Should we avoid colleagues in leisure time during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic?

Oksanen, Lotta‐Maria; Sanmark, Enni; Oksanen, Sampo; Anttila, Veli‐Jukka; Paterno, Jussi J.; Lehtonen, Lasse; Geneid, Ahmed

doi:10.1017/ice.2020.1320

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We consider social desirability bias unlikely since participation is voluntary. In line with international position papers on the COVID-19 pandemic, mental health research is needed [ 4 , 34 , 35 ], as we continue the prospective hospital employee cohort follow-up. Mapping both individual and systemic vulnerability and resiliency factors in this prolonged situation for health care workers should be addressed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At the same time, tailored psychosocial support services have been actively offered to HUS personnel since June 2020 in addition to regular occupational health care services, to support the ability to work and function, which was also followed at a symptom level via this cohort study during the COVID-19 pandemic. Among the hospital personnel, risk of exposure is an issue [ 3 , 4 ] and also a potential source of worry.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

COVID-19 Pandemic and Helsinki University Hospital Personnel Psychological Well-Being: Six-Month Follow-Up Results

Laukkala

Suvisaari

Rosenström

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused an unequally distributed extra workload to hospital personnel and first reports have indicated that especially front-line health care personnel are psychologically challenged. A majority of the Finnish COVID-19 patients are cared for in the Helsinki University Hospital district. The psychological distress of the Helsinki University Hospital personnel has been followed via an electronic survey monthly since June 2020. We report six-month follow-up results of a prospective 18-month cohort study. Individual variation explained much more of the total variance in psychological distress (68.5%, 95% CI 65.2–71.9%) and negative changes in sleep (75.6%, 95% CI 72.2–79.2%) than the study survey wave (1.6%, CI 0.5–5.5%; and 0.3%, CI 0.1–1.2%). Regional COVID-19 incidence rates correlated with the personnel’s psychological distress. In adjusted multilevel generalized linear multiple regression models, potentially traumatic COVID-19 pandemic-related events (OR 6.54, 95% CI 5.00–8.56) and front-line COVID-19 work (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.37–2.39) was associated with personnel psychological distress but age and gender was not. While vaccinations have been initiated, creating hope, continuous follow-up and psychosocial support is still needed for all hospital personnel.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%