Abstract
Objectives This 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.
Methods Preliminary 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).
Results Analyses 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 one’s moral code) was strongly associated with increased levels of CMDs, anxiety, depression, PTSD symptoms, and alcohol misuse.
Conclusions Our 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.
What is already known about this subject?
Large-scale population studies report increased prevalence of depression, anxiety, and psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Evidence from previous epidemics indicates a high and persistent burden of adverse mental health outcomes among healthcare workers.
What are the new findings?
Substantial levels of probable common mental disorders and post-traumatic stress disorder were found among healthcare workers.
Groups 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.
How might this impact on policy or clinical practice in the foreseeable future?
The mental health offering to healthcare workers must consider the interplay of demographic, social, and occupational factors.
Additional 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.
- anxiety
- alcohol misuse
- COVID-19
- depression
- healthcare workers
- mental health
- moral injury
- longitudinal
- quantitative methods
- post-traumatic stress disorder
- suicidal ideation
Competing Interest Statement
Prof Raine reports grants from DHSC/UKRI/ESRC COVID-19 Rapid Response Call, grants from Rosetrees Trust, grants from King's Together rapid response call, grants from UCL (Wellcome Trust) rapid response call, during the conduct of the study; & grants from NIHR outside the submitted work. Dr. Hotopf reports grants from DHSC/UKRI/ESRC COVID-19 Rapid Response Call, grants from Rosetrees Trust, grants from King's Together rapid response call, grants from UCL Partners rapid response call, during the conduct of the study; grants from Innovative Medicines Initiative and EFPIA, RADAR-CNS consortium, grants from MRC, grants from NIHR, outside the submitted work. Professor Hatch reports grants from NIHR, grants from Wellcome Trust, grants from ESRC, grants from Guy's and St. Thomas' Charity, grants from MRC, grants from UKRI, outside the submitted work; and I am a member of the following advisory groups: The Health Foundation - COVID-19 Research Programme Panel, NHS England and NHS Improvement - Patient and Carers Race Equalities Framework [PCREF] Steering Group, NHS England and NHS Improvement - Advancing Mental Health Equalities Taskforce, Health Education England - Mental Health Workforce Equalities Subgroup, Maudsley Learning - Maudsley Learning Advisory Board, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (SLaM) - Independent Advisory Groups, the SLaM Partnership Group, Lambeth Public Health - Serious Youth Violence Public Health Task and Finish Group, NHS England - Workforce Race Equality Standard Advisory Group, Thrive London - Thrive London Advisory Board, Black Thrive - Black Thrive Advisory Board. Commissions: Welsh Government's Race Equality Plan; contribution to the evidence review for Health and Social Care and Employment and Income policy areas. Dr. Stevelink reports grants from UKRI/ESRC/DHSC, grants from UCL, grants from UKRI/MRC/DHSC, grants from Rosetrees Trust, grants from King's Together Fund, during the conduct of the study. Prof. Greenberg reports a potential COI with NHSEI, during the conduct of the study; and I am the managing director of March on Stress Ltd which has provided training for a number of NHS organisations although I am not clear if the company has delivered training to any of the participating trusts or not as I do not get directly involved in commissioning specific pieces of work. Other authors report no competing interests.
Funding Statement
NHS CHECK has received funding from the following organisations and charities for the period of data collection reported in this manuscript: National Institute for Health Research Maudsley Biomedical Research Centre, King's College London; Rosetrees Trust; and the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit in Emergency Preparedness and Response at King's College London. The funders had no role in the design, analysis, interpretation or decision to submit this paper
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:
Ethical approval for the study was granted by the Health Research Authority (reference: 20/HRA/210, IRAS: 282686) and local Trust Research and Development approval.
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
↵* Joint last authors
Data Availability
All data requests should be submitted to the corresponding author for consideration. Access to available anonymised data may be granted following review.
Data Availability
We used data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC), an ongoing population-based study that contains a wide range of phenotypic and environmental measures, genetic information and linkage to health and administrative records.
