Psychological Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Health Care Workers in Singapore Background: In response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, Singapore raised its Disease Outbreak Response System Condition alert to “orange,” the second highest level. Between 19 February and 13 March 2020, confirmed cases rose from 84 to 200 (34.2 per 1 000 000 population), with an increase in patients in critical condition from 4 to 11 (5.5%) and no reported deaths in Singapore (1). Understanding the psychological impact of the COVID-19 outbreak among health care workers is crucial in guiding policies and interventions to maintain their psychological well-being. Objective: To examine the psychological distress, depression, anxiety, and stress experienced by health care workers in Singapore in the midst of the outbreak, and to compare these between medically and non–medically trained hospital personnel. Methods and Findings: From 19 February to 13 March 2020, health care workers from 2 major tertiary institutions in Singapore who were caring for patients with COVID-19 were invited to participate with a self-administered questionnaire. LETTERS

Psychological Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Health Care Workers in Singapore

Many health and social care (HSC) professionals have faced overwhelming pressures throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. As the current situation is constantly changing, and some restrictions across the UK countries such as social distancing and mask wearing in this period (May–July 2021) began to ease, it is important to examine how this workforce has been affected and how employers can help rebuild their services. The aim of this study was to compare cross-sectional data collected from the HSC workforce in the UK at three time points during the COVID-19 pandemic: Phase 1 (May–July 2020), Phase 2 (November 2020–January 2021) and Phase 3 (May–July 2021). Respondents surveyed across the UK (England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland) consisted of nurses, midwives, allied health professionals, social care workers and social workers. Wellbeing and work-related quality of life significantly declined from Phase 1 to 3 (p < 0.001); however, no significant difference occurred between Phases 2 and 3 (p > 0.05). Respondents increasingly used negative coping strategies between Phase 1 (May–July 2020) and Phase 3 (May–July 2021), suggesting that the HSC workforce has been negatively impacted by the pandemic. These results have the potential to inform HSC employers’ policies, practices, and interventions as the workforce continues to respond to the COVID-19 virus and its legacy.

/pdf/decreasing-wellbeing-and-increasing-use-of-negative-coping-3nb3wmmj.pdf

Decreasing Wellbeing and Increasing Use of Negative Coping Strategies: The Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the UK Health and Social Care Workforce

Life and research work in the age of COVID-19 can be compared to the epistolary courting between Florentino Ariza and Fermina Daza, in Gabriel García Márquez’ classic novel Love in the Time of Cholera 1. In the midst of the pandemic, we are using correspondence more than ever. By “correspondence” in this case, we specifically mean the use of e-mail and web surveys. Among the various kinds of surveys that can be conducted via the internet, the book Internet Research Methods 2 provides a didactic review for novices, besides several key insights for more experienced researchers. The current article focuses on web surveys, also known as web-based surveys, e-surveys, and online surveys. The article briefly presents some of the advantages that may have fueled their growing popularity in the current context (besides the possibility of collecting data from a distance, a clear advantage when social distancing is needed), as well as the spinoffs and ethical issues that need to be considered when planning such surveys and interpreting their results. Web surveys are strategies used to obtain primary data and have been performed since the 1990s. Since then, different fields of knowledge such as the social sciences, political science, behavioral science, and communications science have used these surveys and discussed their possible limitations and the need for methodological improvements 3,4,5. Web surveys can generally be conducted using e-mail lists (members of a profession or university students, for example 6,7), internet user panels 8,9, or publication of the survey’s link on websites and social networks 10,11. Considering that each of these approaches has unique characteristics, the focus here will be on web surveys that included volunteers recruited through websites and social networks. A quick search in PubMed/MEDLINE using the terms \"(‘websurvey’ OR ‘web-based survey’ OR online survey) AND COVID-19\", approximately six months after diagnosis of the first case of COVID-19 in China, yielded 146 published studies. This figure does not come close to the total number of web surveys that are being conducted worldwide, but it clearly indicates one of the method’s advantage: the speed between planning the survey and publishing the results. Importantly, this does not even include the results of reports, opinion polls, or other instruments, but only articles published in scientific journals, selected via peer review, in the health field, and in a single database. The speed in obtaining and publishing information is particularly important in crisis situations. A minimal understanding of perceptions, beliefs, knowledge, behaviors, and physical and mental health problems can back new studies and interventions when other data are not available. Besides the speed in data collection, large numbers of individuals may be included in the surveys (thousands or tens of thousands Web surveys in the time of COVID-19

Web surveys in the time of COVID-19/ Websurveys nos tempos de COVID-19/ Websurveys en tiempos de la COVID-19

Longitudinal data on the mental health impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic in healthcare workers is limited. We estimated prevalence, incidence and persistence of probable mental disorders in a cohort of Spanish healthcare workers (Covid-19 waves 1 and 2) -and identified associated risk factors.8996 healthcare workers evaluated on 5 May-7 September 2020 (baseline) were invited to a second web-based survey (October-December 2020). Major depressive disorder (PHQ-8 ≥ 10), generalised anxiety disorder (GAD-7 ≥ 10), panic attacks, post-traumatic stress disorder (PCL-5 ≥ 7), and alcohol use disorder (CAGE-AID ≥ 2) were assessed. Distal (pre-pandemic) and proximal (pandemic) risk factors were included. We estimated the incidence of probable mental disorders (among those without disorders at baseline) and persistence (among those with disorders at baseline). Logistic regression of individual-level [odds ratios (OR)] and population-level (population attributable risk proportions) associations were estimated, adjusting by all distal risk factors, health care centre and time of baseline interview.4809 healthcare workers participated at four months follow-up (cooperation rate = 65.7%; mean = 120 days s.d. = 22 days from baseline assessment). Follow-up prevalence of any disorder was 41.5%, (v. 45.4% at baseline, p < 0.001); incidence, 19.7% (s.e. = 1.6) and persistence, 67.7% (s.e. = 2.3). Proximal factors showing significant bivariate-adjusted associations with incidence included: work-related factors [prioritising Covid-19 patients (OR = 1.62)], stress factors [personal health-related stress (OR = 1.61)], interpersonal stress (OR = 1.53) and financial factors [significant income loss (OR = 1.37)]. Risk factors associated with persistence were largely similar.Our study indicates that the prevalence of probable mental disorders among Spanish healthcare workers during the second wave of the Covid-19 pandemic was similarly high to that after the first wave. This was in good part due to the persistence of mental disorders detected at the baseline, but with a relevant incidence of about 1 in 5 of HCWs without mental disorders during the first wave of the Covid-19 pandemic. Health-related factors, work-related factors and interpersonal stress are important risks of persistence of mental disorders and of incidence of mental disorders. Adequately addressing these factors might have prevented a considerable amount of mental health impact of the pandemic among this vulnerable population. Addressing health-related stress, work-related factors and interpersonal stress might reduce the prevalence of these disorders substantially. Study registration number: NCT04556565. 

/pdf/mental-impact-of-covid-19-among-spanish-healthcare-workers-a-19csnnp0.pdf

Mental impact of Covid-19 among Spanish healthcare workers. A large longitudinal survey

Abstract Aims Longitudinal data on the mental health impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic in healthcare workers is limited. We estimated prevalence, incidence and persistence of probable mental disorders in a cohort of Spanish healthcare workers (Covid-19 waves 1 and 2) -and identified associated risk factors. Methods 8996 healthcare workers evaluated on 5 May–7 September 2020 (baseline) were invited to a second web-based survey (October–December 2020). Major depressive disorder (PHQ-8 ≥ 10), generalised anxiety disorder (GAD-7 ≥ 10), panic attacks, post-traumatic stress disorder (PCL-5 ≥ 7), and alcohol use disorder (CAGE-AID ≥ 2) were assessed. Distal (pre-pandemic) and proximal (pandemic) risk factors were included. We estimated the incidence of probable mental disorders (among those without disorders at baseline) and persistence (among those with disorders at baseline). Logistic regression of individual-level [odds ratios (OR)] and population-level (population attributable risk proportions) associations were estimated, adjusting by all distal risk factors, health care centre and time of baseline interview. Results 4809 healthcare workers participated at four months follow-up (cooperation rate = 65.7%; mean = 120 days s.d. = 22 days from baseline assessment). Follow-up prevalence of any disorder was 41.5%, (v. 45.4% at baseline, p < 0.001); incidence, 19.7% (s.e. = 1.6) and persistence, 67.7% (s.e. = 2.3). Proximal factors showing significant bivariate-adjusted associations with incidence included: work-related factors [prioritising Covid-19 patients (OR = 1.62)], stress factors [personal health-related stress (OR = 1.61)], interpersonal stress (OR = 1.53) and financial factors [significant income loss (OR = 1.37)]. Risk factors associated with persistence were largely similar. Conclusions Our study indicates that the prevalence of probable mental disorders among Spanish healthcare workers during the second wave of the Covid-19 pandemic was similarly high to that after the first wave. This was in good part due to the persistence of mental disorders detected at the baseline, but with a relevant incidence of about 1 in 5 of HCWs without mental disorders during the first wave of the Covid-19 pandemic. Health-related factors, work-related factors and interpersonal stress are important risks of persistence of mental disorders and of incidence of mental disorders. Adequately addressing these factors might have prevented a considerable amount of mental health impact of the pandemic among this vulnerable population. Addressing health-related stress, work-related factors and interpersonal stress might reduce the prevalence of these disorders substantially. Study registration number: NCT04556565

As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to evolve around the world, it is important to examine its effect on societies and individuals, including health and social care (HSC) professionals. The aim of this study was to compare cross-sectional data collected from HSC staff in the UK at two time points during the COVID-19 pandemic: Phase 1 (May–July 2020) and Phase 2 (November 2020–January 2021). The HSC staff surveyed consisted of nurses, midwives, allied health professionals, social care workers and social workers from across the UK (England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland). Multiple regressions were used to examine the effects of different coping strategies and demographic and work-related variables on participants’ wellbeing and quality of working life to see how and if the predictors changed over time. An additional multiple regression was used to directly examine the effects of time (Phase 1 vs. Phase 2) on the outcome variables. Findings suggested that both wellbeing and quality of working life deteriorated from Phase 1 to Phase 2. The results have the potential to inform interventions for HSC staff during future waves of the COVID-19 pandemic, other infectious outbreaks or even other circumstances putting long-term pressures on HSC systems.

A Cross-Sectional Examination of the Mental Wellbeing, Coping and Quality of Working Life in Health and Social Care Workers in the UK at Two Time Points of the COVID-19 Pandemic

During the COVID-19 pandemic interest into its potential impact on mental wellbeing has intensified. Within the social care sector, the pandemic has increased job demands and prolonged stress taking a disproportionate toll on the workforce, particularly social workers. The current paper compares the mental wellbeing and quality of working life of social workers in the United Kingdom (UK) before and during the pandemic. Data were collected in 2018 (N=1195) and 2020 (N=1024) using two cross-sectional surveys. To account for the differences between the datasets, propensity score matching was employed prior to effect estimation, utilising demographic and work-related variables common to both datasets. The differences between the two time-points were estimated using multiple regressions. Both mental wellbeing and quality of working life were significantly higher during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 compared to 2018. This suggests that during the highpoint of the pandemic in the UK, increased support, and changes to working practices, such as reprioritisation of work and other initiatives, may be responsible for increased mental wellbeing and quality of working life. While acknowledging the known pressures on UK social workers during the COVID-19 pandemic this evidence suggests a mixed picture of the pandemic with lessons for managers and employers.

/pdf/mental-wellbeing-and-quality-of-working-life-in-uk-social-3wlig9kfcy.pdf

Mental wellbeing and quality of working life in UK social workers before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A propensity score matching study

Health and social care workers' quality of working life and coping while working during the COVID-19 pandemic: Phase 3 10th May 2021-2nd July 2021: Findings from a UK Survey

Ruth D. Neill

Papers

A Cross-Sectional Examination of the Mental Wellbeing, Coping and Quality of Working Life in Health and Social Care Workers in the UK at Two Time Points of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Mental wellbeing and quality of working life in UK social workers before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A propensity score matching study

Health and social care workers' quality of working life and coping while working during the COVID-19 pandemic: Phase 3 10th May 2021-2nd July 2021: Findings from a UK Survey