Table 3. Associations of PanMan with QoL of hospital HCWs during the second wave of the pandemic, logistic regression analyses adjusted for age and gender with odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI).

PANDEMIC MANAGEMENT (PanMan)	QUALITY OF LIFE (QoL)
	Family Life and activities	Housekeeping	Relationships with relatives	Mental well-being
COVID-19 experience
Serious experience	2.8(1.32–5.74) **	3.6(1.43–8.87) **	0.9(0.29–3.03)ns	2.3(1.21–4.50) *
Information overload
Followed or concerned Followed and concerned	2.0(0.92–4.21)ns 2.9(1.03–8.24)*	1.6(0.69–3.74)ns 0.8(0.17–4.07)ns	3.1(0.82–11.5)ns 3.2(0.55–18.9)ns	1.5(0.77–3.09)ns 1.9(0.67–5.11)ns
Non-adherence of the public
Non-adherence or concerned Non-adherence and concerned	2.0(0.85–4.75)ns 2.6(1.05–6.27)*	1.7(0.66–4.61)ns 1.9(0.66–5.30)ns	2.2(0.40–12.6)ns 4.8(0.92–24.6)ns	2.8(1.21–6.24) * 4.0(1.71–9.36) ***
Work stress
At least one stressor	2.4(1.20–4.87) *	2.8(1.20–6.50) *	4.1(1.04–15.9) *	3.6(1.83–6.90) ***
Barriers of health care provision
Use of PPE	2.8(1.39–5.60) **	3.5(1.53–7.91) **	2.1(0.65–6.75)ns	1.7(0.88–3.20)ns
Lack of hospital beds	3.7(1.82–7.53) ***	5.2(2.21–12.0) ***	2.4(0.73–7.68)ns	2.6(1.36–5.09) **
Lack of staff	1.9(0.97–3.88)ns	2.6(1.14–5.81) *	0.9(0.26–3.04)ns	2.2(1.18–4.26) *
Work exhaustion	2.9(1.41–6.04) **	6.8(2.45–18.9) ***	3.5(0.91–13.2)ns	4.4(2.19–8.89) ***
Facilitators of health care provision
Efficient department management	0.8(0.39–1.60)ns	0.5(0.23–1.22)ns	0.7(0.19–2.16)ns	1.0(0.52–1.85)ns
Colleagues’ support	0.4(0.20–0.82)*	0.5(0.23–1.18)ns	0.7(0.20–2.14)ns	0.7(0.38–1.35)ns
Training	0.5(0.22–1.17)ns	0.1(0.03–0.61) **	0.8(0.20–2.93)ns	0.4(0.20–0.93) *
Public solidarity manifestation	0.9(0.37–2.01)ns	0.4(0.13–1.20)ns	1.4(0.40–4.90)ns	0.7(0.32–1.55)ns

Note

*** p≤0.001

** p<0.01

* p<0.05; ^ns non-significant.