3 results
Translation and validation of Greek version of the Pandemic Grief Scale
- K. S. Kitsou, M. Bakola, C. Kalogirou, S. Aggelakou-Vaitsi, N. Vaitsis, K. Argyropoulos, M. Kampouraki, E. Gkatsi, K. Tsolaki, M. Vakas, A. Theochari, K. Mavridou, M. Siali, S. Karatzeni, M. Chalkidou, V. Karagianni, N. Kioses, P. Gourzis, E. Jelastopulu
-
- Journal:
- European Psychiatry / Volume 66 / Issue S1 / March 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 July 2023, p. S474
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
Introduction
Those who have lost loved ones to COVID-19 may be considered at risk of complicated grief. A 5-item mental health screening tool called the Pandemic Grief Scale (PGS) was developed to find likely instances of dysfunctional grief during the pandemic.
ObjectivesTo develop a Greek version of PGS and to explore the validity and reliability among the general population in Greece in order to further use it as clinical mental health screener.
MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study between January and April 2022, and 342 persons were recruited. The questionnaire included socio-demographic parameters, the PGS, the Brief Resilience Coping Scale to capture tendencies to cope with stress and the Athens Insomnia Scale to assess the insomnia symptoms. Based on experiences over the previous two weeks, each PGS item is scored on a 4-point scale, from 0 (not at all) to 3 (almost every day), with higher rating and a cut-off of 7 indicating dysfunctional grief. Prior to the psychometric validation a linguistic validation and adaptation in Greek was performed.
ResultsA total of 342 patients participated in the study, 67.8 % were females and 27.8% were 18-30 years old. Coefficient Validity Ratio (CVR) results showed that 100% (n = 5) of items were acceptable. Value of Cronbach’s alpha was found 0.848. A one-factor model was conducted by Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), giving acceptable global fit indices. The resulting global fit indices [Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) = 0.037, Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = 0.952, Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI)= 0.903] showed that the 5 items in one-factor solution proposed by the primary researchers shouldn’t be rejected for the Greek version. The Bartlett Test of Sphericity was 758.08 (p <0.001). The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy was 0.826, showing that the data is suitable for factor analysis. The one-factor solution derived in our study consisted of 5 items. The total explained variance was 64.3 %.
ConclusionsThe findings of this research support the PGS psychometric validity and reliability. PGS is suitable to be used in healthcare to identify and assist individuals, who are experiencing this type of pandemic-related dysfunctional grief as it is a screening tool that it’s simple to use, access, and understand.
Disclosure of InterestNone Declared
Prevalence of mental health effects among healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic
- M. Bakola, K. S. Kitsou, C. Kalogirou, N. Vaitsis, S. Aggelakou-Vaitsi, K. Argyropoulos, M. Kampouraki, E. Gkatsi, K. Tsolaki, M. Vakas, A. Theochari, K. Mavridou, S. Karatzeni, M. Siali, X. Bazoukis, M. Chalkidou, V. Karagianni, P. Gourzis, E. Jelastopulu
-
- Journal:
- European Psychiatry / Volume 66 / Issue S1 / March 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 July 2023, pp. S543-S544
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic has placed extraordinary mental health burdens on healthcare professionals. For women, it is a major challenge to reconcile the diverse roles of a professional, mother, and wife. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated this, increasing their vulnerability to mental health issues.
ObjectivesThe aim of the study was to assess COVID-19-related mental health of healthcare professionals and to investigate whether possible gender differences as well as other parameters are associated with mental health disturbances.
MethodsWe conducted a nationwide cross-sectional study of healthcare professionals working in hospitals or primary care settings in Greece from April to June 2022. Participants answered a questionnaire that included socio-demographic and other parameters, the Coronavirus Anxiety Scale (CAS), the Coronavirus Reassurance-Seeking Behaviors Scale (CRBS), and the Obsession with COVID-19 scale (OCS).
ResultsA total of 464 healthcare professionals participated in the study, 71.2% were females and two-thirds were 31-50 years old. Elevated levels of anxiety, frequent reassurance seeking activities and persistent troubling thoughts related to COVID-19 were found in 5.8%, 3.2% and 6.1%, respectively. However, females reported significant higher mean levels on CAS and CRBS compared to males (2.41 vs 1.60, p=0.015, and 3.36 vs 2.64, p=0.041, respectively). Participants living in smaller areas had increased levels on all three scales (CAS, p < 0.001; CRBS, p = 0.007; OCS, p < 0.001), indicating thus higher coronaphobia, more frequent reassurance-seeking behaviors and disturbed thinking about COVID-19, compared to healthcare workers living in urban regions. Furthermore, lower educational level is also associated with higher values on CAS, CRBS and OCS (p < 0.003; p = 0.017; p < 0.023, respectively). Nurses experience higher anxiety scores (2.96) than physicians (1.92, p=0.013) or other healthcare workers (1.87, p=0.016). No dysfunctional thinking about COVID-19 is observed in medical doctors, whereas nurses and other healthcare workers experience higher levels on OCS.
ConclusionsOur study does not show any worrying increased psychological dysfunction related to COVID-19 pandemic among healthcare workers in general. However, females have increased levels than males. Thus, support and mental health protecting strategies should be applied primarily to female healthcare professionals when necessary.
Disclosure of InterestNone Declared
Piloting the development of a cost-effective evidence-informed clinical pathway: Managing hypertension in Jordanian primary care
- Kalipso Chalkidou, Joanne Lord, Nour A. Obeidat, Ibriham A. Alabbadi, Adrian G. Stanley, Rania Bader, Aiman Momani, Rachel M. O'Mahony, Lara Qatami, Derek Cutler
-
- Journal:
- International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care / Volume 27 / Issue 2 / April 2011
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 08 April 2011, pp. 151-158
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Objectives: The UK's National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and the Jordan office of the Medicines Transparency Alliance embarked on a pilot project to design an evidence-based guideline for cost-effective pharmacological treatment of essential hypertension in Jordan. The project's objectives were to directly address a major health problem for Jordan by producing a guideline; and to delineate the strengths and weaknesses of Jordan's healthcare process to allow similar future efforts to be planned more efficiently.
Methods: The pilot spanned a period of approximately 8 months. Activities were overseen by local technical and guideline development teams, as well as experts from NICE. NICE's hypertension guidelines and economic model were used as a starting point. Parameters in the economic model were adjusted according to input and feedback from local experts with regards to Jordanian physician and patient practices, resource costs, and quality of life estimates. The results of the economic model were integrated with the updated available clinical trial literature.
Results: The outputs of the economic model were used to inform recommendations, in the form of a clinical algorithm. A report of the process and the strengths and weaknesses observed was developed, and recommendations for improvements were made.
Conclusions: The pilot represented the start of what is intended to be a healthcare process change for the country of Jordan. Issues emerged which can inform strategies to ensure a more cohesive and comprehensive approach to the cost-effective use of appropriate drugs in managing chronic disease in Jordan and countries operating in a similarly resource-constrained environment. Furthermore, our pilot highlights how richer countries with relevant experience in evidence-informed healthcare policy making can assist others in strengthening their decision-making methods and processes.
![](/core/cambridge-core/public/images/lazy-loader.gif)