Factors influencing attitudes toward vaccine safety and vaccine effectiveness amongst UK healthcare professionals prior to and at the time of COVID-19 vaccine rollout: Insights from the CoPE-HCP cohort study.

Given the potential for nosocomial outbreaks, we must understand factors associated with negative vaccine attitudes amongst healthcare professionals (HCPs) before the rollout of a newly developed vaccine in a pandemic setting. The aim of this prospective cohort study was to study the impact of preexisting and prevailing mental health on United Kingdom HCPs' attitudes towards a newly developed COVID-19 vaccine. Two online surveys were distributed: first during vaccine development (July-September, 2020) and second during nationwide vaccine rollout (December 2020-March 2021). Mental health (PHQ-9 for depression; GAD-7 for anxiety) was assessed in both surveys. Negative attitude regarding vaccine safety and vaccine effectiveness was assessed at vaccine rollout. A series of logistic regression models were developed relating mental health (preexisting during vaccine development, ongoing and new-onset during rollout, and changes in symptom severity) to negative vaccine attitudes. In 634 HCPs, the presence of depression and/or anxiety during vaccine development was associated with elevated negative attitude towards vaccine safety (adj. OR 1.74 [95% CI 1.10-2.75], p = .02), but not vaccine effectiveness (1.13 [0.77-1.66], p = .53) at rollout. This was independent of other characteristics: age, ethnicity, professional role, and history of contracting COVID-19. Ongoing depression and/or anxiety (1.72 [1.10-2.69], p = .02) was associated with elevated negative attitude regarding vaccine effectiveness, but not vaccine safety. Worsened combined symptom scores over time were associated with elevated negative vaccine effectiveness attitudes (1.03 [1.00-1.05], p < .05), but not vaccine safety. Overall, adverse mental health can impact on HCPs' attitudes towards a newly developed vaccine. Further work is required to understand how this translates to vaccine uptake.

Perceived workplace support and mental health, well-being and burnout among health care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the relationship between workplace support and mental health and burnout among health care professionals (HCPs) during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this cohort study, we sought to evaluate the association between perceived level of (and changes to) workplace support and mental health and burnout among HCPs, and to identify what constitutes perceived effective workplace support. METHODS: Online surveys at baseline (July-September 2020) and follow-up 4 months later assessed the presence of generalized anxiety disorder (using the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale [GAD-7]), clinical insomnia, major depressive disorder (using the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire), burnout (emotional exhaustion and depersonalization) and mental well-being (using the Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Score). Both surveys assessed self-reported level of workplace support (single-item Likert scale). For baseline and follow-up, independently, we developed separate logistic regression models to evaluate the association of the level of workplace support (tricohotomized as unsupported, neither supported nor unsupported and supported) with mental health and burnout. We also developed linear regression models to evaluate the association between the change in perceived level of workplace support and the change in mental health scores from baseline and follow-up. We used thematic analyses on free-text entries of the baseline survey to evaluate what constitutes effective support. RESULTS: At baseline (n = 1422) and follow-up (n = 681), HCPs who felt supported had reduced risk of anxiety, depression, clinical insomnia, emotional exhaustion and depersonalization, compared with those who felt unsupported. Among those who responded to both surveys (n = 681), improved perceived level of workplace support over time was associated with significantly improved scores on measures of anxiety (adjusted ß -0.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.25 to -0.01), depression (adjusted ß -0.17, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.04) and mental well-being (adjusted ß 0.19, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.29), independent of baseline level of support. We identified 5 themes constituting effective workplace support, namely concern or understanding for welfare, information, tangible qualities of the workplace, leadership and peer support. INTERPRETATION: We found a significant association between perceived level of (and changes in) workplace support and mental health and burnout of HCPs, and identified potential themes that constitute perceived workplace support. Collectively, these findings can inform changes in guidance and national policies to improve mental health and burnout among HCPs. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT04433260.

Improved lifestyle is associated with improved depression, anxiety and well-being over time in UK healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic: insights from the CoPE-HCP cohort study.

Background: One potential modifiable factor to improve the mental health of healthcare professionals (HCPs) during the pandemic is lifestyle. Aims: This study aimed to assess whether an improved lifestyle during the pandemic is associated with improved mental health symptoms and mental well-being in HCPs over time. Methods: This was a cohort study involving an online survey distributed at two separate time points during the pandemic (baseline (July-September 2020) and follow-up (December 2020-March 2021)) to HCPs working in primary or secondary care in the UK. Both surveys assessed for major depressive disorder (MDD) (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9)), generalised anxiety disorder (GAD) (Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7)), mental well-being (Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Score (SWEMWBS)) and self-reported lifestyle change (compared with the start of the pandemic) on multiple domains. Cumulative scores were calculated to estimate overall lifestyle change compared with that before the pandemic (at both baseline and follow-up). At each time point, separate logistic regression models were constructed to relate the lifestyle change score with the presence of MDD, GAD and low mental well-being. Linear regression models were also developed relating the change in lifestyle scores from baseline to follow-up to changes in PHQ-9, GAD-7 and SWEMWBS scores. Results: 613 HCPs completed both baseline assessment and follow-up assessment. Consistent significant cross-sectional associations between increased lifestyle change scores and a reduced risk of MDD, GAD and low mental well-being were observed at both baseline and follow-up. Over the study period, a whole unit increase in the change in novel scores (ie, improved overall lifestyle) over 4 months was inversely associated with changes in PHQ-9 (adjusted coefficient: -0.51, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.73 to -0.30, p<0.001) and GAD-7 scores (adjusted coefficient: -0.32, 95% CI: -0.53 to -0.10, p=0.004) and positively associated with the change in SWEMWBS scores (adjusted coefficient: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.18 to 0.55, p<0.001). Conclusions: Improved lifestyle over time is associated with improved mental health and mental well-being in HCPs during the pandemic. Improving lifestyle could be a recommended intervention for HCPs to help mitigate the mental health impact during the current and future pandemics. Trial registration number: NCT04433260.

Longitudinal comparisons of mental health, burnout and well-being in patient-facing, non-patient-facing healthcare professionals and non-healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic: findings from the CoPE-HCP study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic may disproportionately affect the mental health of healthcare professionals (HCPs), especially patient-facing HCPs. AIMS: To longitudinally examine mental health in HCPs versus non-HCPs, and patient-facing HCPs versus non-patient-facing HCPs. METHOD: Online surveys were distributed to a cohort at three phases (baseline, July to September 2020; phase 2, 6 weeks post-baseline; phase 3, 4 months post-baseline). Each survey contained validated assessments for depression, anxiety, insomnia, burnout and well-being. For each outcome, we conducted mixed-effects logistic regression models (adjusted for a priori confounders) comparing the risk in different groups at each phase. RESULTS: A total of 1574 HCPs and 147 non-HCPs completed the baseline survey. Although there were generally higher rates of various probable mental health issues among HCPs versus non-HCPs at each phase, there was no significant difference, except that HCPs had 2.5-fold increased risk of burnout at phase 2 (emotional exhaustion: odds ratio 2.50, 95% CI 1.15-5.46, P = 0.021), which increased at phase 3 (emotional exhaustion: odds ratio 3.32, 95% CI 1.40-7.87, P = 0.006; depersonalisation: odds ratio 3.29, 95% CI 1.12-9.71, P = 0.031). At baseline, patient-facing HCPs (versus non-patient-facing HCPs) had a five-fold increased risk of depersonalisation (odds ratio 5.02, 95% CI 1.65-15.26, P = 0.004), with no significant difference in the risk for other outcomes. The difference in depersonalisation reduced over time, but patient-facing HCPs still had a 2.7-fold increased risk of emotional exhaustion (odds ratio 2.74, 95% CI 1.28-5.85, P = 0.009) by phase 3. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic had a huge impact on the mental health and well-being of both HCPs and non-HCPs, but there is disproportionately higher burnout among HCPs, particularly patient-facing HCPs.

The Relationship Between Availability and Changes to Perceived Workplace Support and Their Impact on the Mental Health, Well-being and Burn-Out of Healthcare Professionals (HCP): Insight and Mitigating Strategies From the CoPE-HCP Cohort Study

Aims To examine the relationship between self-reported level of workplace support (WS) and various mental health outcomes in HCPs and non-HCPs at different time-points during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to examine whether improved WS is associated with improved mental health outcomes over time. Lastly, to identify what support healthcare professionals (HCPs) perceive to be most helpful. Methods Cohort survey study at baseline (July-September 2020) and follow-up (approximately four months later). Setting HCPs working in primary or secondary care, from UK and other countries, and non-HCP controls from primarily London-based universities. Participants 1574 HCPs and 147 non-HCPs (academic and research staff at London-based universities). The inclusion criteria for the study were: 1) aged 18 or older, 2) electronic consent given, and 3) identified as HCP or non-healthcare academic staff or self-declared non-HCPs. Main outcome measures Presence of generalized anxiety disorder (assessed using the GAD-7), clinical insomnia (ISI), major depressive disorder (PHQ-9), well-being (SWEMWBS), and burnout (emotional exhaustion and depersonalization;EEDP2Q). Qualitative data exploring what support HCPs perceive as most useful was gathered using free-text inputs. Results At baseline and follow-up, consistently, compared to those who felt unsupported, those who felt supported had significantly reduced risk (odds) of generalized anxiety disorder (baseline: 59% [95% CI of OR, 0.29 to 0.57], follow-up: 41% [0.38 to 0.92]), clinical insomnia (51% [0.34 to 0.69], 66% [0.20 to 0.55]), major depressive disorder (58% [0.31 to 0.58], 54% [0.31 to 0.74]), emotional exhaustion (65% [0.26 to 0.46], 61% [0.27 to 0.56]) and depersonalization (58% [0.28 to 0.61], 68% [0.21 to 0.50]). At follow-up, self-reported improved WS (vs. baseline) was associated with significantly improved GAD-7 (adjusted difference. −1.73 [-2.54 to −0.91]), ISI (-0.96 [-1.88 to −0.04]), PHQ−9 (-1.32 [-2.16 to −0.49]), SWEMWBS (0.97 [0.37 to 1.57]) and EEDP2Q (burnout) (-1.30 [-1.82 to −0.79]) scores, independent of baseline level of support. Five themes were identified constituting WS: ‘managerial support’ was the largest sub-theme. Conclusion A consistent association was observed between level of WS and the mental health of HCPs and non-HCPs. Improved WS was associated with improved mental health scores over a four-month period during the pandemic.