COVID-19 and mental health: Self-care for nursing staff

Causes and solutions to workplace psychological ill-health for nurses, midwives and paramedics: the Care Under Pressure 2 realist review

Background

Nurses, midwives and paramedics are the largest collective group of clinical staff in the National Health Service and have some of the highest prevalence of psychological ill-health. Existing literature tends to be profession-specific and focused on individual interventions that place responsibility for good psychological health with nurses, midwives and paramedics themselves.

Aim

To improve understanding of how, why and in what contexts nurses, midwives and paramedics experience work-related psychological ill-health; and determine which high-quality interventions can be implemented to minimise psychological ill-health in these professions.

Methods

Realist synthesis methodology consistent with realist and meta-narrative evidence syntheses: evolving standards' reporting guidelines.

Data sources

First round database searching in Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online Database ALL (via Ovid), cumulative index to nursing and allied health literature database (via EBSCO) and health management information consortium database (via Ovid), was undertaken between February and March 2021, followed by supplementary searching strategies (e.g. hand searching, expert solicitation of key papers). Reverse chronology screening was applied, aimed at retaining 30 relevant papers in each profession. Round two database searches (December 2021) targeted COVID-19-specific literature and literature reviews. No date limits were applied.

Results

We built on seven key reports and included 75 papers in the first round (26 nursing, 26 midwifery, 23 paramedic) plus 44 expert solicitation papers, 29 literature reviews and 49 COVID-19 focused articles in the second round. Through the realist synthesis we surfaced 14 key tensions in the literature and identified five key findings, supported by 26 context mechanism and outcome configurations. The key findings identified the following: (1) interventions are fragmented, individual-focused and insufficiently recognise cumulative chronic stressors; (2) it is difficult to promote staff psychological wellness where there is a blame culture; (3) the needs of the system often override staff well-being at work ('serve and sacrifice'); (4) there are unintended personal costs of upholding and implementing values at work; and (5) it is challenging to design, identify and implement interventions to work optimally for diverse staff groups with diverse and interacting stressors.

Conclusions

Our realist synthesis strongly suggests the need to improve the systemic working conditions and the working lives of nurses, midwives and paramedics to improve their psychological well-being. Individual, one-off psychological interventions are unlikely to succeed alone. Psychological ill-health is highly prevalent in these staff groups (and can be chronic and cumulative as well as acute) and should be anticipated and prepared for, indeed normalised and expected. Healthcare organisations need to (1) rebalance the working environment to enable healthcare professionals to recover and thrive; (2) invest in multi-level system approaches to promote staff psychological well-being; and use an organisational diagnostic framework, such as the NHS England and NHS Improvement Health and Wellbeing framework, to self-assess and implement a systems approach to staff well-being.

Future work

Future research should implement, refine and evaluate systemic interventional strategies. Interventions and evaluations should be co-designed with front-line staff and staff experts by experience, and tailored where possible to local, organisational and workforce needs.

Limitations

The literature was not equivalent in size and quality across the three professions and we did not carry out citation searches using hand searching and stakeholder/expert suggestions to augment our sample.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020172420. Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020172420.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR129528) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 9. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

The impact of the global COVID-19 pandemic on risk factors for suicide in healthcare workers: A narrative review

BACKGROUND

Suicide is a leading cause of death in the United States. Worldwide, over 700,000 people die by suicide each year. Healthcare workers are more vulnerable to suicide risk factors than the general population. The global COVID-19 pandemic presents additional workplace and health concerns that relate to suicide risk factors in healthcare workers. It is important to recognise suicide risk factors in healthcare workers and to implement strategies to reduce these risk factors.

OBJECTIVES

This study describes the impact of the global COVID-19 pandemic on risk factors for suicide in healthcare workers and identifies evidence-based strategies and resources to reduce suicide risk factors in healthcare workers.

DESIGN

The authors conducted a thematic analysis and narrative review of the literature.

METHODS

Using health science databases, the authors searched the literature, selected and analyzed studies, identified themes, synthesised findings and created a narrative review. The STROBE checklist was used in this study.

RESULTS

Two themes were identified (1) The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on work-related suicide risk factors in healthcare workers; (2) The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health-related suicide risk factors in healthcare workers. The pandemic has affected suicide risk factors in healthcare workers. Many studies discussed evidence-based strategies and resources that can be used to reduce suicide risk factors.

CONCLUSION

The global COVID-19 pandemic has negatively impacted suicide risk factors in healthcare workers. It is time for individuals and healthcare delivery systems to implement suicide risk prevention strategies to protect healthcare workers now and in the future.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

This review increases awareness of the pandemic's impact on healthcare workers' risk factors for suicide and identifies evidence-based suicide risk prevention strategies and resources for healthcare workers.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Library services supported this research by generating search strategies and providing resources and tools.

Psychological Distress and COVID-19: Evidence-Based Interventions for Frontline Health Care Workers-A Literature Review

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a serious impact on the psychological well-being of frontline health care workers. A variety of interventions have been offered to health care workers in their workplace that has them questioning which intervention would be most beneficial. The purpose of this review is to determine what evidence-based interventions would have an impact on alleviating COVID-19-related psychological distress.

METHODS

A search was conducted from multiple databases, including Pubmed, CINAHL, Joanna Briggs, and Cochrane, using the PRISMA framework. The search included COVID-19 as well as previous pandemics. Critical appraisal and synthesis of the 16 relevant sources of evidence were completed.

RESULTS

Based on the current evidence, one cannot conclude that any specific intervention is effective for pandemic-relate distress.

CONCLUSION

The development, implementation, and scientific evaluation of evidence-based interventions to address the immediate, as well as the long-term, psychological effects of COVID-19 on the mental well-being of health care workers, are needed.

Look After Yourself: Students Consistently Showing High Resilience Engaged in More Self-Care and Proved More Resilient During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has prompted severe restrictions on everyday life to curb the spread of infections. For example, teaching at universities has been switched to an online format, reducing students' opportunities for exchange, and social interaction. Consequently, their self-reported mental health has significantly decreased and there is a pressing need to elucidate the underlying mechanisms-ideally considering not only data collected during the pandemic, but also before. One hundred seventeen German university students aged 18-27 were assessed for known resilience factors (optimism, self-care, social support, generalized self-efficacy) and subsequently completed surveys on stress experiences and mental health every 3 months over a period of 9 months before the outbreak of the pandemic and once during the first lockdown in Germany. For each timepoint before the pandemic, we regressed participants' mental health against the reported stressor load, such that the resulting residuals denote better or worse than expected outcomes, i.e., the degree of resilient functioning. We then tested whether different expressions in the resilience factors were predictive of distinct resilient functioning trajectories, which were identified through latent class growth analysis. Finally, we investigated whether trajectory class, resilience factors, and perceived stress predicted resilience during the pandemic. Results show rather stable resilient functioning trajectories, with classes differing mainly according to degree rather than change over time. More self-care was associated with a higher resilient functioning trajectory, which in turn was linked with the most favorable pandemic response (i.e., lower perceived stress and more self-care). Although findings should be interpreted with caution given the rather small sample size, they represent a rare examination of established resilience factors in relation to resilience over an extended period and highlight the relevance of self-care in coping with real-life stressors such as the pandemic.