Healthcare worker stress, anxiety and burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic in Singapore: A 6-month multi-centre prospective study.

AIM: The long-term stress, anxiety and job burnout experienced by healthcare workers (HCWs) are important to consider as the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic stresses healthcare systems globally. The primary objective was to examine the changes in the proportion of HCWs reporting stress, anxiety, and job burnout over six months during the peak of the pandemic in Singapore. The secondary objective was to examine the extent that objective job characteristics, HCW-perceived job factors, and HCW personal resources were associated with stress, anxiety, and job burnout. METHOD: A sample of HCWs (doctors, nurses, allied health professionals, administrative and operations staff; N = 2744) was recruited via invitation to participate in an online survey from four tertiary hospitals. Data were gathered between March-August 2020, which included a 2-month lockdown period. HCWs completed monthly web-based self-reported assessments of stress (Perceived Stress Scale-4), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7), and job burnout (Physician Work Life Scale). RESULTS: The majority of the sample consisted of female HCWs (81%) and nurses (60%). Using random-intercept logistic regression models, elevated perceived stress, anxiety and job burnout were reported by 33%, 13%, and 24% of the overall sample at baseline respectively. The proportion of HCWs reporting stress and job burnout increased by approximately 1·0% and 1·2% respectively per month. Anxiety did not significantly increase. Working long hours was associated with higher odds, while teamwork and feeling appreciated at work were associated with lower odds, of stress, anxiety, and job burnout. CONCLUSIONS: Perceived stress and job burnout showed a mild increase over six months, even after exiting the lockdown. Teamwork and feeling appreciated at work were protective and are targets for developing organizational interventions to mitigate expected poor outcomes among frontline HCWs.

Development and preliminary validation of a leadership competency instrument for existing and emerging allied health professional leaders.

BACKGROUND: No instruments, to our knowledge, exist to assess leadership competency in existing and emerging allied health professional (AHP) leaders. This paper describes the development and preliminary exploration of the psychometric properties of a leadership competency instrument for existing and emerging AHP leaders and examines (i) its factor structure, (ii) its convergent validity with the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI), and (iii) its discriminative validity in AHPs with different grades. METHODS: During development, we included 25 items in the AHEAD (Aspiring leaders in Healthcare-Empowering individuals, Achieving excellence, Developing talents) instrument. A cross-sectional study was then conducted in 106 high-potential AHPs from Singapore General Hospital (34 men and 72 women) of different professional grades (49 principal-grade AHPs, 41 senior-grade AHPs, and 16 junior-grade AHPs) who completed both AHEAD and LPI instruments. Exploratory factor analysis was used to test the theoretical structure of AHEAD. Spearman correlation analysis was performed to evaluate the convergent validity of AHEAD with LPI. Using proportional odds regression models, we evaluated the association of grades of AHPs with AHEAD and LPI. To assess discriminative validity, the c-statistics - a measure of discrimination - were derived from these ordinal models. RESULTS: As theorized, factor analysis suggested a two-factor solution, where "skills" and "values" formed separate factors. Internal consistency of AHEAD was excellent (α-values > 0.88). Total and component AHEAD and LPI scores correlated moderately (Spearman ρ-values, 0.37 to 0.58). The c-index for discriminating between AHP grades was higher for AHEAD than for the LPI (0.76 vs. 0.65). CONCLUSION: The factorial structure of AHEAD was generally supported in our study. AHEAD showed convergent validity with the LPI and outperformed the LPI in terms of discriminative validity. These results provide initial evidence for the use of AHEAD to assess leadership competency in AHPs.

Mandatory continuing professional education in pharmacy: the Singapore experience.

BACKGROUND: Mandatory Continuing Professional Education (CPE) for the renewal of pharmacists' practising certificate was implemented in Singapore in 2008 OBJECTIVE: To study pharmacists' perceptions and attitudes about the impact of mandatory CPE in Singapore. SETTING: Singapore. METHOD: Internet-based questionnaire survey, conducted between May and June 2011. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Pharmacists' perceptions and attitudes toward mandatory CPE and the perceived difficulty in fulfilling the CPE requirements. RESULTS: The overall survey response rate was 52 % (840/1,609). Of the respondents, 32 % were non-practising, 49 % were practising in patient care areas, and 19 % were practising in non-patient care areas. More than half the pharmacists agreed that mandatory CPE (1) enhanced or increased their knowledge base and skills (70 %; 95 % CI 67-73 %), (2) motivated them to continually learn (64 %; 95 % CI, 60-67 %), and (3) motivated them to reflect on their professional practice or work (58 %; 95 % CI, 54-61 %). Mandatory CPE was not perceived to enhance or increase employability. Non-practising pharmacists appeared to have the greatest difficulty meeting the CPE requirements. CONCLUSIONS: In general, pharmacists value mandatory CPE more for positive professional reasons than for employability reasons. The survey results may serve as useful baseline data for future studies of pharmacists' perceptions and attitudes toward CPE in Singapore.