Translation and validation of the Vietnamese Epilepsy Self-Management Scale (V-ESMS).

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to translate and validate the Vietnamese version of the Epilepsy Self-Management Scale (V-ESMS). METHODS: The translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the original version of the ESMS into Vietnamese followed the Principles of Good Practice for the Translation and Cultural Adaptation Process for Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures guideline with "forward-backward" translation and culturally adapted. The participants were recruited consecutively at neurology clinics at Nguyen Tri Phuong Hospital and University Medical Center, Ho Chi Minh City, from January 2022 to July 2022 and required to complete the V-ESMS. The validity was assessed by exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Cronbach's alpha and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were used to evaluate internal and temporal reliability, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 200 participants were recruited for analysis. The V-ESMS included 36 items and five domains. The factor loading ranged between 0.313 and 0.927; most items loaded in their hypothesized factors proved in the original scale. Using the CFA, theCMIN/DF, comparative fit index, and root mean square error of approximation were 2.883, 0.80, and 0.097, respectively. The Cronbach's alpha in each domain was 0.79-0.907; the scale was 0.936. The ICC from 0.94 to 0.98 showed excellent test-retest reliability. CONCLUSION: The 36-item V-ESMS with five domains presented good validity and reliability. This instrument could be used to assess self-management in people with epilepsy in Vietnam.

Mental Health Among Healthcare Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Vietnam.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to characterize mental health issues among Vietnamese healthcare workers (HCWs) and to identify related factors. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 990 HCWs in 2021. Their mental health status was measured using the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale. RESULTS: In total, 49.9%, 52.3%, and 29.8% of respondents were found to have depression, anxiety, and stress, respectively. The multivariable linear regression model revealed that factors associated with increased anxiety scores included depression scores (ß, 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39 to 0.51) and stress scores (ß, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.52). Factors associated with increased depression scores included being frontline HCWs (ß, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.10 to 1.10), stress scores (ß, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.56), and anxiety scores (ß, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.47), while working experience was associated with reduced depression scores (ß, -0.08; 95% CI, -0.16 to -0.01). Factors associated with increased stress scores included working experience (ß, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.00 to 0.16), personal protective equipment interference with daily activities (ß, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.07 to 1.00), depression scores (ß, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.59), and anxiety scores (ß, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.50), while age was associated with reduced stress scores (ß, -0.12; 95% CI, -0.20 to -0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Specific interventions are necessary to enhance and promote the mental health of HCWs so they can successfully cope with the circumstances of the pandemic.