scholarly journals Exploiting Administrative Data to Understand the Mental Health of Children Known to Social Services

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah McKenna ◽  
Aideen Maguire ◽  
Dermot O'Reilly
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
General Population ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Social Services ◽  
Social Care ◽  
Mental Health Outcomes ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
Self Harm ◽  
Children In Care ◽  
Care System

Background Research has consistently found a high prevalence of mental ill-health among children in out-of-home care. However, results have varied significantly by study location, type of care intervention, sample population and mental health measurement, and concerns have been raised about appropriate reference populations. In addition, little is known about children known to social services who remain with their birth families. Aim To examine mental ill-health amongst children known to social services based on care exposure including those who remain at home, those placed in foster care, kinship care or institutional care and the general population not known to social services. Methods Northern Ireland is unique in that has an integrated health and social care system and holds data centrally on all children known to social services. Social services data (1995-2015) will be linked to hospital discharge data (2010-2015), prescribed medication data (2010-2015), self-harm data (2010-2015) and death records (2010-2015) to investigate mental health outcomes in terms of psychiatric hospital admissions, psychotropic medication uptake, self-harm and suicide. Results Data cleaning has been completed and analysis is underway. Preliminary results will be available by December 2019. Descriptive statistics will provide a mental health profile of children in care compared not only to children in the general population but to those who are known to social services but remain in their own home. Regression models will determine which factors are most associated with poor mental health outcomes. Conclusion This project is the UK’s first population-wide data linkage study examining the mental health of children in the social care system, including looked-after children and those known to social services who remain in their own home. Project partners in the Department of Health recognise the potential of these findings to inform future policy relating to targeting interventions for children in receipt of social care services.

scholarly journals Social services Interventions and the Mental Health and Mortality of care leavers: a population based data linkage study in Northern Ireland and Finland

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aideen Maguire ◽  
Anne Kouvonen ◽  
Dermot O'Reilly ◽  
Hanna Remes ◽  
Joonas Pitkänen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Northern Ireland ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Social Services ◽  
Psychiatric Hospital ◽  
Poor Mental Health ◽  
Mental Health Outcomes ◽  
Care Intervention ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Self Harm

BackgroundResearch has highlighted the poor mental health of looked after children compared to those never in care. However, little is known on what becomes of these children and their mental health trajectories after they leave the care of social services. In addition, previous studies are limited in their ability to differentiate between type of social care intervention received; kinship care, foster care or residential care. AimTo utilise nationwide social services data from two countries (Northern Ireland (NI) and Finland), with similar populations but different intervention policies, linked to a range of demographic and health datasets to examine the mental health outcomes of young adults in the years following leaving care. MethodsData from both countries on children born 1991-2000 were linked to social services data, hospital admissions, prescribed medication data and death records. Mental health outcomes were defined after the age of 18years (when statutory care provision ends) examined by care intervention and included admissions to psychiatric hospital, for self-harm and death by suicide. ResultsThe gender split in care in Finland is reflective of the population but more males are in care in NI. Initial results from Finnish data suggest those exposed to care in childhood have an increased risk of self-harm, psychiatric hospital admission and suicide after the age of 18years compared to those never in care. After adjusting for gender, age of entry to care and deprivation at birth those exposed to any care intervention had 3 times the risk of suicide (HR=3.06, 95% CI 1.18,7.98). Risk increased with duration in care but was equivalent across care intervention types. Analysis on the NI data is underway. ConclusionFull results will be available December 2019 and will explore which care pathways are most associated with poor mental health outcomes informing discussion around intervention opportunities and policy.

scholarly journals A rapid review of the impact of COVID-19 on the mental health of healthcare workers: implications for supporting psychological well-being

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes H. De Kock ◽  
Helen Ann Latham ◽  
Stephen J. Leslie ◽  
Mark Grindle ◽  
Sarah-Anne Munoz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Social Care ◽  
Close Contact ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Mental Health Outcomes ◽  
Rapid Review ◽  
Psychological Well Being ◽  
Care Workers ◽  
Health And Social Care

Abstract Background Health and social care workers (HSCWs) have carried a heavy burden during the COVID-19 crisis and, in the challenge to control the virus, have directly faced its consequences. Supporting their psychological wellbeing continues, therefore, to be a priority. This rapid review was carried out to establish whether there are any identifiable risk factors for adverse mental health outcomes amongst HSCWs during the COVID-19 crisis. Methods We undertook a rapid review of the literature following guidelines by the WHO and the Cochrane Collaboration’s recommendations. We searched across 14 databases, executing the search at two different time points. We included published, observational and experimental studies that reported the psychological effects on HSCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results The 24 studies included in this review reported data predominantly from China (18 out of 24 included studies) and most sampled urban hospital staff. Our study indicates that COVID-19 has a considerable impact on the psychological wellbeing of front-line hospital staff. Results suggest that nurses may be at higher risk of adverse mental health outcomes during this pandemic, but no studies compare this group with the primary care workforce. Furthermore, no studies investigated the psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on social care staff. Other risk factors identified were underlying organic illness, gender (female), concern about family, fear of infection, lack of personal protective equipment (PPE) and close contact with COVID-19. Systemic support, adequate knowledge and resilience were identified as factors protecting against adverse mental health outcomes. Conclusions The evidence to date suggests that female nurses with close contact with COVID-19 patients may have the most to gain from efforts aimed at supporting psychological well-being. However, inconsistencies in findings and a lack of data collected outside of hospital settings, suggest that we should not exclude any groups when addressing psychological well-being in health and social care workers. Whilst psychological interventions aimed at enhancing resilience in the individual may be of benefit, it is evident that to build a resilient workforce, occupational and environmental factors must be addressed. Further research including social care workers and analysis of wider societal structural factors is recommended.

scholarly journals A rapid review of the impact of COVID-19 on the mental health of health and social care workers: implications for psychological interventions

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes H. De Kock ◽  
Helen Ann Latham ◽  
Stephen J Leslie ◽  
Mark Grindle ◽  
Sarah-Anne Munoz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Social Care ◽  
Close Contact ◽  
Mental Health Outcomes ◽  
Rapid Review ◽  
Psychological Wellbeing ◽  
Psychological Interventions ◽  
Care Workers ◽  
Health And Social Care

Abstract BackgroundHealth and social care workers (HSCWs) have carried a heavy burden during the COVID-19 crisis and in the challenge to control the virus have directly faced its consequences. Supporting their psychological wellbeing continues therefore to be a priority. This rapid review was carried out to identify whether there are any identifiable risk factors for adverse mental health outcomes amongst HSCWs during the COVID-19 crisis. The review also sought to identify a participant population for the trial of a digital intervention to support HSCW’s psychological wellbeing during the pandemic. MethodsWe undertook a rapid review of the literature following guidelines by the WHO and the COVID-19 Cochrane Collaboration’s recommendations. We searched across 14 databases, executing the search at two different time points. We included published observational and experimental studies that reported the psychological effects on health and care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. ResultsThe 24 studies included in this review reported data predominantly from China (18 out of 24 included studies) and most sampled urban hospital staff. Our study indicates that COVID-19 has a considerable impact on the psychological wellbeing of front line hospital staff. Results suggest that nurses may be at higher risk of adverse mental health outcomes during this pandemic, but no studies compare this group with the social care or primary care workforce. Other risk factors identified were underlying organic illness, gender (female), concern about family, fear of infection, lack of personal protective equipment (PPE) and close contact with COVID-19. Resilience was identified as a factor protecting against adverse mental health outcomes. ConclusionsThe evidence to date suggests that female nurses with close contact with COVID-19 patients may have the most to gain from psychological interventions. However, inconsistencies in findings and a lack of data outside of hospital settings, suggest that we should not exclude any groups when addressing psychological wellbeing in health and social care workers. Psychological interventions aimed at enhancing psychological resilience and utilising innovative methods to personalise treatments without excluding groups may be of benefit.

How Much Does Love Really Hurt? A Meta-Analysis of the Association Between Romantic Relationship Quality, Breakups and Mental Health Outcomes in Adolescents and Young Adults

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anca Mirsu-Paun ◽  
Jason A. Oliver
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Young Adults ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Relationship Quality ◽  
Romantic Relationship ◽  
Suicide Ideation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mental Health Outcomes ◽  
Self Harm ◽  
Romantic Relationship Quality

A meta-analysis of 20 manuscripts reporting on 21 unique studies (N = 19,623) was conducted to investigate the magnitude of the association between adolescent romantic relationship quality (RRQ), romantic relationship breakups (RRB) and mental health outcomes (i.e., depression, suicide ideation, deliberate self-harm, and suicide attempt). Potential moderators of these relationships were also explored. The sample included U.S. and non-U.S. adolescents (13–17 years old), and young adults (18–29 years old). Results indicated statistically significant but modest relationships between both RRQ and RRB and mental health, with the first showing a stronger association. There was some evidence suggesting this relationship may be stronger for women, but no evidence it differed as a function of nationality or age. Additional research is needed to address the distinction between clinical and non-clinical populations on specific outcomes and to further explore the role of mental health outcomes as related to romantic relationship quality and breakups. Implications for practice include the need for (a) services to individuals emotionally affected by romantic relationships, (b) relationship quality psycho-education, and (c) screenings of individuals at risk due to low romantic relationship quality or recent relationship breakup.

scholarly journals Mental Health Outcomes Among Healthcare Workers and the General Population During the COVID-19 in Italy

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodolfo Rossi ◽  
Valentina Socci ◽  
Francesca Pacitti ◽  
Sonia Mensi ◽  
Antinisca Di Marco ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
General Population ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Female Gender ◽  
Mental Health Outcomes ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Front Line ◽  
Post Traumatic ◽  
Traumatic Symptoms

IntroductionDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers in Italy have been exposed to an unprecedented pressure and traumatic events. However, no direct comparison with the general population is available so far. The aim of this study is to detail mental health outcomes in healthcare workers compared to the general population.Methods24050 respondents completed an on-line questionnaire during the contagion peak, 21342 general population, 1295 second-line healthcare workers, and 1411 front-line healthcare workers. Depressive, anxious, post-traumatic symptoms and insomnia were assessed. Specific COVID-19 related potential risk factors were also considered in healthcare workers.ResultsDepressive symptoms were more frequent in the general population (28.12%) and front-line healthcare workers (28.35%) compared to the second-line healthcare workers (19.98%) groups. Anxiety symptoms showed a prevalence of 21.25% in the general population, 18.05% for second-line healthcare workers, and 20.55% for front-line healthcare workers. Insomnia showed a prevalence of 7.82, 6.58, and 9.92% for the general population, second-line healthcare workers, and front-line healthcare workers, respectively. Compared to the general population, front-line healthcare workers had higher odds of endorsing total trauma-related symptoms. Both second-line healthcare workers and front-line healthcare workers had higher odds of endorsing core post-traumatic symptoms compared to the general population, while second-line healthcare workers had lower odds of endorsing negative affect and dissociative symptoms. Higher total traumatic symptom score was associated with being a front-line healthcare worker, having a colleague infected, hospitalized, or deceased, being a nurse, female gender, and younger age.ConclusionThis study suggests a significant psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the Italian general population and healthcare workers. Front-line healthcare workers represent a specific at-risk population for post-traumatic symptoms. These findings underline the importance of monitoring and intervention strategies.

A hidden pandemic? An umbrella review of global evidence on mental health in the time of COVID-19

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marlee Bower ◽  
Scarlett Smout ◽  
Amarina Donohoe-Bales ◽  
Lily Teesson ◽  
Eleisha Lauria ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
General Population ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mental Health Outcomes ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Meta Review ◽  
Meta Analyses

Introduction: Vast available international evidence has investigated the mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. This review aims to synthesise evidence, identifying populations and characteristics associated with poor mental health.Methods: A meta-review of pooled prevalence of anxiety and depression, with subgroup analyses for the general population, healthcare workers (HCW) and COVID-19 patients; and a meta-synthesis of systematic reviews to collate evidence on associated factors and further mental disorders. Databases searched included Scopus, Embase, PsycINFO, and MEDLINE dated to May 2021. Eligibility criteria included systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses, published post-November 2019, reporting data in English on mental health outcomes during the pandemic.Results: Eighty-one systematic reviews were included, 51 of which incorporated meta-analysis. Meta-review overall anxiety prevalence was 29% (95%CI: 27–31%, I2: 99.83%), with subgroup prevalence as 35% (95%CI: 23–47%, I2: 97.4%) in COVID-19 patients, 29% in HCW (95%CI: 25– 32, I2: 99.8%) and 28% in the general population (95%CI: 25–31%, I2: 99.9%). Meta-review overall depression prevalence was 28% (95%CI: 26–30%, I2: 99.7), with subgroup prevalence as 30% (95%CI: 7–60%, I2: 99.8%) in COVID-19 patients, 28% (95%CI: 25–31%, I2: 99.7%) in HCW and 27% (95%CI: 25–30, I2: 99.8%) in the general population. Meta-synthesis found many experienced psychological distress and PTSD/PTSS during COVID-19, but pooled prevalence ranged substantially. Fear of, proximity to, or confirmed COVID-19 infection; undergoing quarantine; and COVID-19-related news exposure were associated with adverse mental health outcomes. Amongst other factors, people who are younger, female, LGBTIQ, pregnant, parents or experiencing low social support, financial issues or socio-economic disadvantage, tended to have poorer mental health during the pandemic period.Conclusions: Despite high volumes of reviews, the diversity of findings and dearth of longitudinal studies within reviews means clear links between COVID-19 and mental health are not available, although existing evidence indicates probable associations.

scholarly journals Mental Health Outcomes and Associations During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Population-Based Study in the United States

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bella Nichole Kantor ◽  
Jonathan Kantor
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Anxiety Disorder ◽  
General Population ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Mental Health Outcomes ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
The Us ◽  
History Of ◽  
Male Sex

Pandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may lead to significant mental health stresses, potentially with modifiable risk factors. We performed an internet-based cross-sectional survey of an age-, sex-, and race-stratified representative sample from the US general population. Degrees of anxiety, depression, and loneliness were assessed using the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 scale (GAD-7), the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire, and the 8-item UCLA Loneliness Scale, respectively. Unadjusted and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to determine associations with baseline demographic characteristics. A total of 1,005 finished surveys were returned of the 1,020 started, yielding a completion rate of 98.5% in the survey panel. The mean (standard deviation) age of the respondents was 45 (16) years, and 494 (48.8%) were male. Overall, 264 subjects (26.8%) met the criteria for an anxiety disorder based on a GAD-7 cutoff of 10; a cutoff of 7 yielded 416 subjects (41.4%), meeting the clinical criteria for anxiety. On multivariable analysis, male sex (odds ratio [OR] = 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.49, 0.87]), identification as Black (OR = 0.49, 95% CI [0.31, 0.77]), and living in a larger home (OR = 0.46, 95% CI [0.24, 0.88]) were associated with a decreased odds of meeting the anxiety criteria. Rural location (OR 1.39, 95% CI [1.03, 1.89]), loneliness (OR 4.92, 95% CI [3.18, 7.62]), and history of hospitalization (OR = 2.04, 95% CI [1.38, 3.03]) were associated with increased odds of meeting the anxiety criteria. Two hundred thirty-two subjects (23.6%) met the criteria for clinical depression. On multivariable analysis, male sex (OR = 0.71, 95% CI [0.53, 0.95]), identifying as Black (OR = 0.62, 95% CI [0.40, 0.97]), increased time outdoors (OR = 0.51, 95% CI [0.29, 0.92]), and living in a larger home (OR = 0.35, 95% CI [0.18, 0.69]) were associated with decreased odds of meeting depression criteria. Having lost a job (OR = 1.64, 95% CI [1.05, 2.54]), loneliness (OR = 10.42, 95% CI [6.26, 17.36]), and history of hospitalization (OR = 2.42, 95% CI [1.62, 3.62]) were associated with an increased odds of meeting depression criteria. Income, media consumption, and religiosity were not associated with mental health outcomes. Anxiety and depression are common in the US general population in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and are associated with potentially modifiable factors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document