Family medicine practitioners' stress during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional survey.


Journal

BMC family practice
ISSN: 1471-2296
Titre abrégé: BMC Fam Pract
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967792

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
14 02 2021
Historique:
received: 03 10 2020
accepted: 04 02 2021
entrez: 15 2 2021
pubmed: 16 2 2021
medline: 24 2 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The COVID-19 pandemic has shaken the world in early 2020. In France, General Practitioners (GPs) were not involved in the care organization's decision-making process before and during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. This omission could have generated stress for GPs. We aimed first to estimate the self-perception of stress as defined by the 10-item Perceived Stress Score (PSS-10), at the beginning of the pandemic in France, among GPs from the Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes, a french administrative area severely impacted by COVID-19. Second, we aimed to identify factors associated with a self-perceived stress (PSS-10 ≥ 27) among socio-demographic characteristics of GPs, their access to reliable information and to personal protective equipment during the pandemic, and their exposure to well established psychosocial risk at work. We conducted an online cross-sectional survey between 8th April and 10th May 2020. The self-perception of stress was evaluated using the PSS-10, so to see the proportion of "not stressed" (≤20), "borderline" (21 ≤ PSS-10 ≤ 26), and "stressed" (≥27) GPs. The agreement to 31 positive assertions related to possible sources of stress identified by the scientific study committee was measured using a 10-point numeric scale. In complete cases, factors associated with stress (PSS-10 ≥ 27) were investigated using logistic regression, adjusted on gender, age and practice location. A supplementary analysis of the verbatims was made. Overall, 898 individual answers were collected, of which 879 were complete. A total of 437 GPs (49%) were stressed (PSS-10 ≥ 27), and 283 GPs (32%) had a very high level of stress (PSS-10 ≥ 30). Self-perceived stress was associated with multiple components, and involved classic psychosocial risk factors such as emotional requirements. However, in this context of health crisis, the primary source of stress was the diversity and quantity of information from diverse sources (614 GPs (69%, OR = 2.21, 95%CI [1.40-3.50], p < 0.001). Analysis of verbatims revealed that GPs felt isolated in a hospital-based model. The first wave of the pandemic was a source of stress for GPs. The diversity and quantity of information received from the health authorities were among the main sources of stress.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
The COVID-19 pandemic has shaken the world in early 2020. In France, General Practitioners (GPs) were not involved in the care organization's decision-making process before and during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. This omission could have generated stress for GPs. We aimed first to estimate the self-perception of stress as defined by the 10-item Perceived Stress Score (PSS-10), at the beginning of the pandemic in France, among GPs from the Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes, a french administrative area severely impacted by COVID-19. Second, we aimed to identify factors associated with a self-perceived stress (PSS-10 ≥ 27) among socio-demographic characteristics of GPs, their access to reliable information and to personal protective equipment during the pandemic, and their exposure to well established psychosocial risk at work.
METHODS
We conducted an online cross-sectional survey between 8th April and 10th May 2020. The self-perception of stress was evaluated using the PSS-10, so to see the proportion of "not stressed" (≤20), "borderline" (21 ≤ PSS-10 ≤ 26), and "stressed" (≥27) GPs. The agreement to 31 positive assertions related to possible sources of stress identified by the scientific study committee was measured using a 10-point numeric scale. In complete cases, factors associated with stress (PSS-10 ≥ 27) were investigated using logistic regression, adjusted on gender, age and practice location. A supplementary analysis of the verbatims was made.
RESULTS
Overall, 898 individual answers were collected, of which 879 were complete. A total of 437 GPs (49%) were stressed (PSS-10 ≥ 27), and 283 GPs (32%) had a very high level of stress (PSS-10 ≥ 30). Self-perceived stress was associated with multiple components, and involved classic psychosocial risk factors such as emotional requirements. However, in this context of health crisis, the primary source of stress was the diversity and quantity of information from diverse sources (614 GPs (69%, OR = 2.21, 95%CI [1.40-3.50], p < 0.001). Analysis of verbatims revealed that GPs felt isolated in a hospital-based model.
CONCLUSION
The first wave of the pandemic was a source of stress for GPs. The diversity and quantity of information received from the health authorities were among the main sources of stress.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33583410
doi: 10.1186/s12875-021-01382-3
pii: 10.1186/s12875-021-01382-3
pmc: PMC7882249
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

36

Références

JAMA. 2020 Apr 7;323(13):1239-1242
pubmed: 32091533
N Engl J Med. 2014 Apr 3;370(14):1335-42
pubmed: 24693893
BMC Fam Pract. 2018 Jul 28;19(1):130
pubmed: 30055571
Med Mal Infect. 2018 Mar;48(2):95-102
pubmed: 29169817
N Engl J Med. 2020 Apr 30;382(18):e41
pubmed: 32212516
Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2015 Oct;9(5):547-53
pubmed: 25797363
JAMA. 2007 Feb 28;297(8):831-41
pubmed: 17327525
Lancet. 2015 Dec 19;386(10012):2535-8
pubmed: 26628327
Med J Aust. 2020 Aug;213(3):104-106.e1
pubmed: 32623740
PLoS One. 2008 May 28;3(5):e2269
pubmed: 18509538
Psychiatr Prax. 2020 May;47(4):190-197
pubmed: 32340048
Lancet. 2020 Mar 14;395(10227):912-920
pubmed: 32112714
Clin Infect Dis. 2020 Jul 28;71(15):825-832
pubmed: 32277759
Sante Publique. 2009 Jul-Aug;21(4):365-73
pubmed: 20101815
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2007 Nov;26(11):819-23
pubmed: 17690927
J Health Soc Behav. 1983 Dec;24(4):385-96
pubmed: 6668417
Cad Saude Publica. 2020 Apr 30;36(4):e00054020
pubmed: 32374806
J Anxiety Disord. 2020 May;72:102232
pubmed: 32408047
Arch Iran Med. 2020 Apr 01;23(4):265-267
pubmed: 32271600
Psychiatry Res. 2020 Jun;288:112954
pubmed: 32325383
BMC Public Health. 2007 Jun 06;7:97
pubmed: 17553153

Auteurs

Marion Dutour (M)

Infectious disease department, Annecy-Genevois hospital, Annecy, France. marion.dutour@etu.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr.

Anna Kirchhoff (A)

Infectious disease department, Annecy-Genevois hospital, Annecy, France.

Cécile Janssen (C)

Infectious disease department, Annecy-Genevois hospital, Annecy, France.

Sabine Meleze (S)

Institut national d'études démographiques (Ined), UR 14, Aubervillers, France.

Hélène Chevalier (H)

Helene Chevalier Conseils, Paris, France.

Sandrine Levy-Amon (S)

Stimulus, Paris, France.

Marc-Antoine Detrez (MA)

Clinical research unit, Annecy-Genevois hospital, Annecy, France.

Emilie Piet (E)

Infectious disease department, Annecy-Genevois hospital, Annecy, France.

Tristan Delory (T)

Institut national d'études démographiques (Ined), UR 14, Aubervillers, France.
Clinical research unit, Annecy-Genevois hospital, Annecy, France.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH