key: cord-0935318-sslw8bua authors: Su, Qinji; Ma, Xiaoyun; Liu, Shun; Liu, Shaogang; Goodman, Bernard A.; Yu, Miaoyu; Guo, Wenbin title: Adverse Psychological Reactions and Psychological Aids for Medical Staff During the COVID-19 Outbreak in China date: 2021-04-15 journal: Front Psychiatry DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.580067 sha: 349885f939240edfbedd85bb80a12b0b6bd09fe1 doc_id: 935318 cord_uid: sslw8bua Background: The outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease COVID-19 caused panic and psychological stress throughout the World. We investigated the extent of adverse psychological reactions in two medical staff groups in China, and explored the importance of online psychological assistance for them. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey including Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) was utilized to assess anxiety, depression, and insomnia. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to match sex and age between the two groups. Differences in the prevalence of adverse psychological reactions between the two groups were compared by a Chi-square test. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was utilized to search for associated adverse psychological reaction factors of two groups. Results: A total of 2,920 medical staff took part in the survey, including 470 frontline and 2,450 non-frontline medical staff. The risk of the frontline group experiencing anxiety, depression, insomnia-early, insomnia-middle, and insomnia-late were 1.16, 1.28, 1.26, 1.22, 1.28 times those of the non-frontline group after PSM. For frontline medical staff, the spinsterhood state (OR = 1.23, 95% CI: 1.00–1.51; P = 0.05) was a risk factor for anxiety. Bachelor or college degree (OR = 2.23, 95% CI: 1.24–4.02, P = 0.01) and a contact history with COVID-19 patients (OR = 1.62, 95% CI: 1.10–2.40; P = 0.02) were risk factors for insomnia. For non-frontline medical staff, being a woman (OR = 1.49, 95% CI: 1.08–2.06, P = 0.01) was a risk factor for anxiety, whilst being in a middle age group was a protective factor for anxiety (OR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.50–0.99, P = 0.04) and depression (OR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.45–0.93, P = 0.02). Being a woman (OR = 1.47, 95% CI: 1.14–1.89, P = 0.003) and working in a COVID-19 unit (OR = 1.31, 95% CI: 1.11–1.54, P = 0.001) were risk factors for insomnia, whilst the spinsterhood state (OR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.67–0.95; P = 0.01) was a protective factor for insomnia. Online forms of psychological aid were all popular with medical staff. Conclusions: The prevalence of anxiety, depression, and insomnia in frontline medical staff was significantly higher than in the non-frontline group. Appropriate intervention methods should be adopted according to the different influencing factors of the two groups. Online psychological aid was the preferred mechanism for relieving psychological problems. The rapid spread of the novel coronavirus disease COVID-19 resulted in a pandemic affecting more than 100 countries in the first few months of 2020 (1) , and created an unprecedented challenge to patients and health care systems (2) . According to the World Health Organization (WHO), as of 21 May 2020 confirmed cases numbered 4,893,186 with a death toll of 323,256 (3). In China, a total of 82,971 confirmed cases and 4,634 deaths were reported by the National Health Commission of China for the period to 24:00 on May 20 (4) . The generation of virus-laden respiratory droplets combined with high transmissibility led to rapid human-to-human transmission of COVID-19 (5, 6) . Faced with such a critical respiratory infectious disease, varying degrees of anxiety, depression, stress, and psychological reactions were observed in Chinese citizens at the beginning of the outbreak of COVID-19 (7) . Furthermore, residents of Hong Kong experienced high perceived susceptibility and severity (8) , whilst Twitter users experienced increased anxiety, depression and indignation, and decreased Oxford happiness index (9) . In order to alleviate the adverse psychological reactions of social groups, the State Council issued a guideline for a hotline to provide psychological support, counseling, crisis intervention, and other services for various groups involved in epidemic prevention and control (9) . However, no specific attention was paid to psychological intervention for medical staff. With the rapid increase in the number of patients with COVID-19 dependent on health care systems, medical staff experienced acute physical and mental burdens, as a result of a soaring workload, separation from families, and fear of becoming infected themselves. This was especially concerning for frontline medical staff who were directly engaged in diagnosis, treatment, and care for patients with COVID-19 (10, 11) . Previous studies based on the SARS outbreak in 2003 reported that medical staff suffered adverse psychological reactions, such as, stress, psychological distress, anxiety, depression, and insomnia (12) (13) (14) , and recent research has suggested that the COVID-19 outbreak posed a huge threat for the development of anxiety, depression, and insomnia in medical staff (15) (16) (17) . Such negative psychological reactions not only weaken the attention, understanding, and decisionmaking ability of medical staff, but also result in deterioration in physical health, reluctance to work in potentially dangerous environments, with resignation from hospitals even being considered (18) (19) (20) . Anxiety and depression are the most common emotional responses when people are faced with unknown or known threats, which frequently coexist (21, 22) . Long periods of anxiety and depression can disrupt normal physiological functions, as well as the immune system (23) , and may also be a cause of insomnia (15) . Furthermore, poor sleep quality is also detrimental to the functioning of the immune system, and thus, increases vulnerability to the virus (24) . On the basis of evidence from the SARS outbreak in 2003, we hypothesized that frontline medical staff might be prone to suffer from anxiety, depression, and insomnia as a result of the high-stress situation of the COVID-19 outbreak, and that it is critical that they receive regular assessments of their mental health status for timely identification of problems and for addressing their psychological status. Psychological aids from mental health workers can usually detect mental health problems, and provide targeted suggestions for medical staff. However, because of the high transmissibility of COVID-19, there was little free time available for frontline medical staff, and face-to-face counseling was no longer appropriate for them. A recent cross-sectional survey showed that psychotherapy has a major role to relieve the stress level of Spanish healthcare workers during the outbreak of COVID-19 (25) . As a consequence, we investigated the contents and forms of psychological aid preferred by medical staff, and our findings may thus provide policy advice for the prevention and treatment of mental health problems in other prolonged high stress situations. In this study, we aimed to assess the levels of anxiety, depression, and insomnia and compared results between frontline and non-frontline medical staff groups. Moreover, we specifically aimed to identify latent influencing factors of adverse psychological reactions in the two medical staff groups in order to provide evidence for alleviating the severity of anxiety, depression, and insomnia disorders in medical staff in the future. Furthermore, the survey of psychological aid modes should be of value to medical practitioners involved in control of the COVID-19 pandemic. A cross-sectional online survey was designed to assess the mental health status of medical staff. We adopted a free online questionnaire survey platform (SO JUMP; http://www.sojump. com) (26, 27) via the WeChat or QQ of the tencent social media network and DingTalk to collect data from respondents. In order to ensure the quality of the questionnaire, we carried out a preliminary survey, and then modified it according to feedback from respondents. The questionnaire information is detailed in Supplementary Materials 1, 2. In order to guarantee confidentiality of personal information, respondents were permitted to answer questionnaires anonymously from 3 to 17 February, 2020. Informed consent was obtained from each participant, and the study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University (No. 2020-KY0004). All subjects enrolled in the survey were medical staff. Demographic information focused on sex (men and women), age (≤28, 29-40, >40), educational level (