Prevalence of Anxiety and Depression among Psychiatric Healthcare Workers during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Malaysian Perspective
Open accessAbstract
The psychological distress reported among frontline healthcare workers (HCWs) is concerning. Little is known about the mental health of non-frontline, psychiatric HCWs, who play a central role in handling the mental health crisis during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to examine the prevalence of anxiety and depression among psychiatric HCWs and evaluate its association with socio-demographic, socio-economic, work-related factors and coping strategies. The authors proposed a cross-sectional study design using the Hospital Anxiety and Depressive Scale (HADS) and Brief-COPE scale. This study found that the prevalence of anxiety and depression were 22.0% and 16.8%, respectively. A multivariate analysis revealed that married psychiatric HCWs had a lower level of anxiety with OR = 0.31 (95% CI: 0.11–0.83). Psychiatric HCWs who were experiencing financial hardships, were unvaccinated and those who had a shorter duration of service in the psychiatric department had a higher level of depressive symptoms with OR = 0.31 (CI: 1.19–11.27), 3.21 (CI: 0.97–10.52), and 1.01 (CI: 1.00–1.02), respectively. For every increase of one unit of avoidant coping score among respondents, the odds of having anxiety and depression increased by 1.25 times (CI: 1.15–1.37) and 1.20 times (CI: 1.09–1.32), respectively, whereas for every increase of one unit of religious coping score among respondents, the odds of having anxiety reduced by 1.42 times (CI: 1.10–1.84). The authors highlight that psychosocial measures addressing the relatively high levels of anxiety and depression among psychiatric HCWs should be a key priority to ensure the sustainment of mental health services in the face of this prolonged pandemic.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Past studies reported that psychological flexibility, psychological mindedness, mindfulness, and coping styles were among protective factors for psychological distress.
“past studies reporting that psychological constructs, such as psychological flexibility, psychological mindedness, mindfulness, and coping styles, were among protective factors for psychological distress [13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20].”
From Seroprevalence of COVID-19 and Psychological Distress among Front Liners at the Universiti Malaysia Sabah Campus during the Third Wave of COVID-19 (2022) · cites this paper as [19]
The Introduction (page unavailable) reports that approach and positive religious coping are inversely correlated with anxiety and depression, and the Discussion (page unavailable) describes religious coping as protective against anxiety. The passages support the coping-styles portion, but do not address psychological flexibility, psychological mindedness, or mindfulness. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 49 · Cited by 25
- Authors
- Narendra Kumar, M. K., Francis, B., Hashim, A. H., Zainal, N. Z., Abdul Rashid, R., Ng, C. G., Danaee, M., Hussain, N., & Sulaiman, A. H.
- Affiliations
- Department of Psychological Medicine, University Malaya Medical Centre, Kuala Lumpur 59100, Malaysia
- University Malaya Medical Centre (MY)
- University of Malaya (MY)
- Malacca General Hospital (MY)
- Corresponding author
- Sulaiman, Ahmad Hatim
- ORCID
- Venue
- Healthcare
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2022-03-14
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 532
- ISSN
- 2227-9032 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC8951112
- OpenAlex
- W4220881354
- Cited by
- 25
- References
- 49
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 4
- FWCI
- 5.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Healthcare (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Health and Burnout
- Keywords
- anxiety, depression, COVID-19 pandemic, mental health of healthcare workers, coping strategies, avoidance coping, religious coping, marital status, financial hardship, COVID-19 vaccination, length of service
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review