3. Results
A total of 600 HCWs were included in this study. Of the participants, 364 (60.7%) were females and 236 (39.3%) were males with a mean age of 33.49±7.29 (range, 19 to 66) years. Among the participants, 381 (63.5%) were married and 219 (36.5%) were single or separated. In addition, 287 (47.8%) were physicians, 192 (32%) were nurses, and 121 (20.2%) were the other HCWs. A total of 292 (48.7%), 175 (29.1%), and 133 (22.2%) of the HCWs were working at a state hospital, university hospital, and training and research hospital, respectively (Table 1).
The mean CAS (t(598)=6.696; p<0.001), FCV-19S (t(598)=5.846; p<0.001), MBI (t(598)=2.214; p<0.05), ISI scores (t(598)=2.839; p<0.01) were significantly higher among female HCWs than men. However, there was no statistically significant difference in the mean ASI-3 scores between the two sexes (p=0.789). The mean CAS (F(2,597)=4.919; p<0.01) and ISI scores (F(2,597)=5.572; p<0.01) were significantly higher among nurses, the mean ASI-3 of the other HCWs (F(2,597)=4.919718 p<0.01) and MBI scores of physicians (F(2,597)=15.120; p<0.001) were significantly higher (Table 1).
In addition, the mean MBI (t(598)=3.868; p<0.001) and ISI scores (t(598)=2.073; p<0.05) were significantly higher in HCWs working in the COVID-19 clinics and ICUs than those who were not working. All scale scores, except for the MBI, were significantly higher in HCWs having a chronic disease (p<0.05). The mean CAS (t(598)=2.384; p<0.05), MBI (t(598)=1.998; p<0.05), and ISI (t(598)=3.261; p<0.01) scores were significantly higher in HCWs with a psychiatric illness than those without (Table 2).
Correlation analysis revealed a mild-to-moderate, positive, statistically significant relationships between the variables (Table 3). The multiple correlations between the variables were analyzed in a structural equation model. Accordingly, there was a significant correlation between ASI-3 scores and CAS (β=0.42; p<0.001), FCV-19S (β=0.49; p<0.001), and MBI scores (β=0.27; p<0.001). The CAS (β=0.30; p<0.001), FCV-19S (β=0.14; p<0.001), and MBI scores (β=0.35; p<0.001) could explain 32% of the ISI scores. In addition, the direct effect of anxiety sensitivity on insomnia severity was statistically significant (β=0.29; p<0.001). The goodness-of-fit of the model was met (CMIN/DF=15.50; GFI=0.97; CFI=0.95; IFI=0.94; NFI=0.94; RMSEA=0.10) (Figure 1).