Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T22:18:01.226Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Mental health impact of COVID-19 pandemic on Spanish healthcare workers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 May 2020

Lorena García-Fernández*
Affiliation:
Clinical Medicine Department, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Ctra, de Valencia, Km 87, 03550San Juan, Alicante, Spain Department of Psychiatry, Hospital Universitario de San Juan, Ctra, N-332, s/n, 03550San Juan, Alicante, Spain CIBERSAM (Biomedical Research Networking Centre in Mental Health), Madrid, Spain
Verónica Romero-Ferreiro
Affiliation:
CIBERSAM (Biomedical Research Networking Centre in Mental Health), Madrid, Spain Brain Mapping Unit, Instituto Pluridisciplinar, Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM), Paseo Juan XXIII, 1, 28040Madrid, Spain Department of Psychiatry, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Hospital 12 de Octubre (imas 12), Av. Córdoba s/n, 28041, Madrid, Spain
Pedro David López-Roldán
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, Hospital Universitario de San Juan, Ctra, N-332, s/n, 03550San Juan, Alicante, Spain
Sergio Padilla
Affiliation:
Clinical Medicine Department, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Ctra, de Valencia, Km 87, 03550San Juan, Alicante, Spain Infectious Diseases Unit, Hospital Universitario de Elche, Carrer Almazara, 11, 03203Elche, Alicante, Spain
Irene Calero-Sierra
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, Hospital Universitario de San Juan, Ctra, N-332, s/n, 03550San Juan, Alicante, Spain
María Monzó-García
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, Hospital Universitario de San Juan, Ctra, N-332, s/n, 03550San Juan, Alicante, Spain
Jorge Pérez-Martín
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, Hospital Universitario de San Juan, Ctra, N-332, s/n, 03550San Juan, Alicante, Spain
Roberto Rodriguez-Jimenez
Affiliation:
CIBERSAM (Biomedical Research Networking Centre in Mental Health), Madrid, Spain Department of Psychiatry, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Hospital 12 de Octubre (imas 12), Av. Córdoba s/n, 28041, Madrid, Spain Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM), Plaza Ramón y Cajal, s/n, 28040Madrid, Spain
*
Author for correspondence: Lorena García-Fernández, E-mail: lorena.garciaf@umh.es
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Correspondence
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Spain has the highest percentage of healthcare workers (HCW) infected with SARS-CoV-2 (WHO, 2019). This has led to significant concern among HCW precipitating emotional responses of anxiety, depression, and acute stress. We aimed to (1) explore differential presence of these symptoms among HCW compared with non-HCW; (2) compare their presence in the different health system roles; and (3) study the relationship between the emotional state of HCW and environmental variables.

Participants conducted a national self-reported online questionnaire starting on 29 March to 5 April 2020, which covers the peak of the infection (WHO, 2019), the questionnaire was distributed by social networks, applying an exponential non-discriminative snowball sampling (Liu et al., Reference Liu, Luo, Haase, Guo, Wang, Liu and Yang2020; Roy et al., Reference Roy, Tripathy, Kar, Sharma, Verma and Kaushal2020; Wang et al., Reference Wang, Pan, Wan, Tan, Xu, Ho and Ho2020).

HCW were eligible if: (a) they worked in a hospital or outpatient clinic, (b) had been occupationally active since the debut of the first case in Spain and (c) were aged between 18 and 65. We categorized the final 781 participants into: 385 physicians (169 trainees and 215 seniors), 233 nurses, and 164 other professionals. Participants (1006) were allocated in the non-HCW if: (a) had been occupationally active since the debut of the first case in Spain and (b) were between 18 and 65 years old. The presence of a current or past mental disorder reported was considered exclusion criteria in both samples. Informed consent was provided. The study was approved by the ethics committee.

Sociodemographic information, as well as whether responders presented symptoms compatible with COVID-19 (suspected cases) or had undergone PCR with a positive result (confirmed cases) was required. Moreover, perception of the quality of the information received (insufficient/adequate/excessive) as well as effectiveness of the protection measures provided (insufficient/adequate/excessive) were included. The questionnaire included three scales to assess anxiety, depression, and acute stress: Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HARS) (Hamilton, Reference Hamilton1959), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) (Bech, Reference Bech1988), and the Acute Stress Disorder Inventory (ASDI): consisting of a list of symptoms based on the clinical criteria of Acute Stress Disorder in the DSM-5 (APA, 2013).

Anxiety, depression, and acute stress in the study groups

Regarding anxiety symptoms (F(1, 1783) = 0.93, p = 0.34), the HCW group (M 18.2, s.d. 10.4) did not show significant higher symptoms of anxiety than non-HCW (M 16.9, s.d. 10.3). In depression, results showed no differences in BDI scores (F(1, 1780) = 0.16, p = 0.68) in HCW (M 4.0, s.d. 3.8) compared to non-HCW (M 3.6, s.d. 3.9). However, when clinical cut-off score of 4 (absent or minimal depression v. mild/moderate/severe depression) are applied to BDI responses, a trend toward greater depressive symptoms in HCW is observed (χ2 = 2.9, p = 0.09).

Finally, HCW showed higher symptoms of acute stress (F(1, 1745) = 8.1, p = 0.004) with higher ASDI scores (M 4.9, s.d. 3.1) than non-HCW (M 4.3, s.d. 3.1).

Comparisons according to the role within the healthcare system

Nurses scored higher in all emotional assessments [anxiety: 21.3 (10.9) v. 16.6 (9.6) v. 17.3 (10.4), p < 0.001; depression 4.5 (4.2) v. 3.2 (3.1) v. 3.4 (3.4), p < 0.03; acute stress 5.5(3.2) v. 4.8 (3.0) v. 4.4 (3.3), p < 0.009] than physicians and other professionals, respectively. No significant differences were found between physicians and other health professionals in all three clinical symptoms.

According to the degree of expertise within physicians, when clinical cut-offs score of 4 are applied to BDI, significant differences were found with up to 40.8% of trainees fulfilling scores for depression compared to 30.7% of specialists (p = 0.04). No differences in acute stress symptoms or anxiety were found between levels of expertise.

Relation between emotional state and COVID-19, level of information, and level of protection

Mean and CI 95% are presented in Table 1. A confirmatory diagnosis of the disease increased the average HARS score (p < 0.001), BDI score (p = 0.001), and ASDI score (p = 0.015), compared with the presence of suspected disease. This latter increased the HARS (p = 0.001), BDI (p = 0.003), and ASDI (p = 0.001) means compared to healthy HCW. Regarding the information received, those participants considering they were provided insufficient information showed higher HARS (p = 0.003), BDI (p = 0.001), and ASDI (p = 0.001) scores than those respondents who consider it adequate. No differences were found between adequate and excessive information in any of the measures. According to the protection measures, participants who considered the protection insufficient showed an increased average of HARS (p = 0.001), BDI (p = 0.001), and ASDI (p = 0.001) scores than those who consider it adequate. Finally, the excesses of protection perceived increased BDI scores (p = 0.029) than those who considered it adequate. No differences on HARS or ASDI scores between adequate and excessive protection were found.

Table 1. Relation between anxiety, depression, and acute stress symptoms and COVID-19, level of information and level of protection

a Ref, Reference category for comparison within variable. General linear model R 2 (p value) for COVID-19, COVID-19 information, and COVID-19 protection were 0.063 (<0.001), 0.077 (<0.001), and 0.050 (<0.001), respectively, adjusted by age and gender.

b Ref, Reference category for comparison within variable. General linear model R 2 (p value) for COVID-19, COVID-19 protection, and COVID-19 information were 0.046 (<0.001), 0.042 (<0.001), and 0.036 (<0.001), respectively, adjusted by age and gender.

c Ref, Reference category for comparison within variable. General linear model R 2 (p value) for COVID-19, COVID-19 protection, and COVID-19 information were 0.044 (<0.001), 0.040 (<0.001), and 0.048 (<0.001), respectively, adjusted by age and gender.

Subsequent analyses of variance are corrected for age and gender.

Findings suggest that COVID-19 has greater impact on the mental health of HCW than in non-HCW. Nurses and physician trainees are the most vulnerable groups. Adequate information and availability of protective measures are associated with emotional wellbeing.

Acknowledgements

We thank all participants, especially frontline clinicians who have kindly responded to the survey.

Financial support

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Conflicts of interest

Dr R. Rodriguez-Jimenez has been a consultant for, spoken in activities of, or received grants from: Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Fondo de Investigación Sanitaria (FIS), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental (CIBERSAM), Madrid Regional Government (S2010/ BMD-2422 AGES; S2017/BMD-3740), JanssenCilag, Lundbeck, Otsuka, Pfizer, Ferrer, Juste, Takeda, Exeltis, Angelini, and Casen-Recordati. All other authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

American Psychiatric Association, & American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publication.Google Scholar
Bech, P. (1988). Rating scales for mood disorders: Applicability, consistency, and construct validity. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 78(S345), 4555.10.1111/j.1600-0447.1988.tb08567.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, M. A. X. (1959). The assessment of anxiety states by rating. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 32(1), 5055.10.1111/j.2044-8341.1959.tb00467.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liu, Q., Luo, D., Haase, J. E., Guo, Q., Wang, X. Q., Liu, S., … Yang, B. X. (2020). The experiences of health-care providers during the COVID-19 crisis in China: A qualitative study. The Lancet Global Health, 8, e790798.10.1016/S2214-109X(20)30204-7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roy, D., Tripathy, S., Kar, S. K., Sharma, N., Verma, S. K., & Kaushal, V. (2020). Study of knowledge, attitude, anxiety & perceived mental healthcare need in Indian population during COVID-19 pandemic. Asian Journal of Psychiatry, 51, 102083.10.1016/j.ajp.2020.102083CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, C., Pan, R., Wan, X., Tan, Y., Xu, L., Ho, C. S., & Ho, R. C. (2020). Immediate psychological responses and associated factors during the initial stage of the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic among the general population in China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(5), 1729.10.3390/ijerph17051729CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
World Health Organization. (2019). Global influenza strategy 2019–2030. World Health Organization. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/311184. License: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1. Relation between anxiety, depression, and acute stress symptoms and COVID-19, level of information and level of protection