Abstract
Background Intensive Care Unit (ICU), anaesthetic and theatres staff have faced significant challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic which have the potential to adversely affect their mental health
Aims To identify the rates of probable mental health disorder in ICU and anaesthetic staff in six hospitals during June and July 2020
Methods An anonymised brief web-based survey comprising standardised questionnaires examining depression, anxiety symptoms, symptoms of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), wellbeing and alcohol use was administered to staff.
Results 709 participants completed the surveys comprising 291 (41%) Doctors, 344 (48.5%) Nurses, and 74 (10.4%) as other clinicians. Over half (58.8%) reported good wellbeing, however 45.4% met the threshold for probable clinical significance on at least one of the following measures: severe depression (6.3%), PTSD (39.5%), severe anxiety (11.3%) or problem drinking (7.2%). 13.4% of respondents reported frequent thoughts of being better off dead, or of hurting themselves in the past two weeks. We found that doctors consistently reported better mental health than nurses.
Conclusions We found substantial rates of probable mental health disorders, and thoughts of self-harm, amongst ICU staff; these difficulties were especially prevalent in ICU nurses. Our results a pressing need for a national strategy should be designed to protect the mental health of ICU staff whilst they carry out their essential work during COVID-19. This should target preventative actions, including reducing exposure of staff to psychological harm, as well as ensuring that staff who need formal treatment are able to access it in a timely manner.
Competing Interest Statement
KF works for NHS England. NG runs a consultancy which provides the NHS with active listening and peer support training.
Funding Statement
The research was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Emergency Preparedness and Response at Kings College London in partnership with Public Health England (PHE), in collaboration with the University of East Anglia and Newcastle University. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, the Department of Health or Public Health England.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The need for ethical review was discussed with two university ethics committees, King's College London (KCL) and University College London (UCL). Both ethics boards confirmed that this project does not require ethical approval as it is a service evaluation since the participants used are not randomised, the protocol does not demand any change in the care being provided or any particular intervention, and the findings will not be generalisable outside of the groups of staff that are the focus of the survey. This is as per the definition provided by the NHS Health Research Authority "Is my study research?" decision tool which also confirmed that the study did not require review by a research ethics committee.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Funding: The research was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Emergency Preparedness and Response at King’s College London in partnership with Public Health England (PHE), in collaboration with the University of East Anglia and Newcastle University. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, the Department of Health or Public Health England.
Competing interests: KF works for NHS England. NG runs a consultancy which provides the NHS with active listening and peer support training.
Ethical approval: No ethical approval was asked for as the survey was a quality improvement measure which did not collect any identifiable data
Data Availability
Data is not available for sharing.