%0 Journal Article %A Giorgio Di Gessa %A Jane Maddock %A Michael J. Green %A Ellen J. Thompson %A Eoin McElroy %A Helena L. Davies %A Jessica Mundy %A Anna J. Stevenson %A Alex S.F. Kwong %A Gareth J. Griffith %A Srinivasa Vittal Katikireddi %A Claire L. Niedzwiedz %A George B. Ploubidis %A Emla Fitzsimons %A Morag Henderson %A Richard J. Silverwood %A Nish Chaturvedi %A Gerome Breen %A Claire J. Steves %A Andrew Steptoe %A David J Porteous %A Praveetha Patalay %T Mental health inequalities in healthcare, economic, and housing disruption during COVID-19: an investigation in 12 longitudinal studies %D 2021 %R 10.1101/2021.04.01.21254765 %J medRxiv %P 2021.04.01.21254765 %X Background The COVID-19 pandemic and its associated virus suppression measures have disrupted lives and livelihoods, potentially exacerbating inequalities. People already experiencing mental ill-health may have been especially vulnerable to disruptions.Aim Investigate associations between pre-pandemic psychological distress and disruptions during the pandemic to (1) healthcare, economic activity, and housing, (2) cumulative disruptions and 3) whether these differ by age, sex, ethnicity or education.Methods Data were from 59,482 participants in 12 UK longitudinal adult population surveys with data collected both prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants self-reported disruptions since the start of the pandemic to: healthcare (medication access, procedures, or appointments); economic activity (negative changes in employment, income or working hours); and housing (change of address or household composition). Logistic regression models were used within each study to estimate associations between pre-pandemic psychological distress scores and disruption outcomes. Findings were synthesised using a random effects meta-analysis with restricted maximum likelihood.Results Between one to two-thirds of study participants experienced at least one disruption during the pandemic, with 2.3-33.2% experiencing disruptions in 2 or more of the 3 domains examined. One standard deviation higher pre-pandemic psychological distress was associated with: (i) increased odds of any healthcare disruptions (OR=1.30; 95% CI: 1.20 to 1.40) with fully adjusted ORs ranging from 1.33 [1.20 to 1.49] for disruptions to prescriptions or medication access and 1.24 [1.09 to 1.41] for disruption to procedures; (ii) loss of employment (OR=1.13 [1.06 to 1.21]) and income (OR=1.12 [1.06 to 1.19]) and reductions in working hours/furlough (OR=1.05 [1.00 to 1.09]); (iii) no associations with housing disruptions (OR=1.00 [0.97 to 1.03]); and (iv) increased likelihood of experiencing a disruption in at least two domains (OR=1.25 [1.18 to 1.32]) or in one domain (OR=1.11 [1.07 to 1.16]) relative to experiencing no disruption. We did not find evidence of these associations differing by sex, ethnicity, education level, or age.Conclusion Those suffering from psychological distress before the pandemic were more likely to experience healthcare disruptions, economic disruptions related to unemployment and loss of income, and to clusters of disruptions across multiple domains during the pandemic. Considering mental ill-health was already unequally distributed in the UK population, the pandemic may exacerbate existing mental health inequalities. Individuals with poor mental health may need additional support to manage these pandemic-associated disruptions.Competing Interest StatementNo conflicts of interest were declared by DJP, EJT, GDG, AS, PP, EM, MJG, HLD, JM, CLN ASFK, GJG, AJS, MH, RJS, CJS, EF, GBP. SVK is a member of the Scientific Advisory Group on Emergencies subgroup on ethnicity and COVID-19 and is co-chair of the Scottish Governments Ethnicity Reference Group on COVID-19. GB is an advisory board member for Otsuka ltd. and Compadd Pathways. NC serves on a data safety monitoring board for trials sponsored by Astra-Zeneca.Funding StatementFunding acknowledgements This work was supported by the National Core Studies, an initiative funded by UKRI, NIHR and the Health and Safety Executive. The COVID-19 Longitudinal Health and Wellbeing National Core Study was funded by the Medical Research Council (MC_PC_20030). Studies: Understanding Society is an initiative funded by the Economic and Social Research Council and various Government Departments, with scientific leadership by the Institute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex, and survey delivery by NatCen Social Research and Kantar Public. The Understanding Society COVID-19 study is funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ES/K005146/1) and the Health Foundation (2076161). The research data are distributed by the UK Data Service. The Millennium Cohort Study, Next Steps, British Cohort Study 1970 and National Child Development Study 1958 are supported by the Centre for Longitudinal Studies, Resource Centre 2015-20 grant (ES/M001660/1) and a host of other co-funders. The 1946 NSHD cohort is hosted by the the MRC Unit for Lifelong Health and Ageing funded by the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00019/1Theme 1: Cohorts and Data Collection). The COVID-19 data collections in these five cohorts were funded by the UKRI grant Understanding the economic, social and health impacts of COVID-19 using lifetime data: evidence from 5 nationally representative UK cohorts (ES/V012789/1) The English Longitudinal Study of Ageing was developed by a team of researchers based at University College London, NatCen Social Research, the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the University of Manchester and the University of East Anglia. The data were collected by NatCen Social Research. The funding is currently provided by the National Institute on Aging in the US, and a consortium of UK government departments coordinated by the National Institute for Health Research. Funding has also been received by the Economic and Social Research Council. The English Longitudinal Study of Ageing Covid-19 Substudy was supported by the UK Economic and Social Research Grant (ESRC) ES/V003941/1. The UK Medical Research Council and Wellcome (Grant Ref: 217065/Z/19/Z) and the University of Bristol provide core support for ALSPAC. A comprehensive list of grants funding is available on the ALSPAC website (http://www.bristol.ac.uk/alspac/external/documents/grant-acknowledgements.pdf). We are extremely grateful to all the families who took part in this study, the midwives for their help in recruiting them, and the whole ALSPAC team, which includes interviewers, computer and laboratory technicians, clerical workers, research scientists, volunteers, managers, receptionists and nurses. TwinsUK receives funding from the Wellcome Trust (WT212904/Z/18/Z), the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre based at Guys and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust and Kings College London. TwinsUK is also supported by the Chronic Disease Research Foundation and Zoe Global Ltd. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Generation Scotland received core support from the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health Directorates [CZD/16/6] and the Scottish Funding Council [HR03006]. Genotyping of the GS:SFHS samples was carried out by the Genetics Core Laboratory at the Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Facility, Edinburgh, Scotland and was funded by the Medical Research Council UK and the Wellcome Trust (Wellcome Trust Strategic Award STratifying Resilience and Depression Longitudinally (STRADL) Reference 104036/Z/14/Z). Generation Scotland is funded by the Wellcome Trust (216767/Z/19/Z). The Genetic Links to Anxiety and Depression project is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) BioResource, the NIHR BioResource Centre Maudsley, and the Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and Kings College London. This study presents independent research supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre BioResource at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and Kings College London. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, NIHR, Department of Health and Social Care or Kings College London. We gratefully acknowledge capital equipment funding from the Maudsley Charity (Grant Ref. 980) and Guys and St Thomass Charity (Grant Ref. STR130505). SVK acknowledges funding from a NRS Senior Clinical Fellowship (SCAF/15/02), the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00022/2) and the Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office (SPHSU13). ASFK acknowledges funding from the ESRC (ES/V011650/1). DJP acknowledges funding from the Wellcome Trust (216767/Z/19/Z and 221574/Z/20/Z). CLN acknowledges funding from a Medical Research Council Fellowship (MR/R024774/1). EJT acknowledges funding from the Wellcome Trust (WT212904/Z/18/Z).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The most recent sweeps of the NSHD, NCDS, BCS70, Next Steps and MCS have all been granted ethical approval by the National Health Service (NHS) Research Ethics Committee and all participants have given informed consent. Ethical approval was obtained from the ALSPAC Ethics and Law Committee and the Local Research Ethics Committees. The study website contains details of all the data that is available through a fully searchable data dictionary and variable search tool: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/alspac/researchers/our-data. All wave of TwinsUK have received ethical approval associated with TwinsUK Biobank (19/NW/0187), TwinsUK (EC04/015) or Healthy Ageing Twin Study (H.A.T.S) (07/H0802/84) studies from NHS Research Ethics Committees at the Department of Twin Research and Genetic Epidemiology, Kings College London. The University of Essex Ethics Committee has approved all data collection for the Understanding Society main study and COVID-19 waves. No additional ethical approval was necessary for this secondary data analysis. Waves 1-9 of ELSA were approved through the National Research Ethics Service, while the COVID-19 Sub-study was approved by the UCL Research Ethics Committee. All participants provided informed consent. Generation Scotland obtained ethical approval from the East of Scotland Committee on Medical Research Ethics (on behalf of the National Health Service). Reference number 20/ES/0021. The GLAD Study was approved by the London - Fulham Research Ethics Committee on 21st August 2018 (REC reference: 18/LO/1218) following a full review by the committee.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesData for NCDS (SN 6137), BCS70 (SN 8547), Next Steps (SN 5545), MCS (SN 8682) and all four COVID-19 surveys (SN 8658) are available through the UK Data Service. NSHD data are available on request to the NSHD Data Sharing Committee. Interested researchers can apply to access the NSHD data via a standard application procedure. Data requests should be submitted to mrclha.swiftinfo{at}ucl.ac.uk; further details can be found at http://www.nshd.mrc.ac.uk/data.aspx. doi:10.5522/NSHD/Q101; doi:10.5522/NSHD/Q10. ALSPAC data is available to researchers through an online proposal system. Information regarding access can be found on the ALSPAC website (http://www.bristol.ac.uk/media-library/sites/alspac/documents/researchers/data-access/ALSPAC_Access_Policy.pdf). The TwinsUK Resource Executive Committee (TREC) oversees management, data sharing and collaborations involving the TwinsUK registry (for further details see https://twinsuk.ac.uk/resources-for-researchers/access-our-data/). Understanding Society data are available through the UK Data Service (SN 6614 and SN 8644). Waves 1-9 of ELSA are available through the UK Data Service (SN 8688 and 5050). Access to Generation Scotland data is approved by the Generation Scotland Access Committee. See https://www.ed.ac.uk/generation-scotland/for-researchers/access or email access{at}generationscotland.org for further details. Researchers wishing to access GLAD Study participants or data are invited to submit a data and sample access request to the NIHR BioResource to request a collaboration. %U https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/04/07/2021.04.01.21254765.full.pdf