Search

Introduction: Although healthcare workers (HCWs) have reported mental health problems since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, they rarely use psychological support. Here, we described the use of psychological support among HCWs in Spain over the 2-year period following the initial pandemic outbreak and explore its association with workplace- and COVID-19-related factors measured at baseline, in 2020. Materials and methods: We conducted a longitudinal study on HCWs working in Spain. We used an online survey to collect information on sociodemographic characteristics, depressive symptoms, workplace- and COVID-19-related variables, and the use of psychological support at three time points (2020, 2021, and 2022). Data was available for 296, 294, and 251 respondents, respectively at time points 1, 2, and 3. Results: Participants had a median age of 43 years and were mostly females (n = 242, 82%). The percentage of HCWs using psychological support increased from 15% in 2020 to 23% in 2022. Roughly one in four HCWs who did not use psychological support reported symptoms compatible with major depressive disorder at follow up. Baseline predictors of psychological support were having to make decisions about patients' prioritisation (OR 5.59, 95% CI 2.47, 12.63) and probable depression (wave 2: OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.06, 1.19; wave 3: OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.04, 1.16). Conclusions: Our results suggest that there is call for implementing mental health promotion and prevention strategies at the workplace, along with actions to reduce barriers for accessing psychological support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Healthcare workers (HCWs) from COVID-19 hotspots worldwide have reported poor mental health outcomes since the pandemic's beginning. The virulence of the initial COVID-19 surge in Spain and the urgency for rapid evidence constrained early studies in their capacity to inform mental health programs accurately. Here, we used a qualitative research design to describe relevant mental health problems among frontline HCWs and explore their association with determinants and consequences and their implications for the design and implementation of mental health programs., Materials and Methods: Following the Programme Design, Implementation, Monitoring, and Evaluation (DIME) protocol, we used a two-step qualitative research design to interview frontline HCWs, mental health experts, administrators, and service planners in Spain. We used Free List (FL) interviews to identify problems experienced by frontline HCWs and Key informant (KI) interviews to describe them and explore their determinants and consequences, as well as the strategies considered useful to overcome these problems. We used a thematic analysis approach to analyze the interview outputs and framed our results into a five-level social-ecological model (intrapersonal, interpersonal, organizational, community, and public health)., Results: We recruited 75 FL and 22 KI interviewees, roughly balanced in age and gender. We detected 56 themes during the FL interviews and explored the following themes in the KI interviews: fear of infection, psychological distress, stress, moral distress, and interpersonal conflicts among coworkers. We found that interviewees reported perceived causes and consequences across problems at all levels (intrapersonal to public health). Although several mental health strategies were implemented (especially at an intrapersonal and interpersonal level), most mental health needs remained unmet, especially at the organizational, community, and public policy levels., Conclusions: In keeping with available quantitative evidence, our findings show that mental health problems are still relevant for frontline HCWs 1 year after the COVID-19 pandemic and that many reported causes of these problems are modifiable. Based on this, we offer specific recommendations to design and implement mental health strategies and recommend using transdiagnostic, low-intensity, scalable psychological interventions contextually adapted and tailored for HCWs., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Mediavilla, Monistrol-Mula, McGreevy, Felez-Nobrega, Delaire, Nicaise, Palomo-Conti, Bayón, Bravo-Ortiz, Rodríguez-Vega, Witteveen, Sijbrandij, Turrini, Purgato, Vuillermoz, Melchior, Petri-Romão, Stoffers-Winterling, Bryant, McDaid, Park, Ayuso-Mateos and RESPOND Consortium.)