Tracking the mental health of home-carers during the first COVID-19 national lockdown: evidence from a nationally representative UK survey.

BACKGROUND: Unpaid carers who look after another member of their household (home-carers) have poorer mental health than the general population. The first COVID-19 national lockdown led to an increasing reliance on home-carers and we investigate the short- and longer-term impacts of lockdown on their mental health. METHODS: Data from 9737 adult participants (aged 16+) from the UK Household Longitudinal Study (Understanding Society) were used to explore changes in 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) score between (a) pre-pandemic (2019) and early lockdowns (April 2020) and (b) early and later (July 2020) lockdowns. RESULTS: GHQ-12 scores among home-carers were higher pre-lockdown and increased more than for non-carers from 2019 to April 2020 with further increases for home-carers compared with non-carers between April and July. Compared with respondents caring for a spouse/partner, those caring for a child under 18 had a particularly marked increase in GHQ-12 score between 2019 and April, as did those caring for someone with a learning disability. Home-carers of children under 18 improved from April to July while those caring for adult children saw a marked worsening of their mental health. Home-carers with greater care burden saw larger increases in GHQ-12 score from 2019 to April and from April to July, and increases through both periods were greater for home-carers who had formal help prior to lockdown but then lost it. CONCLUSIONS: The mental health of home-carers deteriorated more during lockdown than non-carers. Policies that reinstate support for them and their care-recipients will benefit the health of both vulnerable groups.

The mental health impact of COVID-19 and lockdown-related stressors among adults in the UK.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic in the UK and subsequent lockdown may have affected the mental health of the population. This study examines whether there was an increase in the prevalence and incidence of common mental disorders (CMD) in the UK adult population during the first months of lockdown and whether changes in CMD were associated with stressors related to the pandemic and lockdown. METHODS: Longitudinal data from the UK Household Longitudinal Study waves 10-11: 2019-2020 and waves 1-4 of the COVID-19 monthly surveys in April (n = 17 761) to July 2020 (n = 13 754), a representative sample of UK adult population, were analysed. CMD was measured using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) (cut-off >2). Changes in CMD were analysed in relation to COVID-19 and social stressors. RESULTS: Around 29% of adults without CMD less than a year earlier had a CMD in April 2020. However, by July 2020, monthly incidence of CMD had reduced to 9%. Most employment, financial and psychological 'shocks' were at their highest levels in April and reduced steadily in later months. Despite the lifting of some lockdown conditions by July, stressors related to loneliness, unemployment, financial problems and domestic work continued to influence CMD. CONCLUSION: Some COVID-19 policy responses such as furloughing may have been effective in mitigating the increase in CMD for some groups of employees. Despite some reduction in levels of pandemic and lockdown-related stressors by the middle of 2020, loneliness and financial stressors remained key determinants of incidence in CMD among the UK adult population.

Inequalities in mental health among children aged 5–11 before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: findings from the UK Household Longitudinal Study*

BackgroundThere are concerns that social mitigation measures related to the COVID-19 pandemic may have led to declines in child mental health and widened mental health inequalities, because affluent families had greater access to resources to cope with restrictions. We investigated how existing inequalities in child mental health changed during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, using population-representative longitudinal data.MethodsData were from 14,854 observations of 7,929 children in the UK Household Longitudinal Study. Child mental health measures using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) were taken at ages 5 and 8 during annual surveys between 2011 and 2019 and from children aged 5–11 over three waves of data collection between April 2020 and March 2021. In order to estimate the impact of the pandemic on inequalities, we modelled mental health using a mixed effects generalised linear model with an indicator for surveys taken during the pandemic, and interactions between the pandemic and sex, ethnicity, family structure, parent education, employment, household income and area deprivation on mental health. Models were weighted for survey design and non-response, and adjusted for age, year (linear trend), and sex.ResultsChildhood mental health declined between 2011 and 2021. In most cases advantaged groups (including children with coupled parents, highly educated parents, employed parents and higher income households) experienced a more rapid decline in mental health during COVID-19 than less advantaged groups, leading to narrowing of inequalities. Before the pandemic, for example, not having an employed parent was associated with a 1.63 point higher SDQ score (95% confidence intervals: 0.90 to 2.35), while during the pandemic this gap reduced to -0.50 points (95% CI: -1.70 to 0.69). Disadvantages related to male sex and living in deprived areas were maintained during COVID-19, while the mental health advantage of ethnic minorities increased. These patterns were apparent for both internalising and externalising mental health symptoms, and when SDQ scores were treated as a binary outcome indicating mental health difficulties.ConclusionUK children have experienced a ‘levelling down’ of mental health during COVID-19, with mental health becoming worse overall, and children from more advantaged groups experiencing the most rapid declines. Understanding what has created this pattern will be important for developing interventions and policies to improve child mental health in all sociodemographic groups, and prevent inequalities becoming re-established during the pandemic recovery.

Ethnic and educational inequalities in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: cross-sectional analysis of the UK household longitudinal study

BackgroundVaccination is crucial to address the COVID-19 pandemic but inequalities in uptake may exacerbate existing health inequalities. We investigate the UK prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, identify which population subgroups are more likely to be vaccine hesitant, and report stated reasons for hesitancy.MethodsNationally representative survey data from 12,035 participants were collected from 24th November to 1st December 2020 for wave 6 of the UK Household Longitudinal Study (‘Understanding Society’) COVID-19 web survey. Participants self-reported ethnicity, highest educational attainment, gender, age, how likely they would be to have a vaccine if offered and their main reason for hesitancy. Weighted cross-sectional analysis assessed the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy and logistic regression models estimated independent associations.ResultsOverall vaccine hesitancy was low (18% unlikely/very unlikely). Vaccine hesitancy was higher in women (21.0% vs 14.7% in men), in younger age groups (26.5% in 16–24 year olds vs 4.5% in 75+) and in those with lower education levels (18.6% no qualifications vs 13.2% degree qualified). Vaccine hesitancy was high in Black (71.8%) and Pakistani/Bangladeshi (42.3%) ethnic groups. Odds ratios for vaccine hesitancy after adjustment for age and gender were 13.42 (95% CI:6.86, 26.24) in Black, 2.54 (95% CI:1.19, 5.44) in Pakistani/Bangladeshi groups, and 1.76 (95% CI:1.10, 2.82) for Other White (including Eastern European) ethnic groups (compared to White British/Irish). Vaccine hesitancy was not higher in all minority ethnic groups;for example, ORs were 1.11 (95% CI:0.64, 1.95) for Indian ethnicity and 0.67 (95% CI:0.24, 1.87) for Other Asian (including Chinese) ethnicity. Lower education was also related to vaccine hesitancy (no qualifications versus degree OR 3.54;95% CI:2.06, 6.09) but ethnic differences largely remained when education was included in the model. For those who were vaccine hesitant the most common stated reason for hesitancy was concerns over unknown future effects (42.7%). However, when compared to the White British/Irish group, Black participants were more likely to state they ‘Don’t trust vaccines’ (29.2% vs 5.7%) and the Pakistani/Bangladeshi ethnic group more frequently cited worries about side-effects (35.4% vs 8.6%).ConclusionVaccine hesitancy is strongly associated with education and ethnicity, with marked ethnic heterogeneity. Black and Pakistani/Bangladeshi participants reported considerably greater vaccine hesitancy than White British/Irish ethnicity, but some minority ethnic groups did not. Educational inequalities did not account for ethnic differences. Vaccine programmes need to understand reasons for vaccine hesitancy within specific population sub-groups and take urgent action to improve uptake.

Psychological distress among people with probable COVID-19 infection: analysis of the UK Household Longitudinal Study.

Studies exploring the longer-term effects of experiencing coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) on mental health are lacking. We explored the relationship between reporting probable COVID-19 symptoms in April 2020 and psychological distress (measured using the General Health Questionnaire) 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7 months later. Data were taken from the UK Household Longitudinal Study, a nationally representative household panel survey of UK adults. Elevated levels of psychological distress were found up to 7 months after probable COVID-19, compared with participants with no likely infection. Associations were stronger among younger age groups and men. Further research into the psychological sequalae of COVID-19 is urgently needed.

Predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the UK household longitudinal study.

Vaccine hesitancy could undermine efforts to control COVID-19. We investigated the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the UK and identified vaccine hesitant subgroups. The 'Understanding Society' COVID-19 survey asked participants (n = 12,035) their likelihood of vaccine uptake and reason for hesitancy. Cross-sectional analysis assessed vaccine hesitancy prevalence and logistic regression calculated odds ratios. Overall vaccine hesitancy was low (18% unlikely/very unlikely). Vaccine hesitancy was higher in women (21.0% vs 14.7%), younger age groups (26.5% in 16-24 year olds vs 4.5% in 75 + ) and those with lower education levels (18.6% no qualifications vs 13.2% degree qualified). Vaccine hesitancy was high in Black (71.8%) and Pakistani/Bangladeshi (42.3%) ethnic groups. Odds ratios for vaccine hesitancy were 13.42 (95% CI:6.86, 26.24) in Black and 2.54 (95% CI:1.19, 5.44) in Pakistani/Bangladeshi groups (compared to White British/Irish) and 3.54 (95% CI:2.06, 6.09) for people with no qualifications versus degree. Urgent action to address hesitancy is needed for some but not all ethnic minority groups.

Mental health and health behaviours before and during the initial phase of the COVID-19 lockdown: longitudinal analyses of the UK Household Longitudinal Study.

BACKGROUND: There are concerns that COVID-19 mitigation measures, including the 'lockdown', may have unintended health consequences. We examined trends in mental health and health behaviours in the UK before and during the initial phase of the COVID-19 lockdown and differences across population subgroups. METHODS: Repeated cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis of the UK Household Longitudinal Study, including representative samples of over 27,000 adults (aged 18+) interviewed in four survey waves between 2015 and 2020. A total of 9748 adults had complete data for longitudinal analyses. Outcomes included psychological distress (General Health Questionnaire-12), loneliness, current cigarette smoking, use of e-cigarettes and alcohol consumption. Cross-sectional prevalence estimates were calculated and multilevel Poisson regression assessed associations between time period and the outcomes of interest, as well as differential associations by age, gender, education level and ethnicity. RESULTS: Psychological distress increased 1 month into lockdown with the prevalence rising from 19.4% (95% CI 18.7% to 20.1%) in 2017-2019 to 30.6% (95% CI 29.1% to 32.3%) in April 2020 (RR=1.3, 95% CI 1.2 to 1.4). Groups most adversely affected included women, young adults, people from an Asian background and those who were degree educated. Loneliness remained stable overall (RR=0.9, 95% CI 0.6 to 1.5). Smoking declined (RR=0.9, 95% CI=0.8,1.0) and the proportion of people drinking four or more times per week increased (RR=1.4, 95% CI 1.3 to 1.5), as did binge drinking (RR=1.5, 95% CI 1.3 to 1.7). CONCLUSIONS: Psychological distress increased 1 month into lockdown, particularly among women and young adults. Smoking declined, but adverse alcohol use generally increased. Effective measures are required to mitigate negative impacts on health.

Understanding Society at 10 Years

Understanding Society: The UK Household Longitudinal Study (UKHLS) has now been collecting a range of data from its nationally representative sample of participants for 10 years. This significant ‘birthday’ offers a moment to reflect on its contribution to sociological research, and on its current and future potential for fundamental and cutting-edge sociological analysis. While the study shares many features with other longer-standing household panel studies, including its direct predecessor the British Household Panel Survey (BHPS), it incorporated from the outset distinctive features that make it particularly valuable for analysis in specific fields, including biosocial research, ethnicity and migration studies, and analyses of the interplay between environmental, social and institutional contexts and individual characteristics. Understanding Society has incorporated methodological development and innovation since its inception, which has facilitated more extensive forms of data collection.