Life course psychosocial precursors of parent mental health resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic: A three-decade prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: There has been widespread interest in the implications of COVID-19 containment measures on the mental health of parents. Most of this research has focused on risk. Much less is known about resilience; yet such studies are key to protecting populations during major crises. Here we map precursors of resilience using life course data spanning three decades. METHODS: The Australian Temperament Project commenced in 1983 and now follows three generations. Parents (N = 574, 59 % mothers) raising young children completed a COVID-19 specific module in the early (May-September 2020) and/or later (October-December, 2021) phases of the pandemic. Decades prior, parents had been assessed across a broad range of individual, relational and contextual risk and promotive factors during childhood (7-8 years to 11-12 years), adolescence (13-14 years to 17-18 years) and young adulthood (19-20 years to 27-28 years). Regressions examined the extent to which these factors predicted mental health resilience, operationalised as lower than expected anxiety and depressive symptoms during the pandemic relative to pre-pandemic symptoms. RESULTS: Parent mental health resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic was consistently predicted by several factors assessed decades before the pandemic. These included lower ratings of internalizing difficulties, less difficult temperament/personality traits and stressful life events, and higher ratings of relational health. LIMITATIONS: The study included 37-39-year-old Australian parents with children age between 1 and 10 years. DISCUSSION: Results identified psychosocial indicators across the early life course that, if replicated, could constitute targets for long-term investment to maximise mental health resilience during future pandemics and crises.

The prevalence of probable mental health disorders among hospital healthcare workers during COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives The mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic continue to be documented worldwide with systematic reviews playing a pivotal role. Here we present updated findings from our systematic review and meta-analysis on the mental health impacts among hospital healthcare workers during COVID-19. Methods We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Embase and Web Of Science Core Collection between 1st January 2000 to 17th February 2022 for studies using validated methods and reporting on the prevalence of diagnosed or probable mental health disorders in hospital healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. A meta-analysis of proportions and odds ratio was performed using a random effects model. Heterogeneity was investigated using test of subgroup differences and 95 % prediction intervals. Results The meta-analysis included 401 studies, representing 458,754 participants across 58 countries. Pooled prevalence of depression was 28.5 % (95 % CI: 26.3–30.7), anxiety was 28.7 % (95 % CI: 26.5–31.0), PTSD was 25.5 % (95 % CI: 22.5–28.5), alcohol and substance use disorder was 25.3 % (95 % CI: 13.3–39.6) and insomnia was 24.4 % (95 % CI: 19.4–29.9). Prevalence rates were stratified by physicians, nurses, allied health, support staff and healthcare students, which varied considerably. There were significantly higher odds of probable mental health disorders in women, those working in high-risk units and those providing direct care. Limitations Majority of studies used self-report measures which reflected probable mental health disorders rather than actual diagnosis. Conclusions These updated findings have enhanced our understanding of at-risk groups working in hospitals. Targeted support and research towards these differences in mental health risks are recommended to mitigate any long-term consequences.

The prevalence of probable mental health disorders among hospital healthcare workers during COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic continue to be documented worldwide with systematic reviews playing a pivotal role. Here we present updated findings from our systematic review and meta-analysis on the mental health impacts among hospital healthcare workers during COVID-19. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Embase and Web Of Science Core Collection between 1st January 2000 to 17th February 2022 for studies using validated methods and reporting on the prevalence of diagnosed or probable mental health disorders in hospital healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. A meta-analysis of proportions and odds ratio was performed using a random effects model. Heterogeneity was investigated using test of subgroup differences and 95 % prediction intervals. RESULTS: The meta-analysis included 401 studies, representing 458,754 participants across 58 countries. Pooled prevalence of depression was 28.5 % (95 % CI: 26.3-30.7), anxiety was 28.7 % (95 % CI: 26.5-31.0), PTSD was 25.5 % (95 % CI: 22.5-28.5), alcohol and substance use disorder was 25.3 % (95 % CI: 13.3-39.6) and insomnia was 24.4 % (95 % CI: 19.4-29.9). Prevalence rates were stratified by physicians, nurses, allied health, support staff and healthcare students, which varied considerably. There were significantly higher odds of probable mental health disorders in women, those working in high-risk units and those providing direct care. LIMITATIONS: Majority of studies used self-report measures which reflected probable mental health disorders rather than actual diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: These updated findings have enhanced our understanding of at-risk groups working in hospitals. Targeted support and research towards these differences in mental health risks are recommended to mitigate any long-term consequences.

The Australian Temperament Project Generation 3 study: a population-based multigenerational prospective cohort study of socioemotional health and development.

PURPOSE: The Australian Temperament Project Generation 3 Study (ATPG3) was established to examine the extent to which offspring social and emotional development is shaped in the decades prior to conception, in parent and grandparent histories of psychosocial adjustment (eg, emotional regulation, relationship quality and prosociality) and maladjustment (eg, depressive symptoms, substance use and antisociality). PARTICIPANTS: The Australian Temperament Project (ATP) commenced in 1983 as a population representative survey of the social and emotional health of 2443 young Australians (Generation 2: 4-8 months old) and their parents (Generation 1). Since then, families have been followed from infancy to young adulthood (16 waves). Between 2012 and 2018, the cohort was screened biannually for pregnancies (Generation 3), with assessments conducted in the third trimester of pregnancy, and at 8 weeks and 1 year postpartum. FINDINGS TO DATE: A total of 1167 offspring (607 female) born to 703 Generation 2 parents (400 mothers) were recruited into the ATPG3 Study. Findings to date highlight: (1) strong continuities in depressive symptoms and substance use from adolescence through to becoming a parent; (2) a role for persistent preconception mental health problems in risk for parent-child bonding difficulties, as well as infant emotional reactivity and behaviour problems; (3) the importance of secure attachments in adolescence in reducing long-term risk for postpartum mental health problems; and (4) the protective nature of perceived social support, both preconception and postpartum, in strengthening relationship quality and social support during the COVID-19 pandemic. FUTURE PLANS: Assessments of ATPG3 families in preschool and middle childhood are currently funded and underway. We intend to maintain the offspring cohort through childhood, adolescence, young adulthood and into parenthood. Data will be used to map preconception determinants of emotional health, and enhance approaches to population monitoring and targeted intervention over the life course and across generations.

Cohort profile: the Men and Parenting Pathways (MAPP) Study: a longitudinal Australian cohort study of men’s mental health and well-being at the normative age for first-time fatherhood

PurposeThe Men and Parenting Pathways (MAPP) Study is a prospective investigation of men’s mental health and well-being across the normative age for transitioning to fatherhood. This includes trajectories and outcomes for men who do and do not become fathers across five annual waves of the study.ParticipantsAustralian resident, English-speaking men aged 28–32 years at baseline were eligible. Recruitment was over a 2-year period (2015–2017) via social and traditional media and through engagement with study partners. Eight hundred and eighteen eligible men consented to participate. Of these, 664 men completed the first online survey of whom 608 consented to ongoing participation. Of the ongoing sample, 83% have participated in at least two of the first three annual online surveys.Findings to dateThree waves of data collection are complete. The first longitudinal analysis of MAPP data, published in 2020, identified five profiles that characterise men’s patterns of depressive symptom severity and presentations of anger. Profiles indicating pronounced anger and depressive symptoms were associated with fathers’ lack of perceived social support, and problems with coparenting and bonding with infants. In a second study, MAPP data were combined with three other Australian cohorts in a meta-analysis of associations between fathers’ self-reported sleep problems up to 3 years postpartum and symptoms of depression, anxiety and stress. Adjusted meta-analytic associations between paternal sleep and mental health risk ranged from 0.25 to 0.37.Future plansMAPP is an ongoing cohort study. Waves 4 and 5 data will be ready for analyses at the end of 2021. Future investigations will include crossed-lagged and trajectory analyses that assess inter-relatedness and changing social networks, mental health, work and family life. A nested study of COVID-19 pandemic-related mental health and coping will add two further waves of data collection in a subsample of MAPP participants.

Inequalities in the distribution of COVID-19-related financial difficulties for Australian families with young children.

BACKGROUND: We examine (1) the frequency of financial difficulties in Australian families with young children (0-8 years) in the early and later phases of the pandemic; (2) the extent to which parents' pre-pandemic socio-economic disadvantage (SED) predicted financial difficulties; and (3) whether grandparent intergenerational SED further amplified this risk. METHOD: Data: Australian Temperament Project (ATP; established 1983, N = 2443) and ATP Generation 3 study (ATPG3; established 2012; N = 702), of which 74% (N = 553) completed a COVID-specific module in the early (May-September 2020) and/or later (October-December 2021) phases of the pandemic. OUTCOMES: Parent-reported loss of employment/reduced income, difficulty paying for essentials, and financial strain. EXPOSURES: Pre-pandemic parent and grandparent education and occupation. ANALYSIS: Logistic regressions, estimated via generalized estimating equations, were used to examine associations between the pre-pandemic SED of parents and grandparents and their interaction with financial difficulties, adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: At both pandemic time points, a third of parents reported adverse financial impacts (early: 34%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 30-38; later: 32%, 95% CI = 28-36). Each standard deviation increase in the parents' pre-pandemic SED was associated with a 36% increase in the odds of reporting multiple financial difficulties (odds ratio [OR] = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.04-1.78). There was little evidence of an interaction between the SED of parents and grandparents. CONCLUSIONS: Financial impacts related to the COVID-19 pandemic were common and, irrespective of grandparent SED, disproportionately borne by parents with higher pre-pandemic SED. Given the well-established relationship between disadvantage and child health and development, sustained and well-targeted government supports will be critical to minimizing adverse impacts in years to come.

Child and Parent Physical Activity, Sleep, and Screen Time During COVID-19 and Associations With Mental Health: Implications for Future Psycho-Cardiological Disease?

The COVID-19 pandemic has afforded the opportunity for some to improve lifestyle behaviours, while for others it has presented key challenges. Adverse changes in global lifestyle behaviours, including physical activity, sleep, and screen time can affect proximal mental health and in turn distal cardiovascular outcomes. We investigated differences in physical activity, sleep, and screen time in parents and children during early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia compared to pre-COVID-19 national data; and estimated associations between these movement behaviours with parent and child mental health. Cross-sectional baseline data from the COVID-19 Pandemic Adjustment Study (CPAS; N = 2,365) were compared to nationally representative pre-pandemic data from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC; N = 9,438). Participants were parents of children aged ≤ 18 years, residing in Australia. Parents provided self-report measures of mental health, physical activity and sleep quality, and reported on child mental health, physical activity and screen time. Children in CPAS had significantly more sleep problems and more weekend screen time. Their parents had significantly poorer sleep quality, despite increased weekly physical activity. Children's sleep problems were significantly associated with increased mental health problems, after accounting for socioeconomic status, physical activity, and screen time. Poorer parent sleep quality and lower levels of physical activity were significantly associated with poorer mental health. Monitoring this cohort over time will be important to examine whether changes in movement behaviour are enduring or naturally improve with the easing of restrictions; and whether these changes have lasting effects on either parent or child mental health, and in turn, future risk for CVD.

Hidden in Plain Sight? Men's Coping Patterns and Psychological Distress Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Individuals cope with stress using multiple strategies, yet studies of coping profiles are rare. We draw data from a longitudinal study of Australian men (n = 272; 30-37 years), assessed before (T1) and during (T2) a nation-wide COVID-19 lockdown. We aimed to: (1) identify men's multi-strategy coping profiles before and during the pandemic; (2) assess cross-sectional (T1-T1, T2-T2) and prospective (T1-T2) associations between profiles and symptoms of psychological distress (stress, anxiety, depression, and anger); and (3) examine relationships between coping profiles and appraisals of pandemic-related stressors and options for coping. In latent profile analyses of 14 coping strategies, three profiles emerged that were largely consistent across T1 and T2: (1) Relaxed Copers (low use of all strategies), (2) Approach Copers, and (3) Dual Copers (high avoidant and moderate-high approach-oriented strategies). Compared to Relaxed and Approach Copers, men who were Dual Copers had elevated psychological distress cross-sectionally before (T1) and during (T2) the pandemic, but not prospectively. Post hoc analyses suggested this was because many men changed coping profiles in the context of the pandemic. Men with stable (T1-T2) or new (T2 only) Dual Coping profiles experienced greater psychological distress and more negative appraisals of pandemic stressors and options for coping. In sum, at the sample level, the composition of men's coping profiles and associations with mental health risk were relatively stable over time and contexts; however, many men appeared to respond to pandemic conditions by changing coping profile groups, with mostly positive mental health outcomes. Of concern were men who adopted more avoidant strategies (e.g., denial, self-distraction, disengagement, substance use, and self-blame) under pandemic conditions. These Dual Coper men also engaged in commonly observable approach-oriented behaviours (e.g., planning, active coping, humour, seeking practical social support) that may mask their vulnerability to mental health risk. Our findings highlight the clinical importance of enquiring about escalating or frequent avoidant coping even in the presence of more active and interactive approach-oriented behaviours.

Pre-pandemic Predictors of Loneliness in Adult Men During COVID-19.

Loneliness is a major public health issue, with its prevalence rising during COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns and mandated "social distancing" practices. A 2020 global study (n = 46,054) found that, in comparison to women, men experienced the greatest levels of loneliness. Although research on predictors of loneliness during COVID-19 is increasing, little is known about the characteristics of men who may be particularly vulnerable. Studies using prospective data are needed to inform preventative measures to support men at risk of loneliness. The current study draws on rare longitudinal data from an Australian cohort of men in young to mid-adulthood (n = 283; aged M = 34.6, SD = 1.38 years) to examine 25 pre-pandemic psychosocial predictors of loneliness during COVID-19 social restrictions (March-September 2020). Adjusted linear regressions identified 22 pre-pandemic predictors of loneliness across a range of trait-based, relational, career/home and mental health variables. Given the extensive set of predictors, we then conducted penalized regression models (LASSO), a machine learning approach, allowing us to identify the best fitting multivariable set of predictors of loneliness during the pandemic. In these models, men's sense of pre-pandemic environmental mastery emerged as the strongest predictor of loneliness. Depression, neuroticism and social support also remained key predictors of pandemic loneliness (R 2 = 26, including covariates). Our findings suggest that men's loneliness can be detected prospectively and under varying levels of social restriction, presenting possible targets for prevention efforts for those most vulnerable.

Parent and child mental health trajectories April 2020 to May 2021: Strict lockdown versus no lockdown in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To control a second-wave COVID-19 outbreak, the state of Victoria in Australia experienced one of the world's first long and strict lockdowns over July-October 2020, while the rest of Australia experienced 'COVID-normal' with minimal restrictions. We (1) investigate trajectories of parent/child mental health outcomes in Victoria vs non-Victoria and (2) identify baseline demographic, individual and COVID-19-related factors associated with mental health trajectories. METHODS: Online community sample of 2004 Australian parents with rapid repeated assessment over 14 time-points over April 2020 to May 2021. Measures assessed parent mental health (Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scales-21), child depression symptoms (13-item Short Mood and Feelings Questionnaire) and child anxiety symptoms (four items from Brief Spence Children's Anxiety Scale). RESULTS: Mental health trajectories shadowed COVID-19 infection rates. Victorians reported a peak in mental health symptoms at the time of the second-wave lockdown compared to other states. Key baseline predictors, including parent and child loneliness (standardized regression coefficient [ß] = 0.09-0.46), parent/child diagnoses (ß = 0.07-0.21), couple conflict (ß = 0.07-0.18) and COVID-19 stressors, such as worry/concern about COVID-19, illness and loss of job (ß = 0.12-0.15), predicted elevated trajectories. Effects of predictors on parent and child mental health trajectories are illustrated in an online interactive app for readers (https://lingtax.shinyapps.io/CPAS_trend/). CONCLUSION: Our findings provide evidence of worse trajectories of parent and child mental health symptoms at a time coinciding with a second COVID-19 outbreak involving strict lockdown in Victoria, compared to non-locked states in Australia. We identified several baseline factors that may be useful in detecting high-risk families who are likely to require additional support early on in future lockdowns.

Parent perceptions of pediatric oncology care during the COVID-19 pandemic: An Australian study.

BACKGROUND: We examined parents' perceptions of their child's oncology care during a period of significant COVID-19 restrictions in Australia. METHODS: Parents of children, 0-18 years, receiving hospital-based cancer treatment, completed a survey examining their COVID-19 exposure and impact, information and knowledge, and perception of their child's medical care. Recruitment occurred between October and November 2020. RESULTS: Eighty-four parents (95% mothers) completed the survey. Sixty-seven percent of patients were diagnosed pre-COVID-19. The majority of parents (76%) reported negative impacts of COVID-19 on family life, including parenting and emotional well-being despite exposure to COVID-19 cases being very low (4%). Family functioning and parent birthplace were associated with COVID-19 impact and distress. Parents perceived the hospital as a safe place during the pandemic. Very few parents reported delaying presentation to the emergency department (12%). The majority identified no change (69%) or delay (71%) in their child's treatment delivery. Over 90% of parents were confident that COVID-19 did not impact medical decision-making. They felt confident in their COVID-19 knowledge and sought information from trusted sources. Parents reported a positive relationship with their child's care team (93%); however, access to some support services was reduced. CONCLUSION: Understanding patient and family experiences of pediatric oncology care across international contexts during the pandemic is important to inform present and future health care responses. In the Australian context of low infection rates and strict community restrictions, parents perceived their child's oncology care to be relatively unaffected. However, findings indicate that family well-being was impacted, which warrants further investigation.

Preparing for Future Adversities: Lessons From the COVID-19 Pandemic in Australia for Promoting Relational Resilience in Families.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has placed considerable pressure on families, testing the quality of relationships and the strength of social support within and beyond the family network. However, little is known about the pre-pandemic factors that predict family relational resilience and social functioning during times of natural disaster or global crisis. Here we use data from one of Australia's longest running studies of social and emotional development to examine the nature and timing of possible relational and social support intervention aimed at preparing families for future adversities. Methods: Data were from the Australian Temperament Project Generation 3 (ATPG3) Study, a population representative three generation cohort study of families established in 1983. A subset of Generation 2 parents completed a COVID-19 specific survey in May-September 2020 (502 parents of 871 children; 60% mothers; 37-38 years). These participants had completed the Quality of Relationships Inventory to assess social support during young adulthood, at 23-24 years (2006) and 27-28 years (2010), before next generation conception. Participants had also completed the Maternity Social Support Scale 1 year postpartum for each child born across the ATPG3 assessment period (2012-2019). In 2020, during the height of the Australian lockdowns, participants rated the quality of their relationships with their partners, children and broader family and friends, in addition to social support within and extended beyond their family. Results: Pre-pandemic partner support was associated with partner relationship quality during the pandemic (ß = 0.22). Pre-pandemic support from friends was associated with relationship quality with other family and friends during the pandemic (ß = 0.12 - 0.18). Pre-pandemic support (from partner, family and friends) was consistently associated with social support within families during the pandemic (ß = 0.11 - 0.21). Pre-pandemic support from friends was also associated with family support extended to others within their local community during the pandemic (ß = 0.12 - 0.13). Conclusions: Strengthening supportive relationships during major life transitions, prior to the start of family life and in early parenthood, may have long-term and intergenerational benefits years into the future for both families and communities. This may promote resilience during future crises and other more normative stressful life events.

Subjective wellbeing in parents during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia.

OBJECTIVES: To examine (1) the subjective wellbeing of Australian parents raising children and adolescents (0-18 years) during April 2020 'stage three' COVID-19 restrictions, in comparison with parents assessed over 18-years prior to the pandemic; and (2) socio-demographic and COVID-19 predictors of subjective wellbeing during the pandemic. METHODS: Cross-sectional data were from the COVID-19 Pandemic Adjustment Survey (CPAS, N = 2365 parents of a child 0-18 years, 8-28th April 2020); and a pre-pandemic national database containing 18 years of annual surveys collected in 2002-2019 (N = 17,529 parents). RESULTS: Levels of subjective wellbeing during the pandemic were considerably lower than ratings prior to the pandemic (Personal Wellbeing Index, mean[SD] = 65.3 [17.0]; compared to [SD] = 75.8 [11.9], p < 0.001). During the pandemic, lower subjective wellbeing was associated with low education (adjusted regression coefficient, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] = -5.19, -0.93), language other-than-English (95% CI = -7.22, -1.30), government benefit (95% CI = -6.99, -0.96), single parents (95% CI = -8.84, -4.59), child neurodevelopmental condition (95% CI = -3.44, -0.76), parent physical/mental health problems (95% CI = -3.23, -0.67), COVID-environmental stressors (95% CI = -3.48, -2.44), and fear/worry about COVID-19 (95% CI = -8.13, -5.96). Unexpectedly, parent engagement with news media about the pandemic was associated with higher subjective wellbeing (95% CI = 0.35, 1.61). CONCLUSION: Subjective wellbeing in parents raising children aged 0-18 years appears to be disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and restrictions in Australia. Specific at-risk groups, for which government intervention may be warranted, include parents in socially disadvantaged contexts, parents with pre-existing mental health difficulties, and parents facing significant COVID-19-related work changes.

Study Protocol for the COVID-19 Pandemic Adjustment Survey (CPAS): A Longitudinal Study of Australian Parents of a Child 0-18 Years.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic presents significant risks to the mental health and wellbeing of Australian families. Employment and economic uncertainty, chronic stress, anxiety, and social isolation are likely to have negative impacts on parent mental health, couple and family relationships, as well as child health and development. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to: (1) provide timely information on the mental health impacts of the emerging COVID-19 crisis in a close to representative sample of Australian parents and children (0-18 years), (2) identify adults and families most at risk of poor mental health outcomes, and (3) identify factors to target through clinical and public health intervention to reduce risk. Specifically, this study will investigate the extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with increased risk for parents' mental health, lower well-being, loneliness, and alcohol use; parent-parent and parent-child relationships (both verbal and physical); and child and adolescent mental health problems. METHODS: The study aims to recruit a close to representative sample of at least 2,000 adults aged 18 years and over living in Australia who are parents of a child 0-4 years (early childhood, N = 400), 5-12 years (primary school N = 800), and 13-18 years (secondary school, N = 800). The design will be a longitudinal cohort study using an online recruitment methodology. Participants will be invited to complete an online baseline self-report survey (20 min) followed by a series of shorter online surveys (10 min) scheduled every 2 weeks for the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic (i.e., estimated to be 14 surveys over 6 months). RESULTS: The study will employ post stratification weights to address differences between the final sample and the national population in geographic communities across Australia. Associations will be analyzed using multilevel modeling with time-variant and time-invariant predictors of change in trajectory over the testing period. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide timely information on the mental health impacts of the COVID-19 crisis on parents and children in Australia; identify communities, parents, families, and children most at risk of poor outcomes; and identify potential factors to address in clinical and public health interventions to reduce risk.