Search

Aim: To investigate the mental well‐being of early career nurses working in the United Kingdom during the COVID‐19 pandemic, with a particular emphasis on symptoms related to post‐traumatic stress disorder. Design: A longitudinal survey study. Methods: Data were acquired at three timepoints during the COVID‐19 pandemic (between May 2020 and March 2021) to determine whether symptoms of post‐traumatic stress disorder persisted over time. Quantitative measures of well‐being were supplemented with survey data on the nurses' experiences of working during the pandemic. Results: Twenty‐seven per cent of participants suffered from persistent symptoms of post‐traumatic stress while working as nurses during the pandemic. The nurses' baseline resilience, as well as their perception of the quality of their work environment, were significant negative predictors of symptoms of post‐traumatic stress. Participants identified a range of strategies that would have helped them during the crisis, including visible, consistent and empathetic leadership, adequate training and a supportive work environment. Conclusion: The context of the pandemic has highlighted the vulnerability of the psychological well‐being of early career nurses in the workforce. Immediate implementation of some of the more simple interventions suggested in this paper would provide early career nurses with rapid support. More complex support mechanisms should be given immediate consideration, with a view to implementation in the longer term. Implications for the Profession: This study contributes new knowledge about the psychological well‐being of early career nurses working during the pandemic and suggests support mechanisms that will be crucial for the retention of these nurses in the profession. A measurement of resilience may be useful for determining the appropriate level of support to provide to early career nurses. Impact: Early career nurses are vulnerable to attrition from the profession. This could be exacerbated if the psychological well‐being of these nurses is not being supported.Around 25% of early career nurses suffered from persistent symptoms of post‐traumatic stress disorder while working as nurses during the height of the pandemic, which is a novel finding compared to other longitudinal studies.Understanding the psychological well‐being of early career nurses working during a crisis period (such as a pandemic) equips nurse managers with appropriate strategies to improve nurses' emotional health and to enhance their retention within the workforce.The current findings may be of interest to clinical practitioners who have responsibility for the retention of nursing staff. No patient or public contribution. One of the authors is a statistician. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we use a UK case study to explore how the COVID-19 pandemic affected the mental health (emotional, psychological, social wellbeing) of farmers. We outline the drivers of poor farming mental health, the manifold impacts of the pandemic at a time of policy and environmental change, and identify lessons that can be learned to develop resilience in farming communities against future shocks. We undertook a survey answered by 207 farmers across the UK, focusing on drivers of poor mental health and the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic. We also conducted 22 in-depth interviews with individuals in England, Scotland and Wales who provide mental health support to farmers. These explored how and why the COVID-19 pandemic affected the mental health of farmers. These interviews were supplemented by 93 survey responses from a similar group of support providers (UK-wide). We found that the pandemic exacerbated underlying drivers of poor mental health and wellbeing in farming communities. 67% of farmers surveyed reported feeling more stressed, 63% felt more anxious, 38% felt more depressed, and 12% felt more suicidal. The primary drivers of poor mental health identified by farmers during the pandemic included decreased social contact and loneliness, issues with the general public on private land, and moving online for social events. Support providers also highlighted relationship and financial issues, illness, and government inspections as drivers of poor mental health. Some farmers, conversely, outlined positive impacts of the pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic is just one of many potential stressors associated with poor farming mental health and its impacts are likely to be long-lasting and delayed. Multiple stressors affecting farmers at the same time can create a tipping point. Therefore, there is a need for long-term support and ongoing evaluation of the drivers of poor mental health in farming families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Inter- and intragenerational relationships are known to be important in maintaining the wellbeing of older people. A key aspect of these relationships is the exchange of both emotional and instrumental social support. However, relatively little is known about how this exchange of support changes in the context of widespread disruption. The COVID-19 pandemic provides an opportunity to examine how older people's family relationships are impacted by such social change. The present qualitative study explores how older people in the United Kingdom experienced changes in inter- and intragenerational support during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants (N = 33) were recruited through a large-scale nationally representative survey (https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/psychology-consortium-covid19). We asked how life had been pre-pandemic, how they experienced the first national lockdown and what the future might hold in store. The data were analysed using constructivist grounded theory. This paper focuses on the importance of family relationships and how they changed as a consequence of the pandemic. We found that the family support system had been interrupted, that there were changes in the methods of support and that feelings of belonging were challenged. We argue that families were brought into disequilibrium through changes in the exchange of inter- and intragenerational support. The important role of grandchildren for older adults was striking and challenged by the pandemic. The significance of social connectedness and support within the family had not changed during the pandemic, but it could no longer be lived in the same way. The desire to be close to family members and to support them conflicted with the risk of pandemic infection. Our study found support for the COVID-19 Social Connectivity Paradox: the need for social connectedness whilst maintaining social distance. This challenged family equilibrium, wellbeing and quality of life in older people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reports and discusses the weekly Clapping for Carers – described as 'front‐line heroes' that took place across the United Kingdom during the first national lockdown of the coronavirus pandemic. Data are drawn from a UK‐wide online survey of health and social care workers, completed in May to July 2020. The survey received 3,425 responses of which 2,541 were analysed; free‐text comments were categorised. One question asked specifically: 'Do you think the "Clap for Carers" was a helpful response from the public?', and 815 comments were provided. Responses were extracted from these 815 free‐text comments and categorised as follows: unequivocally Yes, predominantly Yes, mixed feelings, predominantly No and unequivocally No. Most comments revealed mixed feelings about the helpfulness of Clapping with only a minority being entirely supportive. The free‐text comments offer some explanations for these views with many feeling that Clapping distracted from the severity of the pandemic and the inadequate resources. The free‐text comments reveal workforce concerns that the support demonstrated for the frontline workforce in Clapping might be transitory and that it may not translate into workforce improvements and political commitment to further funding of health and social care. Some saw the value of Clapping as illustrative of community cohesion. There was little mention of Clapping for heroes, and where it was the notion of heroism was rejected. The demonstration of public support in Clapping for Carers may have directly benefitted the public, but only indirectly the workforce. Future recruitment data may help discern if public support has translated into a desire to join the workforce. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Young carers are children or young people aged up to 25 years old who undertake unpaid caring responsibilities for a friend or family member. Young carers faced significant challenges brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic. We explored the impact of the pandemic and associated restrictions on mental health, wellbeing and access to support in young carers in the United Kingdom (UK) to understand how to improve services, as well as support this population in future health emergencies. Method: We conducted 22 qualitative semi-structured interviews from May to November 2021 with 14 young carers and eight staff working in organisations that supported them. Interviews took place remotely over video or telephone call and explored participant experiences of the pandemic and its impact on their health, wellbeing and caring responsibilities. We used reflexive thematic analysis to analyse interview transcripts. Results: We identified four overarching themes pertaining to the impact of the pandemic and associated restrictions on mental health, wellbeing and access to support in young carers in the UK: (1) challenges in protecting loved ones from the virus, (2) changes to and loss of routine, (3) reduced access to pre-pandemic informal and formal support structures and (4) better understanding of inner resilience and goals. Many participants struggled with their mental health and wellbeing as a result of pandemic related restrictions which impacted on support structures for themselves and the individual they cared for. However, positive impacts pertained to additional support provided by local authority and third sector organisations. Conclusions: Our findings highlight some of the changes that affected young carers during the COVID-19 pandemic. The impact of changes to routine and a reduction in pre-pandemic support were the greatest concerns reported by participants in this study. The additional support provided by local authority and third sector organisations during social restrictions suggests such organisations could play a greater role in supporting this population going forward and that schools and Governments may wish to put in additional strategies and provisions to protect young carers in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To understand the experience of critical care nurses during the COVID‐19 pandemic, through the application of the Job‐Demand‐Resource model of occupational stress. Design: Qualitative interview study. Methods: Twenty‐eight critical care nurses (CCN) working in ICU in the UK NHS during the COVID‐19 pandemic took part in semi‐structured interviews between May 2021 and May 2022. Interviews were guided by the constructs of the Job‐Demand Resource model. Data were analysed using framework analysis. Results: The most difficult job demands were the pace and amount, complexity, physical and emotional effort of their work. Prolonged high demands led to CCN experiencing emotional and physical exhaustion, burnout, post‐traumatic stress symptoms and impaired sleep. Support from colleagues and supervisors was a core job resource. Sustained demands and impaired physical and psychological well‐being had negative organizational consequences with CCN expressing increased intention to leave their role. Conclusions: The combination of high demands and reduced resources had negative impacts on the psychological well‐being of nurses which is translating into increased consideration of leaving their profession. Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care: The full impacts of the pandemic on the mental health of CCN are unlikely to resolve without appropriate interventions. Impact: Managers of healthcare systems should use these findings to inform: (i) the structure and organization of critical care workplaces so that they support staff to be well, and (ii) supportive interventions for staff who are carrying significant psychological distress as a result of working during and after the pandemic. These changes are required to improve staff recruitment and retention. Reporting Method: We used the COREQ guidelines for reporting qualitative studies. Patient and Public Contribution: Six CCN provided input to survey content and interview schedule. Two authors and members of the study team (T.S. and S.C.) worked in critical care during the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To critically evaluate the concepts of harm and re‐traumatization in the research process and to explore the ethical implications of conducting research on distressing topics using our research on the experiences of nurses working during the COVID‐19 pandemic as an exemplar. Design: Longitudinal qualitative interview study. Methods: Using qualitative narrative interviews, we explored the impacts of the COVID‐19 pandemic on nurses' psychological well‐being in the UK. Results: To reduce the potential for harm to both research participants and researchers, the members of the research team were keen to establish ways to reduce the power differential between the researcher and participants. We found that our collaborative and team‐based approach, with participant autonomy and researcher reflexivity embedded into the research framework, enabled the sensitive generation of data. Conclusion: Reduction of potential harm for both participants and researchers in the generation of at times highly distressing data with a traumatized population was achieved through a respectful, honest and empathetic approach within a team that met frequently for reflection. Impact: The research participants were not harmed by our research, instead they expressed gratitude at being given space and time to tell their stories in a supportive environment. Our work advances nursing knowledge through accentuating the value of giving autonomy to research participants to control their stories whilst working within a supportive research team with emphasis placed on reflexivity and debriefing. Patient and Public Contribution: Nurses working clinically during COVID‐19 were involved in the development of this study. Nurse participants were given autonomy over how and when they participated in the research process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Reiki is a biofield therapy which is based on the explanatory model that the fields of energy and information of living systems can be influenced to promote relaxation and stimulate a healing response. Objective: To conduct a pragmatic within-subject pilot trial of a remote Reiki program for frontline healthcare workers' health-related symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Healthcare professionals in the UK (eg, physicians, nurses, and paramedics) were eligible to sign up for a distance Reiki program and were also invited to participate in the research study. Eight Reiki practitioners simultaneously gave each participant Reiki remotely for 20 minutes on 4 consecutive days. Feasibility of the research was assessed, including recruitment, data completeness, acceptability and intervention fidelity, and preliminary evaluation of changes in outcome measures. Participants' stress, anxiety, pain, wellbeing, and sleep quality were evaluated with 7-point numerical rating scales. Measures were completed when signing up to receive Reiki (pre) and following the final Reiki session (post). Pre and post data were analyzed using Wilcoxon signed ranks tests. Results: Seventy-nine healthcare professionals signed up to receive Reiki and took the baseline measures. Of those, 40 completed post-measures after the 4-day intervention and were therefore included in the pre-post analysis. Most participants were female (97.5%), and the mean age was 43.9 years old (standard deviations = 11.2). The study was feasible to conduct, with satisfactory recruitment, data completeness, acceptability, and fidelity. Wilcoxon signed ranks tests revealed statistically significant decreases in stress (M = −2.33; P <.001), anxiety (M = −2.79; P <.001) and pain (M = −.79; P <.001), and significant increases in wellbeing (M = −1.79; P <.001) and sleep quality (M = −1.33; P =.019). Conclusions: The Reiki program was feasible and was associated with decreased stress, anxiety and pain, and increased wellbeing and sleep quality in frontline healthcare workers impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic placed additional demands and stressors on UK obstetric sonographers, who were required to balance parent safety and service quality, alongside staff safety. Increased pressure can negatively impact a healthcare worker's well-being and the provision of person-centred care. The aim of this study was to explore obstetric sonographers' experiences of performing pregnancy ultrasound scans during the pandemic and to assess the impact on burnout, role satisfaction and clinical practice. Methods: An online, anonymous cross-sectional survey was created to capture sonographers' experience alongside using the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory to evaluate burnout and Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation 10 (CORE-10) to measure psychological distress. Results: Responses were received from 138 sonographers. Of those completing the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (n = 89), 92.1% and 91.0% met the burnout thresholds for exhaustion and disengagement, respectively. Sonographers with a higher burnout score also perceived that COVID-19 had a greater, negative impact on their practice (p < 0.05). The mean CORE-10 score of 14.39 (standard deviation = 7.99) suggests mild psychological distress among respondents. A significant decrease in role satisfaction was reported from before to during the pandemic (p < 0.001), which was associated with higher scores for burnout and psychological distress (p < 0.001). Change in role satisfaction was correlated with sonographers' perception of safety while scanning during the pandemic (R 2 = 0.148, p < 0.001). Sixty-five sonographers (73.9%) reported they were considering leaving the profession, changing their area of practice or working hours within the next 5 years. Conclusion: Job and context-specific interventions are required to mitigate burnout and its consequences on the workforce and service provision beyond the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To use nurses' descriptions of what would have improved their working lives during the first peak of the COVID‐19 pandemic in the UK. Design: Analysis of free‐text responses from a cross‐sectional survey of the UK nursing and midwifery workforce. Methods: Between 2 and 14 April 2020, 3299 nurses and midwives completed an online survey, as part of the 'Impact of COVID‐19 on Nurses' (ICON) study. 2205 (67%) gave answers to a question asking for the top three things that the government or their employer could do to improve their working lives. Each participants' response was coded using thematic and content analysis. Multiple response analysis quantified the frequency of different issues and themes and examined variation by employer. Results: Most (77%) were employed by the National Health Service (77%) and worked at staff or senior staff nurse levels (55%). 5938 codable responses were generated. Personal protective equipment/staff safety (60.0%), support to workforce (28.6%) and better communication (21.9%) were the most cited themes. Within 'personal protective equipment', responses focussed most on available supply. Only 2.8% stated that nothing further could be done. Patterns were similar in both NHS and non‐NHS settings. Conclusions: The analysis provided valuable insight into key changes required to improve the work lives of nurses during a pandemic. Urgent improvements in provision and quality of personal protective equipment were needed for the safety of both workforce and patients. Impact Failure to meet nurses needs to be safe at work appears to have damaged morale in this vital workforce. We identified key strategies that, if implemented by the Government and employers, could have improved the working lives of the nursing and midwifery workforce during the early stages of the COVID‐19 pandemic and could prevent the pandemic from having a longer‐term negative impact on the retention of this vital workforce. Patient or Public Contribution: No Patient or Public Contribution, due to the COVID‐19 Pandemic, urgency of the work and the target population being health and social care staff. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Concern has been expressed about the extent to which people with disabilities may be particularly vulnerable to negative impacts of the 2020 COVID‐19 pandemic. However, to date little published research has attempted to characterise or quantify the risks faced by people with/without disabilities in relation to COVID‐19. We sought to compare the impact of the early stages of the COVID‐19 pandemic and associated government responses among working age adults with and without disabilities in the UK on; COVID‐19 outcomes, health and wellbeing, employment and financial security, health behaviours, and conflict and trust. We undertook secondary analysis of data collected in four UK longitudinal surveys; the Millennium Cohort Study, Next Steps, the British Cohort Study and the National Child Development Study. Combining analyses across surveys with random effects meta‐analysis, there was evidence that people with disabilities were significantly more likely to report having had COVID‐19 and had significantly increased levels of stress, less exercise, poorer sleep patterns, more conflict with their partner and others in their local area, and to have less trust in the government. While most outcomes did not differ significantly between participants with and without disability, the findings suggest that in the early days of COVID‐19 a detrimental impact emerges for those with disabilities which is more pronounced among older people with disabilities. Future research is needed to determine the longer‐term impact of the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Emerging evidence suggests that connecting people to non‐medical activities in the community (social prescribing) may relieve pressure on services by promoting autonomy and resilience, thereby improving well‐being and self‐management of health. This way of working has a long history in the voluntary and community sector but has only recently been widely funded by the National Health Service (NHS) in England and implemented in Primary Care Networks (PCNs). The COVID‐19 global pandemic coincided with this new service. There is wide variation in how social prescribing is implemented and scant evidence comparing different delivery models. As embedded researchers within an Integrated Care System in the Southwest of England, we examined the impact of COVID on the implementation of social prescribing in different employing organisations during the period March 2020 to April 2021. Data were collected from observations and field notes recorded during virtual interactions with over 80 social prescribing practitioners and an online survey of 52 social prescribing practitioners and middle managers. We conceptualise social prescribing as a pathway comprising access, engagement and activities, facilitated by workforce and community assets and strategic partnerships. We found that these elements were all impacted by the pandemic, but to different degrees according to the way the service was contracted, whether referrals (access) and approach (engagement) were universal ('open') or targeted ('boundaried') and the extent to which practitioners' roles were protected or shifted towards immediate COVID‐specific work. Social prescribers contracted in PCNs were more likely to operate an 'open' model, although boundaries were developing over time. We suggest the presence of an explicit, agreed delivery model (whether 'open' or 'boundaried') might create a more coherent approach less likely to result in practitioner role drift, whilst allowing flexibility to adjust to the pandemic and enhancing practitioner satisfaction and well‐being. The potential consequences of different models are examined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Providing holistic care to kidney patients is important; however, without full consideration of the perspectives of people living with a kidney transplant, the provision of truly 'holistic healthcare' cannot be possible. It is imperative to understand patient experiences by including kidney patients in key strategies and future renal service planning. Ignoring these important patient views means that there is a significant risk of inappropriate renal service provision and lack of adequate support, impacting overall health. The aim of this study was to develop an in-depth understanding of the lived experiences of kidney transplant recipients. Methods: A total of 23 participants were recruited between two regional nephrology units within the United Kingdom via clinical gatekeepers. In-depth interviews were undertaken. Interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim, and subjected to interpretative phenomenological analysis. Results: Two themes emerged: "managing ongoing fears of dialysis, distress, and COVID-19" and "dealing with difficult conversations". Conclusions: Renal healthcare professionals need to understand more than the biological impact of receiving a kidney transplant. Understanding the holistic and multidomain experiences that these participants experience will help healthcare professionals to recognize the needs of this group and ensure more responsive psychosocial care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It has long been known that nursing work is challenging and has the potential for negative impacts. During the COVID-19 pandemic most nurses' working landscapes altered dramatically and many faced unprecedented challenges. Resilience is a contested term that has been used with increasing prevalence in healthcare with health professionals encouraging a "tool-box" of stress management techniques and resilience-building skills. Drawing on narrative interview data (n = 27) from the Impact of Covid on Nurses (ICON) qualitative study we examine how nurses conceptualized resilience during COVID-19 and the impacts this had on their mental wellbeing. We argue here that it is paramount that nurses are not blamed for experiencing workplace stress when perceived not to be resilient "enough," particularly when expressing what may be deemed to be normal and appropriate reactions given the extreme circumstances and context of the COVID-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVID-19 has had a significant and measurable impact on individuals and families in economically deprived areas both in the United Kingdom and internationally. This article examines issues of community resilience and service adaptability and focuses on the period during the first lockdown in the United Kingdom (May to July 2020). Data were collected from members of the local community in Southend, with specific reference to the 'A Better Start Southend' programme of support. The evidence presented in this article uncovers the impact of the 'first lockdown' on families with young children, and local children's and community services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]