Wong Tai W, Yau Josephine K Y, Chan Cecilia L W, Kwong Rosalie S Y, Ho Samuel M Y, Lau Chor C, Lau Fei L, Lit Chau H
Accident and Emergency Department, Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital, Hong Kong.
Eur J Emerg Med. 2005 Feb;12(1):13-8. doi: 10.1097/00063110-200502000-00005.
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of the present study were to examine the degree and the sources of mental distress and the coping strategies adopted by healthcare workers (HCW) of emergency departments (ED) in Hong Kong during the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). METHODS: Questionnaires were sent to all doctors, nurses and healthcare assistants (HCA) working in the ED of all public hospitals. The overall degree of mental distress was measured by a single-item 11-point Likert scale. The source of distress was measured by an 18-item questionnaire, which was designed based on the experience of clinical psychologist colleagues providing counselling to staff taking care of SARS patients. The Brief Cope questionnaire was used to study coping strategies adopted by staff. RESULTS: A total of 1260 questionnaires were sent out and the response rate was approximately 37%. The mean overall distress level was 6.19 out of a 10-point scale. The mean overall distress levels for doctors, nurses and HCA were 5.91, 6.52 and 5.44, respectively (F(2,420)=6.47, P<0.005). The overall distress level for nurses was significantly higher than for HCA (P<0.005) but not doctors. The overall distress level was highly and significantly correlated with the six sources of distress: vulnerability/loss of control (r=0.68); health of self (r=0.62); spread of virus (r=0.60); health of family and others (r=0.59); changes in work (r=0.46); being isolated (r=0.45). The scores for nurses were significantly higher than for doctors in terms of the six sources of distress (all P values <0.01). HCA were significantly higher than doctors (but not nurses) in worrying about their family's and others' health (P<0.05). In terms of coping strategies, doctors were significantly more likely than nurses and HCA to use planning (P<0.05 and <0.01 respectively); nurses were significantly more likely than doctors to use behavioural disengagement (P<0.01); whereas HCA were significantly more likely than doctors to use self distractions (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: SARS had caused a significant level of distress among ED staff. The distress level was highest for nurses, followed by doctors and HCA. The three most important variables that could account for the distress level were loss of control/vulnerability, fear for self-health and spread of the virus. Overall, the more frequently adopted coping strategies were acceptance, active coping, and positive framing.
目的:本研究旨在调查香港严重急性呼吸综合征(SARS)爆发期间,急诊科医护人员的心理困扰程度、来源及所采取的应对策略。 方法:向所有公立医院急诊科的医生、护士及医护助理发放问卷。采用单项11点李克特量表测量心理困扰的总体程度。困扰来源通过一份18项问卷进行测量,该问卷基于为照顾SARS患者的工作人员提供咨询的临床心理学家同事的经验设计。使用简易应对方式问卷研究工作人员所采用的应对策略。 结果:共发放问卷1260份,回复率约为37%。在10分制量表中,总体困扰水平的平均值为6.19。医生、护士及医护助理的总体困扰水平平均值分别为5.91、6.52和5.44(F(2,420)=6.47,P<0.005)。护士的总体困扰水平显著高于医护助理(P<0.005),但与医生无显著差异。总体困扰水平与六个困扰来源高度显著相关:易感性/失去控制(r=0.68);自身健康(r=0.62);病毒传播(r=0.60);家人及他人健康(r=0.59);工作变化(r=0.46);被隔离(r=0.45)。在六个困扰来源方面,护士的得分显著高于医生(所有P值<0.01)。在担心家人及他人健康方面,医护助理显著高于医生(但与护士无显著差异)(P<0.05)。在应对策略方面,医生比护士及医护助理更有可能采用计划策略(分别为P<0.05和<0.01);护士比医生更有可能采用行为脱离策略(P<0.01);而医护助理比医生更有可能采用自我分心策略(P<0.05)。 结论:SARS给急诊科工作人员带来了显著程度的困扰。困扰程度最高的是护士,其次是医生和医护助理。导致困扰程度的三个最重要变量是失去控制/易感性、对自身健康的担忧以及病毒传播。总体而言,最常采用的应对策略是接受、积极应对和积极看待。
Can J Psychiatry. 2007-4
J Clin Nurs. 2005-4
Behav Sci (Basel). 2024-5-11
Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2024