to COVID-19 and having experienced violence due to being a healthcare worker during the pandemic were associated with both clinically significant depressive symptoms and psychological distress. It must be kept in mind that our study was conducted at the end of a period when HCWs were praised as “heroes”, and it was generally believed that the Italian community had gathered around them with great solidarity, while in other countries HCWs were being strongly discriminated and attacked ( 25 , 26 ). Among several studies conducted during the COVID-19 first wave in Italy, only one in Lombardy assessed discrimination and violence experienced by HCWs, 25% reported episodes of discrimination against themselves, their colleagues, or their family members and even episodes of physical assault and vandalism.…”

Aggression, Micro-aggression, and Abuse Against Health Care Providers During the COVID-19 Pandemic. A Latin American Survey

“…In the same study, the nursing staff suffered more violence; this represents a significant difference from our study where the administrative staff was at higher risk (OR 3.20, p<0.0001). The discrepancy can be explained as in previous studies the non-medical staff was not considered in the survey 24 .…”