Pandemic fatigue encompasses exhaustion, emotional strain, and decreased motivation due to prolonged pandemic effects. This scoping review examines pandemic fatigue issues related to COVID-19, aiming to suggest effective management strategies. We assessed 2,558 records from 1st of December 2019 until 27th of March 2022 in PubMed, Science Direct, ProQuest, and ClinicalKey. Following Arksey and O’Malley (2005) and PRISMA-ScR principles, we selected 31 studies including research papers employing either quantitative or qualitative methods and editorials and other summary articles after excluding redundant and irrelevant works. The authors provide six critical answers to understand better and manage pandemic fatigue, including the need for more research and support, the collaboration between key stakeholders and the community, and the use of information to address pandemic fatigue. The review found that pandemic fatigue is prevalent among certain groups, such as students and healthcare workers. Factors contributing to pandemic fatigue include age, gender, high perceived severity of COVID-19, low trust in government or health organizations, and low social connectedness. The review also identified an instrument, the COVID-19 Pandemic Fatigue Scale, that can be used to measure pandemic fatigue. The review concluded that identifying pandemic fatigue as early as possible is absolutely important and people and their government should work together to handle the fatigue. Many countries have acknowledged the presence hence manage it differently. Nonetheless the strategy suggested by WHO has provided an excellent framework to tackle the pandemic fatigue.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic significantly impacted the global teaching and learning process (TnL). Unfortunately, to date, not many qualitative studies have been published specifically on the impact of COVID-19 on the Family Medicine course, particularly in Malaysia. Hence, this study aimed to explore the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the teaching and learning experience of undergraduate students undergoing their Family Medicine course at a local university. Methods: A qualitative study using focused group discussion (FGD), was conducted among undergraduate students during the lockdown period. A semi-structured interview guide was used to interview 20 students, in their fifth undergraduate year, undertaking their fourth to fifth week of a total six-week course. They were selected using purposive snowball sampling method. There were four focus group discussions (FGD) with five students in a group. All interviews were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim, and the contents were analysed using the standard content analysis framework. Subsequently, thematic content analysis was conducted, and three major themes were produced. Results: The three major themes were (1) facilitators to learning, (2) barriers to learning, and (3) rooms for improvement. Conclusion: Although COVID-19 pandemic had significant impact on TnL of Family Medicine course among undergraduates, the students remained optimistic and proposed some improvement from their point of view. However, a creative, realistic, effective, and impactful way of TnL, particularly in clinical aspects should be developed and experimented. Technological progress and advancement should permit this idea to be achievable and implemented in near future.

Introduction: The use of assessment tools to measure postnatal mental illness is essential in healthcare settings. However, variations in the types of tools and their reliability in a particular population lead to under-recognition of mental health status in postnatal mothers. The aim of this review is to evaluate the most recent 10 year of research on the validity and reliability of postnatal mental illness assessment tools. Methods: A literature search of studies from online databases PubMed, Scopus, and Science Direct was conducted. Results: A total of 59 studies were selected for this review. Several studies utilised multiple assessment tools, and a total of 96 assessment tools were identified and classified into six domains: postnatal blues, postnatal stress, postnatal anxiety, postnatal depression, postnatal psychosis, and postnatal psychological disorder. In this review, EPDS was the most common tool used to identify postnatal depression and anxiety while DASS 21 was the most common tool used to identify postnatal psychological disorder. There is a wide range in preponderance of evidence for the reliability of each assessment tool and there were inconsistencies in assessing the validity of the assessment tools. Conclusion This review provides information regarding some of the main assessment tools currently available to measure postnatal mental illnesses. There were no standardised tools that were used in a particular setting. The results may differ in different population because there are differences in not only languages and dialects, but also cultural and racial backgrounds, which greatly influences their perception and interpretation of postnatal mental illness.
Mental Disorders