Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-22276433

ABSTRACT

BackgroundMoral injury is defined as the strong emotional and cognitive reactions following events which clash with someones moral code, values or expectations. During the COVID-19 pandemic, increased exposure to potentially morally injurious events (PMIEs) has placed healthcare workers (HCWs) at risk of moral injury. Yet little is known about the lived experience of cumulative PMIE exposure and how NHS staff respond to this. ObjectiveWe sought to rectify this knowledge gap by qualitatively exploring the lived experiences and perspectives of clinical frontline NHS staff who responded to COVID-19. MethodsWe recruited a diverse sample of 30 clinical frontline HCWs from the NHS CHECK study cohort, for single time point qualitative interviews. All participants endorsed at least one item on the 9-item Moral Injury Events Scale (MIES) (Nash et al., 2013) at six month follow up. Interviews followed a semi-structured guide and were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. ResultsHCWs described being routinely exposed to ethical conflicts, created by exacerbations of pre-existing systemic issues including inadequate staffing and resourcing. We found that HCWs experienced a range of mental health symptoms primarily related to perceptions of institutional betrayal as well as feeling unable to fulfil their duty of care towards patients. ConclusionThese results suggest that a multi-facetted organisational strategy is warranted to prepare for PMIE exposure, promote opportunities for resolution of symptoms associated with moral injury and prevent organisational disengagement. HighlightsO_LIClinical frontline healthcare workers (HCWs) have been exposed to an accumulation of potentially morally injurious events (PMIEs) throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, including feeling betrayed by both government and NHS leaders as well as feeling unable to provide duty of care to patients C_LIO_LIHCWs described the significant adverse impact of this exposure on their mental health, including increased anxiety and depression symptoms and sleep disturbance C_LIO_LIMost HCWs interviewed believed that organisational change within the NHS was necessary to prevent excess PMIE exposure and promote resolution of moral distress C_LI

2.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-22276479

ABSTRACT

ObjectiveTo examine variations in impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of all types of healthcare workers (HCWs) in England over the first 17 months of the pandemic. MethodWe undertook a prospective cohort study of 22,501 HCWs from 18 English acute and mental health NHS Trusts, collecting online survey data on common mental disorders (CMDs), depression, anxiety, alcohol use, and PTSD, from April 2020 to August 2021. We analysed these data cross-sectionally by time period (corresponding to periods the NHS was under most pressure), and longitudinally. Data were weighted to better represent Trust population demographics. ResultsThe proportion of those with probable CMDs was greater during periods when the NHS was under most pressure (measured by average monthly deaths). For example, 55% (95%CI 53%, 58%) of participants reported symptoms of CMDs in April-June 2020 versus 47% (95%CI 46%, 48%) July-October 2020. Contrary to expectation, there were no major differences between professional groups (i.e. clinical and non-clinical staff). Younger, female, lower paid staff, who felt poorly supported by colleagues/managers, and who experienced potentially morally injurious events were most at risk of negative mental health outcomes. ConclusionAmong HCWs, the prevalence of probable CMDs increased during periods of escalating pressure on the NHS, suggesting staff support should be increased at such points in the future, and staff should be better prepared for such situations via training. All staff, regardless of role, experienced poorer mental health during these periods, suggesting that support should be provided for all staff groups. Key messagesO_ST_ABSWhat is already known on this topicC_ST_ABSExisting evidence about the mental health of healthcare workers (HCWs) through the COVID-19 pandemic comes mainly from cross-sectional studies using unrepresentative convenience samples, typically focussing on clinical staff rather than all HCWs. Such studies show high prevalence of symptoms of mental disorders, but the strength of this evidence is uncertain. What this study addsUsing a defined sampling frame, with longitudinal, weighted data, we show that during periods of greater pressure on the NHS (as indicated by average monthly national COVID-19 death rates), prevalence of mental disorder symptoms increased, and, importantly, that this effect was seen in non-clinical as well as clinical staff. How this study might affect research, practice or policyThese findings indicate that provision of support for HCWs should not only focus on those providing clinical care, but also on non-clinical staff such as porters, cleaners, and administrative staff, and additional support should be provided during higher pressure periods. Better preparation of staff for such situations is also suggested.

3.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-20240887

ABSTRACT

ObjectivesThis study reports preliminary findings on the prevalence of, and factors associated with, mental health and wellbeing outcomes of healthcare workers during the early months (April-June) of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. MethodsPreliminary cross-sectional data were analysed from a cohort study (n=4,378). Clinical and non-clinical staff of three London-based NHS Trusts (UK), including acute and mental health Trusts, took part in an online baseline survey. The primary outcome measure used is the presence of probable common mental disorders (CMDs), measured by the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). Secondary outcomes are probable anxiety (GAD-7), depression (PHQ-9), Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) (PCL-6), suicidal ideation (CIS-R), and alcohol use (AUDIT). Moral injury is measured using the Moray Injury Event Scale (MIES). ResultsAnalyses showed substantial levels of CMDs (58.9%, 95%CI 58.1 to 60.8), and of PTSD (30.2%, 95%CI 28.1 to 32.5) with lower levels of depression (27.3%, 95%CI 25.3 to 29.4), anxiety (23.2%, 95%CI 21.3 to 25.3), and alcohol misuse (10.5%, 95%CI, 9.2 to 11.9). Women, younger staff, and nurses tended to have poorer outcomes than other staff, except for alcohol misuse. Higher reported exposure to moral injury (distress resulting from violation of ones moral code) was strongly associated with increased levels of CMDs, anxiety, depression, PTSD symptoms, and alcohol misuse. ConclusionsOur findings suggest that mental health support for healthcare workers should consider those demographics and occupations at highest risk. Rigorous longitudinal data are needed in order to respond to the potential long-term mental health impacts of the pandemic. HighlightsO_ST_ABSWhat is already known about this subject?C_ST_ABSO_LILarge-scale population studies report increased prevalence of depression, anxiety, and psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic. C_LIO_LIEvidence from previous epidemics indicates a high and persistent burden of adverse mental health outcomes among healthcare workers. C_LI What are the new findings?O_LISubstantial levels of probable common mental disorders and post-traumatic stress disorder were found among healthcare workers. C_LIO_LIGroups at increased risk of adverse mental health outcomes included women, nurses, and younger staff, as well as those who reported higher levels of moral injury. C_LI How might this impact on policy or clinical practice in the foreseeable future?O_LIThe mental health offering to healthcare workers must consider the interplay of demographic, social, and occupational factors. C_LIO_LIAdditional longitudinal research that emphasises methodological rigor, namely with use of standardised diagnostic interviews to establish mental health diagnoses, is necessary to better understand the mental health burden, identify those most at risk, and provide appropriate support without pathologizing ordinary distress responses. C_LI

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...