Emotional responses and coping strategies of medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic

9Citations
Citations of this article
47Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objectives: To assess the emotional responses and coping strategies of medical students during the lockdown and social distancing measures implemented during the coronavirus disease -19 (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods: This cross-sectional study is based on data collected from undergraduate medical students at the College of Medicine, Alfaisal University Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, during the fall semester of academic year 2020-2021. All the participants completed a self-administered online questionnaire consisting of 3 parts: demographic information, emotional response scale, and 14-item, adapted brief coping orientation to problems experienced inventory to determine the use of avoidant or approach coping strategies. Coping and emotional response scores were compared using t-test. Linear regression analysis was also performed. Results: A total of 261 students from all years were included. Overall scores were higher for avoidant coping strategies. The use of avoidant coping strategies was significantly higher in females (p=0.03) and in preclinical students (p<0.001). Preclinical students had a higher mean score for anger (p=0.002). Conversely, students in the clinical phase had higher scores for anxiety (p=0.005) and sadness (p=0.027). The regression analysis of emotional responses and coping strategies suggests that avoidant coping is a predictor of anger (p=0.003) and sadness (p=0.005). Conclusion: Interventions to train medical students in the use of more productive and effective coping strategies may reduce negative emotional responses linked to the present COVID-19 pandemic and in the future.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Naaz, S. I., Hussein, R. M., Khan, H. B., Hussein, M. M., & Arain, S. A. (2022). Emotional responses and coping strategies of medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Saudi Medical Journal, 43(1), 61–66. https://doi.org/10.15537/SMJ.2022.43.1.20210698

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free