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.

Background Health and social care workers (HSCWs) are at risk of experiencing adverse mental health outcomes (e.g. higher levels of anxiety and depression) because of the COVID-19 pandemic. This can have a detrimental effect on quality of care, the national response to the pandemic and its aftermath. Aims A longitudinal design provided follow-up evidence on the mental health (changes in prevalence of disease over time) of NHS staff working at a remote health board in Scotland during the COVID-19 pandemic, and investigated the determinants of mental health outcomes over time. Method A two-wave longitudinal study was conducted from July to September 2020. Participants self-reported levels of depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), anxiety (Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7) and mental well-being (Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale) at baseline and 1.5 months later. Results The analytic sample of 169 participants, working in community (43%) and hospital (44%) settings, reported substantial levels of depression and anxiety, and low mental well-being at baseline (depression, 30.8%; anxiety, 20.1%; well-being, 31.9%). Although mental health remained mostly constant over time, the proportion of participants meeting the threshold for anxiety increased to 27.2% at follow-up. Multivariable modelling indicated that working with, and disruption because of, COVID-19 were associated with adverse mental health changes over time. Conclusions HSCWs working in a remote area with low COVID-19 prevalence reported substantial levels of anxiety and depression, similar to those working in areas with high COVID-19 prevalence. Efforts to support HSCW mental health must remain a priority, and should minimise the adverse effects of working with, and disruption caused by, the COVID-19 pandemic.

SummaryBackgroundIn sub-Saharan Africa, severely immunocompromised HIV-infected individuals have a high risk of mortality during the first few months after starting antiretroviral therapy (ART). We hypothesise that universally providing ready-to-use supplementary food (RUSF) would increase early weight gain, thereby reducing early mortality compared with current guidelines recommending ready-to-use therapeutic food (RUTF) for severely malnourished individuals only.MethodsWe did a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial, open-label, parallel-group trial at inpatient and outpatient facilities in eight urban or periurban regional hospitals in Kenya, Malawi, Uganda, and Zimbabwe. Eligible participants were ART-naive adults and children aged at least 5 years with confirmed HIV infection and a CD4 cell count of fewer than 100 cells per μL, who were initiating ART at the facilities. We randomly assigned participants (1:1) to initiate ART either with (RUSF) or without (no-RUSF) 12 weeks' of peanut-based RUSF containing 1000 kcal per day and micronutrients, given as two 92 g packets per day for adults and one packet (500 kcal per day) for children aged 5–12 years, regardless of nutritional status. In both groups, individuals received supplementation with RUTF only when severely malnourished (ie, body-mass index [BMI] <16–18 kg/m2 or BMI-for-age Z scores <–3 for children). We did the randomisation with computer-generated, sequentially numbered tables with different block sizes incorporated within an online database. Randomisation was stratified by centre, age, and two other factorial randomisations, to 12 week adjunctive raltegravir and enhanced anti-infection prophylaxis (reported elsewhere). Clinic visits were scheduled at weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36, and 48, and included nurse assessment of vital status and symptoms and dispensing of all medication including ART and RUSF. The primary outcome was mortality at week 24, analysed by intention to treat. Secondary outcomes included absolute changes in weight, BMI, and mid-upper-arm circumference (MUAC). Safety was analysed in all randomly assigned participants. Follow-up was 48 weeks. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01825031) and the ISRCTN registry (43622374).FindingsBetween June 18, 2013, and April 10, 2015, we randomly assigned 1805 participants to treatment: 897 to RUSF and 908 to no-RUSF. 56 (3%) were lost-to-follow-up. 96 (10·9%, 95% CI 9·0–13·1) participants allocated to RUSF and 92 (10·3%, 8·5–12·5) to no-RUSF died within 24 weeks (hazard ratio 1·05, 95% CI 0·79–1·40; log-rank p=0·75), with no evidence of interaction with the other randomisations (both p>0·7). Through 48 weeks, adults and adolescents aged 13 years and older in the RUSF group had significantly greater gains in weight, BMI, and MUAC than the no-RUSF group (p=0·004, 0·004, and 0·03, respectively). The most common type of serious adverse event was specific infections, occurring in 90 (10%) of 897 participants assigned RUSF and 87 (10%) of 908 assigned no-RUSF. By week 48, 205 participants had serious a...

Background Health and social care staff are at high risk of experiencing adverse mental health (MH) outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Hence, there is a need to prioritize and identify ways to effectively support their psychological well-being (PWB). Compared to traditional psychological interventions, digital psychological interventions are cost-effective treatment options that allow for large-scale dissemination and transcend social distancing, overcome rurality, and minimize clinician time. Objective This study reports MH outcomes of a Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT)-compliant parallel-arm pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) examining the potential usefulness of an existing and a novel digital psychological intervention aimed at supporting psychological health among National Health Service (NHS) staff working through the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods NHS Highland (NHSH) frontline staff volunteers (N=169) were randomly assigned to the newly developed NHSH Staff Wellbeing Project (NHSWBP), an established digital intervention (My Possible Self [MPS]), or a waitlist (WL) group for 4 weeks. Attempts were made to blind participants to which digital intervention they were allocated. The interventions were fully automated, without any human input or guidance. We measured 5 self-reported psychological outcomes over 3 time points: before (baseline), in the middle of (after 2 weeks), and after treatment (4 weeks). The primary outcomes were anxiety (7-item General Anxiety Disorder), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire), and mental well-being (Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale). The secondary outcomes included mental toughness (Mental Toughness Index) and gratitude (Gratitude Questionnaire-6). Results Retention rates mid- and postintervention were 77% (n=130) and 63.3% (n=107), respectively. Postintervention, small differences were noted between the WL and the 2 treatment groups on anxiety (vs MPS: Cohen d=0.07, 95% CI –0.20 to 0.33; vs NHSWBP: Cohen d=0.06, 95% CI –0.19 to 0.31), depression (vs MPS: Cohen d=0.37, 95% CI 0.07-0.66; vs NHSWBP: Cohen d=0.18, 95% CI –0.11 to 0.46), and mental well-being (vs MPS: Cohen d=–0.04, 95% CI –0.62 to –0.08; vs NHSWBP: Cohen d=–0.15, 95% CI –0.41 to 0.10). A similar pattern of between-group differences was found for the secondary outcomes. The NHSWBP group generally had larger within-group effects than the other groups and displayed a greater rate of change compared to the other groups on all outcomes, except for gratitude, where the rate of change was greatest for the MPS group. Conclusions Our analyses provided encouraging results for the use of brief digital psychological interventions in improving PWB among health and social care workers. Future multisite RCTs, with power to reliably detect differences, are needed to determine the efficacy of contextualized interventions relative to existing digital treatments. Trial Registration ISRCTN Registry (ISRCTN) ISRCTN18107122; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN18107122

Purpose of reviewMental health (MH) problems among healthcare workers (HCWs) have the potential to impact negatively on the capacity of health systems to respond effectively to COVID-19. A thorough understanding of the factors that degrade or promote the MH of HCWs is needed to design and implement suitable intervention strategies to support the wellbeing of this population.Recent findings MH problems among HCWs were elevated prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Accumulating evidence indicates that this public health crisis has had a disproportionately negative impact on the MH of specialised populations, including HCWs. Literature from prior health pandemics suggests that the adverse effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the MH of HCWs are likely to persist in the aftermath of the public health crisis. Primary and secondary risk factors for adverse MH outcomes have been identified and should be considered when implementing interventions to protect the MH of HCWs.

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.

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 establish whether there are any identifiable risk factors for adverse mental health outcomes amongst HSCWs during the COVID-19 crisis. 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 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. ConclusionsThe 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 wellbeing 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.

Background Health and social care workers(HSCWs) are at risk of experiencing adverse mental health (MH) outcomes (e.g., higher levels of anxiety and depression) as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. This can have a detrimental impact on quality of care, the national response to the pandemic and its aftermath. Aims A longitudinal design provided follow-up evidence on the MH(changes in the prevalence of disease over time) of NHS staff working in a remote health board in Scotland during the COVID-19 pandemic and investigated the determinants of MH outcomes over time. Method A two-wave longitudinal study was conducted from July to September 2020. Participants self-reported levels of depression(PHQ-9), anxiety(GAD-7), and mental well-being(WEMWBS) at baseline and again 1.5 months later. Results The analytic sample of 169 participants, working in community(43%) and hospital(44%) settings reported substantial levels of probable clinical depression, anxiety and low mental well-being(MWB) at baseline(depression:30.8%, anxiety:20.1%, low-MWB:31.9%). Whilst the MH of participants remained mostly constant over time, the proportion of participants meeting the threshold for clinical anxiety increased to 27.2% at follow-up. Multivariable modelling indicated that working with, and disruption due to COVID-19 were associated with adverse MH changes over time. Conclusions HSCWs working in a remote area with low COVID-19 prevalence, reported similar levels of substantial anxiety and depression as those working in areas of the UK with high rates of COVID-19 infections. Efforts to support HSCW MH must remain a priority and should minimize the adverse effects of working with, and the disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.