No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Being a technician during COVID-19: a qualitative cross-sectional survey on the experiences of clinical neurophysiology technicians
Abstract
Background
During the Sars-CoV-2 virus pandemic, Italy faced an unrivaled health emergency. Its impact has been significant on the hospital system and personnel. Clinical neurophysiology technicians played a central role (but less visibly so compared to other healthcare workers) in managing the COVID-19 pandemic. This research aims to explore the experiences of clinical neurophysiology technicians during the pandemic and contribute to the debate on the well-being of healthcare workers on the front line.
Methods
We implemented a cross-sectional survey across Italy. It contained questions that were open-ended for participants to develop their answers and acquire a fuller perspective. The responses were analyzed according to the framework method.
Results
One hundred and thirty-one responses were valid, and the following themes were generated: technicians’ experiences in their relationship with patients, technicians’ relationship with their workgroup and directors, and technicians’ relationship with the context outside of their work. The first theme included sub-themes: fear of infection, empathy, difficulty, a sense of obligation and responsibility, anger, and sadness. The second theme contained selfishness/solidarity in the workgroup, lack of protection/collaboration from superiors, stress, and distrust. The last theme included fear, stress/tiredness, serenity, sadness, and anger.
Conclusion
This study contributes to building a humanized perspective for personnel management, bringing attention to the technical work of healthcare professionals in an emergency and the emotional and relational dimensions. These are the starting points to define proper, contextually adequate support.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Background and Aims
The decision to stay in nursing has been challenged by the recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic. New nurses joined the workforce and provided care to patients with COVID‐19 although they received limited training, which could have influenced their intention to stay in nursing. We aimed in this study to examine the impact of caring for patients with COVID‐19 on career decisions, resilience, and perceived self‐efficacy among newly hired nurses in Jordan. It also tested the predictors of intentions to stay among new nurses.
Methods
This cross‐sectional quantitative study was conducted using an online electronic questionnaire form. The sample included newly hired nurses (n = 300) working in public hospitals and providing care to patients with COVID‐19 in different levels of acuity units. The perceived stress scale and Connor−Davidson resilience scale 25 were used to measure stress and resilience among nurses.
Results
The majority chose nursing as their career, but they were not satisfied with the current work conditions or autonomy in decision‐making. Many nurses reported having moderate to high work‐related stress and low to moderate resilience. Among all variables in this study, financial income predicted mild intention to stay in nursing.
Conclusions
Nurses expressed the presence of work‐related stress and low to moderate levels of resilience. As new nurses, exposure to these stress levels might lead to burnout. Nursing managers should take necessary measures to promote better work conditions and improve resilience to avoid nurses leaving the profession at times when there is a shortage.
Italy was the first country in Europe to make vaccination against COVID-19 mandatory for healthcare professionals by imposing restrictions in cases of non-compliance. This study investigates the opinions of the Italian healthcare professionals' categories affected by the regulation. We performed a qualitative online survey: the questionnaire comprised both close- and open-ended questions. The final dataset included n = 4,677 valid responses. Responses to closed-ended questions were analyzed with descriptive statistics. The framework method was applied for analyzing the open-ended questions. The sample spanned all health professions subject to compulsory vaccination, with a prevalence of physicians (43.8%) and nurses (26.3%). The vaccine adhesion before the introduction of the obligation was substantial. 10.4% declared not to have adhered to the vaccination proposal. Thirty-five percent of HPs who opted not to get vaccinated said they experienced consequences related to their choice. The trust in the vaccine seems slightly cracked, demonstrating overall vaccine confidence among professionals. Nonetheless, our results show that whether (or not) professionals adhere to vaccination is not a reliable indicator of consent to how it was achieved. There are criticisms about the lawfulness of the obligation. The data show a great variety of participants interpreting their roles concerning public and individual ethics. The scientific evidence motivates ethics-related decisions—the epidemic of confusing and incorrect information affected professionals. The Law triggered an increased disaffection with the health system and conflicts between professionals. Dealing with the working climate should be a commitment to assume soon.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers have a high workload and have been exposed to various psychosocial stressors. This study aimed to evaluate health workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in the world. The method used in this research is qualitative with a literature review approach. The data sources in this study were taken from the Scopus database using the keywords “health workers,” “burnout,” AND “coronavirus” from the time range of 2020 to April 25, 2022. From the determination of the time range, 150 documents emerged. This study revealed that the Pearson correlation between total burnout scale scores on healthcare workers, professionals, exhaustion, mental, stress, personal, depression, symptoms, emergency, system, job, and impact indicated that overall burnout scores were associated with depression and anxiety. Stress symptoms had correlation values ranging from 0.84 to 0.73. Job burnout had a significant relationship with exhaustion at 0.89; depression r = 0.73), impacting a score of 0.66. At the same time, the fulfillment of professional and interpersonal disengagement showed a Pearson correlation between the total burnout scale scores on health workers, professionals, exhaustion, mental, stress, personal, depression, symptoms, emergency, system, job, and impact. Overall, the participants in health care workers worldwide experienced high levels of psychological distress. We also found that health workers dealing with COVID-19 pandemic patients were more likely to experience depression, stress, and burnout than health staff who were not personally involved in medical work. Furthermore, this study will be a follow-up study using the Work Ability Index (WAI) to measure work ability and work satisfaction.
Background
COVID-19 is associated with increased risks of neurological and psychiatric sequelae in the weeks and months thereafter. How long these risks remain, whether they affect children and adults similarly, and whether SARS-CoV-2 variants differ in their risk profiles remains unclear.
Methods
In this analysis of 2-year retrospective cohort studies, we extracted data from the TriNetX electronic health records network, an international network of de-identified data from health-care records of approximately 89 million patients collected from hospital, primary care, and specialist providers (mostly from the USA, but also from Australia, the UK, Spain, Bulgaria, India, Malaysia, and Taiwan). A cohort of patients of any age with COVID-19 diagnosed between Jan 20, 2020, and April 13, 2022, was identified and propensity-score matched (1:1) to a contemporaneous cohort of patients with any other respiratory infection. Matching was done on the basis of demographic factors, risk factors for COVID-19 and severe COVID-19 illness, and vaccination status. Analyses were stratified by age group (age <18 years [children], 18–64 years [adults], and ≥65 years [older adults]) and date of diagnosis. We assessed the risks of 14 neurological and psychiatric diagnoses after SARS-CoV-2 infection and compared these risks with the matched comparator cohort. The 2-year risk trajectories were represented by time-varying hazard ratios (HRs) and summarised using the 6-month constant HRs (representing the risks in the earlier phase of follow-up, which have not yet been well characterised in children), the risk horizon for each outcome (ie, the time at which the HR returns to 1), and the time to equal incidence in the two cohorts. We also estimated how many people died after a neurological or psychiatric diagnosis during follow-up in each age group. Finally, we compared matched cohorts of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 directly before and after the emergence of the alpha (B.1.1.7), delta (B.1.617.2), and omicron (B.1.1.529) variants.
Findings
We identified 1 487 712 patients with a recorded diagnosis of COVID-19 during the study period, of whom 1 284 437 (185 748 children, 856 588 adults, and 242 101 older adults; overall mean age 42·5 years [SD 21·9]; 741 806 [57·8%] were female and 542 192 [42·2%] were male) were adequately matched with an equal number of patients with another respiratory infection. The risk trajectories of outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 infection in the whole cohort differed substantially. While most outcomes had HRs significantly greater than 1 after 6 months (with the exception of encephalitis; Guillain-Barré syndrome; nerve, nerve root, and plexus disorder; and parkinsonism), their risk horizons and time to equal incidence varied greatly. Risks of the common psychiatric disorders returned to baseline after 1–2 months (mood disorders at 43 days, anxiety disorders at 58 days) and subsequently reached an equal overall incidence to the matched comparison group (mood disorders at 457 days, anxiety disorders at 417 days). By contrast, risks of cognitive deficit (known as brain fog), dementia, psychotic disorders, and epilepsy or seizures were still increased at the end of the 2-year follow-up period. Post-COVID-19 risk trajectories differed in children compared with adults: in the 6 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection, children were not at an increased risk of mood (HR 1·02 [95% CI 0·94–1·10) or anxiety (1·00 [0·94–1·06]) disorders, but did have an increased risk of cognitive deficit, insomnia, intracranial haemorrhage, ischaemic stroke, nerve, nerve root, and plexus disorders, psychotic disorders, and epilepsy or seizures (HRs ranging from 1·20 [1·09–1·33] to 2·16 [1·46–3·19]). Unlike adults, cognitive deficit in children had a finite risk horizon (75 days) and a finite time to equal incidence (491 days). A sizeable proportion of older adults who received a neurological or psychiatric diagnosis, in either cohort, subsequently died, especially those diagnosed with dementia or epilepsy or seizures. Risk profiles were similar just before versus just after the emergence of the alpha variant (n=47 675 in each cohort). Just after (vs just before) the emergence of the delta variant (n=44 835 in each cohort), increased risks of ischaemic stroke, epilepsy or seizures, cognitive deficit, insomnia, and anxiety disorders were observed, compounded by an increased death rate. With omicron (n=39 845 in each cohort), there was a lower death rate than just before emergence of the variant, but the risks of neurological and psychiatric outcomes remained similar.
Interpretation
This analysis of 2-year retrospective cohort studies of individuals diagnosed with COVID-19 showed that the increased incidence of mood and anxiety disorders was transient, with no overall excess of these diagnoses compared with other respiratory infections. In contrast, the increased risk of psychotic disorder, cognitive deficit, dementia, and epilepsy or seizures persisted throughout. The differing trajectories suggest a different pathogenesis for these outcomes. Children have a more benign overall profile of psychiatric risk than do adults and older adults, but their sustained higher risk of some diagnoses is of concern. The fact that neurological and psychiatric outcomes were similar during the delta and omicron waves indicates that the burden on the health-care system might continue even with variants that are less severe in other respects. Our findings are relevant to understanding individual-level and population-level risks of neurological and psychiatric disorders after SARS-CoV-2 infection and can help inform our responses to them.
Funding
National Institute for Health and Care Research Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre, The Wolfson Foundation, and MQ Mental Health Research.
Background
Frontline nurses have been directly exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus and come in close contact with patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nurses endorse tasks related to disease control and face multiple psychosocial challenges in their frontline work, potentially affecting their mental well-being and ability to satisfyingly perform their tasks.
Objectives
To explore the psychosocial experiences of frontline nurses working in hospital-based settings during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Design
The qualitative systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. Registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021259111).
Data sources
Literature searches were performed through PubMed, CINAHL, and the WHO COVID-19 database. Inclusion criteria were: All types of nurses having direct contact with or taking care of patients; Primary, secondary, and tertiary health-care services admitting and treating COVID-19 patients; Experiences, perceptions, feelings, views in psychosocial aspects from the identified population group; Qualitative studies; Mixed methods studies; Language in English; Published date 2019-2021. Exclusion criteria were: Commentaries; Reviews; Discussion papers; Quantitative studies; Language other than English; Published in 2018 or earlier; Studies without an ethical approval and ethical statement.
Review methods
The studies were screened and selected based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Quality appraisal was conducted according to the Critical Appraisal Skills Program qualitative study checklist. Data was extracted from included studies and a thematic synthesis was made.
Results
A total of 28 studies were included in the review. The experiences of 1141 nurses from 12 countries were synthesised. Four themes were constructed: ‘Nurses' emotional, mental and physical reactions to COVID-19’, ‘A mix of environmental and personal stressors’, ‘Internally and externally supported coping strategies’, and ‘A call for future help and support’.
Conclusion
Nurses working frontline during the COVID-19 pandemic have experienced psychological, social, and emotional distress in coping with work demands, social relationships, and their personal life. The results pointed to a need for increased psychological and social support for frontline nurses to cope with stress and maintain mental well-being, which may subsequently affect nursing care outcomes.
Background:
There is increasing evidence that healthcare workers (HCWs) experience significant psychological distress during an epidemic or pandemic. Considering the increase in emerging infectious diseases and the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, it is timely to review and synthesize the available evidence on the psychological impact of disease outbreaks on HCWs. Thus, we conducted a systematic review to examine the impact of epidemics and pandemics on the mental health of HCWs.
Method:
PubMed, PsycInfo, and PsycArticles databases were systematically searched from inception to June-end 2020 for studies reporting the impact of a pandemic/epidemic on the mental health of HCWs.
Results:
Seventy-six studies were included in this review. Of these, 34 (45%) focused on SARS, 28 (37%) on COVID-19, seven (9%) on MERS, four (5%) on Ebola, two (3%) on H1N1, and one (1%) on H7N9. Most studies were cross-sectional (93%) and were conducted in a hospital setting (95%). Common mental health symptoms identified by this review were acute stress disorder, depression, anxiety, insomnia, burnout, and post-traumatic stress disorder. The associated risk factors were working in high-risk environments (frontline), being female, being a nurse, lack of adequate personal protective equipment, longer shifts, lack of knowledge of the virus, inadequate training, less years of experience in healthcare, lack of social support, and a history of quarantine.
Conclusion:
HCWs working in the frontline during epidemics and pandemics experience a wide range of mental health symptoms. It is imperative that adequate psychological support be provided to HCWs during and after these extraordinary distressful events.
Background
The COVID-19 pandemic leads to disruptions of health services worldwide. To evaluate the particular impact on neurological services a rapid review was conducted.
Methods
Studies reporting the provision of neurological services during the pandemic and/or adopted mitigation strategies were included in this review. PubMed and World Health Organization’s (WHO) COVID-19 database were searched. Data extraction followed categories used by WHO COVID-19 pulse surveys and operational guidelines on maintaining essential health services during COVID-19.
Findings
The search yielded 1101 articles, of which 369 fulfilled eligibility criteria, describing data from 210,419 participants, being adults (81%), children (11.4%) or both (7.3%). Included articles reported data from 105 countries and territories covering all WHO regions and World Bank income levels (low income: 1.9%, lower middle: 24.7%, upper middle: 29.5% and high income; 44.8%). Cross-sectoral services for neurological disorders were most frequently disrupted (62.9%), followed by emergency/acute care (47.1%). The degree of disruption was at least moderate for 75% of studies. Travel restrictions due to lockdowns (81.7%) and regulatory closure of services (65.4%) were the most commonly reported causes of disruption. Authors most frequently described telemedicine (82.1%) and novel dispensing approaches for medicines (51.8%) as mitigation strategies. Evidence for the effectiveness of these measures is largely missing.
Interpretation
The COVID-19 pandemic affects all aspects of neurological care. Given the worldwide prevalence of neurological disorders and the potential long-term neurological consequences of COVID-19, service disruptions are devastating. Different strategies such as telemedicine might mitigate the negative effects of the pandemic, but their efficacy and acceptability remain to be seen.
Objective
The COVID-19 pandemic is expected to have a sustained psychological impact on healthcare workers. We assessed individual characteristics related to changes in emotional exhaustion and psychological distress over time.
Methods
A survey of diverse hospital staff measured emotional exhaustion (Maslach Burnout Inventory) and psychological distress (K6) in Fall 2020 (T1) and Winter 2021 (T2). Relationships between occupational, personal, and psychological variables were assessed using repeated measures ANOVA.
Results
Of 539 T1 participants, 484 (89.9%) completed T2. Emotional exhaustion differed by occupational role (F = 7.3, p < .001; greatest in nurses), with increases over time in those with children (F = 8.5, p = .004) or elders (F = 4.0, p = .047). Psychological distress was inversely related to pandemic self-efficacy (F = 110.0, p < .001), with increases over time in those with children (F = 7.0, p = .008). Severe emotional exhaustion occurred in 41.1% (95%CI 36.6–45.4) at T1 and 49.8% (95%CI 45.4–54.2) at T2 (McNemar test p < .001). Psychological distress occurred in 9.7% (95%CI 7.1–12.2) at T1 and 11.6% (95%CI 8.8–14.4) at T2 (McNemar test p = .33).
Conclusions
Healthcare workers' psychological burden is high and rising as the pandemic persists. Ongoing support is warranted, especially for nurses and those with children and elders at home. Modifiable protective factors, restorative sleep and self-efficacy, merit special attention.
Aims
To examine the nurses' burnout and associated risk factors during the COVID‐19 pandemic.
Design
We followed the Cochrane criteria and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analysis guidelines for this systematic review and meta‐analysis.
Data Sources
PubMed, Scopus, ProQuest, Cochrane COVID‐19 registry, CINAHL and pre‐print services (medRχiv and PsyArXiv) were searched from January 1 to November 15, 2020 and we removed duplicates.
Review Methods
We applied a random effect model to estimate pooled effects since the heterogeneity between results was very high.
Results
Sixteen studies, including 18,935 nurses met the inclusion criteria. The overall prevalence of emotional exhaustion was 34.1%, of depersonalization was 12.6% and of lack of personal accomplishment was 15.2%. The main risk factors that increased nurses' burnout were the following: younger age, decreased social support, low family and colleagues readiness to cope with COVID‐19 outbreak, increased perceived threat of Covid‐19, longer working time in quarantine areas, working in a high‐risk environment, working in hospitals with inadequate and insufficient material and human resources, increased workload and lower level of specialized training regarding COVID‐19.
Conclusion
Nurses experience high levels of burnout during the COVID‐19 pandemic, while several sociodemographic, social and occupational factors affect this burnout.
Impact
We found that burnout among nurses is a crucial issue during the COVID‐19 pandemic. There is an urgent need to prepare nurses to cope better with COVID‐19 pandemic. Identification of risk factors for burnout could be a significant weapon giving nurses and health care systems the ability to response in a better way against the following COVID‐19 waves in the near future.
Introduction:
Radiographers and radiation therapists are key patient-facing health practitioners supporting the delivery of optimal patient care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this research was to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on clinical service delivery and well-being of these healthcare professionals in Australia.
Methods:
A cross-sectional online survey of Australian radiographers and radiation therapists was conducted in June-July 2020. The survey collected data on demographic characteristics, and the impact of COVID-19 on professional practice, infection control and workplace-related stress.
Results:
A total of 218 responses were received. Changes in work hours (P < 0.001) and workload (P = 0.022) were experienced due to COVID-19. Diagnostic radiographers reported increased procedural pressure on mobile radiography, computed tomography and general radiography. For radiation therapists, most pressure included areas of simulation and linear accelerator. PPE was in short supply at the start of the pandemic, and at the time of the study, shortages were identified for all PPE items. There was no difference in PPE supply reported by diagnostic radiographers and radiation therapists except for hand sanitiser (P = 0.003). Respondents experienced increased personal stress (61.4%) and anxiety (58.2%) at work due to COVID-19. In addition, their work caused increased stress to their family, partners or friends (57.4%).
Conclusions:
COVID-19 has resulted in changes to clinical working patterns and service delivery. PPE shortages, as well as increased workplace-related stress, were identified. Workplaces should seek to mitigate the pandemic impact through the provision of adequate PPE for safe practice as well as implement strategies to support and enhance staff well-being.
Objectives
To explore the psychosocial well-being of health and social care professionals working during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Design
This was a qualitative study deploying in-depth, individual interviews, which were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was used for coding.
Participants
This study involved 25 participants from a range of frontline professions in health and social care.
Setting
Interviews were conducted over the phone or video call, depending on participant preference.
Results
From the analysis, we identified 5 overarching themes: communication challenges, work-related stressors, support structures, personal growth and individual resilience. The participants expressed difficulties such as communication challenges and changing work conditions, but also positive factors such as increased team unity at work, and a greater reflection on what matters in life.
Conclusions
This study provides evidence on the support needs of health and social care professionals amid continued and future disruptions caused by the pandemic. It also elucidates some of the successful strategies (such as mindfulness, hobbies, restricting news intake, virtual socialising activities) deployed by health and social care professionals that can support their resilience and well-being and be used to guide future interventions.
Aim and objectives
To assess the prevalence of anxiety, sleep disorders and self‐efficacy and their predicting factors among nurses facing COVID‐19.
Background
The spread of COVID‐19 throughout the world determined a series of modifications of several National Health Service organisations, with a potential series of psychological consequences among nurses, who were particularly afflicted by this situation of changes and precariousness.
Design
A cross‐sectional study was carried out from February–April 2020.
Methods
A total of 1,005 nurses employed in different Italian hospital wards, during the COVID‐19 pandemic, were recruited. Analyses were based on descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression. The STROBE checklist for cross‐sectional studies was used in this study.
Results
The prevalence of sleep disturbances, moderate anxiety and low self‐efficacy was 71.4%, 33.23% and 50.65%, respectively. We found a positive correlation between anxiety and sleep quality (0.408; p < .0001) and negative correlations between self‐efficacy and anxiety (−0.217; p < .0001) and sleep quality and self‐efficacy (−0.134; p < .0001).
The factor independently associated with all variables was gender. Females were more prone to sleep disturbances, anxiety and low levels of self‐efficacy than males (p < .05).
Conclusions
The prevalence of anxiety, sleep disorders and low self‐efficacy among Italian nurses during the COVID‐19 pandemic was high. Healthcare managers should recognise and consider these results to reduce the risk of the onset of major mental problems that could result in post‐traumatic stress disorder.
Relevance to clinical practice
Nurses facing major incidents as COVID‐19 pandemic are among healthcare personnel exposed to a high risk to develop psychological disturbance that should be assessed and recognised, in order to find helpful coping strategies to inform support services and avoid to hesitate in post‐traumatic stress disorders.
Since February 2020, when coronavirus disease began to spread in Italy, general practitioners (GPs) were called to manage a growing number of health situations. The challenges experienced by Italian GPs remained unrevealed. This study aimed at exploring Italian GPs' care experiences and practices associated with critical incidents during the first wave of the pandemic. A qualitative study design involving the critical incident technique through an online survey was applied. Sociodemographic data and open-ended responses were collected. While participants' characteristics were analyzed through descriptive statistics, qualitative data were thematically analyzed employing the framework method. 149 GPs responded to the survey and 99 participants completed the survey (dropout rate = 33%). Eight themes emerged indicating factors related to the organization of the healthcare system and factors related to the clinical management of patients, that were perceived as impacting on the GPs' care provision. The analysis revealed difficulties in communicating with other local services. This, together with the lack of coordination among services, was reported as a major challenge. Primary care was perceived as having been undervalued and criticalities in the organization of GP courses, led in a bureaucratic fashion, posed at risk some trainees to be infected. The digital technologies adopted for remote patient consultations were seen as useful tools for daily practice helping the GPs to stay emotionally connected with their patients. Besides, the improvement in the GP–patient relationship in terms of solidarity between patients and doctors and compliance to rules, had a positive impact. Moreover, many respondents addressed the importance of professional collaboration and teamwork, in terms of both support in practical issues (to find PPE, diagnostics and guidelines) and emotional support. At the same time, the lack of resources (e.g., PPE, swabs) and of specific guidelines and protocols impacted on the care provision. Our findings suggest that GPs in Italy are at risk of being left behind within the epidemic management. Communication and coordination among services are essential and should be substantially improved, and primary care research should be initiated to collect the context-specific evidence necessary to enhance the system's preparedness to public health emergencies and the quality of primary care services.
Objectives
To gain insight into the experiences and concerns of front-line National Health Service (NHS) workers while caring for patients with COVID-19.
Design
Qualitative analysis of data collected through an anonymous website (www.covidconfidential) provided a repository of uncensored COVID-19 experiences of front-line NHS workers, accessed via a link advertised on the Twitter feed of two high profile medical tweeters and their retweets.
Setting
Community of NHS workers who accessed this social media.
Participants
54 healthcare workers, including doctors, nurses and physiotherapists, accessed the website and left a ‘story’.
Results
Stories ranged from 1 word to 10 min in length. Thematic analysis identified common themes, with a central aspect being the experience and psychological consequence of trauma. Specific themes were: (1) the shock of the virus, (2) staff sacrifice and dedication, (3) collateral damage ranging from personal health concerns to the long-term impact on, and care of, discharged patients and (4) a hierarchy of power and inequality within the healthcare system.
Conclusions
COVID-19 confidential gave an outlet for unprompted and uncensored stories of healthcare workers in the context of COVID-19. In addition to personal experiences of trauma, there were perceptions that many operational difficulties stemmed from inequalities of power between management and front-line workers. Learning from these experiences will reduce staff distress and improve patient care in the face of further waves of the pandemic.
Background
The COVID-19 pandemic has had a far-reaching negative impact on healthcare systems worldwide and has placed healthcare providers under immense physiological and psychological pressures.
Objective
The aim of current study was to undertake an in-depth exploration of the experiences of health-care staff working during the COVID-19 crisis.
Methods
Using a thematic analysis approach, a qualitative study was conducted using semi-structured interviews with 97 health care professionals. Participants were health care professionals including pre-hospital emergency services (EMS), physicians, nurses, pharmacists, laboratory personnel, radiology technicians, hospital managers and managers in the ministry of health who work directly or indirectly with COVID-19 cases.
Results
Data analysis highlighted four main themes, namely: ‘Working in the pandemic era’, ‘Changes in personal life and enhanced negative affect’, ‘Gaining experience, normalization and adaptation to the pandemic’ and ‘Mental Health Considerations’ which indicated that mental ill deteriorations unfolded through a stage-wise process as the pandemic unfolded.
Conclusions
Participants experienced a wide range of emotions and development during the unfolding of the pandemic. Providing mental health aid should thus be an essential part of services for healthcare providers during the pandemic. Based on our results the aid should be focused on the various stages and should be individual-centred. Such interventions are crucial to sustain workers in their ability to cope throughout the duration of the pandemic.
Background
The COVID-19 pandemic is a public health challenge that puts health systems in a highly vulnerable situation. Nurses in critical care units (CCUs) and hospital emergency services (HESs) have provided care to patients with COVID-19 under pressure and uncertainty.
Objective
To identify needs related to safety, organisation, decision-making, communication and psycho-socio-emotional needs perceived by critical care and emergency nurses in the region of Madrid, Spain, during the acute phase of the epidemic crisis.
Methods
This is a cross-sectional study (the first phase of a mixed methods study) with critical care and emergency nurses from 26 public hospitals in Madrid using an online questionnaire.
Results
The response rate was 557, with 37.5% reporting working with the fear of becoming infected and its consequences, 28.2% reported elevated workloads, high patient-nurse ratios and shifts that did not allow them to disconnect or rest, while taking on more responsibilities when managing patients with COVID-19 (23.9%). They also reported deficiencies in communication with middle management (21.2%), inability to provide psycho-social care to patients and families and being emotionally exhausted (53.5%), with difficulty in venting emotions (44.9%).
Conclusions
Critical care and emegency nurses may be categorised as a vulnerable population. It is thus necessary to delve deeper into further aspects of their experiences of the pandemic.
Objectives:
Evidences from either small series or spontaneous reporting are accumulating that SARS-CoV-2 involves the Nervous Systems. The aim of this study is to provide an extensive overview on the major neurological complications in a large cohort of COVID-19 patients.
Methods:
Retrospective, observational analysis on all COVID-19 patients admitted from February 23rd to April 30th, 2020 to ASST Papa Giovanni XXIII, Bergamo, Italy for whom a neurological consultation/neurophysiological assessment/neuroradiologic investigation was requested. Each identified neurologic complication was then classified into main neurologic categories.
Results:
Of 1760 COVID-19 patients, 137 presented neurologic manifestations that manifested after COVID-19 symptoms in 98 pts and was the presenting symptom in 39. Neurological manifestations were classified as: (a) cerebrovascular disease [53 pts (38.7%)] including 37 ischemic and 11 haemorrhagic strokes, 4 transient ischemic attacks, 1 cerebral venous thrombosis; (b) peripheral nervous system diseases [31 (22.6%)] including 17 Guillain-Barrè syndromes; (c) altered mental status [49 (35.8%)] including one necrotizing encephalitis and 2 cases with RT-PCR detection of SARS-Cov-2 RNA in CSF; (d) miscellaneous disorders, among whom 2 patients with myelopathy associated with Ab anti-SARS-CoV-2 in CSF. Patients with peripheral nervous system involvement had more frequently severe ARDS compared to patients with cerebrovascular disease (87.1% vs 42%; difference = 45.1% 95% CI 42.0-48.2; χ2= 14.306; p < 0.0002) and with altered mental status (87.1% vs 55.6%; difference = 31.5% 95% CI 27.5-37.5%; χ2= 7.055; p < 0.01).
Conclusion:
This study confirms that involvement of nervous system is common in SARS-CoV-2 infection and offers clinicians useful information for prevention and prompt identification in order to set the adequate therapeutic strategies.
Objectives:
The SARS-CoV-2 global pandemic has subjected healthcare workers (HCWs) to high risk of infection through direct workplace exposure, coupled with increased workload and psychological stress. This review aims to determine the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on mental health outcomes of hospital-based HCWs and formulate recommendations for future action.
Methods:
A systematic review was performed between 31st December 2019 and 17th June 2020 through Ovid Medline and Embase databases (PROSPERO ID CRD42020181204). Studies were included for review if they investigated the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on mental health outcomes of hospital-based HCWs and used validated psychiatric scoring tools. Prevalence of ICD-10 classified psychiatric disorders was the primary outcome measure.
Results:
The initial search returned 436 articles. Forty-four studies were included in final analysis, with a total of 69,499 subjects. Prevalence ranges of six mental health outcomes were identified: depression 13.5%-44.7%; anxiety 12.3%-35.6%; acute stress reaction 5.2%-32.9%; post-traumatic stress disorder 7.4%-37.4%; insomnia 33.8%-36.1%; and occupational burnout 3.1%-43.0%. Direct exposure to SARS-CoV-2 patients was the most common risk factor identified for all mental health outcomes except occupational burnout. Nurses, frontline HCWs, and HCWs with low social support and fewer years of working experience reported the worst outcomes.
Conclusion:
The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has significantly impacted the mental health of HCWs. Frontline staff demonstrate worse mental health outcomes. Hospitals should be staffed to meet service provision requirements and to mitigate the impact onmental health. This can be improved with access to rapid-response psychiatric teams and should be continually monitored throughout the pandemic and beyond its conclusion.
Introduction
As of July 2020, South Africa (SA) had the fifth highest number of COVID-19 infections in the world, with the greatest contributor of these infections, being the province of Gauteng. Diagnostic radiographers in Gauteng providing chest CT, chest radiograph and MRI services are frontline workers experiencing these unprecedented times. Therefore, this study undertook to explore diagnostic radiographers’ experiences of COVID-19.
Methods
A qualitative approach using an asynchronous opened-ended online questionnaire was used to explore diagnostic radiographers’ experiences of COVID-19. Responses from purposively sampled diagnostic radiographers in Gauteng SA, underwent thematic analysis.
Results
Sixty diagnostic radiographers representing both the private and public health sector responded to the questionnaire. Thematic analysis revealed three themes: new work flow and operations, effect on radiographer well-being and radiographer resilience.
Conclusion
Besides experiencing a shift in their professional work routine and home/family dynamics, diagnostic radiographers’ well-being has also been impacted by COVID-19. Adapting to the “new way of work” has been challenging yet their resilience and dedication to their profession, providing quality patient care and skill expertise is their arsenal to combat these challenges.
Implications for practice
Understanding the impact of COVID-19 on diagnostic radiographers will allow radiology departments’ management, hospital management, professional bodies and educational institutions to re-evaluate provision of resources, training, employee wellness programs as well as policies and procedures.
The human infection of the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a public health emergency of international concern that has caused more than 16.8 million new cases and 662,000 deaths as of July 30, 2020. Although coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which is associated with this virus, mainly affects the lungs, recent evidence from clinical and pathological studies indicates that this pathogen has a broad infective ability to spread to extrapulmonary tissues, causing multiorgan failure in severely ill patients. In this regard, there is increasing preoccupation with the neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV-2 due to the observation of neurological manifestations in COVID-19 patients. This concern is also supported by the neurotropism previously documented in other human coronaviruses, including the 2002–2003 SARS-CoV-1 outbreak. Hence, in the current review article, we aimed to summarize the spectrum of neurological findings associated with COVID-19, which include signs of peripheral neuropathy, myopathy, olfactory dysfunction, meningoencephalitis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and neuropsychiatric disorders. Furthermore, we analyze the mechanisms underlying such neurological sequela and discuss possible therapeutics for patients with neurological findings associated with COVID-19. Finally, we describe the host- and pathogen-specific factors that determine the tissue tropism of SARS-CoV-2 and possible routes employed by the virus to invade the nervous system from a pathophysiological and molecular perspective. In this manner, the current manuscript contributes to increasing the current understanding of the neurological aspects of COVID-19 and the impact of the current pandemic on the neurology field.
The first cases of Coronavirus (COVID-19) were reported in Wuhan, China in December 2019. Globally millions of people have been diagnosed with the virus whilst thousands have died. As the virus kept spreading health and social care frontline workers (HSCFW) were faced with difficulties when discharging their duties. This paper was set out to explore the challenges faced by different frontline workers in health and social care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The research utilized an explorative qualitative approach. A total of forty (N = 40) in-depth one-to-one semi-structured interviews were undertaken with HSCFW who included support workers (n = 15), nurses (n = 15), and managers (N = 10). Health and social care workers were drawn from domiciliary care and care homes (with and without nursing services). All the interviews were done online. The data were thematically analyzed, and the emergent themes were supported by quotes from the interviews held with participants. Following data analysis the research study found that lack of pandemic preparedness, shortage of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), anxiety and fear amongst professionals, challenges in enforcing social distancing, challenges in fulfilling social shielding responsibility, anxiety and fear amongst residents and service users, delay in testing, evolving PPE guidance and shortage of staff were challenges faced by frontline health and social care workers during COVID-19 pandemic. The results of the current study point to a need for adequate pandemic preparedness within the health and social care sector to protect both frontline workers and the individuals they look after. ARTICLE HISTORY
Objective:
Recognizing the huge potential ramifications of COVID-19 pandemic, this study explores its impact on health professionals personally and professionally along with the associated challenges.
Methods:
A descriptive cross-sectional qualitative survey was conducted from March-April 2020. Participants included health professionals from various disciplines in both public and private-sector institutions of Pakistan. The sample size was not predetermined, and an iterative approach of simultaneous data collection and analysis was taken until data and time saturation were reached. Thematic analysis of the qualitative data was carried out by two analysts.
Results:
Two hundred and Ninety health professionals responded. They reported an impact on their mental, physical and social well-being. The clinicians mentioned facing an unprecedented workload in overstretched health facilities, while those in academia become engaged with planning/providing emergency remote teaching for the students affecting work-life balance. Some challenges associated with work-from-home and in the hospitals were identified.
Conclusion:
During COVID-19, the health professionals are anxious, overworked and financially unstable while planning, creating and caring for others and their families. We need to support them to do their jobs, be safe and stay alive. Future research should explore the fears and coping strategies of health professionals during pandemics.
Background
In the early stages of the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Hubei, China, the local health-care system was overwhelmed. Physicians and nurses who had no infectious disease expertise were recruited to provide care to patients with COVID-19. To our knowledge, no studies on their experiences of combating COVID-19 have been published. We aimed to describe the experiences of these health-care providers in the early stages of the outbreak.
Methods
We did a qualitative study using an empirical phenomenological approach. Nurses and physicians were recruited from five COVID-19-designated hospitals in Hubei province using purposive and snowball sampling. They participated in semi-structured, in-depth interviews by telephone from Feb 10 to Feb 15, 2020. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using Haase's adaptation of Colaizzi's phenomenological method.
Findings
We recruited nine nurses and four physicians. Three theme categories emerged from data analysis. The first was “being fully responsible for patients' wellbeing—‘this is my duty’”. Health-care providers volunteered and tried their best to provide care for patients. Nurses had a crucial role in providing intensive care and assisting with activities of daily living. The second category was “challenges of working on COVID-19 wards”. Health-care providers were challenged by working in a totally new context, exhaustion due to heavy workloads and protective gear, the fear of becoming infected and infecting others, feeling powerless to handle patients' conditions, and managing relationships in this stressful situation. The third category was “resilience amid challenges”. Health-care providers identified many sources of social support and used self-management strategies to cope with the situation. They also achieved transcendence from this unique experience.
Interpretation
The intensive work drained health-care providers physically and emotionally. Health-care providers showed their resilience and the spirit of professional dedication to overcome difficulties. Comprehensive support should be provided to safeguard the wellbeing of health-care providers. Regular and intensive training for all health-care providers is necessary to promote preparedness and efficacy in crisis management.
Funding
National Key R&D Program of China, Project of Humanities and Social Sciences of the Ministry of Education in China.
The Framework Method is becoming an increasingly popular approach to the management and analysis of qualitative data in health research. However, there is confusion about its potential application and limitations.
The article discusses when it is appropriate to adopt the Framework Method and explains the procedure for using it in multi-disciplinary health research teams, or those that involve clinicians, patients and lay people. The stages of the method are illustrated using examples from a published study.
Used effectively, with the leadership of an experienced qualitative researcher, the Framework Method is a systematic and flexible approach to analysing qualitative data and is appropriate for use in research teams even where not all members have previous experience of conducting qualitative research.
Qualitative research produces large amounts of textual data in the form of transcripts and observational fieldnotes. The systematic and rigorous preparation and analysis of these data is time consuming and labour intensive. Data analysis often takes place alongside data collection to allow questions to be refined and new avenues of inquiry to develop. Textual data are typically explored inductively using content analysis to generate categories and explanations; software packages can help with analysis but should not be viewed as short cuts to rigorous and systematic analysis. High quality analysis of qualitative data depends on the skill, vision, and integrity of the researcher; it should not be left to the novice.
I am not allowed to share the full text - please don't request - thank you!
https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/thematic-analysis/book248481
Aim
This study explored the clinical placement experiences of nursing students during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Background
The health emergency caused by Covid-19 required a rapid reorganisation of care settings. This reorganisation entailed revisiting the clinical placements settings and learning programs of Italian nursing faculties. Some Italian universities wanted to seize the health emergency as a learning opportunity enabling the nursing student to acquire additional knowledge and skills.
Design
We conducted a descriptive qualitative study employing a phenomenological approach. The study population was second and third-year nursing students. The students did their clinical placement in 5 Northern Italy hospitals, mainly in infectious diseases wards, intensive care and sub-intensive care units, emergency department, short-stay surgical units and internal medicine wards. In these departments, the inpatient wards were entirely converted into Covid-19 units. Ethical approval was obtained from the local ethics committee.
Methods
Semi-structured, open-ended interviews were conducted in March-April 2021 and analysed following a phenomenological approach.
Results
Twenty-one nursing students in their 2nd and 3rd academic year participated. Their average age was 24 years. 81% were female and 19% were male. Three main themes were generated: (i) Learning which surpasses technicalities; (ii) Confronting dignity issues; (iii) Feeling treated as an equal in the workspace. Students had to learn how to lower their fear and self-manage the emotional burden to be a caring presence for the patients who were intensely suffering from the disease and isolation. Attending a clinical practice placement in Covid-19 wards led them to focus on human dignity issues: participants realised how dignity was questioned and how they could become patients’ advocates. Students also described that they felt part of the team, with their student role almost fading.
Conclusions
This study describes that the most unpredictable public health emergency, such as Covid-19, can provide learning opportunities in the practice environment for nursing students. Students described feeling useful and capitalising on new competencies. Designing educational activities for nursing students concerning pandemic emergencies may be strategic for dealing with similar situations in the future.
Introduction
Diagnostic Radiography plays a major role in the diagnosis and management of patients with Covid-19. This has seen an increase in the demand for imaging services, putting pressure on the workforce. Diagnostic radiographers, as with many other healthcare professions, have been on the frontline, dealing with an unprecedented situation. This research aimed to explore the experience of diagnostic radiographers working clinically during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Method
Influenced by interpretative phenomenology, this study explored the experiences of diagnostic radiographers using virtual focus group interviews as a method of data collection.
Results
Data were analysed independently by four researchers and five themes emerged from the data. Adapting to new ways of working, feelings and emotions, support mechanisms, self-protection and resilience, and professional recognition.
Conclusion
The adaptability of radiographers came across strongly in this study. Anxieties attributed to the provision of personal protective equipment (PPE), fear of contracting the virus and spreading it to family members were evident. The resilience of radiographers working throughout this pandemic came across strongly throughout this study. A significant factor for coping has been peer support from colleagues within the workplace. The study highlighted the lack of understanding of the role of the radiographer and how the profession is perceived by other health care professionals.
Implications for practice
This study highlights the importance of interprofessional working and that further work is required in the promotion of the profession.
Aim: To explore the perception of education and professional development of final-year nursing students who carried out health relief tasks during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a global health emergency. This situation has exacerbated the need for additional healthcare employees, forcing the Spanish government to incorporate volunteer nursing students as auXiliary health staff.
Design: A qualitative study framed in the constructivist paradigm.
Methods: Twenty-two students of nursing were recruited. A purposeful sampling was implemented until reaching saturation. A semi-structured interview as a conversational technique was used to collect information based on three dimensions: academic curriculum, disciplinary professional development, and patient care. Subsequently, a content analysis of the information was carried out. Three phases were followed in the data analysis process: theoretical, descriptive-analytical, and interpretive. The COREQ checklist was used to evaluate the study.
Results: The most important results are linked to the students’ professional and academic preparation, how the
nurses handled the pandemic situation and the characteristics of the COVID-19 patients.
Conclusions: Students require training in order to offer holistic care to patients, adapted to the context. Partici- pants highlight the importance of professional values and recognise a high level of competence and autonomy in nurses.
The COVID-19 outbreak has been associated with significant occupational stressors and challenges for healthcare workers (HCWs) including the risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2. Many reports from all over the world have already found that HCWs have significant levels of self-reported anxiety, depression and even symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder. Therefore, supporting mental health of HCWs is a crucial part of the public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of the present review is to ascertain the interventions put in place worldwide in reducing stress in HCWs during the COVID-19 outbreak. We evidenced how only few countries have published specific psychological support intervention protocols for HCWs. All programs were developed in university associated hospitals and highlighted the importance of multidisciplinary collaboration. All of them had as their purpose to manage the psychosocial challenges to HCW's during the pandemic in order to prevent mental health problems.Whether one program offers distinct benefit compared to the others cannot be known given the heterogeneity of the protocols and the lack of a rigorous protocol and clinical outcomes. Further research is crucial to find out the best ways to support the resilience and mental well-being of HCWs.
Resumen
El objetivo de este estudio fue conocer el impacto psicológico entre el personal sanitario de primera línea en la asistencia a pacientes con SARS-CoV-2 y compararlo con el resto de profesionales sanitarios, a través de una revisión sistemática de la producción científica en el ámbito occidental. La revisión se realizó en las bases PubMed, Scopus y Web of Science y se seleccionaron 12 artículos. Los estudios cuantitativos realizados en Europa y EE.UU. refirieron niveles moderados y altos de estrés, ansiedad, depresión, alteración del sueño y burnout, con estrategias de afrontamiento diversas y síntomas más frecuentes e intensos entre mujeres y enfermería, sin resultados concluyentes por edad. En la primera línea de asistencia, el impacto fue mayor que en el resto de profesionales sanitarios y que en el ámbito asiático. Se requiere profundizar en las experiencias emocionales y necesidades profesionales de apoyo emocional, para diseñar intervenciones eficaces de protección y ayuda.
Fully qualitative surveys, which prioritise qualitative research values, and harness the rich potential of qualitative data, have much to offer qualitative researchers, especially given online delivery options. Yet the method remains underutilised, and there is little in the way of methodological discussion of qualitative surveys. Underutilisation and limited methodological discussion perhaps reflect the dominance of interviewing in qualitative research, and (misplaced) assumptions about qualitative survey data lacking depth. By discussing our experiences of developing online surveys as a tool for qualitative research, we seek to challenge preconceptions about qualitative surveys, and to demonstrate that qualitative surveys are an exciting, flexible method with numerous applications, and advantages for researchers and participants alike. We offer an overview and practical design information, illustrated with examples from some of our studies.
Objective
During the Covid-19 pandemic, government restrictions limited health care to urgent needs. Neurophysiology centers had to suddenly reschedule their activities, with a lack of specific recommendations about electroencephalography (EEG) execution. During the pandemic phase 1, we launched an online survey to understand the flaws and strengths of the EEG management in Italy at the time of Covid-19 pandemic.MethodsA 45-item online survey (published from April 16 to 30, 2020), endorsed by the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology (SINC), the Italian League Against epilepsy (LICE), and the Italian Association of Neurophysiology technologists (AITN), collected EEG management data (EEG’s number and type, indications, personnel and patients safety, devices’ sanification) during the Covid-19 pandemic.ResultsWe received responses from 206 centers. The number of EEGs performed was reduced by 76 ± 20%, and several types of specific EEG (video-EEG, ambulatory-EEG, LTM, polysomnography) were reduced at a minimum. Half of the centers performed inpatient EEGs only for urgencies. Repetitive seizures, encephalitis, and non-convulsive status epilepticus were the most common indications. Covid-19-positive patients received less EEG than negative ones (p < 0.0001). EEG requests came mainly not only from neurologists (n = 176) but also from general practitioners (n = 40), emergentists (n = 79), intensivists (n = 72), and other specialists (n = 53). Those centers which continued performing outpatient EEG examinations were instructed to perform the EEG after a Covid-19-related symptom screening for patients and using personal protective equipment (PPE) through all the procedure. Inpatient EEGs were performed using FFP2/FFP3 masks by neurophysiology technologists in only 50% of cases. Patients executed hyperventilation only for real clinical needs, but often (56%) with a mask.Conclusions
Italian neurophysiology centers strongly adhered to government restrictions of lockdown. Some issues emerged, ranging from the evaluation of a proper indication for EEG, technical procedures of EEG recording, and protection of neurophysiology technicians.
Background
Pandemics and epidemics are a public health emergencies that can result in substantial deaths and socio-economic disruption. Nurses play a key role in the public health response to such crises, delivering direct patient care and risk of exposure to the infectious disease. The experience of providing nursing care in this context has the potential to have significant short and long term consequences for individuals, society and the nursing profession.
Objectives
To synthesize and present the best available evidence on the experiences of nurses working in acute hospital settings during a pandemic.
Design
This review was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for systematic reviews.
Data sources
A structured search using CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, MedNar, ProQuest and Index to Theses was conducted.
Review methods
All studies describing nurses’ experiences were included regardless of methodology. Themes and narrative statements were extracted from included papers using the SUMARI data extraction tool from Joanna Briggs Institute.
Results
Thirteen qualitative studies were included in the review. The experiences of 348 nurses generated a total of 116 findings, which formed seven categories based on similarity of meaning. Three synthesized findings were generated from the categories: (i) Supportive nursing teams providing quality care; (ii) Acknowledging the physical and emotional impact; and (iii) Responsiveness of systematised organizational reaction.
Conclusions
Nurses are pivotal to the health care response to infectious disease pandemics and epidemics. This systematic review emphasises that nurses’ require Governments, policy makers and nursing groups to actively engage in supporting nurses, both during and following a pandemic or epidemic. Without this, nurses are likely to experience substantial psychological issues that can lead to burnout and loss from the nursing workforce.
Background
COVID-19 pandemic has the potential to significantly affect the mental health of healthcare workers (HCWs), who stand in the frontline of this crisis. It is, therefore, an immediate priority to monitor rates of mood, sleep and other mental health issues in order to understand mediating factors and inform tailored interventions. The aim of this review is to synthesize and analyze existing evidence on the prevalence of depression, anxiety and insomnia among HCWs during the Covid-19 outbreak.
Methods
A systematic search of literature databases was conducted up to April 17th, 2020. Two reviewers independently assessed full-text articles according to predefined criteria. Risk of bias for each individual study was assessed and data pooled using random-effects meta-analyses to estimate the prevalence of specific mental health problems. The review protocol is registered in PROSPERO and is available online.
Findings
Thirteen studies were included in the analysis with a combined total of 33,062 participants. Anxiety was assessed in 12 studies, with a pooled prevalence of 23·2% and depression in 10 studies, with a prevalence rate of 22·8%. A subgroup analysis revealed gender and occupational differences with female HCPs and nurses exhibiting higher rates of affective symptoms compared to male and medical staff respectively. Finally, insomnia prevalence was estimated at 38·9% across 5 studies.
Interpretation
Early evidence suggests that a considerable proportion of HCWs experience mood and sleep disturbances during this outbreak, stressing the need to establish ways to mitigate mental health risks and adjust interventions under pandemic conditions.
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is having a profound effect on all aspects of society, including mental health and physical health. We explore the psychological, social, and neuroscientific effects of COVID-19 and set out the immediate priorities and longer-term strategies for mental health science research. These priorities were informed by surveys of the public and an expert panel convened by the UK Academy of Medical Sciences and the mental health research charity, MQ: Transforming Mental Health, in the first weeks of the pandemic in the UK in March, 2020. We urge UK research funding agencies to work with researchers, people with lived experience, and others to establish a high level coordination group to ensure that these research priorities are addressed, and to allow new ones to be identified over time. The need to maintain high-quality research standards is imperative. International collaboration and a global perspective will be beneficial. An immediate priority is collecting high-quality data on the mental health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic across the whole population and vulnerable groups, and on brain function, cognition, and mental health of patients with COVID-19. There is an urgent need for research to address how mental health consequences for vulnerable groups can be mitigated under pandemic conditions, and on the impact of repeated media consumption and health messaging around COVID-19. Discovery, evaluation, and refinement of mechanistically driven interventions to address the psychological, social, and neuroscientific aspects of the pandemic are required. Rising to this challenge will require integration across disciplines and sectors, and should be done together with people with lived experience. New funding will be required to meet these priorities, and it can be efficiently leveraged by the UK's world-leading infrastructure. This Position Paper provides a strategy that may be both adapted for, and integrated with, research efforts in other countries.
Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research
- N K Gale
- G Heath
- NK Gale