Skip to main content
Browse Subject Areas

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

  • Loading metrics

Inadequate preparedness for response to COVID-19 is associated with stress and burnout among healthcare workers in Ghana

  • Patience A. Afulani,

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Project administration, Supervision, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliations Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America, Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America

  • Akua O. Gyamerah ,

    Roles Data curation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    Current address: Department of Community Health Systems, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America

    Affiliation Center for AIDS Prevention Studies, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America

  • Jerry J. Nutor,

    Roles Data curation, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Department of Family Health Care Nursing, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America

  • Amos Laar,

    Roles Data curation, Methodology, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, School of Public Health, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana

  • Raymond A. Aborigo,

    Roles Data curation, Methodology, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Navrongo Health Research Centre, Navrongo, Ghana

  • Hawa Malechi,

    Roles Data curation, Methodology, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Tamale Teaching Hospital, Tamale, Ghana

  • Mona Sterling,

    Roles Project administration, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America

  • John K. Awoonor-Williams

    Roles Data curation, Methodology, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Policy Planning Monitoring and Evaluation Division, Ghana Health Service, Accra, Ghana



The COVID-19 pandemic has compounded the global crisis of stress and burnout among healthcare workers. But few studies have empirically examined the factors driving these outcomes in Africa. Our study examined associations between perceived preparedness to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic and healthcare worker stress and burnout and identified potential mediating factors among healthcare workers in Ghana.


Healthcare workers in Ghana completed a cross-sectional self-administered online survey from April to May 2020; 414 and 409 completed stress and burnout questions, respectively. Perceived preparedness, stress, and burnout were measured using validated psychosocial scales. We assessed associations using linear regressions with robust standard errors.


The average score for preparedness was 24 (SD = 8.8), 16.3 (SD = 5.9) for stress, and 37.4 (SD = 15.5) for burnout. In multivariate analysis, healthcare workers who felt somewhat prepared and prepared had lower stress (β = -1.89, 95% CI: -3.49 to -0.30 and β = -2.66, 95% CI: -4.48 to -0.84) and burnout (β = -7.74, 95% CI: -11.8 to -3.64 and β = -9.25, 95% CI: -14.1 to –4.41) scores than those who did not feel prepared. Appreciation from management and family support were associated with lower stress and burnout, while fear of infection was associated with higher stress and burnout. Fear of infection partially mediated the relationship between perceived preparedness and stress/burnout, accounting for about 16 to 17% of the effect.


Low perceived preparedness to respond to COVID-19 increases stress and burnout, and this is partly through fear of infection. Interventions, incentives, and health systemic changes to increase healthcare workers’ morale and capacity to respond to the pandemic are needed.


The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has become a major health crisis of our generation. The pandemic had affected over 19.8 million people and claimed the lives of over 733,000 people as of August 10th, 2020 [1]. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), Healthcare workers (HCWs) in particular have been disproportionately impacted by COVID-19, accounting for over 10% of global infections [2]. In Africa, over 10,000 HCWs across 40 countries contracted COVID-19 as of July 23rd, 2020 [3]. Underlying the epidemic among these frontline workers are various factors that may be shaping HCWs’ risk of COVID-19, including preparedness indicators such as inadequate training, protocols, knowledge, personal protection equipment (PPE), as well as weak health systems, slow national responses, and poor political leadership [2, 4, 5]. Yet, emerging data indicate that providers across the globe are inadequately prepared to respond to the pandemic [5, 6].

The scale and rapid spread of COVID-19, combined with inadequate preparedness, may be contributing to HCW stress and burnout—two psychological indicators that reached crisis levels among HCWs globally prior to COVID-19 [7, 8]. Chronic work-related stress, when not adequately managed, leads to burnout, which manifests as physical, cognitive, and emotional exhaustion and depersonalization (feelings of negativism, cynicism, or detachment from one’s job), and reduced professional efficacy [9]. Burnout leads to lower productivity and effectiveness, decreased job satisfaction and commitment, and poor quality care, with risks to patient safety [10, 11]. Stress and burnout is also associated with poor health outcomes such as depression, cardiovascular disease, and premature mortality [12, 13]. Moreover, HCW burnout is expensive for the health system given its associations with care quality, absenteeism, and workforce turnover, and is, thus, critical to examine [14, 15].

Since the WHO declared COVID-19 a global pandemic, a growing number of studies have examined its psychological impact on frontline workers [1619]. A qualitative study among HCWs in China found that challenges experienced in responding to COVID-19 included exhaustion from prolonged use of protective gear and heavy workloads, and fear of infection and infecting others, while social support and self-management strategies helped HCWs cope with distress [20]. Additionally, a systematic review found that HCWs are experiencing psychological distresses due to COVID-19, with the following pooled estimates for anxiety (26%), depression (25%), distress (35%), stress (40%), insomnia (32%), and PTSD (3% to 16%) [19]. None of these studies were in Africa.

Inadequate preparedness has been linked to various psychological outcomes among HCWs in prior epidemics outbreaks [21]. But few studies have empirically examined this in the context of COVID-19 and no studies, to our knowledge, have specifically examined the psychological impact of perceived preparedness among HCWs to respond to the COVID-19. A nationwide survey examining psychological distress among the general population in China during the COVID-19 epidemic found that preparedness indicators (e.g., having effective prevention and control measures and a highly efficient health system) were protective against psychological distress [22]. In Africa, where health systems are constrained and underfunded [23], no empirical studies in the context of COVID-19 have reported on this issue to date for HCWs. However, a prior systematic review found that, generally, burnout is high among physicians and even higher among nurses in Africa and that drivers of burnout include lack of social support, long work hours and understaffing, and professional and interpersonal conflicts [24, 25].

Due to shortage of staff and limited resources, HCWs in African settings have been working under excessive workloads and psychologically charged environments where demand outweighs capacity [26, 27]. In Ghana, which has the third highest number of COVID-19 cases in Africa and over 2,000 HCWs infected [28, 29], stress and burnout may be even higher among HCWs. Previous studies assessing HCWs’ preparedness for the Ebola outbreak in Ghana found that providers felt inadequately prepared to respond, and reported issues such as inadequate PPE and staff [3033]. Our study contributes to addressing the gap in the literature on the psychological impact of COVID-19 on African HCWs by examining HCW stress and burnout and associations with perceived preparedness to respond to COVID-19 and other factors in Ghana.

Materials and methods

Study setting

Ghana recorded its first two cases of COVID-19 on March 12th, 2020. Since then, the epidemic in Ghana has grown exponentially, with 41,212 cases and 215 deaths as of August 10th, 2020, making it the country with the third highest number of cases in Africa and 51st globally [1, 29]. Ghana has a constrained health system, with a population of approximately 30 million, an estimated 1.8 medical doctors and 42 nurses and midwives per 10,000 population, and less than one hospital bed per 1,000 people [23, 3436]. The increasing number of cases within an overburdened healthcare infrastructure is, therefore, a major source of concern for many HCWs. In addition, HCWs have expressed fear of coronavirus infection due to concerns about inadequate PPE and testing, sparking threats of industrial strike actions by nurses and doctors in Ghana [37, 38]. New data on the high number of COVID-19 cases among HCWs, including six deaths, has elevated this fear and, raised renewed concerns about the potential catastrophic effects of a weak health system and lack of HCW preparedness [39, 40].

Study design

This is a cross-sectional study conducted with HCWs in Ghana (i.e., nurses, physicians, and allied health workers) from April 17th, 2020 to May 31st, 2020. We used a convenience sampling approach to recruit HCWs virtually through advertising on diverse online and social media platforms (WhatsApp, Facebook, and direct messaging), and invited them to complete a self-administered online survey through a link in the ad. Eligibility criteria was identifying as a HCW based in Ghana. To maximize representativeness in our sample, we disseminated survey links to Facebook and WhatsApp pages of different professional groups, graduation year groups, and regional groups of HCWs, as well as to leaders of professional organizations and Ghana Health Service directors to share with members of their groups. No incentives were provided, and respondents had the option of skipping questions. The survey was conducted in English and included questions on demographics, perceived preparedness, stress, burnout, and other questions relevant to the pandemic response. The survey was pretested with 10 HCWs in Ghana by sending them the link to complete the survey and provide feedback. Feedback from the pretest was used to finalize the survey. Providers consented to the study by completing the survey. A total of 646 HCWs started the survey (i.e., answered the first question in the survey). Additional study methods can be found in a prior manuscript on HCWs’ perceived preparedness to respond to COVID-19 [41].


Dependent variables: Stress and burnout.

The two outcome variables—stress and burnout—were measured using validated psychosocial measures. Stress was assessed using the 10-item Cohen perceived stress scale, which captures people’s feelings and thoughts in the past month [42]. Questions relate to how nervous or stressed, unpredictable, uncontrollable, and overloaded respondents find their lives (S1 Appendix). Each question is on a scale of 0 (never) to 4 (very often). Burnout was assessed using the 14-item Shirom-Melamed Burnout measure (SMBM), which assesses feelings at work in the past month [43]. Questions capture three domains of burnout: physical fatigue, emotional exhaustion, and cognitive weariness, with responses options ranging from 1 (never or almost never) to 7 (always or almost always) (S2 Appendix).

Independent variables.

The key predictor in this analysis is perceived preparedness to respond to COVID-19, which was assessed using a 15-item scale developed by our team. The questions capture personal, facility, and psychological preparedness for prevention, diagnoses, management, and education regarding COVID-19. Each question has response options from 0 (not prepared at all) to 3 (very prepared), with options for “I don’t know about this (4), and “Not applicable to my role” (5) (S3 Appendix). The scale development process is described elsewhere [41].

Other independent variables included feeling of appreciation, support, and communication from management; family support, ability to isolate at home without exposing family, fear of contracting COVID-19, confidence in being cared for if infected, COVID-19 training; availability of PPE, isolation ward, and protocols for COVID-19; perceived knowledge of how to manage COVID-19 (S4 Appendix), and provider and facility characteristics.


We used data from respondents who answered all questions on stress and burnout and relevant predictors for this analysis. Many respondents (n = 216) did not get to the stress and burnout questions, which were among the final set of questions, because they ended the survey prematurely. We, therefore, excluded these respondents, as well as an additional 16 and 21 respondents who started but did not complete the questions on stress and burnout, respectively. The resulting analytic samples, which are overlapping, are 414 and 409 for the stress and burnout, respectively.

We examined the distribution of variables using descriptive statistics and created summative scores for stress, burnout, and preparedness. Factor analysis showed all three scales had good construct validity with all items in each scale loading on one dominant factor with eigen-values greater than three. The scales also had good internal consistency with Cronbach alpha of 0.79 for stress, 0.94 for burnout, and 0.91 for preparedness. Before creating summative scores, items were recoded such that higher scores indicate higher stress, burnout, and preparedness. For the preparedness score, we coded response options to range from 0 to 3 by recoding 4 (I don’t know about this) to 0 (not at all prepared) and 5 (not applicable to my role) to 2 (prepared). Stress scores range from 0 to 40. Scores of 0–13 are considered low stress, 14–26 moderate stress, and 27–40 high stress [42]. Burnout scores range from 14–98—rescaled to 1–7 by dividing by total number of items for ease of comparison with sub-domains. Scores of ≤2.0 are considered no burnout, 2–3.74 moderate burnout, and ≥3.75 as high burnout [44]. We used the same cutoffs for burnout domains. Preparedness scores range from 0–45. We categorized scores less than 15 as “not at all prepared”; scores 15 to 29 as “somewhat prepared,” and ≥30 as “prepared” [41].

We used the continuous scores for the outcomes in linear regressions with robust standard errors to examine the associations with various predictors. The burnout score was slightly skewed to the right, which was corrected with a log transformation. For ease of interpretation, we used the untransformed variable for the main analysis and conducted sensitivity analysis with the log transformed variable. We built multivariate models by gradually adding demographic and other independent variables that were significant in the bivariate analysis and testing for model fit and collinearity. Finally, we examined if the relationships between perceived preparedness and both stress and burnout were mediated by fear of infection using the difference of coefficients (c-c’) method. The mediated or indirect effect is the difference in the coefficients in the model without the mediator (total effect: c) and that in the model with the mediator (direct effect: c’). The proportion mediated is ((c-c’)/c) [45, 46]. We also examined if the associations were moderated by type of health provider, appreciation from management, and family support. In additional analysis, we ran the models with preparedness as a continuous variable and with the outcomes as binary variables.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was obtained from the University of California, San Francisco (#20–30656) and the Navrongo Health Research Centre (#NHRCIRB374).


Descriptive results

About 20% were doctors, 62% nurses (including midwives and medical/physician assistants) and 18% other professionals, including medical laboratory professionals, disease control officers, nutritionists and other allied health care workers (Table 1). About 26% worked in teaching hospitals, 59% in other public hospitals (e.g., regional and district hospitals and health centers), and 15% in private facilities. Approximately 23% work in the Greater Accra and Ashanti regions (the initial epicenters), 23% from Northern region, and the rest from other regions. There were at least 10 respondents from each the 16 regions of the country, except for the Bono and Ahafo regions, which had less than five respondents. The average age of respondents was 34.2 years (SD = 6.0), with 8.2 years of professional experience (SD = 5.6). About half were female.

Table 1. Participant demographics and univariate distribution of study variables, healthcare workers in Ghana.

The average stress score was 16.3 (SD = 5.9), with 64% having moderate stress and 4% high stress. Average burnout score was 37.4 (SD = 15.5), with 47% having low burnout and 20% high burnout. About 33%, 15%, and 23%, respectively, had high values for physical exhaustion, emotional exhaustion, and cognitive weariness. Average preparedness score was 24 (SD = 8.8), with 56.9% somewhat prepared and 27.5% prepared (Table 1). About 44% perceived management was appreciative or very appreciative of their efforts and 55% perceived communication from management was good or very good. Additionally, 46% were fearful or very fearful of contracting COVID-19 and only 20% were confident or very confident that they would be adequately cared for in their facility if they got infected. About 67% felt their families were supportive or very supportive of their work, and 33% were certain of a place to isolate at home without exposing their family if they were infected. Distribution of other variables shown in Table 1.

Bivariate results

In the bivariate analysis (Table 2), higher perceived preparedness was associated with lower perceived stress and burnout. The average stress and burnout scores among those who felt prepared was 14 (SD = 5.1) and 33 (SD = 13.5), respectively, compared to 19 (SD = 6.1) and 47 (SD = 15.3), respectively, for those who did not feel at all prepared. Burnout scores among other HCWs were lower than that of doctors and nurses. HCWs in Northern region had lower stress than those in Greater Accra and Ashanti regions and HCWs in other southern regions had lower burnout than those in Greater Accra and Ashanti regions. Other factors significantly associated with lower stress and burnout included appreciation, support, and communication from management; family support; confidence in being cared for if infected; training on COVID-19; availability of PPE, isolation ward, and COVID-19 guidelines; and confidence in being able to manage COVID-19 patients. Fear of infection and being female were associated with higher stress and burnout.

Table 2. Bivariate distributions of stress and burnout among healthcare workers in Ghana by independent variables.

Multivariate analysis

In the multivariate analysis (Tables 3 and 4), the associations between perceived preparedness with both stress and burnout were still significant. When accounting for only the demographic variables (model 1 of Table 3), providers who felt somewhat prepared and prepared had about 3- and 5-points lower stress scores respectively compared to those who did not feel at all prepared. This decreased to about 2 and 3 points, respectively, with the addition of appreciation from management and family support in model 2. In model 3, which includes fear of infection, the coefficients for somewhat prepared and prepared decreased further (β = -1.89, 95%CI:-3.49 to -0.30 and β = -2.66, 95%CI:-4.48 to -0.84) by 17% and 16% from model 2, suggesting fear of infection partially mediates the relationship between perceived preparedness and stress.

Table 3. Multivariable linear regression of potential predictors on perceived stress among healthcare workers in Ghana (N = 414).

Table 4. Multivariable linear regression of potential predictors on burnout of healthcare workers in Ghana (N = 409).

For burnout, when accounting for only the demographic variables (Table 4, model 1), providers who felt somewhat prepared and prepared had about 10 points and 14 points lower burnout scores, respectively, compared to those who did not feel at all prepared. This decreased to about 9 and 10 points, respectively, with the addition of appreciation from management and family support in model 2. In model 3, which includes fear of infection, the coefficients for somewhat prepared and prepared decreased to about 8 and 9 points (β = -7.74, 95%CI:-11.8 to -3.64 and β = -9.25, 95%CI:-14.1 to –4.41)—a 10% decrease from model 2, suggesting potential partial mediation by fear of infection. The mediated effect with the categorical preparedness variable was not significant, but it was significant with the continuous preparedness variable with the proportion of the mediated effect at 16% (Table 5).

Table 5. Mediation by fear of infection among healthcare workers in Ghana.

Providers in the Northern region had about 3 points lower stress scores than those in Greater Accra and Ashanti regions (the COVID-19 epicenters). Females also had about 3 points higher burnout scores than males, and married providers had about 5 points lower burnout scores than unmarried providers. Perceived appreciation from management and family support were associated with about 2 points lower stress scores and about 5 points lower burnout scores, while fear of infection was associated with about 2 points higher stress scores and 4 points higher burnout scores.

Sensitivity results

The interactions between preparedness with type of provider, appreciation from management and family support were not significant for neither stress nor burnout, suggesting the absence of conditional effects. The results obtained from using the log of burnout as the outcome, as well as that from using preparedness as a continuous variable, were consistent with the results of the untransformed burnout variable and the categorical preparedness variables respectively in their significance, direction, and magnitude of the associations. Results from the binary logistic regression based on the dichotomized stress and burnout scores were also generally consistent with the results of the continuous variables, with minor variations depending on how the variable was dichotomized (S5 Appendix). The characteristics of respondents excluded was not substantially different from those included, except on facility type where 18% of those excluded worked in a teaching hospital compared to 23% of those included (S6 Appendix).


We found evidence of high stress and burnout and low perceived preparedness to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic among HCWs in Ghana. Low perceived preparedness was associated with increased stress and burnout. Our findings suggest that increased fear of infection partly accounts for the effect of perceived preparedness on stress and burnout—i.e., inadequate preparation leads to fear of infection, which leads to high stress and burnout. This is, however, a small indirect effect (<20%), which is likely because other factors, including fear of poor outcomes for patients, may also be mediating the effect of preparedness on stress and burnout. In contrast, increased appreciation from management and family support decreases stress and burnout. Inadequate preparedness may, therefore, have multiplicative effects through its association with stress and burnout, which may negatively affect HCW job satisfaction, productivity, quality of care, and workforce turnover [14, 15]—outcomes that would impede Ghana’s progress in containing COVID-19.

High stress and burnout among health workers in Ghana is not surprising given global evidence prior to the pandemic of provider stress and burnout—including in Ghana and other African countries [25, 47, 48]. Our prevalence of moderate (64%) and high (4%) stress among HCWs is comparable to that reported in a recent systematic review of the psychological impact of COVID-19 on HCWs and general public, which found stress to be at 40% (20%-60%) [19]. Also, compared to our findings of low (47%) and high (20%) burnout, a study of HCWs in Ghana reported burnout scores ranging from good (71.5%), alarming (12.6%), acute crisis (6.0%), and burnout (9.9%) among Accra-based HCWs; however this was prior to the COVID-19 pandemic [48]. Additionally, a study among frontline nurses caring for COVID-19 patients in Wuhan, China reported that about half of the nurses studied experienced moderate and high burnout—characterized by emotional exhaustion (60.5%) and depersonalization (42.3%) [49]. We found lower levels of moderate to emotional exhaustion (39%) and higher levels physical exhaustion (73%), although the estimates are not directly comparable given the use of different measures in the different studies.

Burnout among HCWs during COVID-19 pandemic has thus been characterized as an infection of the mind, with calls for interventions to fight the two afflictions: COVID-19 and the psychological strain experienced by medical professionals at the frontline of the response [50]. Extant studies show that factors associated with preparedness include availability of PPE, clear protocols, and isolation wards, training, and good communication from management [5, 41]. Improving these would increase perceived preparedness, decrease fear of infection, and decrease stress and burnout. Recommended steps related to preparedness include development of national and regional disaster mitigation plans to shorten the time needed to provide necessary equipment and testing; provision of adequate test kits and PPE; training on disaster management and response for HCWs; and creating a medical reserve corps of licensed individuals [50]. Such initiatives would help improve HCW preparedness to respond to COVID-19.

Similar to findings from other studies [18, 19, 51], our results suggest that feeling appreciated by management and having family support is important for HCWs’ psychological wellbeing, while being unmarried, female, and working in the most impacted areas negatively affected wellbeing. Efforts are therefore needed to ensure providers feel appreciated for their role in the pandemic response and to provide additional support to HCWs who are female, unmarried, and based at the epicenters of Ghana’s epidemic. Additionally, interventions are needed to increase workplace awareness of stress and burnout, self-care, availability of and access to mental health services, and to implement organizational policies and practices that prioritize HCW wellbeing [52]. In some jurisdictions, support programs such as peer-support video conferencing sessions are being offered for peer groups to discuss various issues affecting them [53]. Additionally, categorizing COVID-19 as an occupational disease, like healthcare organizations have demanded, may help improve worker protections and government accountability [26]. Interventions, like mindfulness exercises, changes to institutional culture, and workplace incentives could also improve psychological outcomes among HCWs [54]. Family support is also critical and may help lower stress and burnout [18].

Limitations and strengths

There are some limitations to the study. The use of an online survey with a volunteer sample limits the generalizability of findings to all HCWs in Ghana. This was, however, the best option available for rapid data collection as the country was in partial lock-down due to the COVID-19 pandemic. To address this limitation, we recruited from diverse platforms such as Facebook and WhatsApp pages of different professional groups, graduation year groups, and regional groups of HCWs. Survey links were also emailed to leaders of professional organizations and Ghana Health Service directors to share with members of their groups. Thus, our sample is diverse in terms of gender, age, years of experience, region, and facility type as shown in the sample distribution—which increases the representativeness of the findings. Moreover, our study sets the stage for future research to examine these issues in a more representative sample under circumstances that allow for probability sampling. Additionally, as with all self-reported data, social desirability and recall bias are potential limitations. The use of composite scores from validated psychosocial measures, however, helps to address this limitation. Another limitation is that this was a cross-sectional study, thus, associations described are not causal. Finally, our study only examined psychosocial outcomes; future research is needed to examine biological effects of the stress and burnout induced by COVID-19. Despite these limitations, this is the first study to our knowledge assessing perceived preparedness for COVID-19 and psychological well-being among HCWs in Africa and contributes critical findings that can help address emerging issues and challenges in the current pandemic response. It also provides a baseline for future studies in Ghana, Africa, and globally.


HCWs in Ghana reported low perceived preparedness to respond to COVID-19, which was associated with increased stress and burnout. The effect of inadequate preparation on both stress and burnout is partially mediated by fear of infection. This finding is likely replicable in other low-resource settings, and potentially globally, and highlights the need for interventions to increase providers’ preparedness. The government of Ghana has demonstrated commitment to addressing the needs of HCWs; however, more efforts are needed. Government and other stakeholders must institute necessary trainings, protections, and incentives to improve HCWs’ psychological wellbeing and ability to respond to the pandemic. With HCW shortage in Africa, a high number of cases among these frontline workers, inadequate PPE and preparedness, and growing work demands, such interventions are critically needed to retain them and maintain the quality of care in already strained health systems. Studies in different settings examining the impact of these factors on health care quality and outcomes in the context of the pandemic are also needed. For Africa, stress and burnout have far reaching implications for the COVID-19 response. Given warnings that the continent could witness the loss of millions of lives, immediate actions are needed to strengthen health systems, train HCWs, and provide support and encouragement to boost morale.

Supporting information

S5 Appendix. Multivariable linear regression of potential predictors on stress and burnout.


S6 Appendix. Comparing sample excluded to analytic samples.



We wish to thank all healthcare providers who participated in the study and who helped in the survey dissemination.


  1. 1. Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center. COVID-19 Map [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2020 Jun 9].
  2. 2. World Health Organization. WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19. World Health Organization. 2020 Jul 17;
  3. 3. World Health Organization. Over 10 000 health workers in Africa infected with COVID-19 [Internet]. WHO | Regional Office for Africa. 2020 [cited 2020 Aug 10].
  4. 4. Guest JL, del Rio C, Sanchez T. The Three Steps Needed to End the COVID-19 Pandemic: Bold Public Health Leadership, Rapid Innovations, and Courageous Political Will. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2020 Apr 6;6(2):e19043. pmid:32240972
  5. 5. Suleiman A, Bsisu I, Guzu H, Santarisi A, Alsatari M, Abbad A, et al. Preparedness of Frontline Doctors in Jordan Healthcare Facilities to COVID-19 Outbreak. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 May 2;17(9):3181. pmid:32370275
  6. 6. Raina S, Kumar R, Galwankar S, Garg S, Bhatt R, Dhariwal A, et al. Are we prepared? Lessons from Covid-19 and OMAG position paper on epidemic preparedness. J Fam Med Prim Care. 2020;9(5):2161. pmid:32754465
  7. 7. Lancet The. Physician burnout: a global crisis. The Lancet. 2019 Feb 6;394(10193):93. pmid:31305255
  8. 8. Kopacz MS, Ames D, Koenig HG. It’s time to talk about physician burnout and moral injury. The Lancet. 2019;6(11):e28. pmid:31631880
  9. 9. Maslach C, Schaufeli WB, Leiter MP. Job burnout. Annu Rev Psychol. 2001;52:397–422. pmid:11148311
  10. 10. Klein J, Frie KG, Blum K, Knesebeck O von dem. Burnout and perceived quality of care among German clinicians in surgery. Int J Qual Health Care. 2010 Dec 1;22(6):525–30. pmid:20935011
  11. 11. Maslach C, Leiter MP. Understanding the burnout experience: recent research and its implications for psychiatry. World Psychiatry Off J World Psychiatr Assoc WPA. 2016 Jun;15(2):103–11. pmid:27265691
  12. 12. Wallace JE, Lemaire JB, Ghali WA. Physician wellness: a missing quality indicator. Lancet Lond Engl. 2009 Nov 14;374(9702):1714–21. pmid:19914516
  13. 13. Melamed S, Kushnir T, Shirom A. Burnout and risk factors for cardiovascular diseases. Behav Med Wash DC. 1992;18(2):53–60. pmid:1392214
  14. 14. Toh SG, Ang E, Devi MK. Systematic review on the relationship between the nursing shortage and job satisfaction, stress and burnout levels among nurses in oncology/haematology settings. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2012;10(2):126–41. pmid:22672602
  15. 15. Labrague Leodoro J., De los Santos Janet. Fear of COVID-19, psychological distress, work satisfaction and turnover intention among front line nurses. Res Sq. 2020;
  16. 16. Du J, Dong L, Wang T, Yuan C, Fu R, Zhang L, et al. Psychological symptoms among frontline healthcare workers during COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2020 Apr; pmid:32381270
  17. 17. Muller AE, Hafstad EV, Himmels JPW, Smedslund G, Flottorp S, Stensland SØ, et al. The mental health impact of the covid-19 pandemic on healthcare workers, and interventions to help them: A rapid systematic review. Psychiatry Res. 2020 Nov 1;293:113441. pmid:32898840
  18. 18. Kisely S, Warren N, McMahon L, Dalais C, Henry I, Siskind D. Occurrence, prevention, and management of the psychological effects of emerging virus outbreaks on healthcare workers: rapid review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2020 May 5;369:m1642. pmid:32371466
  19. 19. Luo M, Guo L, Yu M, Wang H. The psychological and mental impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on medical staff and general public–A systematic review and meta-analysis. Vol. 291, Psychiatry Research. Elsevier Ireland Ltd; 2020. pmid:32563745
  20. 20. Liu Q, Luo D, Haase JE, Guo Q, Wang XQ, Liu S, et al. The experiences of health-care providers during the COVID-19 crisis in China: a qualitative study. Lancet Glob Health. 2020 Jun;8(6):e790–8. pmid:32573443
  21. 21. Belfroid E, van Steenbergen J, Timen A, Ellerbroek P, Huis A, Hulscher M. Preparedness and the importance of meeting the needs of healthcare workers: a qualitative study on Ebola. In: Journal of Hospital Infection. W.B. Saunders Ltd; 2018. p. 212–8. pmid:28690117
  22. 22. Qiu J, Shen B, Zhao M, Wang Z, Xie B, Xu Y. A nationwide survey of psychological distress among Chinese people in the COVID-19 epidemic: implications and policy recommendations. Gen Psychiatry [Internet]. 2020 Mar 6 [cited 2020 Aug 4];33(2). Available from: pmid:32215365
  23. 23. Craig J, Kalanxhi E, Hauck S. National estimates of critical care capacity in 54 African countries. medRxiv. 2020 May 16;727.
  24. 24. Selamu M, Thornicroft G, Fekadu A, Hanlon C. Conceptualisation of job-related wellbeing, stress and burnout among healthcare workers in rural Ethiopia: a qualitative study.
  25. 25. Dubale BW, Friedman LE, Chemali Z, Denninger JW, Mehta DH, Alem A, et al. Systematic review of burnout among healthcare providers in sub-Saharan Africa. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):1247. pmid:31510975
  26. 26. International Amnesty. Global: Health workers silenced, exposed and attacked [Internet]. Amnesty International. 2020 [cited 2020 Jul 20]. p. 1–61. Available from:
  27. 27. Chersich MF, Gray G, Fairlie L, Eichbaum Q, Mayhew S, Allwood B, et al. COVID-19 in Africa: care and protection for frontline healthcare workers. Glob Health. 2020 Dec;16(1):46. pmid:32414379
  28. 28. Adamu Z. Ghana coronavirus: Over 2,000 health care workers have been infected [Internet]. CNN. 2020 [cited 2020 Jul 20].
  29. 29. World Health Organization. COVID-19 in the WHO African Region [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2020 Aug 10].
  30. 30. Annan AA, Yar DD, Owusu M, Biney EA, Forson PK, Okyere PB, et al. Health care workers indicate ill preparedness for Ebola Virus Disease outbreak in Ashanti Region of Ghana. BMC Public Health. 2017 Jun 6;17(1):546. pmid:28587602
  31. 31. Adokiya MN, Awoonor-Williams JK. Ebola virus disease surveillance and response preparedness in northern Ghana. Glob Health Action. 2016 Dec 1;9(1):29763. pmid:27146443
  32. 32. Nyarko Y, Goldfrank L, Ogedegbe G, Soghoian S, de-Graft Aikins A, Koram K, et al. Preparing for Ebola Virus Disease in West African countries not yet affected: Perspectives from Ghanaian health professionals. Glob Health. 2015 Feb 26;11(1):1–6.
  33. 33. Adongo PB, Tabong PTN, Asampong E, Ansong J, Robalo M, Adanu RM. Health workers perceptions and attitude about Ghana’s preparedness towards preventing, containing, and managing Ebola Virus Disease. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Apr 12;17(1):266. pmid:28403852
  34. 34. United Nations Economic Commission for Africa. COVID-19 in Africa: Protecting Lives and Economies. 2020 Apr.
  35. 35. World Health Organization. Density of physicians (total number per 1000 population) [Internet]. World Health Organization; 2019 [cited 2020 Jun 28].
  36. 36. World Health Organization. Nursing and midwifery personnel (per 10 000 population) [Internet]. World Health Organization. 2020 [cited 2020 Jul 2].
  37. 37. GhanaWeb. Korle-Bu doctors threaten to strike over poor coronavirus preparedness [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2020 Jun 25].
  38. 38. GhanaWeb. Korle-Bu nurses stage sit-home strike after one tested positive for coronavirus [Internet]. GhanaWeb. 2020 [cited 2020 Jun 25].
  39. 39. Alessandra Prentice. Ghana health workers warn of potential COVID-19 calamity—Reuters [Internet]. Reuters. 2020 [cited 2020 Jul 10].
  40. 40. Joint health sector unions and professional associations. Joint health sector unions and professional associations press release. 2020 Jul 9;
  41. 41. Afulani PA, Gyamerah AO, Aborigo R, Nutor J, Malechi H, Laar A, et al. Perceived preparedness to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic: A study with healthcare workers in Ghana. J Glob Health Sci. 2020 Jul 11;In press:2020.07.10.20151142.
  42. 42. Cohen S, Kamarck T, Mermelstein R. A global measure on perceived stress. Glob Meas Perceived Stress. 1983;385–96.
  43. 43. Shirom A, Melamed S. A comparison of the construct validity of two burnout measures in two groups of professionals. Int J Stress Manag. 2006;13(2):176–200.
  44. 44. Grossi G, Perski A, Osika W, Savic I. Stress-related exhaustion disorder–clinical manifestation of burnout? A review of assessment methods, sleep impairments, cognitive disturbances, and neuro-biological and physiological changes in clinical burnout. Scand J Psychol. 2015 Dec 1;56(6):626–36. pmid:26496458
  45. 45. Aneshensel CS. Theory-based data analysis for the social sciences. Sage Publications; 2012. pmid:22918896
  46. 46. VanderWeele TJ. Mediation analysis: a practitioner’s guide. Annu Rev Public Health. 2016;37:17–32. pmid:26653405
  47. 47. Chersich MF, Gray G, Fairlie L, Eichbaum Q, Mayhew S, Allwood B, et al. COVID-19 in Africa: care and protection for frontline healthcare workers. Vol. 16, Globalization and health. NLM (Medline); 2020. p. 46. pmid:32414379
  48. 48. Odonkor ST, Frimpong K. Burnout among Healthcare Professionals in Ghana: A Critical Assessment. BioMed Res Int. 2020 Mar 21;2020:1–8. pmid:32280676
  49. 49. Hu D, Kong Y, Li W, Han Q, Zhang X, Zhu LX, et al. Frontline nurses’ burnout, anxiety, depression, and fear statuses and their associated factors during the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan, China: A large-scale cross-sectional study. EClinicalMedicine [Internet]. 2020 Jul 1 [cited 2020 Aug 4];24. Available from:
  50. 50. Sasangohar F, Jones SL, Masud FN, Vahidy FS, Kash BA. Provider Burnout and Fatigue During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Lessons Learned From a High-Volume Intensive Care Unit. Anesth Analg. 2020;131(1):106–11. pmid:32282389
  51. 51. Chew NWS, Lee GKH, Tan BYQ, Jing M, Goh Y, Ngiam NJH, et al. A multinational, multicentre study on the psychological outcomes and associated physical symptoms amongst healthcare workers during COVID-19 outbreak. Brain Behav Immun. 2020 Aug;88:559–65. pmid:32330593
  52. 52. Sultana Abida, Sharma Rachit, Hossain Mahbub, Bhattacharya Sudip, Purohit Neetu. Burnout among healthcare providers during COVID-19: Challenges and evidence-based interventions. Indian J Med Ethics. 2020;1–4.
  53. 53. Ross J. The Exacerbation of Burnout During COVID-19: A Major Concern for Nurse Safety. J Perianesth Nurs. 2020 Aug;35(4):439–40. pmid:32741522
  54. 54. West CP, Dyrbye LN, Erwin PJ, Shanafelt TD. Interventions to prevent and reduce physician burnout: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet. 2016;388(10057):2272–81. pmid:27692469