Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on working conditions and mental well-being of mental health professionals in the Netherlands: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the extent of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health and well-being of mental health professionals (MHPs) in the Netherlands and understand their needs during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN AND SETTING: A cross-sectional, mixed-methods study was conducted with MHPs from the Netherlands from June 2020 to October 2020, consisting of an online survey and three online focus group discussions. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were MHPs from various occupational groups (psychologists, social workers, mental health nurses, developmental education workers, etc). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The online survey included questions about work-related changes due to COVID-19 perceived resilience to stress, changes in lifestyle behaviours and mental health symptoms. The focus group discussions focused mostly on work experiences during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: MHP's reported an increase in experience workload during the pandemic (mean score 8.04 based on a scale of 1-10) compared to before the pandemic (mean score of 7). During the first wave of the pandemic, 50% of respondents reported increased stress, 32% increased sleeping problems and 24% increased mental health problems. Adverse occupational (eg, increased workload OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.28-2.32), psychological (eg, life satisfaction OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.52-0.75), lifestyle (eg, increased sleep problems OR 2.80, 95% CI 2.07-3.80) and physical factors (decline in physical health OR 3.56, 95% CI 2.61-4.85) were associated with a decline in mental health. Participants expressed significant concern in the focus group discussions about the duration of the pandemic, the high workload, less work-life balance and lack of contact with colleagues. Suggestions to improve working conditions included ensuring clear communication about guidelines and facilitating worker contact and support via peer-to-peer coaching where experiences can be shared. CONCLUSIONS: The current study indicates that MHP experienced a decline in mental health status during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, which should be taken into consideration by employers, policymakers and researchers.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and earthquake on mental health of persons with severe mental illness: A survey study among people receiving community mental health care versus treatment as usual in Croatia.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic led to the disruption of mental health services in most countries. Croatia has been developing and strengthening its mental health system, including the introduction of community mental health teams (CMHT) for persons with severe mental illness (SMI), whose implementation was ongoing during the pandemic through the RECOVER-E project. AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess the differences in mental health outcomes, perceived social support and healthcare utilization in the group of participants receiving treatment as usual (TAU group) compared to the group receiving TAU and additional care by the CMHT (CMHT group) during the COVID-19 pandemic and two earthquakes. METHOD: This is a cross-sectional survey administered among 90 participants with SMI at two time points: in May/June 2020 (first COVID-19 wave, earthquake) and in December 2020/January 2021 (second COVID-19 wave, earthquake). RESULTS: A significantly larger proportion of participants from the CMHT group visited the general practitioners in both waves of COVID-19 (first wave: CMHT 72.1%, TAU 44.2%, p = .009; second wave: CMHT 91.1%, TAU 64.1%, p = .003), as well as psychiatric services in the second wave (CMHT 95.3%, TAU 79.5%, p = .028). The use of long-acting injectables was also more frequent in the CMHT group (p = .039). Furthermore, analysis of the first wave showed higher perceived support of significant others (p = .004) in the CMHT group. We did not identify any differences in mental health outcomes between groups in either wave. CONCLUSIONS: While mental health outcomes did not differ between TAU and CMHT group, people in CMHT used services and treatments more frequently than those in TAU during the pandemic, which may indicate that CMHT services enable the continuity and accessibility of care for people with SMI under the circumstances where standard care is interruped (for example pandemic, disaster conditions).

The effects of state earned income tax credits on mental health and health behaviors: A quasi-experimental study.

The earned income tax credit (EITC) is the largest U.S. poverty alleviation program for families with children, and state EITC policies provide a modest supplement to the federal program. Yet there are few studies of the effects of state EITC policies on population health. We examined whether state EITC policies affect mental health and health behaviors. Participants were drawn from the 1995-2015 waves of the Panel Study of Income Dynamics, a diverse national cohort study (N = 10,567). We used a quasi-experimental difference-in-differences analysis to examine the effects of state EITC programs among eligible individuals, accounting for secular trends among similar individuals in non-EITC states. Outcomes included self-reported general health, psychological distress, alcohol use, and smoking. The mean size of state EITC refunds in our sample was $265 for eligible individuals. In the overall sample, state EITC programs were not associated with any health outcomes of interest. This finding was robust to alternative specifications, and similar in subgroup analyses by gender and marital status. This study suggests that state EITC programs, which tend to provide smaller refunds than the federal program, may not be large enough to have a positive impact on mental health and health behaviors. These findings may inform policymaking related to the generosity of state EITC programs, especially as states seek to address the socioeconomic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Bittersweet Effects of COVID-19 on Mental Health: Results of an Online Survey among a Sample of the Dutch Population Five Weeks after Relaxation of Lockdown Restrictions.

Previous research shows that crises can have both negative and positive mental health effects on the population. The current study explored these effects in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic after relaxation of governmental measures. An online survey was administered among a representative sample of the Dutch population (n = 1519) in June 2020, ten weeks after the peak of COVID-19 had passed, and five weeks after restrictions were relaxed. Participants were asked about mental health, adverse events during COVID-19, and about any positive effects of the pandemic. Most participants (80%, n = 1207) reported no change in mental health since the COVID-19 pandemic. This was also the case among respondents who had experienced an adverse event. Protective factors of mental health were being male and high levels of positive mental well-being. Risk factors were emotional loneliness and the experience of adverse life events. Social loneliness was positively associated with stable mental health, stressing the importance of meaningful relationships. Note that 58% of participants reported positive effects of the pandemic, the most common of which were rest, working from home, and feeling more socially connected. In summary, 10 weeks after the start of the crisis, and 5 weeks after relaxation of the restrictions, most people remained stable during the crisis, and were even able to report positive effects.