Psychological distress among healthcare professionals in Mbarara, following the 2022 Ebola Virus Disease outbreak in Uganda: a mixed methods study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The 2022 Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) outbreak occurred at a time when Uganda was still battling the social and psychological challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic; placing health care professionals (HCPs) at a much higher risk of developing psychological distress. Psychological distress among HCPs can cause decreased workplace productivity and ineffective management of their patients. The current study aimed to investigate and understand psychological distress among HCPS in Mbarara city in Southwestern Uganda following the 2022 EVD outbreak. METHOD: We enrolled 200 HCPs through convenient sampling from one private and one public health facility in Mbarara city in Southwestern Uganda, in a cross-sectional convergent parallel mixed method approach where qualitative and quantitative data were collected concurrently. Quantitative data, utilizing the Kessler Psychological Distress (K10) Scale, provided us with a quantitative measure of the prevalence of psychological distress among HCPs, and were analyzed using STATA version 16. Qualitative data, on the other hand, offered deeper insights into the nature, perceptions, and contextual factors influencing this distress, and were analyzed using emergent theme analysis. RESULTS: The prevalence of psychological distress was 59.5% and it was higher among females (63.9%) compared to males (36.1%). HCPs vividly expressed distress and anxiety, with heightened suspicion that every patient might be an EVD carrier, creating a pervasive sense of unsafety in the workplace. However, the outbreak had an educational affect where concerns about the announcement of another EVD outbreak were diverse, with HCPs expressing anxiety, despair, and dissatisfaction with the country's management of potential outbreaks. CONCLUSION: High levels of psychological distress were experienced by HCPs in Southwestern Uganda as a result of the 2022 EVD pandemic. HCPs express a wide range of feelings, such as dread, anxiety, despair, pessimism, and discontent with the way the outbreaks are handled throughout the nation. We recommend implementation of comprehensive psychosocial support programs tailored to the unique needs of HCPs, including counseling services, stress management workshops, and peer support networks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".