'It was brutal. It still is': a qualitative analysis of the challenges of bereavement during the COVID-19 pandemic reported in two national surveys.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has been a devastating, mass bereavement event characterised by high levels of disruption to end-of-life, grieving and coping processes. Quantitative evidence is emerging on the effects of the pandemic on grief outcomes, but rich qualitative evidence on the lived experiences of people bereaved during these times is lacking. Methods: We analysed qualitative data from two independent UK-wide online surveys to describe the experiences of 881 people bereaved during the pandemic. We analysed the data in two phases, conducting an inductive thematic analysis and then applying Stroebe and Schut's Dual Process Model (DPM) and concepts of loss-oriented and restoration-oriented coping (1999; 2010) as an analytic lens to further contextualise and interpret the data. Results: We identified six main themes: troubled deaths; mourning, memorialisation and death administration; mass bereavement, the media and the ongoing threat of the pandemic; grieving and coping; work and employment; and support from the health and social care system. Examples of loss-oriented stressors included being unable to visit and say goodbye at the end of life and restricted funeral and memorialisation practices. Associated reactions were feelings of guilt, anger, and problems accepting the death and beginning to grieve. Examples of restoration-oriented stressors and reactions were severely curtailed support-systems and social/recreational activities, which impacted people's ability to cope. Conclusion: Study results demonstrate the exceptionally difficult sets of experiences associated with pandemic bereavement, and the utility of the DPM for conceptualising these additional challenges and their impacts on grieving. Our analysis builds and expands on previous use of the DPM in explicating the impact of the pandemic on bereavement. We make recommendations for statutory, private and third sector organisations for improving the experiences of people bereaved during and following this and future pandemics.

Perceived threat of COVID-19, attitudes towards vaccination, and vaccine hesitancy: A prospective longitudinal study in the UK.

OBJECTIVES: Using the Health Belief Model as a conceptual framework, we investigated the association between attitudes towards COVID-19, COVID-19 vaccinations, and vaccine hesitancy and change in these variables over a 9-month period in a UK cohort. METHODS: The COPE study cohort (n = 11,113) was recruited via an online survey at enrolment in March/April 2020. The study was advertised via the HealthWise Wales research registry and social media. Follow-up data were available for 6942 people at 3 months (June/July 2020) and 5037 at 12 months (March/April 2021) post-enrolment. Measures included demographics, perceived threat of COVID-19, perceived control, intention to accept or decline a COVID-19 vaccination, and attitudes towards vaccination. Logistic regression models were fitted cross-sectionally at 3 and 12 months to assess the association between motivational factors and vaccine hesitancy. Longitudinal changes in motivational variables for vaccine-hesitant and non-hesitant groups were examined using mixed-effect analysis of variance models. RESULTS: Fear of COVID-19, perceived susceptibility to COVID-19, and perceived personal control over COVID-19 infection transmission decreased between the 3- and 12-month surveys. Vaccine hesitancy at 12 months was independently associated with low fear of the disease and more negative attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination. Specific barriers to COVID-19 vaccine uptake included concerns about safety and efficacy in light of its rapid development, mistrust of government and pharmaceutical companies, dislike of coercive policies, and perceived lack of relaxation in COVID-19-related restrictions as the vaccination programme progressed. CONCLUSIONS: Decreasing fear of COVID-19, perceived susceptibility to the disease, and perceptions of personal control over reducing infection-transmission may impact future COVID-19 vaccination uptake.

Cohort profile: The UK COVID-19 Public Experiences (COPE) prospective longitudinal mixed-methods study of health and well-being during the SARSCoV2 coronavirus pandemic.

Public perceptions of pandemic viral threats and government policies can influence adherence to containment, delay, and mitigation policies such as physical distancing, hygienic practices, use of physical barriers, uptake of testing, contact tracing, and vaccination programs. The UK COVID-19 Public Experiences (COPE) study aims to identify determinants of health behaviour using the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation (COM-B) model using a longitudinal mixed-methods approach. Here, we provide a detailed description of the demographic and self-reported health characteristics of the COPE cohort at baseline assessment, an overview of data collected, and plans for follow-up of the cohort. The COPE baseline survey was completed by 11,113 UK adult residents (18+ years of age). Baseline data collection started on the 13th of March 2020 (10-days before the introduction of the first national COVID-19 lockdown in the UK) and finished on the 13th of April 2020. Participants were recruited via the HealthWise Wales (HWW) research registry and through social media snowballing and advertising (Facebook®, Twitter®, Instagram®). Participants were predominantly female (69%), over 50 years of age (68%), identified as white (98%), and were living with their partner (68%). A large proportion (67%) had a college/university level education, and half reported a pre-existing health condition (50%). Initial follow-up plans for the cohort included in-depth surveys at 3-months and 12-months after the first UK national lockdown to assess short and medium-term effects of the pandemic on health behaviour and subjective health and well-being. Additional consent will be sought from participants at follow-up for data linkage and surveys at 18 and 24-months after the initial UK national lockdown. A large non-random sample was recruited to the COPE cohort during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, which will enable longitudinal analysis of the determinants of health behaviour and changes in subjective health and well-being over the course of the pandemic.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity: a systematic review following COSMIN guidelines.

BACKGROUND: The current standard of care in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) requires regular assessment of disease activity (DA). All standard RA DA measurement instruments require joint counts to be undertaken by a healthcare professional with/without a blood test. Few healthcare providers have the capacity to assess patients as frequently as stipulated by guidelines. Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) could be an efficient and informative way to assess RA DA, which is highlighted by the SARS-COV-2 pandemic, as most consultations are remote rather than face-to-face. We aimed to assess all PROMs for RA DA against the internationally recognised COSMIN guidelines to provide evidence-based recommendations to select the most suitable PROMs. METHODS: Review registered on PROSPERO as CRD42020176176. The search strategy was based on a previous similar systematic review and expanded to include all articles up to January 2019. All identified articles were rated by two independent assessors following the COSMIN guidelines. RESULTS: 668 abstracts were identified, with 10 articles included. A further 21 were identified from a previous review. Ten PROMs were identified. There was insufficient evidence to place any of the identified PROMs into recommendation for use category A due to lack of evidence for content validity, as stipulated by the COSMIN guidelines. CONCLUSION: Lack of evidence of content validity limits suitable PROM selection, therefore none can be recommended for use. It is acknowledged that all included PROMs were developed before the COSMIN guidelines were published. Future research on PROMs for RA DA must provide evidence of content validity.

‘There is nowhere to place the anger’: accounts of bereavement experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic

IntroductionThe Covid-19 pandemic has been a mass bereavement event, causing major disruption to end-of-life, grieving and coping processes. Based on their Dual Process Model (DPM), Stroebe and Schut have identified pandemic-specific risk factors for poor bereavement outcomes and categorised these in terms of disruptions to loss-oriented and restoration-oriented coping processes which grieving people naturally oscillate between. Loss-oriented coping involves focussing on one’s loved one and their death, while restoration-oriented coping involves continuing with daily life and distracting oneself from one’s grief.AimsTo explore and describe bereavement experiences during the pandemic, relating our findings to the constructs of the DPM.MethodTwo independent online surveys were disseminated UK-wide via social media platforms and community and charitable organisations. They captured end-of-life and bereavement experiences (to all causes of death) from March 2020 to January 2021. Free-text data were analysed thematically, using the DPM as an analytic lens.ResultsSix main themes were identified: troubled and traumatic deaths;disrupted mourning, memorialisation and difficulties in death-related administration;mass bereavement, media and societal responses and the ongoing threat of the virus;grieving and coping (alone and with others);workplace and employment difficulties;and accessing health and social care support. Examples of loss-oriented stressors were being unable to visit or say goodbye and restricted funeral and memorialisation practices, leading to guilt and anger. Restoration-oriented stressors included severely restricted social networks and support systems, which affected peoples’ ability to cope.ConclusionThese results highlight significant disruptions to end-of-life, death and mourning practices, as well as usual coping mechanisms and support systems, during the Covid-19 pandemic. The DPM provides a useful framework for conceptualizing the additional challenges associated with pandemic bereavement and their impact on grieving and mental health.ImpactRecommendations are made for statutory, private and third sector organisations for improving experiences of people bereaved during this and future pandemics.

The role of perceived public and private green space in subjective health and wellbeing during and after the first peak of the COVID-19 outbreak.

Research has consistently shown that access to parks and gardens is beneficial to people's health and wellbeing. In this paper, we explore the role of both public and private green space in subjective health and wellbeing during and after the first peak of the COVID-19 outbreak that took place in the UK in the first half of 2020. It makes use of the longitudinal COVID-19 Public Experiences (COPE) study, with baseline data collected in March/April 2020 (during the first peak) and follow-up data collected in June/July 2020 (after the first peak) which included an optional module that asked respondents about their home and neighbourhood (n = 5,566). Regression analyses revealed that both perceived access to public green space (e.g. a park or woodland) and reported access to a private green space (a private garden) were associated with better subjective wellbeing and self-rated health. In line with the health compensation hypothesis for green space, private gardens had a greater protective effect where the nearest green space was perceived to be more than a 10-minute walk away. This interaction was however only present during the first COVID-19 peak when severe lockdown restrictions came into place, but not in the post-peak period when restrictions were being eased. The study found few differences across demographic groups. A private garden was relatively more beneficial for men than for women during but not after the first peak. The results suggest that both public and private green space are an important resource for health and wellbeing in times of crisis.

Engaging and supporting women with chronic kidney disease with pre-conception decision-making (including their experiences during COVID 19): A mixed-methods study protocol.

AIM: To report a protocol for a qualitative study to better understand the key factors that influence decision making about pregnancy from women's perspectives and to use these data to develop a theoretical model for shared decision-making tools for the multiple stakeholders. DESIGN: Mixed-method design using online surveys (with validated components) and purposively sampled follow-up semi structured interviews. METHODS: Funded from September 2020 for 12 months. Online surveys of adult women (aged 18-50) identified via all Wales kidney database (n ≥ 500), additional recruitment through multidisciplinary healthcare professionals, relevant third sector organizations and social media. Follow-up in-depth qualitative interviews with n = 30 women. Linear regression models to identify associations between shared decision-making preferences and clinical and psychosocial variables. Qualitative interviews will use a visual timeline task to empower women in taking control over their narratives. Qualitative data will be fully transcribed and analysed thematically, based around a chronological and theoretical (theoretical domains framework) structure that maps out key challenges and opportunities for improved decision support in the care pathway. Visual timelines will be used during stakeholder consultation activities, to enable us to co-create a map of current support, gaps in provision, and opportunities for interventions. Quantitative data will be analysed descriptively to characterize our cohort. We will assemble a multidisciplinary shared decision-making intervention development group and provide ongoing stakeholder consultation activities with patient and public representatives. DISCUSSION: Outcomes will support new learning into; the ways women's knowledge of kidney disease may affect family planning and pregnancy, their needs in terms of psychological and social support, and how they weigh up the pros and cons of starting a family. IMPACT: Evidence will inform the design of new shared decision-making tools to better support women with the complex and often emotional decisions about having children while living with kidney disease.