CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 21COVID-19 and Mental HealthHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutOccupational Health and Burnout

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 2 are not checked yet.

Coping Strategies Among Healthcare Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Emotional Responses, Challenges, and Adaptive Practices

Open access
Puia, Aida, Pop, Sorina Rodica, Manzat, Bianca Olivia Cojan, Pintea, Sebastian, Puia, Ion Cosmin, Fadgyas-Stanculete, Mihaela·2025·Medicina
DOI 10.3390/medicina61020311PMC PMC11857654
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background and Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic has posed unprecedented challenges to healthcare workers, leading to significant psychological distress, altered health-related behaviors, and reliance on various coping mechanisms. Understanding these impacts is critical for developing targeted interventions to support healthcare professionals. This study aimed to evaluate the psychological stressors, emotional responses, changes in healthy behaviors, and coping mechanisms employed by healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study further examined differences across demographic and professional groups and explored correlations between stressors, coping strategies, and emotional outcomes. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 338 healthcare workers, including physicians and nurses, in urban and rural healthcare settings during the pandemic. Data were collected using validated instruments to measure emotional responses (anxiety and anger), lifestyle behaviors (dietary habits, sleep patterns, physical activity, and smoking), and coping strategies. Statistical analyses included descriptive, inferential, and correlation techniques to assess relationships between variables. Results: Fear of infecting family members (M = 3.36, SD = 0.86) and concerns about inadequate protective equipment (M = 2.80, SD = 0.95) were the most significant stressors, strongly associated with heightened anxiety and anger. Changes in healthy behaviors were observed: 69.2% maintained a healthy meal schedule, 56.5% reported disrupted sleep patterns, and only 39.6% engaged in regular physical activity. Among smokers (27.5%), 31.1% increased smoking as a maladaptive coping strategy, while 21.1% reduced smoking. Nurses predominantly relied on emotion-focused strategies, such as religious coping and venting, whereas physicians favored problem-focused strategies like planning and active coping. Social support emerged as a protective factor, mitigating stress and facilitating adaptive coping. Conclusions: The study revealed significant psychological and behavioral impacts on healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Key stressors included the fear of infecting family members, concerns about inadequate protective measures, and the prolonged uncertainty of the pandemic, which contributed to heightened levels of anxiety and anger. Changes in healthy behaviors, such as disrupted sleep patterns, decreased physical activity, and increased reliance on maladaptive coping mechanisms, further underscored the multifaceted challenges faced by healthcare professionals. Although the acute phase of the pandemic has passed, the long-term consequences on the mental health and well-being of healthcare workers remain critical concerns. Further research is essential to develop effective strategies for monitoring, preventing, and addressing psychological distress among healthcare professionals, ensuring their preparedness for future public health crises.

Overview

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/medicina61020311

Cites

37 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Conceptual framework of stressors, coping strategies, and emotional responses.
Figure 1 Conceptual framework of stressors, coping strategies, and emotional responses.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 37 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Spielberger, C.D., Gorsuch, R.L., Lushene, R.E., Vagg, P.R., and Jacobs, G.A. (1983). State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), Consulting Psychologists Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Puia, A., Pop, S. R., Manzat, B. O. C., Pintea, S., Puia, I. C., & Fadgyas-Stanculete, M.
Affiliations
  • Iuliu Hațieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy (RO)
  • Department of Community Medicine, “Iuliu Hațieganu” University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 400347 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
  • Babeș-Bolyai University (RO)
  • Department of Neurosciences, Discipline of Psychiatry and Pediatric Psychiatry, “Iuliu Hatieganu” University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
Corresponding author
Pop, Sorina Rodica
ORCID
Venue
Medicina
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2025-02-11
Volume
61
Issue
2
Pages
311
ISSN
  • 1010-660X (ISSN-L)
  • 1648-9144
DOI
10.3390/medicina61020311
PMC
PMC11857654
OpenAlex
W4407354325
Cited by
16
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 6
FWCI
18.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Medicina (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
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 › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Occupational Health and Burnout
Keywords
COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers, coping strategies, psychological stress, anxiety, anger, healthy lifestyle behaviors, sleep disruption, physical activity, smoking, social support, emotion-focused coping, problem-focused coping, nurses, physicians, workplace mental health, religious coping, venting, demographic differences, occupational differences
MeSH terms
COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Coping Skills, Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Anger, Anxiety, Cross-Sectional Studies, Emotions, Female, Health Personnel, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Stress, Psychological, Health Behavior, Pandemics

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