Probable COVID-19 infection is associated with subsequent poorer mental health and greater loneliness in the UK COVID-19 Mental Health and Wellbeing study.

The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with psychological distress. In addition to physical effects including fatigue and cognitive impairment, contracting COVID-19 itself may also be related to subsequent negative mental health outcomes. The present study reports data from a longitudinal, national survey of the UK adult population investigating whether contracting suspected or confirmed COVID-19 at the early stages of the pandemic (March-May 2020) was associated with poorer mental health outcomes in May/June 2020, October/November 2020 and June/July 2021. A quota survey design and a sampling frame that permitted recruitment of a national sample (n = 3077) were utilised. Experience of contracting COVID-19 during the first UK lockdown was assessed along with levels of depression, anxiety, mental wellbeing and loneliness. Around 9% of participants reported contracting COVID-19 in March/May 2020 (waves 1-3) with just under 13% of the overall sample reporting COVID-19 at any one of the first three time points. Compared to those without probable COVID-19 infection, participants with probable COVID-19 had poorer mental health outcomes at follow-up with these effects lasting up to 13 months (e.g., May/June 2020:ORdepression = 1.70, p < 0.001; ORanxiety = 1.61, p = 0.002; Oct/Nov 2020, ORdepression = 1.82, p < 0.001; ORanxiety 1.56, p = 0.013; June/July 2021, ORdepression = 2.01, p < 0.001; ORanxiety = 1.67, p = 0.008). Having a pre-existing mental health condition was also associated with greater odds of having probable COVID-19 during the study (OR = 1.31, p = 0.016). The current study demonstrates that contracting probable COVID-19 at the early stage of the pandemic was related to long-lasting associations with mental health and the relationship between mental health status and probable COVID-19 is bidirectional.

Optimizing the implementation of lung cancer screening in Scotland: Focus group participant perspectives in the LUNGSCOT study.

INTRODUCTION: Targeted lung cancer screening is effective in reducing lung cancer and all-cause mortality according to major trials in the United Kingdom and Europe. However, the best ways of implementing screening in local communities requires an understanding of the population the programme will serve. We undertook a study to explore the views of those potentially eligible for, and to identify potential barriers and facilitators to taking part in, lung screening, to inform the development of a feasibility study. METHODS: Men and women aged 45-70, living in urban and rural Scotland, and either self-reported people who smoke or who recently quit, were invited to take part in the study via research agency Taylor McKenzie. Eleven men and 14 women took part in three virtual focus groups exploring their views on lung screening. Focus group transcripts were transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis, assisted by QSR NVivo. FINDINGS: Three overarching themes were identified: (1) Knowledge, awareness and acceptability of lung screening, (2) Barriers and facilitators to screening and (3) Promoting screening and implementation ideas. Participants were largely supportive of lung screening in principle and described the importance of the early detection of cancer. Emotional and psychological concerns as well as system-level and practical issues were discussed as posing barriers and facilitators to lung screening. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the views of people potentially eligible for a lung health check can usefully inform the development of a further study to test the feasibility and acceptability of lung screening in Scotland. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The LUNGSCOT study has convened a patient advisory group to advise on all aspects of study development and implementation. Patient representatives commented on the focus group study design, study materials and ethics application, and two representatives read the focus group transcripts.

Information seeking, mental health and loneliness: Longitudinal analyses of adults in the UK COVID-19 mental health and wellbeing study.

Information seeking has generally been seen as an adaptive response to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, it may also result in negative outcomes on mental health. The present study tests whether reporting COVID-related information seeking throughout the pandemic is associated with subsequently poorer mental health outcomes. A quota-based, non-probability-sampling methodology was used to recruit a nationally representative sample. COVID-related information seeking was assessed at six waves along with symptoms of depression, anxiety, mental wellbeing and loneliness (N = 1945). Hierarchical linear modelling was used to assess the relationship between COVID-related information seeking and mental health outcomes. Information seeking was found to reduce over time. Overall, women, older and higher socioeconomic group individuals reported higher levels of information seeking. At waves 1-4 (March-June 2020) the majority of participants reported that they sought information on Covid 1-5 times per day, this decreased to less than once per day in waves 5 and 6 (July-November 2020). Higher levels of information seeking were associated with poorer mental health outcomes, particularly clinically significant levels of anxiety. Use of a non-probability sampling method may have been a study limitation, nevertheless, reducing or managing information seeking behaviour may be one method to reduce anxiety during pandemics and other public health crises.

Information seeking, mental health and loneliness: Longitudinal analyses of adults in the UK COVID-19 Mental Health & Wellbeing study

Information-seeking has generally been seen as an adaptive response to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, it may also result in negative outcomes on mental health. The present study tests whether reporting COVID-related information-seeking throughout the pandemic is associated with subsequently poorer mental health outcomes. A quota-based, non-probability-sampling methodology was used to recruit a nationally representative sample. COVID-related information-seeking was assessed at six waves along with symptoms of depression, anxiety, mental wellbeing and loneliness (N = 1945). Hierarchical linear modelling was used to assess the relationship between COVID-related information-seeking and mental health outcomes. Information-seeking was found to reduce over time. Overall, women, older and higher socioeconomic group individuals reported higher levels of information-seeking. At waves 1-4 (March-June 2020) the majority of participants reported that they sought information on Covid 1-5 times per day, this decreased to less than once per day in waves 5 and 6 (July-November 2020). Higher levels of information-seeking were associated with poorer mental health outcomes, particularly clinically significant levels of anxiety. Use of a non-probability sampling method may have been a study limitation, nevertheless, reducing or managing information-seeking behaviour may be one method to reduce anxiety during pandemics and other public health crises.

Acceptability of a standalone written leaflet for the National Health Service for England Targeted Lung Health Check Programme: A concurrent, think-aloud study.

BACKGROUND: Many countries are introducing low-dose computed tomography screening programmes for people at high risk of lung cancer. Effective communication strategies that convey risks and benefits, including unfamiliar concepts and outcome probabilities based on population risk, are critical to achieving informed choice and mitigating inequalities in uptake. METHODS: This study investigated the acceptability of an aspect of NHS England's communication strategy in the form of a leaflet that was used to invite and inform eligible adults about the Targeted Lung Health Check (TLHC) programme. Acceptability was assessed in terms of how individuals engaged with, comprehended and responded to the leaflet. Semi-structured, 'think aloud' interviews were conducted remotely with 40 UK screening-naïve current and former smokers (aged 55-73). The verbatim transcripts were analysed thematically using a coding framework based on the Dual Process Theory of cognition. RESULTS: The leaflet helped participants understand the principles and procedures of screening and fostered cautiously favourable intentions. Three themes captured the main results of the data analysis: (1) Response-participants experienced anxiety about screening results and further investigations, but the involvement of specialist healthcare professionals was reassuring; (2) Engagement-participants were rapidly drawn to information about lung cancer prevalence, and benefits of screening, but deliberated slowly about early diagnosis, risks of screening and less familiar symptoms of lung cancer; (3) Comprehension-participants understood the main principles of the TLHC programme, but some were confused by its rationale and eligibility criteria. Radiation risks, abnormal screening results and numerical probabilities of screening outcomes were hard to understand. CONCLUSION: The TLHC information leaflet appeared to be acceptable to the target population. There is scope to improve aspects of comprehension and engagement in ways that would support informed choice as a distributed process in lung cancer screening. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The insight and perspectives of patient representatives directly informed and improved the design and conduct of this study.

Mental health and well-being during the second wave of COVID-19: longitudinal analyses of the UK COVID-19 Mental Health and Wellbeing study (UK COVID-MH)

BackgroundWaves 1 to 3 (March 2020 to May 2020) of the UK COVID-19 Mental Health and Wellbeing study suggested an improvement in some indicators of mental health across the first 6 weeks of the UK lockdown;however, suicidal ideation increased.AimsTo report the prevalence of mental health and well-being of adults in the UK from March/April 2020 to February 2021.MethodQuota sampling was employed at wave 1 (March/April 2020), and online surveys were conducted at seven time points. Primary analyses cover waves 4 (May/June 2020), 5 (July/August 2020), 6 (October 2020) and 7 (February 2021), including a period of increased restrictions in the UK. Mental health indicators were suicidal ideation, self-harm, suicide attempt, depression, anxiety, defeat, entrapment, loneliness and well-being.ResultsA total of 2691 (87.5% of wave 1) individuals participated in at least one survey between waves 4 and 7. Depressive symptoms and loneliness increased from October 2020 to February 2021. Defeat and entrapment increased from July/August 2020 to October 2020, and remained elevated in February 2021. Well-being decreased from July/August 2020 to October 2020. Anxiety symptoms and suicidal ideation did not change. Young adults, women, those who were socially disadvantaged and those with a pre-existing mental health condition reported worse mental health.ConclusionsThe mental health and well-being of the UK population deteriorated from July/August 2020 to October 2020 and February 2021, which coincided with the second wave of COVID-19. Suicidal thoughts did not decrease significantly, suggesting a need for continued vigilance as we recover from the pandemic.

Qualitative evaluation of a codesigned faith-based intervention for Muslim women in Scotland to encourage uptake of breast, colorectal and cervical cancer screening.

OBJECTIVES: This pilot study aimed to evaluate the acceptability of a codesigned, culturally tailored, faith-based online intervention to increase uptake of breast, colorectal and cervical screening in Scottish Muslim women. The intervention was codesigned with Scottish Muslim women (n=10) and underpinned by the reframe, reprioritise and reform model and the behaviour change wheel. SETTING: The study was conducted online, using Zoom, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. PARTICIPANTS: Participants (n=18) taking part in the intervention and subsequently in its evaluation, were Muslim women residing in Scotland, recruited through purposive and snowball sampling from a mosque and community organisations. Participants were aged between 25 years and 54 years and of Asian and Arab ethnicity. DESIGN: The study's codesigned intervention included (1) a peer-led discussion of barriers to screening, (2) a health education session led by a healthcare provider, (3) videos of Muslim women's experiences of cancer or screening, and (4) a religious perspective on cancer screening delivered by a female religious scholar (alimah). The intervention was delivered twice online in March 2021, followed 1 week later by two focus groups, consisting of the same participants, respectively, to discuss participants' experiences of the intervention. Focus group transcripts were analysed thematically. RESULTS: Participants accepted the content and delivery of the intervention and were positive about their experience of the intervention. Participants reported their knowledge of screening had increased and shared positive views towards cancer screening. They valued the multidimensional delivery of the intervention, appreciated the faith-based perspective, and in particular liked the personal stories and input from a healthcare provider. CONCLUSION: Participatory and community-centred approaches can play an important role in tackling health inequalities in cancer and its screening. Despite limitations, the intervention showed potential and was positively received by participants. Feasibility testing is needed to investigate effectiveness on a larger scale in a full trial.

How has physical distancing impacted on health and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic? A Scottish longitudinal qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: This study provides an in-depth understanding of the impact of physical distancing restrictions and other quarantining measures during the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic on physical and mental health and well-being. DESIGN: Longitudinal qualitative research using semistructured interviews at two time points (21 May to 10 June 2020 when the first restrictions were eased, and 2 to 26 August 2020 when many restrictions had been eased, but physical distancing measures remained) and framework analysis. SETTING: Interviews by telephone or video call in Scotland. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty participants: 16 women, 93% reporting white ethnicity, 18+ years, 47% from deprived areas, 47% reported mental and/or physical health conditions. RESULTS: Four main themes described the impact of physical distancing restrictions on (1) health behaviours; (2) healthcare access; (3) physical health; and (4) mental health. Changes in impact over the two time points were compared. For example, health behaviours in May/June, such as reduced physical activity and increased calorie intake, appeared to improve by August. From May/June to August, an increasing number of participants expressed dissatisfaction with healthcare they received. Participants with existing physical health conditions reported continued negative impact of restrictions on their physical health. All participants reported some negative mental health impact, mostly anxiety. An increasing number reported mental health improvements in August, with those with mental health conditions or under 30 years reporting improvement most frequently. CONCLUSIONS: In line with previous research, our participants felt able to return to prepandemic health habits. Our findings corroborate evidence of reduced preventive healthcare use and help-seeking behaviours. People with existing health conditions appear to be most vulnerable to negative mental and physical health impacts of physical distancing. These negative impacts and periods of unhealthy behaviours have potential long-term consequences, especially among already underserved groups. We recommend public health and policy strategies to mitigate long-term impacts of physical distancing.

Mental health and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic: longitudinal analyses of adults in the UK COVID-19 Mental Health & Wellbeing study.

BACKGROUND: The effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the population's mental health and well-being are likely to be profound and long lasting. AIMS: To investigate the trajectory of mental health and well-being during the first 6 weeks of lockdown in adults in the UK. METHOD: A quota survey design and a sampling frame that permitted recruitment of a national sample was employed. Findings for waves 1 (31 March to 9 April 2020), 2 (10 April to 27 April 2020) and 3 (28 April to 11 May 2020) are reported here. A range of mental health factors was assessed: pre-existing mental health problems, suicide attempts and self-harm, suicidal ideation, depression, anxiety, defeat, entrapment, mental well-being and loneliness. RESULTS: A total of 3077 adults in the UK completed the survey at wave 1. Suicidal ideation increased over time. Symptoms of anxiety, and levels of defeat and entrapment decreased across waves whereas levels of depressive symptoms did not change significantly. Positive well-being also increased. Levels of loneliness did not change significantly over waves. Subgroup analyses showed that women, young people (18-29 years), those from more socially disadvantaged backgrounds and those with pre-existing mental health problems have worse mental health outcomes during the pandemic across most factors. CONCLUSIONS: The mental health and well-being of the UK adult population appears to have been affected in the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. The increasing rates of suicidal thoughts across waves, especially among young adults, are concerning.

Clinician Attitudes to Using Low-Dose Radiation Therapy to Treat COVID-19 Lung Disease.

PURPOSE: Current treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) lung disease have limited efficacy. Low-dose radiation therapy (LDRT) has received both interest and criticism as a potential treatment for this condition. In this qualitative study we explored clinicians' perspectives to identify barriers to testing LDRT in clinical trials and implementing it in clinical practice. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Semistructured interviews were undertaken with 6 clinicians from 3 medical disciplines. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed thematically, using a framework approach. Common themes regarding barriers to using LDRT for COVID-19 lung disease were identified from the data. RESULTS: Three categories of barriers emerged: (1) the potential to do harm to the patient, including difficulty in predicting harm and lack of existing data to inform quantification of risks; (2) the feasibility of trialing this novel treatment strategy in the clinical setting, in particular trial design and recruitment, patient selection and buy-in from relevant clinician groups; and (3) the logistics of delivering the treatment, in particular risks of transmission to other patients and resources required for patient transfer. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified several barriers that may impede the evaluation and subsequent implementation of LDRT as a treatment for COVID-19 lung disease, from the perspectives of clinicians in 3 relevant specialties. By documenting and articulating these concerns, we hope to enhance discussion of why these barriers exist, and enable them to be addressed in a proactive manner to facilitate research into the potential benefits of radiation treatment for patients with COVID-19 lung disease going forward.