Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T16:41:56.510Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The interrelation between proactive coping and job stressors subjective evaluation in healthcare professionals during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 August 2021

A. Kuznetsova*
Affiliation:
Faculty Of Psychology, Lomonosov Moscow state university, Moscow, Russian Federation
M. Gushchin
Affiliation:
Faculty Of Psychology, Lomonosov Moscow state university, Moscow, Russian Federation
*
*Corresponding author.

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Introduction

Proactive coping helps to reduce stress “in advance” – by possible stressors’ anticipating (Greenglass & Fiksenbaum, 2009). Does it helps to reduce distress in hazardous work environment with extremely high uncertainty level – like in healthcare professionals’ work at the beginning COVID-19 pandemic? Data showed the lover level of proactive coping in healthcare professionals in comparison with non-medical group (Pearman, Hughes, Smith & Neupert, 2020). The acute issue is to investigate proactive coping among medical professionals with different stress level.

Objectives

Specialists of Moscow public dispensaries (doctors, n=209; nurses, n=131) were checked during pandemic breakout (April 2020) - in order to compare proactive coping and job stressors’ subjective evaluation in groups with high and low chronic states.

Methods

The diagnostic set included: the job stress survey (Spielberger, 1994); the proactive coping inventory (Greenglass, 2002); the chronic stress and fatigues inventories (Leonova, 2012).

Results

Cluster analysis by combination of stress-fatigue scores extracted equal 22% of professionals in risk subgroups. Surprisingly no proactive coping differences were found in nurses; among doctors preventive coping is significantly lower in risk subgroup (t=7.05; p=0.009). Revealed job stressors in risk groups for nurses are quite typical; but for doctors they are unusual: extreme workload (t=33.97; p<0.001), low coworkers support (t=48.94; p<0.001), lack of positive feedback (t=62.29; p<0.001).

Conclusions

Despite the undeniable workload increase, well-to-do professionals perceived no high job stressors. In risk subgroup with lack of preventive coping, perceived stressors are likely connected with inability to predict strain increase and to minimize the impact of its negative effects (Moore, 2017).

Type
Abstract
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the European Psychiatric Association
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.