We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The current coronavirus pandemic is a unique and unusual situation. It is putting the general population under severe strain. However, frontline medical and paramedical staff remain particularly vulnerable to depression because of its close contact with patients.
Objectives
The aim of this work was to screen and evaluate depression in the frontline professionals during the pandemic and to study their associated factors .
Methods
In this study , we conducted a national descriptive and analytical cross-sectional study over a 2-month period from September to October 2020. We used “Beck Depression Inventory” to assess depression and “Brief Cope Scale” to detect a possible correlation between depression and coping mechanisms.
Results
We collected 78 professionals. The mean age was 29.86 years. 2/3 of workers were women. 67.9% of the staff were residents. 39.7% worked in Covid units. 7.7% had personal psychiatric history. 56.4% of the staff worked daily and 76.9% of them provided direct care to patients with Coronavirus. 52.6% of workers did not receive adequate training of protection against Covid-19.The staff reported 66.7% of death among their patients. 42.3% suffered from minor depression and only 2.3% suffered from severe depression. During this period we objectified an increase of 14.1% in the psychoactive substances use. Stigma affected 57.7% of professionals. We didn’t objectify a significant correlation between Depression and coping mechanisms .
Conclusions
Screening depression among healthcare professionals should be considered in order to prevent it, ensure continuity of care and avoid sick leaves.
Anxiety has become a topical issue since the arrival of the coronavirus pandemic, especially for frontline healthcare professionals as they deal with patients affected by the Covid-19.
Objectives
Objectify anxiety in frontline medical and paramedical staff and study its associated factors.
Methods
We conducted a national descriptive and analytical cross-sectional study via a survey over a 2-month period from September to October 2020. We used “Beck Anxiety Inventory” to screen anxiety as well as “Brief Cope Scale” to detect probable correlations between anxiety and coping mechanisms.
Results
We collected 78 persons. The mean age was 29.86 years. 35.9% moved out of home. 39.7% worked in Covid units. 7.7% had personal psychiatric history. 76.9% provided direct care to patients with Coronavirus. The frontline staff reported that only 29.5% of patients were stables. Only 48.4% received adequate training of protection against Covid-19. 64.1% of professionals did PCR test and only 16.7% of them tested positive. We objectified an increase of 6.4% in the anxiolytics use. Stigma affected 57.7% of professionals. We highlighted a link between anxiety and social support strategy (p=0.048). 92.3 % of the staff suffered from anxiety according to Beck Anxiety Inventory.
Conclusions
Screening anxiety among frontline medical and paramedical staff might enhance their productivty and thus provide patients with the best care.
from
Part VI
-
Models for collaborative services and staff training
By
Adrian Falkov, Children's Hospital, Westmead, Australia
Edited by
Michael Göpfert, Webb House Democratic Therapeutic Community, Crewe,Jeni Webster, 5 Boroughs Partnership, Warrington,Mary V. Seeman, University of Toronto
This chapter describes the development of a training programme commissioned by the Department of Health (UK) in 1998. It provides examples of its use and ongoing challenges to implementation and evaluation. Risks for staff and costs to families are presented to highlight the need for improving practice through the use of service protocols. The chapter emphasizes the need to integrate training and protocols in order to achieve better outcomes for children and their mentally ill parents. A programme of training and a clear, fully supported protocol must be the minimum necessary requirements to ensure implementation of best practice. The opportunities for prevention and early intervention would be well supported by adherence to a protocol which promoted timely referrals and an appropriate network of relevant professionals to assess, support, treat and review needs. Early intervention is good risk management, which requires early intervention.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.