Network Analysis of Comorbid Anxiety and Insomnia Among Clinicians wit | NSS
DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/NSS.S367974 Checked for plagiarism Yes Peer reviewer comments 3 Depressive, anxiety and insomnia symptoms were common among clinicians during the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic in many countries including China. For example, a meta-analysis revealed that the global prevalence of sleep disturbances was 42.47% (95% CI: 37.95-47.12%), anxiety symptoms were 20% (95% CI: 15-25%) and depressive symptoms were 22% (95% CI: 18-28%) among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Conclusion: Central symptoms and key bridge symptoms identified in this NA should be targeted in the treatment and preventive measures for clinicians suffering from comorbid anxiety, insomnia and depressive symptoms during the late stage of the COVID-19 pandemic.
• Source: Nature and Science of Sleep
• Conclusion: “Central symptoms and key bridge symptoms identified in this NA [network analysis] should be targeted in the treatment and preventive measures for clinicians suffering from comorbid anxiety, insomnia and depressive symptoms during the late stage of the COVID-19 pandemic.”
• In the current cross-sectional study, researchers explored the psychiatric comorbidities in Chinese clinicians during the late stage of the COVID-19 pandemic (October 2020).
• The authors state that central symptoms, such as “sleep dissatisfaction” or “interference with daytime function,” and bridge symptoms, such as “sleep” and “fatigue,” could be important treatment targets. By targeting these measures, comorbid anxiety and insomnia in physicians with depression could be avoided.
• “Further research should focus on developing appropriate interventions (eg, shorter shift duties and online clinician counselling platforms) that focus on the central and bridge symptoms among clinicians in need,” the authors state.
• Limitations include the study’s cross-sectional design providing only a snapshot of the depression-anxiety-insomnia network; no causality could be inferred. Another limitation is the inclusion of only physicians with depression and not those without, thus limiting the generalizability of the findings.