The impact of COVID-19 on the wellbeing of the UK nursing and midwifery workforce during the first pandemic wave: A longitudinal survey study.
The impact of COVID-19 on the wellbeing of the UK nursing and midwifery workforce during the first pandemic wave: A longitudinal survey study.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2021.104155
复制
发表时间：
2022-03
影响因子：
8.1
通讯作者：
Harris R
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Couper K;Murrells T;Sanders J;Anderson JE;Blake H;Kelly D;Kent B;Maben J;Rafferty AM;Taylor RM;Harris R
护理和助产工作人员在以前的大流行中经历的具体挑战加剧了先前存在的专业和个人挑战，并引发了新的问题。我们的目标是确定新冠肺炎大流行对英国护理和助产劳动力的心理影响，并确定与创伤后应激障碍迹象相关的潜在因素。英国全国在线调查是在2020年4月至8月新冠肺炎大流行第一波期间的三个时间点进行的(第一波期间为T1和T2；第一波之后三个月为T3)。所有英国注册和未注册的护士和助产士都有资格参加。这项调查是通过社交媒体、组织电子邮件和时事通讯进行宣传的。主要结果是事件量表修订后的分数对创伤后应激障碍诊断的影响(使用截止分数≥33定义)。多变量Logistic回归模型被用来评估解释变量和创伤后应激障碍之间的关系。我们收到了7840份合格回复(T1-2040份；T2-3638份；T3-2162份)。总体而言，91.6%的参与者是女性，77.2%是成年注册护士，28.7%的人在大流行期间重新部署。事件量表修订分数≥33(可能的创伤后应激障碍)在T1、T2和T3分别有44.6%、37.1%和29.3%的参与者观察到影响。在所有三个时间点，个人和工作场所因素都与可能的创伤后应激障碍有关，尽管一些具体的关联在大流行过程中发生了变化。在T1和T2(例如，在T1优势比(OR)0.60，95%可信区间(CI)0.42-0.86下，41-50岁)，年龄的增加与创伤后应激障碍的可能性减少有关，但在T3时不相关。同样，在T1和T2，接受培训不足或没有接受培训的重新部署与创伤后应激障碍的可能性增加有关，但在T3没有关联(T1 OR 1.37，95%CI 1.06-1.77；T3 OR 1.17，95%CI 0.89-1.55)。在所有三个时间点，对感染预防和控制训练缺乏信心与创伤后应激障碍的可能性增加相关(例如，T1 OR 1.48，95%CI 1.11-1.97)。在第一波大流行之后的3个月，负面的心理影响很明显。个人和工作场所都与新冠肺炎大流行相关的不良心理影响有关。这些发现将为医疗机构在当前大流行期间以及在规划未来大流行时应如何应对员工福利需求提供信息。
The specific challenges experienced by the nursing and midwifery workforce in previous pandemics have exacerbated pre-existing professional and personal challenges, and triggered new issues. We aimed to determine the psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the UK nursing and midwifery workforce and identify potential factors associated with signs of post-traumatic stress disorder. A United Kingdom national online survey was conducted at three time-points during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic between April and August 2020 (T1 and T2 during initial wave; T3 at three-months following the first wave). All members of the UK registered and unregistered nursing and midwifery workforce were eligible to participate. The survey was promoted via social media and through organisational email and newsletters. The primary outcome was an Impact of Events Scale-Revised score indicative of a post-traumatic stress disorder diagnosis (defined using the cut-off score ≥33). Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to assess the association between explanatory variables and post-traumatic stress disorder. We received 7840 eligible responses (T1- 2040; T2- 3638; T3- 2162). Overall, 91.6% participants were female, 77.2% were adult registered nurses, and 28.7% were redeployed during the pandemic. An Impact of Events Scale-Revised score ≥33 (probable post-traumatic stress disorder) was observed in 44.6%, 37.1%, and 29.3% participants at T1, T2, and T3 respectively. At all three time-points, both personal and workplace factors were associated with probable post-traumatic stress disorder, although some specific associations changed over the course of the pandemic. Increased age was associated with reduced probable post-traumatic stress disorder at T1 and T2 (e.g. 41–50 years at T1 odds ratio (OR) 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42–0.86), but not at T3. Similarly, redeployment with inadequate/ no training was associated with increased probable post-traumatic stress disorder at T1 and T2, but not at T3 (T1 OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.06–1.77; T3 OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.89–1.55). A lack of confidence in infection prevention and control training was associated with increased probable post-traumatic stress disorder at all three time-points (e.g. T1 OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.11–1.97). A negative psychological impact was evident 3-months following the first wave of the pandemic. Both personal and workplace are associated with adverse psychological effects linked to the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings will inform how healthcare organisations should respond to staff wellbeing needs both during the current pandemic, and in planning for future pandemics.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Hall LH;Johnson J;Watt I;Tsipa A;O'Connor DB
通讯作者：
O'Connor DB
影响因子：
5
作者：
Allan SM;Bealey R;Birch J;Cushing T;Parke S;Sergi G;Bloomfield M;Meiser-Stedman R
通讯作者：
Meiser-Stedman R
DOI：
10.3390/ijerph16234801
发表时间：
2019-12-01
影响因子：
--
作者：
Chen, Yi-Chuan;Guo, Yue-Liang Leon;Shiao, Judith Shu-Chu
通讯作者：
Shiao, Judith Shu-Chu
影响因子：
15.1
作者：
Chew, Nicholas W. S.;Lee, Grace K. H.;Sharma, Vijay K.
通讯作者：
Sharma, Vijay K.
影响因子：
4.5
作者：
De Kock JH;Latham HA;Leslie SJ;Grindle M;Munoz SA;Ellis L;Polson R;O'Malley CM
通讯作者：
O'Malley CM