Zerban Matthias, Puhlmann Lara Marie Christine, Lassri Dana, Fonagy Peter, Montague P Read, Kiselnikova Natalia, Lorenzini Nicolas, Desatnik Alex, Kalisch Raffael, Nolte Tobias
Neuroimaging Center (NIC), Focus Program Translational Neuroscience (FTN), Johannes Gutenberg University Medical Center, Mainz, Germany.
Leibniz Institute for Resilience Research (LIR), Mainz, Germany.
Front Psychol. 2023 Dec 18;14:1272199. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1272199. eCollection 2023.
Although the COVID-19 pandemic has severely affected wellbeing of at-risk groups, most research on resilience employed convenience samples. We investigated psychosocial resilience and risk factors (RFs) for the wellbeing of psychotherapists and other mental health practitioners, an under-researched population that provides essential support for other at-risk groups and was uniquely burdened by the pandemic.
We examined 18 psychosocial factors for their association with resilience, of which four were chosen due to their likely relevance specifically for therapists, in a cross-sectional multi-national sample ( = 569) surveyed between June and September 2020. Resilience was operationalized dimensionally and outcome-based as lower stressor reactivity (SR), meaning fewer mental health problems than predicted given a participant's levels of stressor exposure. General SR (SR) scores expressed reactivity in terms of general internalizing problems, while profession-specific SR (SR) scores expressed reactivity in terms of burnout and secondary trauma, typical problems of mental health practitioners.
Factors previously identified as RFs in other populations, including perceived social support, optimism and self-compassion, were almost all significant in the study population (SR: 18/18 RFs, absolute βs = 0.16-0.40; SR: 15/18 RFs, absolute βs = 0.19-0.39 all s < 0.001). Compassion satisfaction emerged as uniquely relevant for mental health practitioners in regularized regression.
Our work identifies psychosocial RFs for mental health practitioners' wellbeing during crisis. Most identified factors are general, in that they are associated with resilience to a wider range of mental health problems, and global, in that they have also been observed in other populations and stressor constellations.
尽管新冠疫情严重影响了高危群体的健康，但大多数关于心理韧性的研究采用的是便利样本。我们调查了心理治疗师和其他心理健康从业者心理健康的心理社会韧性及风险因素，这一群体的研究较少，他们为其他高危群体提供重要支持，且在疫情中负担独特。
我们在2020年6月至9月对一个跨国横断面样本（n = 569）进行了调查，研究18种心理社会因素与韧性的关联，其中4种因其可能与治疗师特别相关而被选取。韧性从维度和结果两方面进行操作化定义，即较低的应激源反应性（SR），意味着在考虑参与者应激源暴露水平的情况下，心理健康问题少于预期。一般SR（SR）分数以一般内化问题来表示反应性，而特定职业的SR（SR）分数以职业倦怠和继发性创伤（心理健康从业者的典型问题）来表示反应性。
先前在其他人群中被确定为风险因素的因素，包括感知到的社会支持、乐观和自我同情，在研究人群中几乎都具有显著意义（SR：18个风险因素中有18个，绝对β值 = 0.16 - 0.40；SR：18个风险因素中有15个，绝对β值 = 0.19 - 0.39，所有p < 0.001）。在正则回归中，同情满意度对心理健康从业者具有独特的相关性。
我们的研究确定了危机期间心理健康从业者心理健康的心理社会风险因素。大多数确定的因素具有普遍性，因为它们与更广泛的心理健康问题的韧性相关；也具有全局性，因为它们在其他人群和应激源组合中也有观察到。
