Health and social care workers experiences of coping while working in the frontline during the COVID-19 pandemic: One year on.

BACKGROUND: The unprecedented pressure of working on the frontline during the Covid-19 pandemic had a demonstrable impact on the mental health and wellbeing of health and social care workers in the early stages of the pandemic, however, less research has focused on workers' experiences over the longer course of the pandemic. AIMS: We set out to develop an explanatory model of the processes that helped and hindered the coping of HSCWs working over the course of the Covid-19 pandemic. METHOD: Twenty HSCWs based in the UK took part in the study. They completed semi-structured interviews 12-18 months after the peak of the first wave in the UK. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using grounded theory methodology. RESULTS: The analysis identified eleven theoretical codes: personal context, organisational resources, organisational response, management, colleagues, decision-making and responsibilities, internal impacts, external impactors, safety, barriers to accessing support and temporal factors. The findings suggest that factors related to the individual themselves, their personal context, the organisation they work in, their managers, the support structures around them and their sense of safety impacted on HSCWs; ability to cope. Some factors changed over time throughout the first year of the pandemic, such as workload and staff illness, which further impacted HSCWs' coping. There were many barriers to accessing support that also impacted coping, including availability, awareness and time. The relationship between the factors that impacted coping are represented in an explanatory model. CONCLUSIONS: The findings extend previous studies on the mental health impact on frontline HSCWs working during Covid-19, providing novel insight by developing an explanatory model illustrating the underlying factors that impacted their coping experiences over the course of the pandemic in the UK. The findings from this study may assist in the development of improved and more effective support for HSCWs going forwards.

Synthesis of the Evidence on What Works for Whom in Telemental Health: Rapid Realist Review.

BACKGROUND: Telemental health (delivering mental health care via video calls, telephone calls, or SMS text messages) is becoming increasingly widespread. Telemental health appears to be useful and effective in providing care to some service users in some settings, especially during an emergency restricting face-to-face contact, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. However, important limitations have been reported, and telemental health implementation risks the reinforcement of pre-existing inequalities in service provision. If it is to be widely incorporated into routine care, a clear understanding is needed of when and for whom it is an acceptable and effective approach and when face-to-face care is needed. OBJECTIVE: This rapid realist review aims to develop a theory about which telemental health approaches work (or do not work), for whom, in which contexts, and through what mechanisms. METHODS: Rapid realist reviewing involves synthesizing relevant evidence and stakeholder expertise to allow timely development of context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations in areas where evidence is urgently needed to inform policy and practice. The CMO configurations encapsulate theories about what works for whom and by what mechanisms. Sources included eligible papers from 2 previous systematic reviews conducted by our team on telemental health; an updated search using the strategy from these reviews; a call for relevant evidence, including "gray literature," to the public and key experts; and website searches of relevant voluntary and statutory organizations. CMO configurations formulated from these sources were iteratively refined, including through discussions with an expert reference group, including researchers with relevant lived experience and frontline clinicians, and consultation with experts focused on three priority groups: children and young people, users of inpatient and crisis care services, and digitally excluded groups. RESULTS: A total of 108 scientific and gray literature sources were included. From our initial CMO configurations, we derived 30 overarching CMO configurations within four domains: connecting effectively; flexibility and personalization; safety, privacy, and confidentiality; and therapeutic quality and relationship. Reports and stakeholder input emphasized the importance of personal choice, privacy and safety, and therapeutic relationships in telemental health care. The review also identified particular service users likely to be disadvantaged by telemental health implementation and a need to ensure that face-to-face care of equivalent timeliness remains available. Mechanisms underlying the successful and unsuccessful application of telemental health are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Service user choice, privacy and safety, the ability to connect effectively, and fostering strong therapeutic relationships need to be prioritized in delivering telemental health care. Guidelines and strategies coproduced with service users and frontline staff are needed to optimize telemental health implementation in real-world settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO); CRD42021260910; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021260910.