Mini-Z validation for burnout and stress evaluation: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: The Mini-Z is a questionnaire created to evaluate the levels of burnout in healthcare workers. It consists of 10 items rated using a 5-point Likert scale and one open question. It explores three outcomes (burnout, stress and satisfaction) and seven drivers of burnout (work control, work chaos, teamwork, values alignment with leadership, documentation time pressure, EMR use at home, and EMR proficiency). The aim of this study is to validate the Italian version of the Mini-Z, comparing it with the other most used scales. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We recruited a sample of 120 healthcare professionals and administered all three questionnaires to each of them, after which we compared the answers and the scores of the results. A cross-sectional study among healthcare workers was conducted from May to July 2022. An online questionnaire was sent, by e-mail, to 120 healthcare workers (60.8% male, 39.2% female), aged between 18 and 60 years old (26.8% between 25 and 38 years old). They were invited to answer to an anonymous survey, consisting of three assessment instruments: Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI), Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) and Mini-Z Inventory 2.0. The Mini-Z 2.0 is a new and easier tool to assess burnout syndrome, actually validated only in English. It was translated into Italian by reverse translation. Cronbach's Alpha coefficient, a statistical index, was used to assess its reliability. The last phase of the study compared the Mini-Z, the CBI and the MBI, by means of Pearson's coefficient, to highlight the Mini-Z's ability to be used for Burnout assessment. RESULTS: The analysis of the results showed that 18.3% of the interviewed healthcare professionals scored equal (2.5%) or higher (15.8%) than 40. The average percentage value was 33.35%, with a standard deviation of 6.3%. This emphasises, therefore, that this portion of employees is more or less satisfied with their working environment. The remaining portion of employees, on the other hand, 81.7%, scored below 40, emphasising an unpleasant and unjoyful working environment. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Burnout is very common among employees and especially among healthcare workers and a routine assessment seems to be necessary to be able to prevent the syndrome. The Italian version of the Mini-Z includes ten items, is more user-friendly and aims to assess not only Burnout subscales, as in the previous tests, but also well-being factors and has applied a rigorous approach, including forward translation, back translation and cognitive debriefing.

Occupational Medicine and Prevention of Chronic and Infectious Diseases.

Occupational medicine is a clinical discipline that draws attention to the health of workers and their ability to work [...].

Evaluation of the Factors Associated with Reinfections towards SARS-CoV-2 Using a Case Control Design.

OBJECTIVE: The risk of reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 has been rapidly increased with the circulation of concerns about variants. So, the aim of our study was to evaluate the factors that increase the risk of this reinfection in healthcare workers compared to those who have never been positive and those who have had only one positivity. METHODS: A case-control study was carried out at the Teaching Hospital Policlinico Umberto I in Rome, Sapienza University of Rome, in the period between 6 March 2020 and 3 June 2022. Cases are healthcare workers who have developed a reinfection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, while controls were either healthcare workers who tested positive once or those who have never tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: 134 cases and 267 controls were recruited. Female gender is associated with a higher odds of developing reinfection (OR: 2.42; 95% CI: 1.38-4.25). Moreover, moderate or high alcohol consumption is associated with higher odds of reinfection (OR: 1.49; 95% CI: 1.19-1.87). Diabetes is also associated with higher odds of reinfection (OR: 3.45; 95% CI: 1.41-8.46). Finally, subjects with increased red blood cell counts have higher odds of reinfection (OR: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.21-2.25). CONCLUSION: From the prevention point of view, these findings indicate that particular attention should be paid to subjects with diabetes mellitus, women and alcoholic drinkers. These results could also suggest that contact tracing represents a fundamental approach model against the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, together with the health information of participants.

Synergistic Effect between SARS-CoV-2 Wave and COVID-19 Vaccination on the Occurrence of Mild Symptoms in Healthcare Workers.

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of the pandemic, five variants of epidemiological interest have been identified, each of them with its pattern of symptomology and disease severity. The aim of this study is to analyze the role of vaccination status in modulating the pattern of symptomatology associated with COVID-19 infection during four waves. METHODS: Data from the surveillance activity of healthcare workers were used to carry out descriptive analysis, association analyses and multivariable analysis. A synergism analysis between vaccination status and symptomatology during the waves was performed. RESULTS: Females were found at a higher risk of developing symptoms. Four SARS-CoV-2 waves were identified. Pharyngitis and rhinitis were more frequent during the fourth wave and among vaccinated subjects while cough, fever, flu syndrome, headache, anosmia, ageusia, arthralgia/arthritis and myalgia were more frequent during the first three waves and among unvaccinated subjects. A correlation was found between vaccination and the different waves in terms of developing pharyngitis and rhinitis. CONCLUSION: Vaccination status and viruses' mutations had a synergic effect in the mitigation of the symptomatology caused by SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare workers.

The Relationship between Working Night Shifts and Depression among Nurses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: For many years, occupational physicians have debated whether there is a link between working the night shift and depression and other co-occurring mental health issues, with an emphasis on work-related, biological, individual, and environmental factors. We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the overall association between sleep deprivation and depression among nurses working night shifts. METHODS: A systematic search was carried out across the electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception to 30 September 2022, for studies that reported a relationship between estimated night shift work and depression in nurses. The outcomes were measured using the odds ratio (OR) and matching 95% confidence interval (CI). The I2 statistic was used to assess heterogeneity. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation technique was used to evaluate the quality of the evidence, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was utilized to assess the methodological quality of each of the included studies. We determined the overall relationship between working nights and the onset of depression. RESULTS: A total of 20 studies were included in the systematic review. Furthermore, 8 studies were included in the meta-analysis due to their common use of the OR as an effect measure. The 8 studies gave an overall estimate indicating a statistically significant association between night shift work and depression among nurses (OR = 1.49 95% CI: 1.26, 1.76). The prediction interval for the overall estimate was (0.995, 2.231). This implies that the true OR in a future study would most likely fall within this range, with a 95% certainty. CONCLUSIONS: The outcome of this systematic review and meta-analysis showed a significant association between night shift work, the circadian and sleep disruption it causes, and the risk of depression in nurses. This demonstrates that nurses who work night shifts are at risk of developing depression.

What Are the Determinants of the Quality of Systematic Reviews in the International Journals of Occupational Medicine? A Methodological Study Review of Published Literature.

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the methodological quality of systematic reviews published in occupational medicine journals from 2014 to 2021. Methods: Papers edited between 2014 and 2021 in the 14 open access journals with the highest impact were assessed for their quality. Studies were included if they were systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and if they were published in English. Results: The study included 335 studies. Among these, 149 were meta-analyses and 186 were systematic reviews. The values of the AMSTAR-2 score range between three and fourteen with a mean value of 9.85 (SD = 2.37). The factors that significantly and directly associate to a higher AMSTAR-2 score were impact factor (p = 0.003), number of consulted research databases (p = 0.011), declaration of PRISMA statement (p = 0.003), year of publication (p < 0.001) and performing a meta-analysis (p < 0.001).The R² values from the multivariate analysis showed that the AMSTAR-2 score could be predicted by the inclusion of these parameters by up to 23%. Conclusions: This study suggests a quality assessment methodology that could help readers in a fast identification of good systematic reviews or meta-analyses. Future studies should analyze more journals without applying language restrictions and consider a wider range of years of publication in order to give a more robust evidence for results.

Flu Vaccination among Healthcare Professionals in Times of COVID-19: Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behavior.

The seasonal flu vaccine is the most important way to prevent influenza epidemics, so it is useful to increase the awareness of health professionals. The aim of our study is to evaluate knowledge, attitudes, and behavior about flu vaccination among healthcare professionals in times of COVID-19. METHODS: A cross sectional study was carried out between November 2020 and April 2021. Participants were recruited in teaching hospital 'Policlinico Umberto I' of Rome. A survey of 24 questions about flu vaccination was administered, evaluating their knowledge, attitude, and practice about this topic. RESULTS: 872 healthcare professionals were involved in the study (36.9% men, 63.1% women). More than 90% of the HCWs, especially physicians, recognize the importance of getting influenza vaccination: The main reasons for not getting vaccinated were fear of vaccine side effects (20.3%) and fear of the needle (6.4%). Nevertheless, 40.7% of the healthcare providers consider mandatory vaccination as unethical, especially if they work in low-intensity wards. CONCLUSION: a high percentage of healthcare workers agree with the importance of influenza vaccination and only a small percentage is still opposed. It is therefore important to continue to promote the influenza vaccination through communication and health education programs.