Skip to main content
. 2020 Dec 16;6(12):e05766. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05766

Table 2.

Frequency of the variables investigated.

Variables Total (n = 103)
Emotional exhaustion Low 47 (45.6%)
Moderate 27 (26.2%)
High 29 (28.2%)
Somatic symptom No to minimal 21 (20.4%)
Low 26 (25.2%)
Medium 26 (25.2%)
High 19 (18.4%)
Very high 11 (10.7%)
Bruxism symptoms No to minimal 74 (71.8%)
Medium 22 (21.4%)
High 7 (6.8%)
Negative Affect (PANAS)
(Response modalities moderately to extremely)
Afraid 64 (62.2%)
Scared 53 (51.5%)
Nervous 63 (61,2%)
Jittery 48 (46,6%)
Guilty 14 (13.5%)
Ashamed 12 (11.6%)
Irritable 50 (48.6%)
Hostile 20 (19.4%)
Upset 54 (52.4%)
Distressed 43 (41.7%)
Feeling of protection by national government Never 19 (18.4%)
Rarely 37 (35.9%)
Sometimes 39 (37.9%)
Always 8 (7.8%)
Feeling of protection by regional administration Never 19 (18.4%)
Rarely 36 (35.0%)
Sometimes 41 (39.8%)
Always 7 (6.8%)
Feeling of protection by hospital agencies Never 22 (21.4%)
Rarely 25 (24.3%)
Sometimes 43 (41.7%)
Always 13 (12.6%)
Perceived adequacy of the emotional support Yes 52 (50.5%)
No 51 (49.5%)
Perceived usefulness of the emotional support Yes 66 (64.15%)
No 37 (35.9%)
Feeling of adequacy of the hygiene safety measures Insufficient 33 (32.0%)
Sufficient 50 (48.5%)
Highly sufficient 20 (19.4%)