Cargando…
The qualitative analysis of characteristic of callers to a psychological hotline at the early stage of COVID-19 in China
BACKGROUND: As the outbreak of COVID-19, traditional face-to-face psychological intervention are difficult to achieve, so hotline becomes available and recommended strategies. The callers’ characteristic could help us to study their experiences of emotional distress, as well as the reasons for calli...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8079161/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33906613 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-10883-w |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: As the outbreak of COVID-19, traditional face-to-face psychological intervention are difficult to achieve, so hotline becomes available and recommended strategies. The callers’ characteristic could help us to study their experiences of emotional distress, as well as the reasons for calling during the pandemic, which can be used to inform future service design and delivery. METHODS: The information of 1558 callers called our hospital’ s hotline for help from February 3, 2020, to March 16, 2020 were collected in the form of Tick-box and Free text, and the inductive content analysis was undertaken focusing on the reasons for caller engagement. RESULTS: It was indicated that more than half of the callers are female (59.7%), mostly between the age of 18–59 (76.5%). The average age was 37.13 ± 13.76 years old. The average duration of a call to the hotline was 10.03 ± 9.84 min. The most frequent description emotional state were anxious (45.1%) and calm (30.3%), with the sub-sequence of scared (18.2%), sad (11.9%), and angry (6.9%). All callers displayed a wide range of reasons for calling, with needing support around their emotion (64.6%), seeking practical help (44.0%), and sleep problems (20.3%) constituting the majority of calls. Among the subthemes, 314 callers thought the epidemic has made them upset, 198 asked questions about the epidemic, and 119 reported their life routines were disrupted. The prevalence of key reasons does not appear to differ over time. Through their feedback, 79.1% agreed that they felt emotionally better after calling, and 95.0% agreed that hotline had helped them. CONCLUSIONS: During the epidemic, the most concern of the public is still related to epidemics and its adverse effects. Fortunately, the hotline can be an active and effective rescue measure after an emergency happened. |
---|