Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on domiciliary care workers in Wales, UK: a data linkage cohort study using the SAIL Databank.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify population health risks for domiciliary care workers (DCWs) in Wales, UK, working during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: A population-level retrospective study linking occupational registration data to anonymised electronic health records maintained by the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank in a privacy-protecting trusted research environment. SETTING: Registered DCW population in Wales. PARTICIPANTS: Records for all linked DCWs from 1 March 2020 to 30 November 2021. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Our primary outcome was confirmed COVID-19 infection; secondary outcomes included contacts for suspected COVID-19, mental health including self-harm, fit notes, respiratory infections not necessarily recorded as COVID-19, deaths involving COVID-19 and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Confirmed and suspected COVID-19 infection rates increased over the study period to 24% by 30 November 2021. Confirmed COVID-19 varied by sex (males: 19% vs females: 24%) and age (>55 years: 19% vs <35 years: 26%) and were higher for care workers employed by local authority social services departments compared with the private sector (27% and 23%, respectively). 34% of DCWs required support for a mental health condition, with mental health-related prescribing increasing in frequency when compared with the prepandemic period. Events for self-harm increased from 0.2% to 0.4% over the study period as did the issuing of fit notes. There was no evidence to suggest a miscoding of COVID-19 infection with non-COVID-19 respiratory conditions. COVID-19-related and all-cause mortality were no greater than for the general population aged 15-64 years in Wales (0.1% and 0.034%, respectively). A comparable DCW workforce in Scotland and England would result in a comparable rate of COVID-19 infection, while the younger workforce in Northern Ireland may result in a greater infection rate. CONCLUSIONS: While initial concerns about excess mortality are alleviated, the substantial pre-existing and increased mental health burden for DCWs will require investment to provide long-term support to the sector's workforce.

Adaptation of ACTivate Your Wellbeing, a Digital Health and Well-being Program for Young Persons: Co-design Approach.

BACKGROUND: ACTivate your wellbeing is a digital health and well-being program designed to support and encourage positive lifestyle behavior change. The website includes 5 lifestyle behavior change modules and a 12-week well-being intervention based on acceptance and commitment therapy. It was timely to adapt the resource for a new audience in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Young persons' mental health needs have increased substantially, and lifestyle behaviors play a critical role in both mental and physical health statuses. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to adapt an existing health and well-being website for use by young persons aged 16 to 24 years. METHODS: A 3-staged participatory, co-design approach was adopted. The participants reviewed the existing program and provided feedback (stage 1) before cocreating new content (stage 2). Finally, the updated program underwent formative evaluation (stage 3). Two groups were created: one had access for 3 weeks and the other could self-select their study duration. The options were 3 weeks, 60 days, or 90 days. Outcome measures were the Warwick and Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale, 4-item Patient Health Questionnaire, and Acceptance and Action Questionnaire version 2. RESULTS: Stage 1 identified that the website was appealing to the new audience (19/24, 79%), and the 3 web-based focus group discussions explored data from the written review in more depth to identify and clarify the main areas for update and adaptation. Overall, 3 themes were developed, and the data informed the creation of 6 tasks for use in 5 web-based co-design workshops. Stage 2 led to the cocreation of 36 outputs, including a new name, new content, scenarios, images, and a new user dashboard, which included streaks and an updated color scheme. After the website update program was completed, 40 participants registered to use the website for formative evaluation (stage 3). Data analysis revealed differences in engagement, completion, and mean well-being after intervention between the 2 groups. The completion rate was 68% in the 3-week duration group, and well-being scores improved after intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Young persons engaged actively with the participatory design process. The participants discussed the updates they desired during the web-based discussions, which worked well via Zoom (Zoom Video Communications Inc) when small groups were used. The participants easily cocreated new content during the web-based co-design workshops. The web-based format enabled a range of participants to take part, share their ideas, search for images, and design digital content creatively together. The Zoom software enabled screen sharing and collaborative whiteboard use, which helped the cocreation process. The formative evaluation suggested that younger users who engage more with the website for a shorter duration may benefit more.

Mental wellbeing and psychological distress in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic: a comparison across time

This study aimed to assess the trajectory of wellbeing and psychological distress in a UK sample by comparing data taken from the first and second UK lockdowns. Wellbeing (indexed via the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale) and psychological distress (indexed via the K10) were measured in two surveys in large online samples from Wales, UK. The first survey (n = 12,989) took place 11–16 weeks into the first UK lockdown and the second survey (n = 10,428) took place 4–11 weeks into the second UK lockdown. Levels of wellbeing were lower in the second survey compared to the first survey, which were already low compared to pre-pandemic data (2019). Clinically significant levels of psychological distress were found in 40.4% of participants in the second survey, representing a 9.8% increase in prevalence from the first survey. Poorer mental health was found in women, younger adults, and those from deprived areas. The greatest reduction in mental health was found in the youngest age group (16-24 years old). The COVID-19 pandemic and the measures taken to curb its spread continue to negatively impact the wellbeing of the UK population. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Advances in Mental Health is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Suicide and self-harm in low- and middle- income countries during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review

There is widespread concern over the potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicide and self-harm globally, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) where the burden of these behaviours is greatest. We synthesised the evidence from the published literature on the impact of the pandemic on suicide and self-harm in LMIC. This review is nested within a living systematic review (PROSPERO ID CRD42020183326) that continuously identifies published evidence (all languages) through a comprehensive automated search of multiple databases (PubMed;Scopus;medRxiv, PsyArXiv;SocArXiv;bioRxiv;the WHO COVID-19 database;and the COVID-19 Open Research Dataset by Semantic Scholar (up to 11/2020), including data from Microsoft Academic, Elsevier, arXiv and PubMed Central.) All articles identified by the 4th August 2021 were screened. Papers reporting on data from a LMIC and presenting evidence on the impact of the pandemic on suicide or self-harm were included. Methodological quality was assessed using an appropriate tool, and a narrative synthesis presented. A total of 22 studies from LMIC were identified representing data from 12 countries. There was an absence of data from Africa, the Pacific, and the Caribbean. The reviewed studies mostly report on the early months of COVID-19 and were generally methodologically poor. Few studies directly assessed the impact of the pandemic. The most robust evidence, from time-series studies, indicate either a reduction or no change in suicide and self-harm behaviour. As LMIC continue to experience repeated waves of the virus and increased associated mortality, against a backdrop of vaccine inaccessibility and limited welfare support, continued efforts are needed to track the indirect impact of the pandemic on suicide and self-harm in these countries.

Risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, severe COVID-19 illness and COVID-19 mortality in people with pre-existing mental disorders: an umbrella review.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a serious health risk, especially in vulnerable populations. Even before the pandemic, people with mental disorders had worse physical health outcomes compared to the general population. This umbrella review investigated whether having a pre-pandemic mental disorder was associated with worse physical health outcomes due to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Following a pre-registered protocol available on the Open Science Framework platform, we searched Ovid MEDLINE All, Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL, and Web of Science up to the 6th of October 2021 for systematic reviews on the impact of COVID-19 on people with pre-existing mental disorders. The following outcomes were considered: risk of contracting the SARS-CoV-2 infection, risk of severe illness, COVID-19 related mortality risk, risk of long-term physical symptoms after COVID-19. For meta-analyses, we considered adjusted odds ratio (OR) as effect size measure. Screening, data extraction and quality assessment with the AMSTAR 2 tool have been done in parallel and duplicate. RESULTS: We included five meta-analyses and four narrative reviews. The meta-analyses reported that people with any mental disorder had an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR: 1.71, 95% CI 1.09-2.69), severe illness course (OR from 1.32 to 1.77, 95%CI between 1.19-1.46 and 1.29-2.42, respectively) and COVID-19 related mortality (OR from 1.38 to 1.52, 95%CI between 1.15-1.65 and 1.20-1.93, respectively) as compared to the general population. People with anxiety disorders had an increased risk of SAR-CoV-2 infection, but not increased mortality. People with mood and schizophrenia spectrum disorders had an increased COVID-19 related mortality but without evidence of increased risk of severe COVID-19 illness. Narrative reviews were consistent with findings from the meta-analyses. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: As compared to the general population, there is strong evidence showing that people with pre-existing mental disorders suffered from worse physical health outcomes due to the COVID-19 pandemic and may therefore be considered a risk group similar to people with underlying physical conditions. Factors likely involved include living accommodations with barriers to social distancing, cardiovascular comorbidities, psychotropic medications and difficulties in accessing high-intensity medical care.

Widening Excess Mortality During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Individuals Who Self-Harmed.

Background: Studies on COVID-19 pandemic-associated changes in mortality following self-harm remain scarce and inconclusive. Aims: To compare mortality risks in individuals who had self-harmed to those for individuals who had not, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic (Waves 1 and 2) in Wales, the United Kingdom, using population-based routinely collected data. Method: We linked whole population health data to all-cause mortality following an episode of self-harm between April 2016 and March 2021. Propensity score matching, Cox regression, and difference-in-differences were applied to compute changes in excess mortality (as ratios of hazard ratios, RHRs) before and during the pandemic for individuals who self-harmed. Results: The difference in mortality for individuals who self-harmed compared to those who did not widened during Wave 1 (RHR = 2.03, 95% CI: 1.04-4.03) and Wave 2 (RHR = 2.19, 95% CI: 1.12-4.29) from before the pandemic. Stratification by sex and age group produced no significant subgroup differences although risk for younger than 65 years group were higher. Limitations: Limitations include small sample size and incomplete data on cause-specific deaths during the pandemic. Conclusion: Our results underscore continuous monitoring of mortality of individuals who self-harm and effective interventions to address any increases in mortality.

Suicide in India during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: There has been substantial discussion as to whether the mental health and socio-economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic might impact suicide rates. Although India accounts for the largest proportion of global suicides, the early impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicide rates in this country are unknown. METHODS: National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) data were used to calculate annual suicide rates for the period 2010-2020, stratified by sex and state. Rate Ratios (RRs) stratified by sex and state were calculated to estimate the extent of change in suicide rates. RESULTS: Suicide rates in India generally showed a decreasing trend from 2010 until 2017, with the trend reversing after this period, particularly for males. Among males and females, the highest increase post 2017 was noted in 2020 (compared to 2017) (males: RR = 1.18 95% UI 1.17-1.19; females: RR = 1.05 95% UI 1.03-1.06). LIMITATION: Suicide rates based on the NCRB data might be an underestimation of the true suicide rates. CONCLUSION: Suicide rates in India increased during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, and although the increase in suicide rates, especially among males, predates the pandemic, the increase in suicide rates was highest in 2020, compared to increases in previous years. Further research is warranted to understand the potential ongoing impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicide in India.

Engagement of individuals aged 14–25 years with a digital mental health service during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: a cohort study of service usage data

Background Public use of digital mental health technologies has informed several studies focusing on patterns of engagement within user-led digital support systems. General engagement with these services has increased since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to explore how user engagement patterns with these platforms changed during the pandemic. Methods In this cohort study, we included individuals aged 14–25 years who signed up to the online mental health platform Kooth in the UK before the pandemic (May 1, 2019 to March 10, 2020) and during the pandemic (March 11, 2020 to Oct 31, 2021). Routinely collected usage data were assessed for consenting users who returned to Kooth at least once after sign-up. We used logistic regression to compare service component usage and overall engagement across cohorts. Findings 5048 individuals (mean sign-ups per day 9·0 [12·0]) were included in the pre-pandemic cohort and 13 841 (mean sign-ups per day 11·5 [13·9]) in the pandemic cohort, representing a significant increase in sign-ups per day during the pandemic compared with the pre-pandemic period (Welch's t-test p=0·0001). Compared with users pre-pandemic, users during the pandemic were less likely to have a drop-in chat with a practitioner (odds ratio [OR] 0·50 [95% CI 0·47–0·54], p<0·0001) but were more likely to journal (1·92 [1·77–2·07], p<0·0001) and comment on existing content (1·10 [1·03–1·18], p=0·008). Users who signed up to Kooth during the pandemic and requested a chat with a practitioner (7816 [56·5%] of 13 841 users) were also less likely to receive a chat than users who requested a chat pre-pandemic (3791 [75·1%] of 5048 users;OR 0·68 [0·63–0·74], p<0·0001). Interpretation During the COVID-19 pandemic, people with the ability and resources to access digital mental health support were diverted from face-to-face services to digital mental health services. This change might have resulted in an unmet need for drop-in practitioner chats, with users probably resorting to asynchronous support through community interaction or journaling. Funding Kooth Digital Health.

"I don't mean to be rude, but could you put a mask on while I'm here?" A qualitative study of risks experienced by domiciliary care workers in Wales during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Domiciliary care workers (DCWs) continued to provide care to adults in their own homes throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. The evidence of the impact of COVID-19 on health outcomes of DCWs is currently mixed. The OSCAR study will quantify the impact of COVID-19 upon health outcomes of DCWs in Wales, explore causes of variation and extrapolate to the rest of the UK DCW population. An embedded qualitative study aimed to explore DCW experiences during the pandemic, including factors that may have varied risk of exposure to COVID-19 and adverse health and wellbeing outcomes. Registered DCWs working throughout Wales were invited to participate in a semi-structured telephone interview. 24 DCWs were interviewed between February and July 2021. Themes were identified through inductive analysis using thematic coding. Several themes emerged relating to risk of exposure to COVID-19. First, general changes to the role of the DCW during the pandemic were identified. Second, practical challenges for DCWs in the workplace were reported, including staff shortages, clients and families not following safety procedures, initial shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE), DCW criticism of standard use PPE, client difficulty with PPE and management of rapid antigen testing. Third, lack of government/employer preparation for a pandemic was described, including the reorganisation of staff clients and services, inadequate or confusing information for many DCWs, COVID-19 training and the need for improved practical instruction and limited official standard risk assessments for DCWs. Pressure to attend work and perceptions of COVID-19 risk and vaccination was also reported. In summary, this paper describes the risk factors associated with working during the pandemic. We have mapped recommendations for each problem using these qualitative findings including tailored training and better support for isolated team members and identified the required changes at several socio-ecological levels.

Posttraumatic growth related to the COVID-19 pandemic among individuals with lived experience of psychiatric disorder.

Although the COVID-19 pandemic has been shown to be detrimental to mental health, it may hold a parallel potential for positive change. Little is known about posttraumatic growth (PTG) as a potential outcome for individuals with lived experience of psychiatric disorders following trauma exposure, especially in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants were 1,424 adults with lived experience of a psychiatric disorder who took part in a longitudinal study of mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic conducted by the National Centre for Mental Health. PTG was measured using the Posttraumatic Growth Inventory-Short Form (PTGI-SF). Factors hypothesized to be associated with PTG were investigated using linear regression. The mean participant PTGI score was 12.64 (SD = 11.01). On average, participants reported the highest scores on items related to appreciation of life and lowest on those related to spiritual change subscale. We found the strongest evidence of associations between higher levels of PTG and higher scores on assessment items related to perceived social support, B = 2.86; perceptions of the pandemic as traumatic, B = 4.89; and higher psychological well-being, B = 0.40. Taken together, we did not observe evidence of widespread PTG related to the COVID-19 pandemic among individuals with lived experiences of psychiatric disorders.

The mental health experiences of ethnic minorities in the UK during the Coronavirus pandemic: A qualitative exploration.

Background: Worldwide, the Coronavirus pandemic has had a major impact on people's health, lives, and livelihoods. However, this impact has not been felt equally across various population groups. People from ethnic minority backgrounds in the UK have been more adversely affected by the pandemic, especially in terms of their physical health. Their mental health, on the other hand, has received less attention. This study aimed to explore the mental health experiences of UK adults from ethnic minorities during the Coronavirus pandemic. This work forms part of our wider long-term UK population study "Mental Health in the Pandemic." Methods: We conducted an exploratory qualitative study with people from ethnic minority communities across the UK. A series of in-depth interviews were conducted with 15 women, 14 men and 1 non-binary person from ethnic minority backgrounds, aged between 18 and 65 years old (mean age = 40). We utilized purposefully selected maximum variation sampling in order to capture as wide a variety of views, perceptions and experiences as possible. Inclusion criteria: adults (18+) from ethnic minorities across the UK; able to provide full consent to participate; able to participate in a video- or phone-call interview. All interviews took place via MS Teams or Zoom. The gathered data were transcribed verbatim and underwent thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke carried out using NVivo 12 software. Results: The qualitative data analysis yielded seven overarching themes: (1) pandemic-specific mental health and wellbeing experiences; (2) issues relating to the media; (3) coping mechanisms; (4) worries around and attitudes toward vaccination; (5) suggestions for support in moving forward; (6) best and worst experiences during pandemic and lockdowns; (7) biggest areas of change in personal life. Generally, participants' mental health experiences varied with some not being affected by the pandemic in a way related to their ethnicity, some sharing positive experiences and coping strategies (exercising more, spending more time with family, community cohesion), and some expressing negative experiences (eating or drinking more, feeling more isolated, or even racism and abuse, especially toward Asian communities). Concerns were raised around trust issues in relation to the media, the inadequate representation of ethnic minorities, and the spread of fake news especially on social media. Attitudes toward vaccinations varied too, with some people more willing to have the vaccine than others. Conclusion: This study's findings highlight the diversity in the pandemic mental health experiences of ethnic minorities in the UK and has implications for policy, practice and further research. To enable moving forward beyond the pandemic, our study surfaced the need for culturally appropriate mental health support, financial support (as a key mental health determinant), accurate media representation, and clear communication messaging from the Governments of the UK.

Evaluation of the shielding initiative in Wales (EVITE Immunity): protocol for a quasiexperimental study.

INTRODUCTION: Shielding aimed to protect those predicted to be at highest risk from COVID-19 and was uniquely implemented in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinically extremely vulnerable people identified through algorithms and screening of routine National Health Service (NHS) data were individually and strongly advised to stay at home and strictly self-isolate even from others in their household. This study will generate a logic model of the intervention and evaluate the effects and costs of shielding to inform policy development and delivery during future pandemics. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a quasiexperimental study undertaken in Wales where records for people who were identified for shielding were already anonymously linked into integrated data systems for public health decision-making. We will: interview policy-makers to understand rationale for shielding advice to inform analysis and interpretation of results; use anonymised individual-level data to select people identified for shielding advice in March 2020 and a matched cohort, from routine electronic health data sources, to compare outcomes; survey a stratified random sample of each group about activities and quality of life at 12 months; use routine and newly collected blood data to assess immunity; interview people who were identified for shielding and their carers and NHS staff who delivered healthcare during shielding, to explore compliance and experiences; collect healthcare resource use data to calculate implementation costs and cost-consequences. Our team includes people who were shielding, who used their experience to help design and deliver this study. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has received approval from the Newcastle North Tyneside 2 Research Ethics Committee (IRAS 295050). We will disseminate results directly to UK government policy-makers, publish in peer-reviewed journals, present at scientific and policy conferences and share accessible summaries of results online and through public and patient networks.

Has the COVID-19 pandemic influenced suicide rates differentially according to socioeconomic indices and ethnicity? More evidence is needed globally.

The COVID-19 pandemic has harmed many people's mental health globally. Whilst the evidence generated thus far from high-income countries regarding the pandemic's impact on suicide rates is generally reassuring, we know little about its influence on this outcome in lower- and middle-income countries or among marginalised and disadvantaged people. There are some signals for concern regarding the pandemic's potentially unequal impact on suicide rates, with some of the affected demographic subgroups and regions being at elevated risk before the pandemic began. However, the evidence-base for this topic is currently sparse, and studies conducted to date have generally not taken account of pre-pandemic temporal trends. The collection of accurate, complete and comparable data on suicide rate trends in ethnic minority and low-income groups should be prioritised. The vulnerability of low-income groups will likely be exacerbated further by the current energy supply and cost-of-living crises in many countries. It is therefore crucial that reassuring messaging highlighting the stability of suicide rates during the pandemic does not lead to complacency among policymakers.

Suicide and self-harm in low- and middle- income countries during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review.

There is widespread concern over the potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicide and self-harm globally, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) where the burden of these behaviours is greatest. We synthesised the evidence from the published literature on the impact of the pandemic on suicide and self-harm in LMIC. This review is nested within a living systematic review (PROSPERO ID CRD42020183326) that continuously identifies published evidence (all languages) through a comprehensive automated search of multiple databases (PubMed; Scopus; medRxiv, PsyArXiv; SocArXiv; bioRxiv; the WHO COVID-19 database; and the COVID-19 Open Research Dataset by Semantic Scholar (up to 11/2020), including data from Microsoft Academic, Elsevier, arXiv and PubMed Central.) All articles identified by the 4th August 2021 were screened. Papers reporting on data from a LMIC and presenting evidence on the impact of the pandemic on suicide or self-harm were included. Methodological quality was assessed using an appropriate tool, and a narrative synthesis presented. A total of 22 studies from LMIC were identified representing data from 12 countries. There was an absence of data from Africa, the Pacific, and the Caribbean. The reviewed studies mostly report on the early months of COVID-19 and were generally methodologically poor. Few studies directly assessed the impact of the pandemic. The most robust evidence, from time-series studies, indicate either a reduction or no change in suicide and self-harm behaviour. As LMIC continue to experience repeated waves of the virus and increased associated mortality, against a backdrop of vaccine inaccessibility and limited welfare support, continued efforts are needed to track the indirect impact of the pandemic on suicide and self-harm in these countries.

Evaluation of the shielding initiative in Wales (EVITE Immunity): protocol for a quasiexperimental study

Introduction Shielding aimed to protect those predicted to be at highest risk from COVID-19 and was uniquely implemented in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinically extremely vulnerable people identified through algorithms and screening of routine National Health Service (NHS) data were individually and strongly advised to stay at home and strictly self-isolate even from others in their household. This study will generate a logic model of the intervention and evaluate the effects and costs of shielding to inform policy development and delivery during future pandemics. Methods and analysis This is a quasiexperimental study undertaken in Wales where records for people who were identified for shielding were already anonymously linked into integrated data systems for public health decision-making. We will: interview policy-makers to understand rationale for shielding advice to inform analysis and interpretation of results;use anonymised individual-level data to select people identified for shielding advice in March 2020 and a matched cohort, from routine electronic health data sources, to compare outcomes;survey a stratified random sample of each group about activities and quality of life at 12 months;use routine and newly collected blood data to assess immunity;interview people who were identified for shielding and their carers and NHS staff who delivered healthcare during shielding, to explore compliance and experiences;collect healthcare resource use data to calculate implementation costs and cost–consequences. Our team includes people who were shielding, who used their experience to help design and deliver this study. Ethics and dissemination The study has received approval from the Newcastle North Tyneside 2 Research Ethics Committee (IRAS 295050). We will disseminate results directly to UK government policy-makers, publish in peer-reviewed journals, present at scientific and policy conferences and share accessible summaries of results online and through public and patient networks.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on presentations to health services following self-harm: systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the impact of the pandemic on healthcare presentations for self-harm has accumulated rapidly. However, existing reviews do not include studies published beyond 2020. AIMS: To systematically review evidence on presentations to health services following self-harm during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: A comprehensive search of databases (WHO COVID-19 database; Medline; medRxiv; Scopus; PsyRxiv; SocArXiv; bioRxiv; COVID-19 Open Research Dataset, PubMed) was conducted. Studies published from 1 January 2020 to 7 September 2021 were included. Study quality was assessed with a critical appraisal tool. RESULTS: Fifty-one studies were included: 57% (29/51) were rated as 'low' quality, 31% (16/51) as 'moderate' and 12% (6/51) as 'high-moderate'. Most evidence (84%, 43/51) was from high-income countries. A total of 47% (24/51) of studies reported reductions in presentation frequency, including all six rated as high-moderate quality, which reported reductions of 17-56%. Settings treating higher lethality self-harm were overrepresented among studies reporting increased demand. Two of the three higher-quality studies including study observation months from 2021 reported reductions in self-harm presentations. Evidence from 2021 suggests increased numbers of presentations among adolescents, particularly girls. CONCLUSIONS: Sustained reductions in numbers of self-harm presentations were seen into the first half of 2021, although this evidence is based on a relatively small number of higher-quality studies. Evidence from low- and middle-income countries is lacking. Increased numbers of presentations among adolescents, particularly girls, into 2021 is concerning. Findings may reflect changes in thresholds for help-seeking, use of alternative sources of support and variable effects of the pandemic across groups.

Mental health in the pandemic: a repeated cross-sectional mixed-method study protocol to investigate the mental health impacts of the coronavirus pandemic in the UK

IntroductionThe WHO declared a global pandemic on 11 March 2020. Since then, the world has been firmly in the grip of the COVID-19. To date, more than 211 730 035 million confirmed cases and more than 4 430 697 million people have died. While controlling the virus and implementing vaccines are the main priorities, the population mental health impacts of the pandemic are expected to be longer term and are less obvious than the physical health ones. Lockdown restrictions, physical distancing, social isolation, as well as the loss of a loved one, working in a frontline capacity and loss of economic security may have negative effects on and increase the mental health challenges in populations around the world. There is a major demand for long-term research examining the mental health experiences and needs of people in order to design adequate policies and interventions for sustained action to respond to individual and population mental health needs both during and after the pandemic.Methods and analysisThis repeated cross-sectional mixed-method study conducts regular self-administered representative surveys, and targeted focus groups and semi-structured interviews with adults in the UK, as well as validation of gathered evidence through citizens’ juries for contextualisation (for the UK as a whole and for its four devolved nations) to ensure that emerging mental health problems are identified early on and are properly understood, and that appropriate policies and interventions are developed and implemented across the UK and within devolved contexts. STATA and NVIVO will be used to carry out quantitative and qualitative analysis, respectively.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval for this study has been granted by the Cambridge Psychology Research Ethics Committee of the University of Cambridge, UK (PRE 2020.050) and by the Health and Life Sciences Research Ethics Committee of De Montfort University, UK (REF 422991). While unlikely, participants completing the self-administered surveys or participating in the virtual focus groups, semi-structured interviews and citizens’ juries might experience distress triggered by questions or conversations. However, appropriate mitigating measures have been adopted and signposting to services and helplines will be available at all times. Furthermore, a dedicated member of staff will also be at hand to debrief following participation in the research and personalised thank-you notes will be sent to everyone taking part in the qualitative research.Study findings will be disseminated in scientific journals, at research conferences, local research symposia and seminars. Evidence-based open access briefings, articles and reports will be available on our study website for everyone to access. Rapid policy briefings targeting issues emerging from the data will also be disseminated to inform policy and practice. These briefings will position the findings within UK public policy and devolved nations policy and socioeconomic contexts in order to develop specific, timely policy recommendations. Additional dissemination will be done through traditional and social media. Our data will be contextualised in view of existing policies, and changes over time as-and-when policies change.

SARS-CoV-2 Infection and the Risk of Suicidal and Self-Harm Thoughts and Behaviour: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a complex impact on risks of suicide and non-fatal self-harm worldwide with some evidence of increased risk in specific populations including women, young people, and people from ethnic minority backgrounds. This review aims to systematically address whether SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or COVID-19 disease confer elevated risk directly. METHOD: As part of a larger Living Systematic Review examining self-harm and suicide during the pandemic, automated daily searches using a broad list of keywords were performed on a comprehensive set of databases with data from relevant articles published between January 1, 2020 and July 18, 2021. Eligibility criteria for our present review included studies investigating suicide and/or self-harm in people infected with SARS-CoV-2 with or without manifestations of COVID-19 disease with a comparator group who did not have infection or disease. Suicidal and self-harm thoughts and behaviour (STBs) were outcomes of interest. Studies were excluded if they reported data for people who only had potential infection/disease without a confirmed exposure, clinical/molecular diagnosis or self-report of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result. Studies of news reports, treatment studies, and ecological studies examining rates of both SARS-CoV-2 infections and suicide/self-harm rates across a region were also excluded. RESULTS: We identified 12 studies examining STBs in nine distinct samples of people with SARS-CoV-2. These studies, which investigated STBs in the general population and in subpopulations, including healthcare workers, generally found positive associations between SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or COVID-19 disease and subsequent suicidal/self-harm thoughts and suicidal/self-harm behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: This review identified some evidence that infection with SARS-CoV-2 and/or COVID-19 disease may be associated with increased risks for suicidal and self-harm thoughts and behaviours but a causal link cannot be inferred. Further research with longer follow-up periods is required to confirm these findings and to establish whether these associations are causal.