Diabetes mellitus is a lifelong metabolic disorder that impacts people’s well-being and biopsychosocial status. Psychiatric problems and diabetes mellitus have a complex, reciprocal interaction in which one condition affects the other. In this narrative review, we provide an overview of the literature on the psychological effects of diabetes, expound on the evaluation of emotional disorders in the setting of diabetes, and suggest interventions aimed at enhancing both mental and physical health. Diabetes can make daily life complicated and stressful. Frequent blood glucose testing, taking medications on a regular basis, adhering to a tight diet plan, and exercising are some examples of the suggested daily routine of subjects with diabetes. Furthermore, comorbid diseases and typical diabetic complications can have a detrimental impact on quality of life. When mental health conditions coexist with diabetes mellitus, there is a greater likelihood of medication noncompliance, a decreased commitment to diabetes-related self-care, increased functional impairment, inadequate glycemic control, a higher risk of complications, and overall higher healthcare expenses. Thus, evaluation of the mental health status of patients with diabetes is crucial. When treating psychological issues and psychiatric disorders, a comprehensive biopsychosocial approach should be taken, and where appropriate, psychopharmacological therapies or psychotherapy should be applied. The goal of continuous education and assistance for self-care is to give individuals with the disease the information and abilities they need to control their condition over time.

Background and Objectives: The fatigue, stress, and burnout of nurses lead to them frequently making mistakes, which have a negative impact not only on the safety of the patients but also on their psychology. The ability to bounce back from mistakes is crucial for nurses. Nursing staff members’ physical and mental health, particularly their depression, is far from ideal, and this ill health is directly correlated with the frequency of self-reported medical errors. The nurses’ mental and physical health are also positively correlated with their perception of wellness support at work. This cross-sectional study aimed to investigate the status of nurses’ mental and physical health regarding clinical errors and the impact of resilience on coping with these situations. Materials and Methods: A total of 364 healthcare professionals participated in this research; 87.5% of them were females and 12.5% of them were males. Most of the participants were 22–35 years old. The median number of years of employment was nine. Clinical nurses anonymously and voluntarily completed a special structured questionnaire that included questions from different validated tools in order to assess their state of physical and mental wellbeing after events of stress and errors made during their practice. Results: In total, 49.4% of the nurses had made an error on their own, and 73.2% had witnessed an error that someone else had made. At the time of the error, 29.9% of the participants were in charge of more than 20 patients, while 28.9% were responsible for a maximum of three patients. Participants who were 36–45 years old had more resilience (p = 0.049) and experienced fewer negative emotions than participants who were 22–35 years old. The participants who mentioned more positive feelings according to their mental state had greater resilience (p > 0.001). Conclusions: Errors were likely to happen during clinical practice due to nurses’ negative experiences. The level of resilience among the nursing population was found to play a very important role not only in making mistakes but also in coping with errors during their daily routine. Wellness and prevention must be given top priority in all healthcare systems across the country in order to promote nurses’ optimal health and wellbeing, raise the standard of care, and reduce the likelihood of expensive, avoidable medical errors. Healthcare administrations should promote prevention programs for stress occurrence in order to support nurses’ wellbeing maintenance.

Quality of life (QOL) is based on one’s perception of one’s position in life with respect to one’s goals, expectations, standards, and concerns. It is also influenced by one’s culture and value system, workflow, and workplace situation; in turn, QOL influences the quality of service one is able to provide. In this study, we aim to report on dental and nursing academics’ QOL and wellbeing at the end of the third year of the COVID-19 pandemic. There are several studies on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on health professionals (nurses and dentists), but it is important to investigate their quality of life three years later; furthermore, knowledge about academic staff is very limited. The World Health Organization Quality of Life–BREF Scale (WHOQOL-BREF) tool, recording the physical, psychological, social, and environmental dimensions of QOL, was used. The WHOQOL-BREF was modified using a spiritual coaching/mentoring approach in a two-step design and validation procedure. The modified SHQOL-BREF (Spiritual Healthcare version) designed for this study was uploaded and filled in online during April–June 2023. The staff (N = 120, 75% female) of the Departments of Dentistry (44.2%) and Nursing (55.8%) of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens participated anonymously. QOL in terms of physical health was reported at a higher level (M = 72.2 points) compared to social relationships (M = 69 points), psychological health (M = 65 points), and environment (M = 59 points) (scores reported on a 0–100 scale). Overall, QOL was rated at 66 points, while satisfaction with one’s health was at 72 points. Job satisfaction (M₁ = 3.2) and spirituality (M₂ = 3.0) were reported at a medium level on a five-point scale, while personal beliefs and values were reported at a high level (M₃ = 4.0). The four areas of QOL are associated with job satisfaction, personal beliefs, and spirituality. Participant age presented a significant moderate–strong effect on physical health (F (3.97) = 2.89, p < 0.05, η²_p = 0.08) and on the environment (F (3.97) = 2.80, p < 0.05, η²_p = 0.08), and marital status had a significant effect on social relationships (F (1.97) = 9.66, p < 0.05, η²_p = 0.09). Married participants reported consistently higher levels of QOL compared to single participants, for all age groups. The department had a significant moderate effect on social relationships (F (1.97) = 5.10, p < 0.05, η²_p = 0.05), and education had a significant moderate–strong effect on psychological health (F (2.97) = 3.74, p < 0.05, η²_p = 0.07). PhD-level participants in both departments presented higher levels of psychological health compared to those with lower educational levels. Also, participants from the Department of Dentistry reported higher levels of social relationship QOL in all educational groups compared to the Department of Nursing. Overall, according to our findings, PhD participants generally had better psychological health. Those under 40 years of age had higher levels of physical health and environmental quality of life, while married participants and those from the Department of Dentistry had higher levels of social interactions than those from the Department of Nursing. Strategic planning on sustainability and QOL initiatives should be introduced after the COVID-19 pandemic for dental and nursing academic personnel to promote resilience and QOL scores. Enhancing the QOL of academic staff is essential for developing health promotion activities at universities and can help boost performance among staff and students.

The COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on everyone’s daily lives with short-term or long-term consequences. Among the affected population, university students were studied by researchers specifically due to the total change to their educational way of learning and the courses they attended. The present study aimed to assess the psychological difficulties experienced by the university students of Greece during the first wave of the outbreak. Methods: 288 university nursing students completed an electronic questionnaire after consent. The sample included students from all years of study. The questionnaire included demographic data and questions about mental health status, resilience level, coping strategies, positive and negative emotions and an optimism assessment. Results: Depression (44.8%), anxiety (36.8%) and stress (40.3%) were experienced by the students. Females had significantly greater anxiety and stress signs compared to males (p < 0.001). The resilience score was significantly greater in males, as it was for the Positive Affect Score. Students in the fourth year of study used significantly more active/positive coping strategies than students in the first (p = 0.016) or second year of study (p = 0.005). Conclusion: Several students experienced serious mental disorders during the first period of the COVID-19 outbreak. Variables such as gender, year of study, age, positive and negative affect score, life orientation test score and coping strategies were identified as factors contributing to this situation. Special attention must be paid to female students as they mentioned negative emotions more frequently than males. Further research on the academic population could be beneficial to university administrators.

Background: Dentistry and nursing students experience significant anxiety, negatively impacting their well-being and academic performance. Objectives: This study aims to assess the prevalence and relationships of stress, anxiety, depression, resilience, hope, and spiritual well-being among dentistry and nursing students, identify demographic influences and propose strategies to enhance resilience and well-being. Methods: This study surveyed 271 students attending Greece’s departments of dentistry and nursing at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, using an electronic questionnaire aimed to assess stress, anxiety, and depression (depression, anxiety, stress scale—DASS-21); resilience (resilience assessment questionnaire—RAQ8, brief resilience scale—BRS); hope (adult hope scale—AHS); and spiritual well-being (functional assessment of chronic illness therapy–spiritual well-being scale—FACIT-Sp-12). The survey also collected demographic data to identify factors influencing these variables. Statistical analyses, including hierarchical multiple linear regression and t-tests, were performed to analyze the relationships between variables. Results: The sample included 145 dentistry and 126 nursing students, with 68.6% female and 80.1% undergraduate. Half of the students reported mild or higher levels of stress (48.7%), anxiety (51.3%), and depression (53.5%). The prevalence of depression was the highest in our sample, followed by anxiety and stress. Higher family wealth was associated with reduced stress levels, while female undergraduate students reported higher levels of anxiety than their male counterparts. Hope was a strong predictor of resilience, but stress and worry had a negative correlation. Conclusions: Promoting students’ well-being and academic success requires effective stress-reduction and resilience-building techniques to improve students’ performance and support future healthcare professionals’ personal sustainability and holistic growth.

Introduction: Stress is a common concern among healthcare students, due to the demands of their coursework and the elevated expectations they face. Especially among dentistry and nursing students, the phenomenon, although well-documented, covers psychosocial and physiological dimensions, with somatization symptoms being less explored. These manifestations are crucial to identify discipline-specific stressors and health impacts that can lead to targeted interventions for both disciplines. Aim: This study investigates stress perceptions, somatization, and coping strategies among 271 nursing and dentistry students at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. Methodology: An e-questionnaire was open for submissions during February and March 2024. Results: Females reported higher stress somatization (M = 10.22, SD = 5.23) than males (M = 7.94, SD = 6.14; Cohen’s d = 0.412, p < 0.05). The interpretation of stress as “restlessness and psychological pressure” was more prevalent in dentistry students compared to nursing students. Moreover, nursing students who perceived stress as the “inability to manage unexpected or difficult situations, insecurity, panic” were more likely to experience stress somatization symptoms, while for dentistry students, stress somatization was related to “pressure to meet daily obligations/long-term goals”. Physical symptoms for all students included chest discomfort, digestive issues, and headaches/nausea. Also, dentistry students reported more teeth clenching or grinding than nursing students. Short-term coping strategies included emotional balance, managing stressors, situation analysis, and breathing techniques. Long-term strategies involved distraction and entertainment, physical exercise, and patience. A higher willingness to seek coaching support correlated with higher stress somatization among dental students. Nursing students favored psychological support, while dentistry students suggested curriculum revision and improved infrastructure. Discussion/Conclusions: Females exhibited higher stress somatization levels, with themes of insecurity and physical symptoms. Nursing students reported higher somatization linked to insecurity, while dental students associated stress with daily obligations and goals. The study highlights the need for improved support systems, flexible academic procedures, and better communication to address stress in healthcare academia.