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., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 García-Vázquez et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Evidence-based mental health interventions to support healthcare workers (HCWs) in crisis settings are scarce., Objective: To evaluate the capacity of a mental health intervention in reducing anxiety and depression symptoms in HCWs, relative to enhanced care as usual (eCAU), amidst the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: We conducted an analyst-blind, parallel, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. We recruited HCWs with psychological distress from Madrid and Catalonia (Spain). The intervention arm received a stepped-care programme consisting of two WHO-developed interventions adapted for HCWs: Doing What Matters in Times of Stress (DWM) and Problem Management Plus (PM+). Each intervention lasted 5 weeks and was delivered remotely by non-specialist mental health providers. HCWs reporting psychological distress after DWM completion were invited to continue to PM+. The primary endpoint was self-reported anxiety/depression symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-Anxiety and Depression Scale) at week 21., Findings: Between 3 November 2021 and 31 March 2022, 115 participants were randomised to stepped care and 117 to eCAU (86% women, mean age 37.5). The intervention showed a greater decrease in anxiety/depression symptoms compared with eCAU at the primary endpoint (baseline-adjusted difference 4.4, 95% CI 2.1 to 6.7; standardised effect size 0.8, 95% CI 0.4 to 1.2). No serious adverse events occurred., Conclusions: Brief stepped-care psychological interventions reduce anxiety and depression during a period of stress among HCWs., Clinical Implications: Our results can inform policies and actions to protect the mental health of HCWs during major health crises and are potentially rapidly replicable in other settings where workers are affected by global emergencies., Trial Registration Number: NCT04980326., Competing Interests: Competing interests: A-LP, AM-M, CB, DM, JLA-M and MS received support from the European Commission for the submitted work (grant number: 101016127). MS is president of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies. RK has received personal advisory honoraria from Joy Ventures (Herzlia, Israel) and is secretary of the International Resilience Alliance (Mainz, Germany)., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. Published by BMJ.)

We examined whether excess chronic medical comorbidity mediated excess COVID-19 inpatient mortality among people with mental disorders in the early phase of the pandemic, a question with important implications for public health and clinical decision-making. Using records of 2599 COVID-19 hospitalized patients, we conducted a formal causal mediation analysis to estimate the extent to which chronic comorbidity mediates the association between mental disorders and COVID-19 mortality. The Odds Ratio (95% CI) for Natural Indirect Effect and Controlled Direct Effect were 1.07(1.02, 1.14) and 1.40 (1.00, 1.95), respectively, suggesting that a large proportion of excess COVID-19 mortality among people with mental disorders may be explained by factors other than comorbidity., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany.)

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.)

The measures to contain the spread of the COVID-19 outbreak have no precedent in the recent history of many countries. Around 2,000 million people in the world are in isolation or quarantine, and gatherings of people have been expressly banned in many countries. In Spain, this prohibition affects workplaces, schools, and the national health system, where most of the healthcare is being provided either on the phone or online.

Objective: To examine any prospective association between neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) at hospital admission and subsequent delirium in older COVID-19 hospitalized patients comparing by sex and age groups. Methods: The sample consisted of 1,785 COVID-19 adult inpatients (minimum sample size required of 635 participants) admitted to a public general hospital in Madrid (Spain) between March 16th and April 15th, 2020. Variables were obtained from electronic health records. Binary logistic regression models were performed between baseline NLR and delirium adjusting for age, sex, medical comorbidity, current illness severity, serious mental illness history and use of chloroquine and dexamethasone. An NLR cut-off was identified, and stratified analyses were performed by age and sex. Also, another biomarker was tested as an exposure (the systemic immune-inflammation index –SII). Results: 55.3% of the patients were men, with a mean age of 66.8 years. Roughly 13% of the patients had delirium during hospitalization. NLR on admission predicted subsequent delirium development (adjusted OR = 1.02, 95 percent CI: 1.00–1.04, p = 0.024). Patients between 69 and 80 years with NLR values > 6.3 presented a twofold increased risk for delirium (p = 0.004). There were no sex differences in the association between baseline NLR and delirium (p > 0.05) nor SII predicted delirium development (p = 0.341). Conclusion: NLR is a good predictor of delirium during hospitalization, especially among older adults, independently of medical comorbidity, illness severity, and other covariates. Routine blood tests on admission might provide valuable information to guide the decision-making process to be followed with these especially vulnerable patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]