Nurses' coping strategies caring for patients during severe viral pandemics: A mixed-methods systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Nurses play an essential role in responding to severe viral disease which bring considerable challenges to their personal and professional well-being. This subsequently can affect the delivery of care and healthcare systems' organisational capacity to respond. Understanding nurses' experiences of these challenges will help inform healthcare policies. AIM: To explore the experiences and coping strategies of nurses caring for patients during severe viral disease pandemics. DESIGN: A mixed-methods systematic review informed by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology. METHODS: A mixed-methods systematic review. Five electronic databases Medline, CINAHL, PsychInfo, ASSIA and Scopus were searched on 4th April 2021. Results were reported in accordance with PRISMA. The findings were analysed and reported in the context of the Self-Regulatory Common-Sense Model. RESULTS: In total, 71 peer-review primary research articles describing nurses' experiences of caring for patients during SARS, MERS, Swine flu H1N1, Avian influenza or SARS-CoV-2 / COVID-19 published in English from 2003 to 2021 were included. We found links between nurses' perception of the health threats, their emotional reactions, and coping strategies. Perceived health threats were influenced by organisational factors including frequent changes in clinical guidelines and workplace protocols, onerous workloads and working hours, unavailability of PPE, and lack of knowledge and training in pandemic management. These impacted nurses' physical, psychological and social well-being. Nurses also reported helpful and unhelpful coping strategies to manage the health threats. CONCLUSIONS: It is vital for stakeholders, policymakers, government and healthcare institutions to recognise and monitor the wider impact on healthcare workers from health emergencies. In addition, support to develop and implement effective systems and individual mechanisms to offset the anticipated impact pre and post pandemics/epidemics is needed. Our findings can inform those strategies for similar future health emergencies. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Nurses are often the first point of contact in providing direct care to patients, hence they are at high risk of being infected. The findings from this review can help managers and policymakers in developing programmes to enhance resilience in the nursing workforce. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This was a literature review study.

A mixed methods systematic review of digital interventions to support the psychological health and well-being of people living with dermatological conditions.

Background: Dermatological conditions can have a substantial impact on psychological as well as physical health yet dedicated face-to-face psychological support for patients is lacking. Thus, individuals may require additional support to self-manage dermatological conditions effectively. Digital technology can contribute to long-term condition management, but knowledge of the effectiveness of digital interventions addressing psychological (cognitive, emotional, and behavioural) aspects of dermatological conditions is limited. Objectives: To identify, determine the effectiveness, and explore people's views and experiences of digital interventions supporting the psychological health of people with dermatological conditions. Methods: A mixed methods systematic review informed by JBI methodology. The protocol was registered on PROSPERO. Eight electronic databases were searched for papers written between January 2002 and October 2021. Data screening and extraction were conducted in Covidence. The methodological quality of studies were scrutinised against JBI critical appraisal tools. Intervention characteristics were captured using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist and guide. Data were synthesised using a convergent segregated approach. The results were reported in a narrative summary. Results: Twenty-three papers were identified from 4,883 references, including 15 randomised controlled trials. Nineteen interventions were condition-specific, 13 were delivered online, 16 involved an educational component, and 7 endorsed established, evidence-based therapeutic approaches. Improvements in knowledge, mood, quality of life, the therapeutic relationship, and reduced disease severity in the short to medium term, were reported, although there was substantial heterogeneity within the literature. Thirteen studies captured feedback from users, who considered various digital interventions as convenient and helpful for improving knowledge, emotion regulation, and personal control, but technical and individual barriers to use were reported. Use of established qualitative methodologies was limited and, in some cases, poorly reported. Conclusion: Some web-based digital psychological interventions seem to be acceptable to people living with mainly psoriasis and eczema. Whilst some digital interventions benefitted cognitive and emotional factors, heterogeneity and inconsistencies in the literature meant definitive statements about their effectiveness could not be drawn. Interdisciplinary and patient-centred approaches to research are needed to develop and test quality digital interventions supporting the psychological health of adults living with common and rare dermatological conditions. Systematic review registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=285435], identifier [CRD42021285435].

Online survey comparing coping responses to SARS-CoV-2 by people with and without existing health conditions in the UK.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on self-reported mood, coping and health behaviours of people living with existing health conditions in the UK to understand how to improve coping responses to the threat of SARS-CoV-2. DESIGN: Quantitative design using a cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Online survey in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: UK adults (18+ years) were eligible to participate. A total of 9110 people participated. Of these, 4377 (48%) reported at least one existing health condition, 874 (10%) reported having two or more existing conditions, and 715 (8%) reported having an existing mental health condition. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Multivariable linear regression and sequential multiple mediation analysis were used to estimate differences in average scores for active and avoidant coping response scores due to pre-existing health conditions, and to investigate the extent to which these differences are explained by differences in perceptions, beliefs, concerns and mood. RESULTS: People with pre-existing physical (+1.11 higher; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.34) and especially mental health conditions (3.06 higher; 95% CI 2.65 to 3.48) reported poorer health and used more avoidant coping compared with healthy participants. Under some strong untestable assumptions, we estimate that experiencing low mood or concern related to SARS-CoV-2 mostly explained the relationship between existing health conditions and avoidant coping. CONCLUSION: Psychological support and interventions including behaviour change are required to mitigate the psychological burden of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and increase autonomy in people with and without pre-existing conditions during this highly uncertain time. Psychologists are well placed to support clinicians and people with existing health conditions to minimise the psychological impact of SARS-CoV-2, in order to alleviate the subsequent strain on healthcare services.

Covid-19 Coping Survey: an In-depth Qualitative Analysis of Free-Text Responses from People With and Without Existing Health Conditions in the UK.

BACKGROUND: There is currently a lack of qualitative research exploring how cognitive and emotional reactions to the threat of SARS-CoV-2 affected the health behaviours of people living with and without pre-existing mental and physical health conditions. We aimed to investigate how the threat of SARS-CoV-2 influenced the thoughts, feelings and health behaviours of people with and without pre-existing health conditions in the UK. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey of UK adults (aged 18 and over). Free-text responses were analysed using a qualitative framework approach guided by the Common-Sense Model of Self-Regulation. RESULTS: Of the 9110 respondents, 2763 participants provided at least one free-text response. Three main themes were derived from the data. Theme one, locus of control, reports on the extent to which people felt in control during the first wave of the pandemic. Theme two, emotional impact, conveys how individuals felt and how people's personal circumstances made them more vulnerable to experiencing negative emotions during the pandemic. Theme three, coping strategies, describes common health-protective and health-threatening behaviours performed by individuals, as well as the importance of social connectedness, the social context and the need for collective action during the first national lockdown. CONCLUSION: Complex psychological interventions including behaviour change are required to mitigate the psychological burden of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and increase autonomy in people with and without pre-existing conditions during this highly uncertain time. Behavioural scientists can support governments and public health agencies to develop evidence-based communication and behaviour change strategies that support people to address unhelpful beliefs and emotions and strengthen coping abilities as the UK moves through and beyond the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.