Health workers’ psychological distress during early phase of the covid-19 pandemic in Morocco

  1. Jihane Belayachi
  2. Sarah Benammi
  3. Hasnae Chippo
  4. Rhita Nechba Bennis
  5. Naoufel Madani
  6. Abdelmalek Hrora
  7. Redouane Abouqal

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Introduction

The mental being of healthcare workers with the COVID 19 pandemic is a determinant of their resilience. We investigated the psychological impact of health workers during early phase of Covid 19 pandemic in Morocco.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study based on a survey of health workers of the Rabat University Hospital Ibn-Sina in Morocco. Data were collected during the first week of health emergency state –between 23 and 30 march-related to the covid-19 pandemic declaration in Morocco. Sociodemographic, health characteristics and professional characteristics of each health worker were collected. We also evaluated the knowledge of health workers concerning the protective measures against COVID 19. The mental health status of the health workers was investigated using the Arabic validated version of HADS 14 items, evaluating hospital anxiety and depression

Results

Two hundred eighty-seven health workers were included.The mean age was 34.4±12.18 year; and 64.5% were female, 54% have been trained regarding protection procedures, and 94.8% declared that they are aware of individual protection measures. The incidence of anxiety and depression was respectively 77.4% and 73.9%. High degree of anxiety and depression was associated with female gender. However, Higher degree of anxiety was also related to function, specialty of practice, and knowledge of the protective measures against COVID-19.

Conclusion

We reported the result of the first evaluation of psychological burden of health worker during early period of COVID-19 pandemic in a developing country. The study showed high frequency of anxiety and depression among Moroccan health worker in a hospital faced to COVID-19 patient management.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1101/2021.02.02.21250639v2 on medRxiv
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.02.02.21250639: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.02.02.21250639v1 on medRxiv