Journal of Health Care Communications Open Access

Resiliency Model of Medical Staff in COVID-19 Conditions: Evidence from Red Crescent

Parisa Marei¹, Abbass Khamseh^2* and Amirhossein Pichka^{3 1}Department of Technology Management Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University Tehran, Iran
²Department of Industrial Management, Karaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Karaj, Iran
³Department of Industrial Engineering, K N Toosi University of Technology University, Tehran, Iran
^*Correspondence: Abbass Khamseh, Department of Industrial Management, Karaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Karaj, Iran, Email:

Received: 29-Jun-2022, Manuscript No. ipjhcc-22-14058; Editor assigned: 01-Jul-2022, Pre QC No. ipjhcc-22-14058 (PQ); Reviewed: 15-Jul-2022, QC No. ipjhcc-22-14058; Revised: 20-Jul-2022, Manuscript No. ipjhcc-22-14058 (R); Published: 27-Jul-2022, DOI: 10.36846/IPJHCC-7.7.70030

Introduction

Scholars have considered individual resilience a strong personality character, an expandable ability, or a procedure [1,2]. Resilience is defined as a discrete and stable personal characteristic or a set of various personal strengths [3]. This conceptualization means that resilient human beings typically withstand issues and failures better than non-resilient people [4].

The American psychological association recommends that humans can socialize (as an instance, by friendship, accepting, and assisting), support physical and mental health (e.g., mindfulness training, care, and body care), find a goal (for instance: assisting others, being energetic, setting and transferring toward sensible desires) and accept wholesome thoughts (as an example: retaining everything in perspective, take delivery of change, optimism) and are looking for professional assistance if they feel not able to carry out well [5]. In the face of an unexpected epidemic, the general population has varying levels of anxiety, depression, intense pressure, and different effective psychological factors (e.g., the front line medical team of workers) [6].

Due to the advent of pandemic conditions worldwide, medical staff has the greatest effect and cope with this trouble. We decided to test the resilience of the medical staff. Additionally, this study aims to decide the resilience sample of the Red Crescent clinical group of workers in COVID-19 conditions, the outcomes of which can be utilized in decisions to enhance the resilience of scientific staff. Then again, the components and signs affecting the resilience of medical staff have been decided, and a suitable answer has been provided to improve those factors in the treatment system. Consequently, this research is innovative in terms of application. Additionally, the approach of gathering the consequences of the questionnaire using the press line system and the usage of the structural equation model in the factor analysis of the recognized components of the resilience of clinical staff may be other innovations of this study. Identifying the factors affecting the resilience of scientific staff can enhance scientific personnel’s resilience and offer the correct version to assist policy and direction in this area.

Consistent with Nguyen et al. in 2016, worker resilience is defined as the ability of personnel to be supported and facilitated via the organization to use resources for high quality coping and version, and growth in response to converting working situations [7,8]. In line with the American psychological association (2011), resilience refers back to the “capability to return” that allows a person to hold adaptation to lifestyles troubles, threats, or different critical disturbing occasions [9].

Cooper et al. additionally articulate resilience as an individual’s capacity to head again to annoying conditions and effectively impact dangerous conditions [10]. Worker resilience also relies upon activity characteristics in terms of leadership and the character of the companions [11]. Resilience is an inherent feature that consists of the physical and mental characteristics of people [12]. Resilience can also be described as coping well with stress, adversity, harm, tragedy, and threats [13].

While organizations modify employees’ roles and duties to perform larger organizational missions and goals, it evokes positive feelings. Consistent with Frederickson’s theory of Extensibility and creation (2001), pleasant emotions lead to improved private psychological abilities and growth worker flexibility [14,15]. In keeping with Luthans, resilience is one of the principal structures of positive organizational conduct [16]. In step with Wagnild and young (1993), early research on flexibility centered on intellectual or individual characteristics and may be described as “a personality trait that modulates the poor consequences of pressure and creates adaptation” [17].

Flexibility also protects and supports personnel against stress and allows them to evolve to disturbing and dynamic environments [18]. In line with (Hugh et al., 2020) and (2019, Yildirim), studies on flexibility have proven that resilience is negatively related to signs of intellectual illness, which include poor impact, despair, and tension, and positively correlated with signs of mental health, including high quality impact, lifestyles pleasure, intellectual well-being, and prosperity [19].

Human beings may revel in negative emotions in times of demanding disaster or acute life activities (for instance, the loss of a loved one, a terrorist assault). However, they can frequently adapt through the years [20]. Adaptation is a time consuming and ongoing process, and the effort required to take effective movement and recovery is known as psychological resilience [21]. In particular, resilience related personality tendencies had been recognized as contributing elements to low perceptions of process stress and lack of confidence. For instance, resistance is described as a protecting feature that reduces business pressure [22].

A few researchers, including Ayala and Manzano 2014; Murtaza, Sultan, Ahmed, and Mustafa, 2016; Singh and Yu, 2010 stated that hardiness, resourcefulness, and optimism are positive dimensions of individual resilience [22]. Academic resilience protects against depressive signs [21]. Studies have proven that resilience acts as a mediator between stress and burnout. It means that resilience can reduce the damaging effect of stress on burnout [23]. Thus, given the current unique circumstances, COVID-19 pandemic disorder may also purpose dysfunctional anxiety ranges in the front line nurses. Increased ranges of personal resilience, social support, and organizational aid can be related to lower ranges of hysteria associated with COVID-19. Therefore, organizational strategies to boom personal resilience and increase social and organizational guide in nurses may also reduce their tension about COVID-19, which could be essential while managing patients with COVID-19 [24]. Resilience also varies from person to person and depends on various factors, including personality or interpersonal and social contexts [25].

Adequate protection is likewise the most fundamental circumstance for the personal protection of a clinical team of workers. Lack of protective materials additionally ends in psychological insecurity [9]. The phenomenon of stress is perceived as a mental experience depending on sources and perceived dreams. In pressure studies, the study of doubtlessly vulnerable elements has reputedly changed many humans’ innate capabilities, helping them adapt to difficult conditions [26]. Therefore, some of the effective signs about resilience have been identified and categorized based on literature review (Table 1).

Table 1: Diagnosed indicators of resilience

Materials and Methods

This research describes the current situation systematically, and then it is descriptive survey research and is practical in terms of the aim. Based on the direct relationship of the researcher with the phenomena, this is the field research. It is performed within the medical staff of the Red Crescent, so it is a case study. In this study, the literature review and summary of the previous studies are done, and 36 effective indicators about the resilience of Red Crescent staff were recognized, which were classified into four groups. The main dimensions are Interpersonal System of Personality, Behavioral Characteristics Progression, Management and Organizational Decision Making, and Total Infrastructure Outsourcing.

The last questionnaire was designed, distributed, and collected based on 43 members of the Iranian Red Crescent medical staff selected by the available sampling method. The research model was fitted using structural equations and PLS Smart software. The initial conceptual model of the research was obtained from studying the literature and researches according to Figure 1.

Figure 1: The initial conceptual model of research

Analysis

In this research, 36 literature indicators were identified using an initial literature review, and the finding was analyzed to legalize the research model with Smart Pls. The results represent the final research measurement model with significant coefficients of Z in Table 2. The criterion for the suitability of the factor loading coefficients is 0.7. All questions with a factor loading of less than 0.7 are detached from the research model [27], and the correction model is as indicated in Figure 2. Based on Figures 3 and 4 indicators (dom7, tio8, tio13, tio14) were detached from the research model’s homogeneity.

Table 2: Effective components and indicators on resilience

Figure 2: Initial measurement model in standard coefficient estimation mode (factor loading)

Figure 3: Revising measurement model in standard coefficient estimation mode (factor loading)

Figure 4: Structural model of the estimating path coefficients mode

As shown in Table 3, the combined reliability and Cronbach’s alpha coefficient obtained for the variables indicate that the internal consistency is at the anticipated level. Besides, based on the convergent validity, as said by the results of all factor loads, the questions are significant after fitting, i.e., T-Value is superior to the absolute value of 1.96. On the other hand, the extracted variance mean is more than 0.5 and likewise, in comparison with the combined reliability with the variance means extracted for each of the factors is CR>AVE. Consequently, it can be settled that the research model has an acceptable convergent validity.

Table 3: Convergence reliability and validity results and measurement model quality

R² or R Squares: This criterion is the determination coefficient of the path that points to the effect of an exogenous variable on an endogenous variable. For R², three values of 0.19 and 0.33, 0.67 are measured as the criterion values for weak, medium, and strong values [28]. In this research, R² is equal to 0.894, which indicates its suitability.

Q²: This criterion defines the predictive supremacy of the model, and if the value of Q² in the case of an endogenous structure attains three values of 0.02, 0.15, and 0.35, respectively, it specifies the weak, medium, and strong predictive power of the related exogenous structures. The value of Q² obtained for this research model is equal to 0.514, which specifies the very good predictive power of the model. The results of all examine of R², and Q² models are specified in Table 4. To conclude, Figure 5 illustrates the structural model of estimating the path coefficients, and Figure 6 indicated the structural model in the significant state of the path coefficients.

Table 4: Dimensional ranking based on the coefficient of determination

Figure 5: Structural model of the significant state of path coefficients

Figure 6: Dimensional Ranking

Overall Model Fit (GOF)

GOF is used with three values of 0.01, 0.25 and 0.36 introduced as weak, medium and strong values to fit the general research model. The results indicate 0.697 for GOF in this study, which points to a very respectful fit of the model. The calculation of GOF is according to the following equation.

Discussion

This paper aims to recognize the affecting factors on the resilience of Red Crescent medical staff in COVID-19 conditions. The results obtained from the confirmatory factor analysis with structural equations and SMART PLS3 software indicates that four components in the form of 32 indicators are operational on the resilience of Red Crescent medical staff. Then, the most significant indicators of each component are given below based on the coefficients of determination. It indicates the effect of the relevant index in explaining its component upon which recommendations and suggestions are conducted to the treatment staff.

In the Interpersonal System of Personality component, depression has the highest coefficient of determination. It specifies that the depression level of medical staff has the highest impact on staff resilience. As Havnen and et al., 2020. Yörük and Güler,2020; Lin and et al., 2020; Hu and et al.,2020 and Yildirim, 2019 call attention to the fact that their resilience is affected by people at risk for depression by this important factor. Indeed, the depression degree can be exacerbated by the current pandemic may have a direct impact on their resilience. Herein, senior managers are advised to consider regular psychological counseling to prevent depression in medical staff. Then, psychological tests can be achieved by the medical staff to determine the amount of depression, and under the level of depression of each employee, the necessary executive plan can be designed and implemented, and the necessary measures can be taken to improve this.

Conversely, in the Behavioral Characteristics Progression component, life satisfaction has the highest coefficient of determination. This note has also been highlighted by Hu et al. (2020) and Yildirim (2019). It refers that the higher a person’s satisfaction with life, the more effective it is on a person’s resilience. Accordingly and considering that employees’ personal life and organizational life are closely related and in fact organizations need proper performance of employees to achieve organizational goals. To increase the life satisfaction of employees, organizations should include two main measures in the program. First of all, the practices taken by the organization increase the life satisfaction of employees, such as providing regular sports and entertainment programs. Second of all, creating an understanding of the concept of life satisfaction in employees by cultivating their thoughts to define specific personal goals and strive to achieve them. In truth, organizations should strive to provide the necessary training to employees to properly understand the goals of personal life that are achievable and realistic so that employees strive to achieve their personal life goals and observe satisfactory progress. In achieving them, show life satisfaction in them.

In the decision making component, organizational support has the maximum coefficient of determination. Suppose employees touch that their organization funds them in a particular situation, appropriately and properly, and is respected by the organization. In that case, it will improve their resilience, and as Labrague and Santos, 2020 pointed out, increasing the level of organizational support is directly related to the degree of resilience of employees. Therefore, it is suggested that organizations provide care, welfare, and incentive programs in both material and nonphysical areas to maintenance employees so that employees feel that the organization is attentive to their efforts and respects the performance of employees.

Conclusion

In Total Infrastructure Outsourcing, the availability of protective supplies has the highest coefficient of determination. Based on Huang and et al., 2020, it can be stated that the direct impact on their resilience is obvious in the condition of provided corona supportive materials for the medical staff. Then, it is commended that organizations assign the necessary funding and the obligatory arrangements to provide protective facilities such as masks, alcohol, guns, and shields for every medical staff to shrink staff concerns.

Acknowledgement

None.

Conflict of Interest

The author declares there is no conflict of interest in publishing this article has been read and approved by all named authors.

REFERENCES

1. Kossek EE, Perrigino MB (2016) Resilience: A review using a grounded integrated occupational approach. Acad Manag Ann. 10(1):729-797

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

2. Richardson GE (2002) The metatheory of resilience and resiliency. J Clin Psychol. 58(3):307-321

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]

3. Wanberg CR, Banas JT (2000) Predictors and outcomes of openness to changes in a reorganizing workplace. J Appl Psychol. 85(1):132-142

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]

4. Shin J, Taylor M S, Seo MG (2012) Resources for change: The relationships of organizational inducements and psychological resilience to employees' attitudes and behaviors toward organizational change. Acad Manage J. 55(3):727-748

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

5. American Psychological Association. Building your resilience 2020.
6. Wang W, Tang J, Wei F (2020) Updated understanding of the outbreak of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019–nCoV) in Wuhan, China. J Med Virol. 92(4):441–47

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]

7. Nguyen Q, Kuntz JR, Näswall K, Malinen S (2016) Employee resilience and leadership styles: The moderating role of proactive personality and optimism. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 45(2):13–21

   [Google Scholar] [Research Gate]

8. Prayag G, Spector S, Orchiston C, Chowdhury M (2019) Psychological resilience, organizational resilience and life satisfaction in tourism firms: Insights from the Canterbury earthquakes. Cur Iss Tour. 23(10):1216-1233

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

9. Huang L, Wang Y, Liu J, Ye P, Cheng B, et al. (2020) Factors associated with resilience among medical staff in radiology departments during the outbreak of 2019 novel coronavirus disease (covid-19): A cross-sectional study. Med Sci Monit. 26:e925669

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]

10. Cooper CL, Flint-Taylor J, Pearn M (2013) Building resilience for success: A resource for managers and organizations. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [Research Gate]

11. Marjolein C, Caniëls J, Hatak I (2019) Employee resilience: Considering both the social side and the economic side of leader-follower exchanges in conjunction with the dark side of followers' personality. Int J Hum Resour Man. 33(2):297-328

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

12. Heath C, Sommerfield A, Von Ungern-Sternberg BS (2020) Resilience strategies to manage psychological distress amongst healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A narrative review. Anaesthesia. 75(10):1364-1371

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]

13. Resilience: A review using a grounded integrated occupational approach
14. Bunderson JS, Thompson JA (2009) The call of the wild: Zookeepers, callings, and the double-edged sword of deeply meaningful work. Admin Sci Qtly. 54(1):32–57

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

15. Duffy RD, Sedlacek WE (2007) The presence of and search for a calling: Connections to career development. J Vocat Behav. 70(3):590–601

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

16. Hartmann.S, Weiss M, Newman A, Hoegl M (2020) Resilience in the workplace: A multilevel review and synthesis, Appl Psychol. 69(3):913-959

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

17. Malik P, Garg P (2017) The relationship between learning culture, inquiry and dialogue, knowledge sharing structure, and affective commitment to change. J Organ Change Manag. 30(4):610-631

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

18. Rutter M (2006) Implications of resilience concepts for scientific understanding. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1094(1):1–12

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]

19. Yıldırım M, Solmaz F (2020) COVID-19 burnout, COVID-19 stress, and resilience: Initial psychometric properties of COVID-19 Burnout Scale. Death Stud. 46(3):524-532.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]

20. Feldman R (2020) What is resilience: An affiliative neuroscience approach. World Psychiatry. 19(2):132‐150.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]

21. Yörük S, Güler D (2020) The relationship between psychological resilience, burnout, stress, and sociodemographic factors with depression in nurses and midwives during the COVID‐19 pandemic: A cross‐sectional study in Turkey. Perspect Psychiatr Care. 57(1):390-398

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]

22. Saad SK, Elshaer IA (2020) Justice and trust’s role in employees’ resilience and business’ continuity: Evidence from Egypt. Tour Manag Perspect. 35(7):100712

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

23. Hao S, Hong W, Xu H, Zhou L, Xie Z (2015) Relationship between resilience, stress and burnout among civil servants in Beijing, China: Mediating and moderating effect analysis. Pers Individ Differ. 83(9):65–71

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

24. Labrague LJ, Santos JAADS (2020) COVID‐19 anxiety among front‐line nurses: Predictive role of organizational support, personal resilience and social support, J Nurs Manag. 28(7):1653-1661

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]

25. Chen S, Bonanno GA (2020) Psychological adjustment during the global outbreak of COVID-19: A resilience perspective. Psychol Trauma. 12(S1):51–54

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]

26. Havnen A, Anyan F, Hjemdal O, Solem S, Riksfjord MG et al. (2020) Resilience moderates negative outcome from stress during the COVID-19 pandemic: A moderated-mediation approach. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 17(18):6461

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]

27. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE, Tatham R (2006) Multivariate Analysis (6th ed). New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.
28. Azar A, GholamReza R, Ghanavati M (2012) Route structural modeling in management: Application of smart PLS software. Tehran: Negah Danesh Publication.

    [Google Scholar]