Longitudinal profile of post-traumatic symptoms in HealthCare Workers during COVID-19 pandemic: A latent transition model.

INTRODUCTION: Pandemics have the potential to be considered traumatic event, increasing the risk of developing post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) in HealthCare Workers (HCW). However, few longitudinal studies have evaluated the impact of prolonged exposure to the risk imposed by COVID-19. Our aim was to identify subgroups of HCW with profiles of PTSS, how this profile changed during the pandemic and which variables were related to these changes. METHODS: We evaluated the levels of PTSS and psychological distress in a Brazilian HealthCare Workers' sample (n = 1398) in three waves of assessment: from May to June 2020 (Wave 1), December 2020 to February 2021 (Wave 2) and May to August 2021 (Wave 3), using Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) to identify subgroups with different profiles of symptms, and then, Latent Transition Analysis (LTA) was applied to examine changes in symptom profiles over time, including gender, psychiatric diagnosis history, and pandemic-related fears as covariates. RESULTS: two profiles were identified: high-PTSS profile (Wave 1-23%; Wave 2-64% and Wave 3-73%) and a low-PTSS (Wave 1-77%; Wave 2-36% and Wave 3-27%). Being female, fear of contamination, and fearing financial problems were strong predictors of changes in the profile. In addition, the participants had a high probability of being in the high-PTSS in the long run. CONCLUSION: These results suggests that targeted interventions can mitigate the impact of pandemic. Providing financial support, and psychological support can be beneficial for those with psychiatric diagnoses and experiencing bereavement.

Emotional Stability and Anxiety Symptoms Differentiates People Leaving the Home Usually During the Covid-19 Pandemic.

Objective: The population's adhesion to measures to ensure social distancing represents a great management challenge in a pandemic context. Despite of evidence shown that social distancing is effective, lack of adherence still persists in many countries. Therefore, it is challenging to separate the effectiveness of government measures, from social distancing driven by personal initiatives. Theory: It is possible that the output of protective behaviors, such as adherence to protective measures and staying in social isolation, is influenced by individual characteristics, such as personality traits or symptoms of mental distress of anxiogenic nature. We hypothesized that individuals with more expressive symptoms of fear or anxiety would have a more protective behavioral tendency in terms of risk exposure, leaving less home during the pandemic. In contrast, individuals with greater emotional stability, as they feel more secure and with a lower perception of risk, could go out more often. Method: A total of 2709 individuals from all regions of Brazil participated in the study (mean age = 42 years; 2134 women). Correlation analysis was performed to investigate the relationships between personality traits according to the big five model and Psychopathological Symptoms (BSI). Then, correlation analysis was performed to investigate how people that go out often differ from people that stay at home, in both symptoms and personality traits. Finally, to investigate the predictors for going out usually, we use multiple regression analysis, using gender, marital status, level of education, and personality traits. Results: During the second wave of COVID-19 in Brazil, individuals with higher emotional stability tended to leave home more than those with more expressive levels of anxiogenic dysregulation. These results reinforce the role of both personality traits and psychopathological symptoms in prophylactic behavior during COVID-19 pandemics. Conclusions: Individuals with greater emotional stability were more likely to leave home during the second wave of COVID-19 than those with higher levels of anxiogenic dysregulation.

Longitudinal invariance and validity of the Impact of Event Scale-Revised under COVID-19 pandemic in a Brazilian sample.

Although the Impact Event Scale-Revised is widely used, its factor structure is still controversial. In addition, its longitudinal measurement invariance (LMI) remains uninvestigated. In this sense, we carried out three studies to investigate its psychometric properties. In Study 1, we evaluated the factorial structure of the scale comparing the different models existing in the literature in Brazilian samples who responded to the instrument during the COVID-19 pandemic. In Study 2, we provide support for a five-factor model throughout convergent validity with psychological distress and sleep problems, and criterion validity between people with diagnostic of mental disorders. Finally, we evaluated the LMI over a 6-month interval. The results indicated that the five-factor model has excellent goodness of fit and holds strict longitudinal invariance. Additionally, internal consistency and stability coefficients indicate that the scale is appropriate to measure posttraumatic stress symptomatology) in nonclinical samples across multiple assessments. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Social Determinants in Self-Protective Behavior Related to COVID-19: Association Rule-Mining Study.

BACKGROUND: Human behavior is crucial in health outcomes. Particularly, individual behavior is a determinant of the success of measures to overcome critical conditions, such as a pandemic. In addition to intrinsic public health challenges associated with COVID-19, in many countries, some individuals decided not to get vaccinated, streets were crowded, parties were happening, and businesses struggling to survive were partially open, despite lockdown or stay-at-home instructions. These behaviors contrast with the instructions for potential benefits associated with social distancing, use of masks, and vaccination to manage collective and individual risks. OBJECTIVE: Considering that human behavior is a result of individuals' social and economic conditions, we investigated the social and working characteristics associated with reports of appropriate protective behavior in Brazil. METHODS: We analyzed data from a large web survey of individuals reporting their behavior during the pandemic. We selected 3 common self-care measures: use of protective masks, distancing by at least 1 m when out of the house, and handwashing or use of alcohol, combined with assessment of the social context of respondents. We measured the frequency of the use of these self-protective measures. Using a frequent pattern-mining perspective, we generated association rules from a set of answers to questions that co-occur with at least a given frequency, identifying the pattern of characteristics of the groups divided according to protective behavior reports. RESULTS: The rationale was to identify a pool of working and social characteristics that might have better adhesion to behaviors and self-care measures, showing these are more socially determined than previously thought. We identified common patterns of socioeconomic and working determinants of compliance with protective self-care measures. Data mining showed that social determinants might be important to shape behavior in different stages of the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Identification of context determinants might be helpful to identify unexpected facilitators and constraints to fully follow public policies. The context of diseases contributes to psychological and physical health outcomes, and context understanding might change the approach to a disease. Hidden social determinants might change protective behavior, and social determinants of protective behavior related to COVID-19 are related to work and economic conditions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

The mental health of Brazilian healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the distress level among Brazilian healthcare professionals during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and estimate risks by sex, age, and occupation. METHODS: In a longitudinal cohort design, a nationally distributed online survey was used to collect data from 10,490 active healthcare professionals who worked during the pandemic. Participants were mostly female, aged 18 to 82 years; 13 different health professions and all states of Brazil were represented. RESULTS: The most frequent professions were psychology, dentistry, and nursing. The Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) score suggested an increased distress perception among health professionals. Females showed poorer mental health than males, but the absolute rise in Global Severity Index (GSI) score was larger in males than in females. Younger adults reported more symptoms of psychological distress than older adults. The most impacted age group was between 30-39 years. Nurse technicians presented the highest risk of distress. CONCLUSION: Health professionals are essential to overcoming the pandemic; thus, their mental health status should be monitored, and features associated with increased distress should be identified. Our findings suggest distress risk should be stratified by occupation, age, and sex. Health professionals showed an increased distress perception. Women, individuals between the ages of 30 and 39, nursing personnel, and physicians were more likely to report distress compared with other health professionals.

The mental health of Brazilian healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal study

Objective: To compare the distress level among Brazilian healthcare professionals during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and estimate risks by sex, age, and occupation. Methods: In a longitudinal cohort design, a nationally distributed online survey was used to collect data from 10,490 active healthcare professionals who worked during the pandemic. Participants were mostly female, aged 18 to 82 years; 13 different health professions and all states of Brazil were represented. Results: The most frequent professions were psychology, dentistry, and nursing. The Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) score suggested an increased distress perception among health professionals. Females showed poorer mental health than males, but the absolute rise in Global Severity Index (GSI) score was larger in males than in females. Younger adults reported more symptoms of psychological distress than older adults. The most impacted age group was between 30-39 years. Nurse technicians presented the highest risk of distress. Conclusion: Health professionals are essential to overcoming the pandemic; thus, their mental health status should be monitored, and features associated with increased distress should be identified. Our findings suggest distress risk should be stratified by occupation, age, and sex. Health professionals showed an increased distress perception. Women, individuals between the ages of 30 and 39, nursing personnel, and physicians were more likely to report distress compared with other health professionals.