Data_Sheet_1_Acute Stress Response Profiles in Health Workers Facing SARS-CoV-2.zip (49.79 kB)
Download file

Data_Sheet_1_Acute Stress Response Profiles in Health Workers Facing SARS-CoV-2.zip

Download (49.79 kB)
dataset
posted on 31.05.2021, 05:30 by Luca Moderato, Davide Lazzeroni, Annalisa Oppo, Francesco Dell’Orco, Paolo Moderato, Giovambattista Presti
Objective

The study is an explorative investigation aimed to assess the differences in acute stress response patterns of health workers facing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during Italy’s first lockdown.

Methods

A cross-sectional investigation using convenience sampling method was conducted in Italy during April 2020. Eight hundred fifty-eight health workers participated in the research filling out self-report measures including Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7), Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), and Impact of Event Scale–Revised (IES-R).

Results

Moderate/severe depression was found in 28.9% (95% CI, 25.8–32.04), moderate/severe anxiety in 55.4% (95% CI, 51.9–58.8), insomnia in 15% (95% CI, 12.5–17.5), and distress in 52.5% (95% CI, 48.5%–56.6) of participants. The 3% of health workers reported frequent suicidal thoughts. Female sex, working for >15 h/week in a COVID-19 unit, and living apart from family were associated with a significantly higher risk of distress, anxiety, insomnia, depression, and functional impairment. Four profiles were identified on the basis of psychopathological measures: Profile_0 included 44% (N = 270); Profile_1, 25.6% (N = 157); Profile_2, 19.1% (N = 117); and Profile_3, 11.3% (N = 69) of participants. Results showed a significant effect for Profiles X IES-R (η2 = 0.079; f = 0.29), indicating that in all profiles, except for Profile_0, avoidance scale is lower than hyperarousal and intrusion symptoms scales of the IES-R. This characteristic could be a probable index of the control exerted by the responders to not fly away from their job.

Conclusion

The identification of specific profiles could help psychiatrists and emergency psychologists to build specific interventions in terms of both primary and secondary prevention to face future waves of the COVID-19 outbreak.

History