Mental health outcomes in health care providers during the COVID-19 pandemic: an umbrella review.

As we head into the third year of the COVID-19 pandemic, there is an increasing need to consider the long-term mental health outcomes of health care workers (HCWs) who have experienced overwhelming work pressure, economic and social deprivation, burnout, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). This scoping umbrella review summarizes the mental health outcomes of published evidence syntheses on HCWs worldwide. We analyzed 39 evidence syntheses representing the findings from 1297 primary studies. We found several persistent fears and concerns (job-related fears, fear of stigmatization, worries about the pandemic, and infection-related fears) that shaped HCW experiences in delivering health care. We also describe several risk factors (job-related, social factors, poor physical and mental health, and inadequate coping strategies) and protective factors (individual and external factors). This is the first scoping umbrella review comprehensively documenting the various risk and protective factors that HCWs have faced during the COVID-19 pandemic. HCWs continue to fear the risk that they may infect their family and friends since they regularly interact with COVID-19 patients. This places HCWs in a precarious situation requiring them to balance risk to their family and friends and potential social deprivation from isolation.

This review summarizes the mental health outcomes of health care workers (HCWs) during the COVID-19 pandemic, including their worries and concerns. The fear of infecting loved ones was one of the essential fears faced by HCWs. Job-related fears included job instability, career uncertainty, the fear of losing control in the workplace, and increased workload. Furthermore, HCWs expressed concerns about stigmatization and uncertainty associated with the pandemic's magnitude, duration, and effects. Several risk factors and protective factors for the mental health of HCWs were identified in this review. Risk factors included the lack of personal protective equipment (PPE), the increased workload, the lack of timely information regarding the pandemic, involuntary conscription, social restrictions, pre-existing physical and mental illnesses, and improper coping strategies. In contrast, protective factors included personal characteristics such as altruism and humor, perceived control and self-efficacy, adequate training and education regarding the pandemic, adequate supply of PPE, and favorable work environments. These findings can serve as a basis for the formulation of interventions by governing bodies that promote the mental health of HCWs.

A Systematic Map of Non-Clinical Evidence Syntheses Published Globally on COVID-19.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Evidence syntheses perform rigorous investigations of the primary literature and they have played a vital role in generating evidence-based recommendations for governments worldwide during the Covid-19 pandemic. However, there has not yet been an attempt to organize them by topic and other characteristics. This study performed a systematic mapping exercise of non-clinical evidence syntheses pertaining to Covid-19. METHODS: This study conducted a systematic search on December 5, 2020 across 10 databases and servers: CINAHL (EBSCO Information Services, Ipswich, Massachusetts, United States), Embase (Elsevier, Aalborg, Denmark), Global Health (EBSCO Information Services, Ipswich, Massachusetts, United States), Healthstar (NICHSR and AHA, Bethesda, United States), MEDLINE (NLM, Bethesda, United States), PsychINFO (APA, Washington, DC, United States), Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics, London, UK), Research Square (Research Square, Durham, North Carolina), MEDRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, New York, United States), and PROSPERO (NIHR, York, United Kingdom). Only full evidence syntheses published in a peer-reviewed journal or preprint server were included. RESULTS: This study classified all evidence syntheses in the following topics: health service delivery (n = 280), prevention and behavior (n = 201), mental health (n = 140), social epidemiology (n = 31), economy (n = 22), and environment (n = 19). This study provides a comprehensive resource of all evidence syntheses categorized according to topic. CONCLUSIONS: This study proposes the following research priorities: governance, the impact of Covid-19 on different populations, the effectiveness of prevention and control methods across contexts, mental health, and vaccine hesitancy.