Psychological Distress in South African Healthcare Workers Early in the Covid-19 Pandemic

An Analysis of Associations and Mitigating Factors

Bibliographic Data

ID15510340
AuthorsHsin-Ling Lee (0000-0003-4491-7323, University of British Columbia), Kerry Wilson (0000-0002-7933-0031, National Health Laboratory Service), Colleen Bernstein (0000-0002-1888-4794, University of the Witwatersrand), Nisha Naicker (0000-0001-7223-7881, National Health Laboratory Service), Annalee Yassi (0000-0001-9103-4051, University of British Columbia, corresponding author), Jennifer Spiegel (0000-0002-4699-3082, University of British Columbia)
Year2022
Volume19
Issue15
Pages9722-9722
Publication date2022-08-07
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1661-7827 • E-ISSN: 1660-4601
PublisherMultidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (PUBLISHER • CH)
DOI10.3390/ijerph19159722
PMID35955078
OpenAlexW4290515206
LanguageEN
Citations received6
References cited70

While the global COVID-19 pandemic has been widely acknowledged to affect the mental health of health care workers (HCWs), attention to measures that protect those on the front lines of health outbreak response has been limited. In this cross-sectional study, we examine workplace contextual factors associated with how psychological distress was experienced in a South African setting where a severe first wave was being experienced with the objective of identifying factors that can protect against HCWs experiencing negative impacts. Consistent with mounting literature on mental health effects, we found a high degree of psychological distress (57.4% above the General Health Questionnaire cut-off value) and a strong association between perceived risks associated with the presence of COVID-19 in the healthcare workplace and psychological distress (adjusted OR = 2.35, p < 0.01). Our research indicates that both training (adjusted OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.21−0.81) and the reported presence of supportive workplace relationships (adjusted OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.27−0.97) were associated with positive outcomes. This evidence that workplace resilience can be reinforced to better prepare for the onset of similar outbreaks in the future suggests that pursuit of further research into specific interventions to improve resilience is well merited

Affect (linguistics · Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19 · Cross-sectional study · Disease · Distress · Health care · Mental health · Pandemic · Psychiatry · Psychological distress · Psychological intervention · Psychological resilience · Clinical Psychology · COVID-19 and Mental Health · Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout · Medicine · Psychology · Resilience and Mental Health · Social Psychology

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access