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.

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.

"SPEECH": A literature based framework for the study of past epidemics.

INTRODUCTION: This paper details the development of a public health research framework for the holistic examination of past epidemics. The Covid-19 pandemic has further highlighted the influence of a breadth of determinants of infectious disease morbidity and mortality. These are multidisciplinary and act in conjunction with each other. Hence, a broader interdisciplinary framework is required to conduct a comprehensive in-depth study of past epidemics and pandemics which focuses, not only on the epidemiology, but also on the broader political, social, economic and cultural factors which impact upon the public's risk perception and response to infectious disease outbreaks. METHODS: A literature review was performed based on a systematic approach framework. Publications of interest were identified through a search of PubMed/Medline, the Cochrane Library and Google Scholar, the latter especially for additional grey literature, and reference lists were hand searched for further articles to include. Key determinants were extracted and classified based initially on the European Core Health Community Indicators (ECHIs), and further refined through narrative summary. RESULTS: A total of 45 studies were identified, 13 of which fulfilled the inclusion criteria of comprehensive secondary research. A total of 26 determinants were extracted from the 13 publications, including microbiological, socioeconomic, political, meteorological and genetic determinants. Of the 26 identified factors, those prioritised were the 16 most relevant to the aim of applying a public health, rather than a narrow medical, lens to studying epidemics through considering a broader ecosystem of influences. The 16 determinants were summarised and categorised into the SPEECH (Society and Politics, Economy, Epidemiology, Culture, Healthcare and Public Health) framework. CONCLUSION: The interdisciplinary SPEECH framework set out in this paper provides the structure for the systematic and holistic in-depth investigation of past epidemics, incorporating the multitude of contextual factors which impact upon infectious disease outbreaks and the public's response to them at a national level.

Loneliness, coping, suicidal thoughts and self-harm during the COVID-19 pandemic: a repeat cross-sectional UK population survey

ObjectivesThere has been speculation on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated lockdown on suicidal thoughts and self-harm and the factors associated with any change. We aimed to assess the effects and change in effects of risk factors including loneliness and coping, as well as pre-existing mental health conditions on suicidal thoughts and self-harm during the COVID-19 pandemic.DesignThis study was a repeated cross-sectional online population-based survey.Participants and measuresNon-probability quota sampling was adopted on the UK adult population and four waves of data were analysed during the pandemic (17 March 2020 to 29 May 2020). Outcomes were suicidal thoughts and self-harm associated with the pandemic while loneliness, coping, pre-existing mental health conditions, employment status and demographics were covariates. We ran binomial regressions to evaluate the adjusted risks of the studied covariates as well as the changes in effects over time.ResultsThe proportion of individuals who felt lonely increased sharply from 9.8% to 23.9% after the UK lockdown began. Young people (aged 18–24 years), females, students, those who were unemployed and individuals with pre-existing mental health conditions were more likely to report feeling lonely and not coping well. 7.7%–10.0% and 1.9%–2.2% of respondents reported having suicidal thoughts and self-harm associated with the pandemic respectively throughout the period studied. Results from cross-tabulation and adjusted regression analyses showed young adults, coping poorly and with pre-existing mental health conditions were significantly associated with suicidal thoughts and self-harm. Loneliness was significantly associated with suicidal thoughts but not self-harm.ConclusionsThe association between suicidality, loneliness and coping was evident in young people during the early stages of the pandemic. Developing effective interventions designed and coproduced to address loneliness and promote coping strategies during prolonged social isolation may promote mental health and help mitigate suicidal thoughts and self-harm associated with the pandemic.

Mental health among healthcare workers and other vulnerable groups during the COVID-19 pandemic and other coronavirus outbreaks: A rapid systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Although most countries and healthcare systems worldwide have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, some groups of the population may be more vulnerable to detrimental effects of the pandemic on mental health than others. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesise evidence currently available from systematic reviews on the impact of COVID-19 and other coronavirus outbreaks on mental health for groups of the population thought to be at increased risk of detrimental mental health impacts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of reviews on adults and children residing in a country affected by a coronavirus outbreak and belonging to a group considered to be at risk of experiencing mental health inequalities. Data were collected on symptoms or diagnoses of any mental health condition, quality of life, suicide or attempted suicide. The protocol for this systematic review was registered in the online PROSPERO database prior to commencing the review (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=194264). RESULTS: We included 25 systematic reviews. Most reviews included primary studies of hospital workers from multiple countries. Reviews reported variable estimates for the burden of symptoms of mental health problems among acute healthcare workers, COVID-19 patients with physical comorbidities, and children and adolescents. No evaluations of interventions were identified. Risk- and protective factors, mostly for healthcare workers, showed the importance of personal factors, the work environment, and social networks for mental health. CONCLUSIONS: This review of reviews based on primary studies conducted in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic shows a lack of evidence on mental health interventions and mental health impacts on vulnerable groups in the population.

Prioritizing the Mental Health and Well-Being of Healthcare Workers: An Urgent Global Public Health Priority.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had an unprecedented impact on health systems in most countries, and in particular, on the mental health and well-being of health workers on the frontlines of pandemic response efforts. The purpose of this article is to provide an evidence-based overview of the adverse mental health impacts on healthcare workers during times of crisis and other challenging working conditions and to highlight the importance of prioritizing and protecting the mental health and well-being of the healthcare workforce, particularly in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. First, we provide a broad overview of the elevated risk of stress, burnout, moral injury, depression, trauma, and other mental health challenges among healthcare workers. Second, we consider how public health emergencies exacerbate these concerns, as reflected in emerging research on the negative mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare workers. Further, we consider potential approaches for overcoming these threats to mental health by exploring the value of practicing self-care strategies, and implementing evidence based interventions and organizational measures to help protect and support the mental health and well-being of the healthcare workforce. Lastly, we highlight systemic changes to empower healthcare workers and protect their mental health and well-being in the long run, and propose policy recommendations to guide healthcare leaders and health systems in this endeavor. This paper acknowledges the stressors, burdens, and psychological needs of the healthcare workforce across health systems and disciplines, and calls for renewed efforts to mitigate these challenges among those working on the frontlines during public health emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic.