Literature DB >> 32224344

Screening for Chinese medical staff mental health by SDS and SAS during the outbreak of COVID-19.

Yingjian Liang1, Meizhu Chen1, Xiaobin Zheng1, Jing Liu2.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 32224344      PMCID: PMC7139244          DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2020.110102

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Psychosom Res        ISSN: 0022-3999            Impact factor:   3.006


× No keyword cloud information.
Since December 2019, an outbreak of 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China has raised worldwide concern as it spiraled into a pandemic [1]. By Feb 29, 2020, there were more than 75,000 confirmed cases of COVID-19 in China [2]. The Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, as one of the biggest tertiary hospital serving for millions people, set up COVID-19-associated departments which were consisted of a 24-h fever clinic, a number of isolation wards as well as one Intensive Care Unit (ICU) for suspected infection patient and confirmed cases and undertook nearly 100 cases in Guangdong Province, a province whose cases numbered second only to Hubei Province in China. Confronted this sudden public health crisis, Chinese doctors and nurses were under considerable psychological pressure. Mental health of the medical staff was assessed at the Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University using Zung's self-rating depression scale (SDS) and Zung's self-rating anxiety scale (SAS). Our study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University (approve number K17–1). All participants provided written informed consent. We analyzed SDS and SAS raw scores of 23 doctors and 36 nurses from COVID-19-associated departments (38 participants) and others (21 participants), including Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine (PCCM), Department of Cardiology and General ICU, from 3 to 21, February 2020 (Fig. 1 ). As illustrated, several staff were experiencing clinically signficiant depressive symptoms according to established thresholds [3]. There were no significant differences in scores between staff in COVID-19-associated andother departments (Fig. 1A, t-test, tSDS = 0.77, dfSDS = 95, P  = 0.44; t-test, tSAS = 1.03, dfSAS = 95, P  = 0.31). Younger (age ≤ 30) medical staff had higher SDS scores than older staff but this difference was not statistically signficant. (Fig. 1 B, t-test, tSDS = 1.64, dfSDS = 83, P  = 0.11; t-test, tSAS = 0.31, dfSAS = 83, P  = 0.76). (Table 1 ).
Fig. 1

Raw scores of various departments or ages. (A) Orange is the medical staffs of COVID-19-associated departments and the blue represents other departments. Dots represents each doctor or nurse raw score. SDS raw scores are on the left of the dashed line and the SAS scores are on the right. (B) Green is medical staffs under 30 years old and the magenta represents over 30 years old. Dots represents each doctor or nurse raw score. SDS raw scores are on the left of the dashed line and the SAS scores are on the right. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

Table 1

Average SDS and SAS raw scores.

AgeRaw scoreCOVID-19 associated department (n = 38)Other departments (n = 21)t-test (t, df, P)
≤30 (n = 33)SDS30.05 ± 8.1634.09 ± 8.971.30, 31, 0.21
SAS28.09 ± 4.9829.36 ± 4.460.76, 31, 0.46
>30 (n = 26)SDS29.06 ± 7.8727.9 ± 5.860.40,24, 0.69
SAS27.63 ± 6.3429 ± 4.50.60, 24. 0.56
t-test (t, df, P)SDS0.37, 36, 0.711.85, 19, 0.08
SAS0.26, 36, 0.790.19, 19, 0.85

Raw score were present as mean ± standard deviation.

Raw scores of various departments or ages. (A) Orange is the medical staffs of COVID-19-associated departments and the blue represents other departments. Dots represents each doctor or nurse raw score. SDS raw scores are on the left of the dashed line and the SAS scores are on the right. (B) Green is medical staffs under 30 years old and the magenta represents over 30 years old. Dots represents each doctor or nurse raw score. SDS raw scores are on the left of the dashed line and the SAS scores are on the right. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.) Average SDS and SAS raw scores. Raw score were present as mean ± standard deviation. Our results are a reminder not to neglect the mental health of the other medical department staff during the pandemic, including younger medical staff. Intervention including daily living supplies, pre-job training, leisure activities and psychological counseling like the Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University advised, were also ongoing in our hospital [4]. Reasonable resting for medical staff may also help relieve stress according to our experience. It's essential for medical staff to keep physical and psychological health during our struggle of COVID-19. SDS and SAS were simple = tools to monitoring the self-mental health [5].

Disclosure

The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work. All authors have read and approved the manuscript.
  3 in total

1.  From art to science. The diagnosis and treatment of depression.

Authors:  W W Zung
Journal:  Arch Gen Psychiatry       Date:  1973-09

2.  A rating instrument for anxiety disorders.

Authors:  W W Zung
Journal:  Psychosomatics       Date:  1971 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.386

3.  Mental health care for medical staff in China during the COVID-19 outbreak.

Authors:  Qiongni Chen; Mining Liang; Yamin Li; Jincai Guo; Dongxue Fei; Ling Wang; Li He; Caihua Sheng; Yiwen Cai; Xiaojuan Li; Jianjian Wang; Zhanzhou Zhang
Journal:  Lancet Psychiatry       Date:  2020-02-19       Impact factor: 27.083

  3 in total
  86 in total

1.  Evidence-based nursing intervention can improve the treatment compliance, quality of life and self-efficacy of patients with lung cancer undergoing radiotherapy and chemotherapy.

Authors:  Tianjie Zhang; Jierong Lu; Yanmei Fan; Li Wang
Journal:  Am J Transl Res       Date:  2022-01-15       Impact factor: 4.060

Review 2.  Problems Facing Healthcare Providers When Caring for COVID-19 Patients: An Integrative Review.

Authors:  Henny Suzana Mediani; Fanny Adistie; Sri Hendrawati; Yanny Trisyani
Journal:  J Multidiscip Healthc       Date:  2022-07-19

3.  Psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on nursing students in the first wave: A cross-sectional survey.

Authors:  Juan Roldán-Merino; Barbara Hurtado-Pardos; Lorena Molina-Raya; David Bande; Irma Casas; Mariona Farrés-Tarafa
Journal:  Nurs Open       Date:  2022-03-30

4.  Mental Health in Health Professionals in the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Authors:  Antonia Bendau; Andreas Ströhle; Moritz Bruno Petzold
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2021       Impact factor: 2.622

5.  Treatment of Patients with Mental Illness Amid A Global COVID-19 Pandemic.

Authors:  Ankit Jain; Kamal Kant Sahu; Paroma Mitra
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2021       Impact factor: 2.622

Review 6.  Behavioral and neural mechanisms of latent inhibition.

Authors:  Dylan B Miller; Madeleine M Rassaby; Katherine A Collins; Mohammad R Milad
Journal:  Learn Mem       Date:  2022-01-18       Impact factor: 2.460

7.  Experiences, emotional responses, and coping skills of nursing students as auxiliary health workers during the peak COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative study.

Authors:  Judith Roca; Olga Canet-Vélez; Tània Cemeli; Ana Lavedán; Olga Masot; Teresa Botigué
Journal:  Int J Ment Health Nurs       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 5.100

8.  Nurses' mental health and COVID-19 pandemic: Is there any approach?

Authors:  Khashayar Maroufi; Rashin Razavi
Journal:  Nurs Open       Date:  2021-05-12

9.  Nursing strategies for COVID-19 prevention and control in a selected dental clinic.

Authors:  Jiali Zheng; Xiaojun Ni; Weijun Yuan; Lili Hou
Journal:  Int Nurs Rev       Date:  2021-06       Impact factor: 2.871

Review 10.  The Impact of Epidemics and Pandemics on the Mental Health of Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Ottilia Cassandra Chigwedere; Anvar Sadath; Zubair Kabir; Ella Arensman
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-06-22       Impact factor: 3.390

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.