4.7 Article

Comparison of mental health indicators in clinical psychologists with the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 13, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-32316-x

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mental healthcare professionals in Austria showed lower prevalence of depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms compared to the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to an online survey. However, there was no difference in insomnia symptoms. Further research is needed to understand the reasons behind these findings.
Mental healthcare professionals face diverse challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, which may augment their risk of experiencing adverse mental health outcomes themselves. We aimed to compare depressive, anxiety, insomnia, and stress symptoms in Austrian clinical psychologists during the COVID-19 pandemic with the Austrian general population. A total of N = 172 Austrian clinical psychologists (91.9% women; mean age: 44.90 +/- 7.97 years) participated in an online survey in spring 2022. A representative sample (N = 1011) of the Austrian general population was surveyed simultaneously. Symptoms of depression (PHQ-2), anxiety (GAD-2), insomnia (ISI-2), and stress (PSS-10) were assessed. Differences in the prevalence of clinically relevant symptoms were analyzed using univariate (Chi-squared tests) and multivariable (binary logistic regression including covariates age and gender) analyses. Clinical psychologists showed lower adjusted odds for exceeding the cut-offs for clinically relevant depression (aOR 0.37), anxiety (aOR 0.50), and moderate to high stress levels (aOR 0.31) compared to the general population (p < 0.01). No difference was observed for insomnia (aOR 0.92; p = 0.79). In conclusion, clinical psychologists experience better mental health than the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic. Future studies are needed to analyze the underlying reasons.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据