scholarly journals The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health and wellbeing of UK healthcare workers

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Gilleen ◽  
Aida Santaolalla ◽  
Lorena Valdearenas ◽  
Clara Salice ◽  
Montserrat Fusté
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Protective Factors ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Risk And Protective Factors ◽  
Mental Wellbeing ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Controllable Factors ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

AbstractBackgroundThere is an urgent need to understand the psychological impact the COVID-19 pandemic has had on UK healthcare workers (HCW).AimsTo reveal risk and protective factors associated with poor mental wellbeing of HCW working during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK.Method2773 UK HCWs completed a survey between 22ndApril and 10th May 2020 containing scales measuring anxiety, depression, PTSD, and stress, and questions about roles and COVID-19-related factors including workplace preparation and risk management. Respondents were classified as high or low symptomatic on each mental health scale and logistic regression revealed risk and protective factors associated with each outcome. Change in wellbeing from pre to during COVID-19 was also quantified.ResultsA large proportion of UK HCW had high mental health symptoms. ‘Fixed’ risk factors of poor mental health included being female, being ‘frontline’, pre-existing mental health diagnoses, and experience of stressful/traumatic events. An additional set of ‘controllable’ factors also significantly increased risk: PPE availability, workload, lack of COVID-19 preparation and training, and insufficient communication of clinical procedures. Resilience and sharing stress reduced risk, as did ethical support for those making treatment decisions. Allied HCW and managers were at elevated risk of high symptoms particularly PTSD. Wellbeing, especially of frontline workers, had significantly worsened compared to before COVID-19.ConclusionsPoor mental wellbeing was prevalent in HCW during the UK COVID-19 response. A number of controllable factors should be targeted, and protective factors promoted, to reduce the detrimental effect of COVID-19 and other pandemics on HCW mental health.

scholarly journals Emotional and Mental Wellbeing Following COVID-19 Public Health Measures on People Living With Dementia and Carers

2021 ◽  
pp. 089198872199681
Author(s):  
Kerry Hanna ◽  
Clarissa Giebel ◽  
Hilary Tetlow ◽  
Kym Ward ◽  
Justine Shenton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Mental Health ◽  
Social Support ◽  
Support Services ◽  
Mental Wellbeing ◽  
Daily Lives ◽  
Health Measures ◽  
Social Support Services ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

Background: To date, there appears to be no evidence on the longer-term impacts caused by COVID-19 and its related public health restrictions on some of the most vulnerable in our societies. The aim of this research was to explore the change in impact of COVID-19 public health measures on the mental wellbeing of people living with dementia (PLWD) and unpaid carers. Method: Semi-structured, follow-up telephone interviews were conducted with PLWD and unpaid carers between June and July 2020. Participants were asked about their experiences of accessing social support services during the pandemic, and the impact of restrictions on their daily lives. Results: 20 interviews were conducted and thematically analyzed, which produced 3 primary themes concerning emotional responses and impact to mental health and wellbeing during the course of the pandemic: 1) Impact on mental health during lockdown, 2) Changes to mental health following easing of public health, and 3) The long-term effect of public health measures. Conclusions: The findings from this research shed light on the longer-term psychological impacts of the UK Government’s public health measures on PLWD and their carers. The loss of social support services was key in impacting this cohort mentally and emotionally, displaying a need for better psychological support, for both carers and PLWD.

scholarly journals Mental burden and its risk and protective factors during the early phase of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: systematic review and meta-analyses

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela M. Kunzler ◽  
Nikolaus Röthke ◽  
Lukas Günthner ◽  
Jutta Stoffers-Winterling ◽  
Oliver Tüscher ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
General Population ◽  
Protective Factors ◽  
Early Phase ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk And Protective Factors ◽  
Comparative Data ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Background Mental burden due to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has been widely reported for the general public and specific risk groups like healthcare workers and different patient populations. We aimed to assess its impact on mental health during the early phase by comparing pandemic with prepandemic data and to identify potential risk and protective factors. Methods For this systematic review and meta-analyses, we systematically searched PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science from January 1, 2019 to May 29, 2020, and screened reference lists of included studies. In addition, we searched PubMed and PsycINFO for prepandemic comparative data. Survey studies assessing mental burden by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in the general population, healthcare workers, or any patients (eg, COVID-19 patients), with a broad range of eligible mental health outcomes, and matching studies evaluating prepandemic comparative data in the same population (if available) were included. We used multilevel meta-analyses for main, subgroup, and sensitivity analyses, focusing on (perceived) stress, symptoms of anxiety and depression, and sleep-related symptoms as primary outcomes. Results Of 2429 records retrieved, 104 were included in the review (n = 208,261 participants), 43 in the meta-analysis (n = 71,613 participants). While symptoms of anxiety (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.40; 95% CI 0.15–0.65) and depression (SMD 0.67; 95% CI 0.07–1.27) were increased in the general population during the early phase of the pandemic compared with prepandemic conditions, mental burden was not increased in patients as well as healthcare workers, irrespective of COVID-19 patient contact. Specific outcome measures (eg, Patient Health Questionnaire) and older comparative data (published ≥5 years ago) were associated with increased mental burden. Across the three population groups, existing mental disorders, female sex, and concerns about getting infected were repeatedly reported as risk factors, while older age, a good economic situation, and education were protective. Conclusions This meta-analysis paints a more differentiated picture of the mental health consequences in pandemic situations than previous reviews. High-quality, representative surveys, high granular longitudinal studies, and more research on protective factors are required to better understand the psychological impacts of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and to help design effective preventive measures and interventions that are tailored to the needs of specific population groups.

scholarly journals Impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on perinatal mental health (Riseup-PPD-COVID-19): protocol for an international prospective cohort study

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Motrico ◽  
◽  
Rena Bina ◽  
Sara Domínguez-Salas ◽  
Vera Mateus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Mental Health ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Protective Factors ◽  
Prospective Cohort Study ◽  
Prospective Cohort ◽  
Risk And Protective Factors ◽  
Perinatal Mental Health ◽  
Postpartum Women ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Corona Virus Disease 19 (COVID-19) is a new pandemic, declared a public health emergency by the World Health Organization, which could have negative consequences for pregnant and postpartum women. The scarce evidence published to date suggests that perinatal mental health has deteriorated since the COVID-19 outbreak. However, the few studies published so far have some limitations, such as a cross-sectional design and the omission of important factors for the understanding of perinatal mental health, including governmental restriction measures and healthcare practices implemented at the maternity hospitals. Within the Riseup-PPD COST Action, a study is underway to assess the impact of COVID-19 in perinatal mental health. The primary objectives are to (1) evaluate changes in perinatal mental health outcomes; and (2) determine the risk and protective factors for perinatal mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, we will compare the results between the countries participating in the study. Methods This is an international prospective cohort study, with a baseline and three follow-up assessments over a six-month period. It is being carried out in 11 European countries (Albania, Bulgaria, Cyprus, France, Greece, Israel, Malta, Portugal, Spain, Turkey, and the United Kingdom), Argentina, Brazil and Chile. The sample consists of adult pregnant and postpartum women (with infants up to 6 months of age). The assessment includes measures on COVID-19 epidemiology and public health measures (Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker dataset), Coronavirus Perinatal Experiences (COPE questionnaires), psychological distress (BSI-18), depression (EPDS), anxiety (GAD-7) and post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSD checklist for DSM-V). Discussion This study will provide important information for understanding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on perinatal mental health and well-being, including the identification of potential risk and protective factors by implementing predictive models using machine learning techniques. The findings will help policymakers develop suitable guidelines and prevention strategies for perinatal mental health and contribute to designing tailored mental health interventions. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04595123.

scholarly journals Risk and Protective Factors for the Mental Wellbeing of Deployed Healthcare Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic in China: A Qualitative Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vicky Poh Hoay Khoo ◽  
Rachel Sing-Kiat Ting ◽  
Xinli Wang ◽  
Yuanshan Luo ◽  
Janet Seeley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Protective Factors ◽  
Organizational Support ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Social Connectedness ◽  
Risk And Protective Factors ◽  
Mental Wellbeing ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Risk Environment ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Multidisciplinary Study

Background: Though many literatures documented burnout and occupational hazard among healthcare workers and frontliners during pandemic, not many adopted a systemic approach to look at the resilience among this population. Another under-studied population was the large numbers of global healthcare workers who have been deployed to tackle the crisis of COVID-19 pandemic in the less resourceful regions. We investigated both the mental wellbeing risk and protective factors of a deployed healthcare workers (DHWs) team in Wuhan, the epicenter of the virus outbreak during 2020.Method: A consensual qualitative research approach was adopted with 25 DHWs from H province through semi-structured interviews after 3 months of deployment period.Results: Inductive-Deductive thematic coding with self-reflexivity revealed multi-layered risk and protective factors for DHWs at the COVID-19 frontline. Intensive working schedule and high-risk environment, compounded by unfamiliar work setting and colleagues; local culture adaptation; isolation from usual social circle, strained the DHWs. Meanwhile, reciprocal relationships and “familial relatedness” with patients and colleagues; organizational support to the DHWs and their immediate families back home, formed crucial wellbeing resources in sustaining the DHWs. The dynamic and dialectical relationships between risk and protective factors embedded in multiple layers of relational contexts could be mapped into a socio-ecological framework.Conclusion: Our multidisciplinary study highlights the unique social connectedness between patient-DHWs; within DHWs team; between deploying hospital and DHWs; and between DHWs and the local partners. We recommend five organizational strategies as mental health promotion and capacity building for DHWs to build a resilient network and prevent burnout at the disaster frontline.

scholarly journals Mental Health Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Health Care Workers in Ebonyi State, Southeast, Nigeria

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (09) ◽  
pp. 400-406
Author(s):  
Okechukwu B. Anozie ◽  
Johnbosco I. Nwafor ◽  
Ephraim I. Nwokporo ◽  
Chidi U. Esike ◽  
Richard L. Ewah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Health Outcome ◽  
Psychological Distress ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Health Impact ◽  
Mental Health Outcome ◽  
Mental Wellbeing ◽  
Frontline Healthcare Workers ◽  
The Impact

Background: Globally, mental health issues have become one of the predominant public health concerns as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak. The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of frontline healthcare workers has not been fully described in Nigeria. Aim: To determine the mental health impact of COVID-19 pandemic and its associated factors among frontline healthcare workers in Ebonyi State, Nigeria. Materials and methods: This was an online cross-sectional study conducted among 315 frontline healthcare workers treating COVID-19 patients at Alex Ekwueme Federal University Teaching Hospital, Abakaliki, Ebonyi State, Nigeria. The mental health outcome of the participants was assessed using the short form of the Mental Health Continuum (MHC-SF). Results: The prevalence of mental health outcome for different categories was 47% (n = 148) for flourishing, 28.3% (n = 89) for moderate and 24.7% (n = 78) for languishing mental health. The predictors of languishing mental health outcome were being married (OR = 3.12, 95%CI 1.67 - 4.09, p = 0.035), a physician (OR = 4.09, 95%CI 1.98 - 5.61, p = 0.002), a nurse (OR = 2.21, 95%CI 0.05 - 0.24, p < 0.001), limited access to personal protective equipment (OR = 3.25, 95%CI 1.62 - 6.22, p = 0.043) and self-isolation and quarantine due to SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR = 3.03, 95%CI 0.02 - 0.95, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Nigeria’s frontline healthcare workers, especially physicians and nurses, are experiencing COVID-19 related psychological distress. There is need to develop and implement interventions to reduce the impact of prolonged psychological distress on long-term mental wellbeing in healthcare workers treating COVID-19 patients.

scholarly journals The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on adult mental health in the UK: A rapid systematic review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleonore Batteux ◽  
Jo Taylor ◽  
Holly Carter
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Protective Factors ◽  
Social Contact ◽  
Policy Recommendations ◽  
Effective Policy ◽  
Risky Behaviours ◽  
Different Populations ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

Background. There is evidence that the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the mental health of the UK population, but this needs synthesising to guide effective policy recommendations and ensure support is targeted to populations most at risk. We conducted a rapid systematic review of the evidence of the impact of COVID-19 and associated restrictions on the mental health of UK adults, including risk and protective factors. Method. A range of databases were searched to identify eligible studies. Studies were eligible if they reported primary quantitative or qualitative research on the mental health of UK adults between March 2020 and March 2021. Journal publications and pre-prints were included. Reviews, position papers, protocol papers and studies published in languages other than English were excluded. The study authors screened papers for eligibility and included 102 papers in the analysis. Results. The evidence from this review indicates that the mental health of UK adults has declined since the start of the pandemic, with different populations being unequally affected. Populations particularly affected are women, young adults, ethnic minorities, people from lower socio-economic backgrounds, people with pre-existing conditions and people who have had COVID-19. Other risk factors include having to isolate and time spent watching pandemic related news. Protective factors include social contact and maintaining healthy behaviours, such as physical activity. Conclusions. Policy should aim to discourage risky behaviours while ensuring support is available for people to engage in protective behaviours. Interventions should be directed towards populations that have been most adversely affected. Addressing the decline in mental health across the UK population since the COVID-19 pandemic will require increasing mental health provision and ensuring equitable access to support.

scholarly journals Postpartum change in common mental disorders among rural Vietnamese women: Incidence, recovery and risk and protective factors

2015 ◽  
Vol 206 (2) ◽  
pp. 110-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Trang Thu Nguyen ◽  
Thach Duc Tran ◽  
Tuan Tran ◽  
Buoi La ◽  
Hau Nguyen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Protective Factors ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
Risk And Protective Factors ◽  
Perinatal Period ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Vietnamese Women

BackgroundIn low- and middle-income countries little is known about changes in women's mental health status from the perinatal period to 15 months postpartum or the factors associated with different trajectories.AimsTo determine the incidence and rates of recovery from common mental disorders (CMD) among rural Vietnamese women and the risk and protective factors associated with these outcomes from the perinatal period to 15 months after giving birth.MethodIn a population-based prospective study, a systematically recruited cohort of women completed baseline assessments in either the last trimester of pregnancy or 4–6 weeks after giving birth and were followed up 15 months later. The common mental disorders of major depression, generalised anxiety and panic disorder were assessed by psychiatrist-administered Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Disorders at both baseline and follow-up.ResultsA total of 211 women provided complete data in this study. The incidence rate of CMD in the first postpartum year was 13% (95% CI 8–19), and 70% (95% CI 59–80) of women who had perinatal CMD recovered within the first postpartum year. Incidence was associated with having experienced childhood maltreatment, experiencing the intimate partner as providing little care, sensitivity, kindness or affection, and the chronic stress of household poverty. Recovery was associated with higher quality of a woman's relationships with her intimate partner and her own mother, longer period of mandated rest following birth, and sharing of domestic tasks and infant care.ConclusionsModifiable social factors, in particular the quality of a woman's closest relationships with her partner and her own mother, and participation by family members in domestic work and infant care, are closely related to women's mental health in the first year after giving birth in resource-constrained settings.

Evaluating Risk and Protective Factors for Suicidality and Self-Harm in Australian Adolescents With Traditional Bullying and Cyberbullying Victimizations

2021 ◽  
pp. 089011712110341
Author(s):  
Md Irteja Islam ◽  
Fakir Md Yunus ◽  
Enamul Kabir ◽  
Rasheda Khanam
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Substance Use ◽  
Mental Disorder ◽  
Protective Factors ◽  
Risk And Protective Factors ◽  
Parental Distress ◽  
Traditional Bullying ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Self Harm ◽  
Bullying Victims

Purpose: To identify and compare important risk and protective factors associated with suicidality and self-harm among traditional bullying and cyberbullying victims aged 14-17-years in Australia. Design: Cross-sectional population-based study. Setting: Young Minds Matter, a nationwide survey in Australia. Subjects: Adolescents aged 14-17-years (n = 2125). Measures: Suicidality and self-harm were outcome variables, and explanatory variables included sociodemographic factors (age, gender, country of birth, household income, location, family type), risk factors (parental distress, family functioning, family history of substance use, child substance use, mental disorder, psychosis, eating disorders, sexual activity) and protective factors (high self-esteem, positive mental health or resilience, school connectedness, sleep) among 2 types of bullying victims—traditional and cyber. Traditional bullying includes physical (hit, kick, push) or verbal (tease, rumors, threat, ignorance), and cyberbullying includes teasing messages/pictures via email, social medial using the internet and/or mobile phones. Analysis: Bivariate analysis and binary logistic regression models. Statistical metrics include Hosmer-Lemeshow Goodness-of-Fit-test, VIF test, Linktest and ROC curve for model performance and fitness. Results: Overall, 25.6% of adolescents were traditional bullying victims and 12% were cyberbullying victims. The percentages of suicidality (34.4% vs 21.6%) and self-harm (32.8% vs 22.3%) were higher in cyberbullying victims than in traditional bullying victims. Girls were more often bullied and likely to experience suicidal and self-harming behavior than boys. Parental distress, mental disorder and psychosis were found to be significantly associated with the increase risk for self-harm and suicidality among both bullying victims (p < 0.05). While, eating disorder and sexual activity increased the risk of suicidality in traditional bullying victims and self-harm in cyberbullying victims, respectively. Positive mental health/resilience and adequate sleep were found be significantly associated with decreased suicidality and self-harm in both bullying victims. Conclusion: Suicidality and self-harm were common in bullying victims. The findings highlight that the risk and protective factors associated with suicidality and self-harm among adolescent who experienced traditional and cyberbullying victimization should be considered for the promotion of effective self-harm and suicide prevention and intervention programs.

scholarly journals Are we back to normal yet? The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health with a specific focus on schizotypal traits in the general population of Germany and the UK, comparing responses from April/May vs. September/October

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Daimer ◽  
Lorenz Mihatsch ◽  
Lisa Ronan ◽  
Graham K. Murray ◽  
Franziska Knolle
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
General Population ◽  
Psychological Symptoms ◽  
Financial Burden ◽  
Psychological Impact ◽  
Strong Impact ◽  
Symptom Index ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

AbstractStudies reported a strong impact on mental health during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in March–June, 2020. In this study, we investigated the impact of the pandemic on mental health in general and on schizoptypal traits specifically in general population samples of the UK (N 1sttimepoint=239, N 2ndtimepoint= 126) and Germany (N 1sttimepoint= 543, N 2ndtimepoint=401) over two timepoints, April/May and September/October 2020. We were able to show that whereas general psychological symptoms (global symptom index, GSI) and percentage of responders above clinical cut-off for further psychological investigation declined from the first to the second timepoint in both countries, schizotypy scores (Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire) were increased at the second timepoint. We investigated potential predictors, using regression models. For schizotypy, we detected a doubling or more of the estimated impact from the first to the second timepoint, including stronger perceived loneliness, increased use of drugs, stronger financial burden, and decreased regular exercise and sleep. These effects predicted GSI, however with a lower increase of impact from the first to the second timepoint. We furthermore found that living in the UK was a predictor for higher schizotypal scores or GSI. However, the results are highly comparable between the two countries. In conclusion, this study shows that while the general psychological impact decreases, potentially showing a normative response to an exceptional situation; schizotypy scores increase, revealing a stronger impact of loneliness, drug use, and financial burden. This development might create an increased risk for developing psychosis in some individuals. The development of the general psychological and schizotypy scores over time requires further attention and investigation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document