BackgroundHealthcare workers (HCWs) from COVID-19 hotspots worldwide have reported poor mental health outcomes since the pandemic's beginning. The virulence of the initial COVID-19 surge in Spain and the urgency for rapid evidence constrained early studies in their capacity to inform mental health programs accurately. Here, we used a qualitative research design to describe relevant mental health problems among frontline HCWs and explore their association with determinants and consequences and their implications for the design and implementation of mental health programs.Materials and methodsFollowing the Programme Design, Implementation, Monitoring, and Evaluation (DIME) protocol, we used a two-step qualitative research design to interview frontline HCWs, mental health experts, administrators, and service planners in Spain. We used Free List (FL) interviews to identify problems experienced by frontline HCWs and Key informant (KI) interviews to describe them and explore their determinants and consequences, as well as the strategies considered useful to overcome these problems. We used a thematic analysis approach to analyze the interview outputs and framed our results into a five-level social-ecological model (intrapersonal, interpersonal, organizational, community, and public health).ResultsWe recruited 75 FL and 22 KI interviewees, roughly balanced in age and gender. We detected 56 themes during the FL interviews and explored the following themes in the KI interviews: fear of infection, psychological distress, stress, moral distress, and interpersonal conflicts among coworkers. We found that interviewees reported perceived causes and consequences across problems at all levels (intrapersonal to public health). Although several mental health strategies were implemented (especially at an intrapersonal and interpersonal level), most mental health needs remained unmet, especially at the organizational, community, and public policy levels.ConclusionsIn keeping with available quantitative evidence, our findings show that mental health problems are still relevant for frontline HCWs 1 year after the COVID-19 pandemic and that many reported causes of these problems are modifiable. Based on this, we offer specific recommendations to design and implement mental health strategies and recommend using transdiagnostic, low-intensity, scalable psychological interventions contextually adapted and tailored for HCWs.
Background We assessed the moderating effect of pre-pandemic mental disorders on the association of COVID-related perceived stress and social support with mental health. Methods A nationally representative sample of 3500 Spanish adults was interviewed in June 2020 (mean age 49.25 years, ± 15.64; 51.50% females). Mental health included Generalized Anxiety Disorders (GAD; GAD-7, cut-off point of ≥ 10), Major Depressive Disorders (MDD; PHQ-8, cut-off point of ≥ 10) and the comorbid form (those screening positive for GAD and MDD). COVID-related stress was assessed using an adapted version of the Peri Life Events Scale, and social support using the Oslo Social Support Scale. Logistic regression models were used to assess if COVID-related stress and social support were related to mental health outcomes and interactions were conducted to examine whether these relationships differed according to the presence of pre-pandemic mental disorders. Results Higher COVID-related stress was associated with a higher risk of lower mental health. The association between COVID-related stress with GAD and MDD was significantly moderated by pre-pandemic mental disorders, except for comorbid GAD + MDD. Higher levels of social support were linked to better mental health. Only the association between social support and GAD was significantly moderated by pre-pandemic mental disorders. That is, for those without pre-pandemic mental disorders, higher levels of social support decreased the odds of GAD, while minor decreases were observed in those with pre-pandemic mental disorders. Conclusions The impact of COVID-related stress and social support on specific indicators of mental health may vary depending on the existence of a previous mental disorder.
Background and aims The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has challenged health services worldwide, with a worsening of healthcare workers’ mental health within initial pandemic hotspots. In early 2022, the Omicron variant is spreading rapidly around the world. This study explores the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a stepped-care programme of scalable, internet-based psychological interventions for distressed health workers on self-reported anxiety and depression symptoms. Methods We present the study protocol for a multicentre (two sites), parallel-group (1:1 allocation ratio), analyst-blinded, superiority, randomised controlled trial. Healthcare workers with psychological distress will be allocated either to care as usual only or to care as usual plus a stepped-care programme that includes two scalable psychological interventions developed by the World Health Organization: A guided self-help stress management guide (Doing What Matters in Times of Stress) and a five-session cognitive behavioural intervention (Problem Management Plus). All participants will receive a single-session emotional support intervention, namely psychological first aid. We will include 212 participants. An intention-to-treat analysis using linear mixed models will be conducted to explore the programme's effect on anxiety and depression symptoms, as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire – Anxiety and Depression Scale summary score at 21 weeks from baseline. Secondary outcomes include post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms, resilience, quality of life, cost impact and cost-effectiveness. Conclusions This study is the first randomised trial that combines two World Health Organization psychological interventions tailored for health workers into one stepped-care programme. Results will inform occupational and mental health prevention, treatment, and recovery strategies. Registration details ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04980326.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.