Literature DB >> 33313579

Psychological impact of COVID-19 pandemic: Protocol and results of first three weeks from an international cross-section survey - focus on health professionals.

Shanaya Rathod1,2, Saseendran Pallikadavath2, Allan H Young3, Lizi Graves1, Mohammad Mahbubur Rahman2, Ashlea Brooks1, Mustafa Soomro4, Pranay Rathod5, Peter Phiri1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The psychological impact of COVID-19, resultant measures and future consequences to life will be unveiled in time. AIM: To investigate the psychological impact of COVID-19, resultant restrictions, impact on behaviours and mental wellbeing globally. This early analysis, explores positive and adverse factors and behaviours with focus on healthcare professionals.
METHODS: This is a cross-sectional survey, using a questionnaire based on published approaches to understand the psychological impact of COVID-19. The survey will be repeated at 6 months because of rapidly changing situation.
RESULTS: We have presented results from first 3 weeks of the survey. Conclusions may change as more individuals take part over time. 7,917 participants completed the survey in the first 3 weeks; 7,271 are from the United Kingdom. 49.7% of the participants are healthcare professionals. There is high representation of female participants. Participants reporting suicidal thoughts is 32%. Healthcare professionals have reported mild depression and anxiety in higher proportions. Increasing age and female gender report higher compliance with government advice on COVID 19 whereas higher education, homeowners, key worker status, high alcohol, drug use and participants with pre-existing suicidal thoughts reported low compliance with government advice. Participants who reported suicidal thoughts pre-COVID are less likely to communicate with friends and family, or engage in coping strategies.
CONCLUSIONS: Evidence has shown an adverse psychological impact of previous pandemics on the population, especially wellbeing of healthcare professionals. Research should focus on identifying the need, preparing services and determining the factors that enhance and build resilience. FUNDING: This survey is linked to a MRC global health research program of the Portsmouth-Brawijaya center for Global Health, Population, and Policy, (MR/N006267/1), University of Portsmouth.
© 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Covid-19; Healthcare professionals; Psychological impact

Year:  2020        PMID: 33313579      PMCID: PMC7507987          DOI: 10.1016/j.jadr.2020.100005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Affect Disord Rep        ISSN: 2666-9153


Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has threatened the health and lives of millions of people across the globe. On 30th January 2020, the World Health Organization declared a public health emergency of international concern, and governments were urged to prepare for the global spread of COVID-19 from East Asia (World Health Organisation, 2020). The United Kingdom (UK) government and its advisers initially had a four-pronged plan (of 3rd March 2020) to contain, delay, research, and mitigate (Department of Health and Social Care, 2020). Subsequently, on 23rd March 2020, the UK went into lockdown. In early May, there was some easing for hardware and home improvement stores, and on 11th May 2020, ‘the plan to rebuild’ in England was published. While the primary focus has been on preventing transmission of the virus, finding vaccines and a cure, there is a realization that the effects and aftermath of this crisis, especially for mental health globally, could be unprecedented. These may range from the understandable anxiety related to health, life and global uncertainty (Yao et al., 2020), to the effects of restrictions that have been placed on lives in the form of social distancing (Bedford et al., 2020), self-isolation and quarantine regimes (Reynolds et al., 2007; Memish et al., 2020). A recent review reported negative psychological effects, including post-traumatic stress symptoms, confusion, and anger. Stressors reported in quarantine included longer quarantine duration, infection fears, frustration, boredom, inadequate supplies, inadequate information, financial loss and stigma (Brooks et al., 2020). Vindegaarda, and Benros (2020) completed a systematic review of 43 studies measuring psychiatric impact associated with COVID-19 and concluded that further research is needed for preventive measures during potential subsequent pandemics. Key workers, younger adults, those living in over-crowded households, and individuals with health conditions (especially mental health conditions) have reported more daily stressors (Fancourt et al., 2020). Changes in behavior and adaptations determine perceived levels of stress, depression and anxiety. Emerging evidence suggests that individuals with pre-existing psychiatric disorders have experienced worsening of psychiatric symptoms (Vindegaard and Eriksen Benros, 2020). Given this unpreceded situation, health and social care workers on the frontline are directly involved in the treatment and care of patients with COVID-19, which has led to an overwhelming workload. The working environment and lack of personal protection equipment (PPE) emphasize the need to investigate the psychological impacts of COVID-19 on health and social care workers. Recent studies investigating health care workers found increased depression/depressive symptoms, anxiety, psychological distress, and poor sleep quality (Vindegaard and Eriksen Benros, 2020; Lai et al., 2020). Previous studies on the outbreaks of other infectious diseases, such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), have consistently showed adverse psychological impacts on health care workers. These impacts include a high level of anxiety and depression and stress that resulted in meeting the diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder (Lee et al., 2018; Tam et al., 2004). Other studies have shown that the potential to transmit the disease to families and friends have been a fear weighing in healthcare professionals minds (Rubin et al. 2020; Wingfield et al. 2020; Brooks et al., 2020). Despite the rapidly building evidence on the impact of COVID 19, there are significant gaps due to the unprecedented nature of the pandemic and the resultant changes across the globe. Each study makes a unique contribution and adds a different perspective, thereby improving generalisability and our understanding of the landscape. Given the unique situation we face, we sought to explore, via an international study, the psychological impact of COVID-19, the resultant restrictions and impact on emotions, behaviours and changes in mental health and wellbeing.

Main purpose of this study

To investigate the psychological impact of COVID-19, the resultant restrictions and impact on behaviours and changes in mental wellbeing across the global population. We also aim to explore what pre-COVID-19 factors and behaviours may support people's wellbeing and what might have a negative impact. The study is designed to explore the psychological impact of COVID-19 on the following groups though they are not mutually exclusive: General population Individuals with pre-existing vulnerabilities such as mental health conditions Individuals with families of COVID-19 Healthcare professionals (HCP) For interim analysis in first three weeks of the study we wanted to investigate: Are families with experience of COVID-19, healthcare workers, and people with pre-existing mental health conditions or other co morbid conditions or vulnerabilities more likely to experience mental health consequences compared to others? Are there differences in psychological impact of COVID 19 for different demographics Null hypothesis: There will be no difference in the psychological impact of COVID-19 between the different groups or by demographics.

Methodology

This is a repeated, cross-sectional study. The survey will be repeated at 6 months because of rapidly changing situation and potential of second wave of the pandemic, predicted in the winter. We devised an online questionnaire, based on published approaches, to understand the psychological impact of COVID-19 and the resultant restrictions. Five standardised measures have been included to explore levels of depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9; Kroenke and Spitzer, 2002), anxiety (GAD-7; Generalised Anxiety Disorder Assessment; Spitzer et al., 2006) impact (The Impact of Event Scale- Revised; IES –R; Weiss and Marmar, 1997), loneliness (a brief loneliness scale, Hughes et al., 2004) and social support (The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social support; MSPSS, Zimet et al., 1988) The questionnaire has several versions. The first version has been implemented in the UK, and the other versions have been adapted based on cultures and landscapes of different countries. The adaptations are culturally informed and translated into local languages to make them relevant and sensitive to local populations. The questions have been investigated for face and content validity with a limited relevant sample before using them in the survey. We have reviewed other questionnaires currently being implemented and found that each is unique and different in what it is trying to measure. For an unknown entity like COVID-19, over-inclusiveness and repetition improves validity. In the UK, the questionnaire was implemented on 1st May 2020 with Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust as the sponsor. Since then, 50 National Health Service (NHS) Trusts, Universities and The center for Applied Research and Evaluation International Foundation (CAREIF) have collaborated and are advertising the survey to their staff, patients and public. Organisations joined slowly as in the first week there were 18 organisations, 37 in the second week and 42 in the third week of this analysis paper. Of the 42 NHS organisations, 26 were mental health and community trusts and 18 were acute NHS organisations. Further organisations joined and recruitment continues until 31st July 2020 for the first wave. The second wave will commence from 1st October to 31st December 2020.

Study sample

This is a participatory study, as the sampling is based on self-selection by the participants if they meet the criteria.

Inclusion criteria

The inclusion criteria for this survey are broad to capture the views of any individual above 16 years of age who would like to respond to the online questionnaire. We aim to include members of the public, keyworkers, including HCP, individuals who have suffered COVID-19, and those with vulnerabilities like Diabetes, Hypertension, pre-existing mental health conditions.

Exclusion criteria

No specific exclusion criteria apart from those unwilling or who lack the capacity to participate.

Recruitment

Participants are invited to participate in the study via multiple media sources, including social media, newsletters, communication platforms within participating organisations and countries. Informed consent is implied. Participants are allowed as much time as they wish to consider the information and to decide whether to participate in the study. The survey includes a participant information sheet detailing the relevant information regarding the study. Participants have the right to withdraw from participating in the study before submitting it. The surveys are anonymous, participants can leave an email address if they would like to be contacted about the second wave of the study and this is stored separately to their survey data.

Questionnaire design

The questionnaire is designed to be completed using Qualtrics XM, a cloud-based online platform. The survey consists of 35 questions divided into 5 parts. It takes 12–16 min to complete. The different sections of the questionnaire are: PART A: Demographics - this section ascertains participant characteristics such as age, gender, ethnicity, nationality, and country in which they reside, religion, level of education, employment status and sector and accommodation. PART B: About participants’ health including core questions about health and wellbeing. PART C: Participants’ experience and knowledge of COVID-19 including access to COVID-19 information guidance and updates, compliance to advice, information guidance and updates, changes in behaviours, including self-isolation. PART D: Psychological impact including validated measures adapted for this survey. These are PHQ-9 (Patient Health Questionnaire-9; Kroenke and Spitzer, 2002), GAD-7 (Generalised Anxiety Disorder Assessment; Spitzer et al., 2006) and the Impact of Event Scale- Revised (IES –R; Weiss and Marmar, 1997). PART E: Ways of coping, exploring what changes in behavior and social contacts are made to cope with any restrictions on lifestyle; a brief loneliness scale (Hughes et al., 2004) and the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social support (MSPSS) (Zimet et al., 1988).

Study analysis strategy

We aim to provide timely information to inform the public, organisations, and policymakers regarding the psychological impact of COVID-19. Therefore the following analytic strategy is used for this paper that focusses on rapid response, initially with three weeks data. As a high proportion of respondents in our dataset is HCP, we have focussed our interim analysis on this group. Descriptive statistics for categorical data are presented as frequencies and proportions for the whole sample and relevant subgroups. The association between categorical variables is considered through t-test. Statistical significance is indicated by p-values. Outcomes are measured as categorical variables. Except for the outcome ‘change in suicidal thoughts due to corona virus’, that has two categories (yes/no), all other outcomes have more than two categories, and those multiple categories are ordinal (e.g., GAD-7: 0–4 score implies minimal anxiety, 5–9 mild anxiety, 10–14 moderate anxiety, and 15–21 severe anxiety) variables. For all outcomes, we have conducted ordered logit regressions with adjustment for appropriate (observed) confounders. We have reported changes in log-odds ratios as coefficients, and marginal effects of healthcare professional dummy, and those by their gender. The statistical software packages SPSS and R are employed for data and regression analyses as appropriate. Missing data figures indicating a selection bias, are high for few questions but generally there has been good response to most questions. Therefore we did not conduct tests like instrumental variable regression.

Data management

We aim to present the results of this study in aggregate form, with no individuals being identified. All data is being collected in a secure password protected Qualtrics XM online cloud based platform. Access to systems is restricted to specific individuals whose access is monitored and audited for compliance. Data exported from the survey platform is anonymous, stored and managed in password protected files on encrypted computers and servers. Access to electronic data is limited only to members of the research team. Study documentation will be archived in accordance with guidelines for Good Clinical Practice and in NHS approved, secure and adequate archiving facility. Research personnel will keep information relevant to the study for up to 15 years, and then will be destroyed.

Ethics

The study received ethics and HRA approval (IRAS project ID: 282,858; REC reference: 20/HRA/1934) on 27 April 2020.

Results

Summary statistics

7917 participants completed the survey in the first three weeks. Of those, 7271 individuals are from the United Kingdom. All participants did not respond to all questions, and hence, there are some missing values as already discussed and presented in the tables.

Part A: demographics

Among 7917 participants, 3933 (49.7%) identified themselves as HCP. Of the UK participants, approx. 52% identified themselves as HCP. Among the non-HCP, approximately 6% receive mental health services and approx. 43% are from the general population as per the categories of participants we sought. As this is initial data the numbers in different categories are variable. Table 1 shows summary statistics of demographics by non-HCP and HCP that are the large groups.
Table 1

Summary statistics of demographics by healthcare professional.

Non-healthcare Professional (N = 3984)
Healthcare Professional (N = 3933)
Mean Diff.p-value
NMeanSDMeanSD
Age group (N=7513; missing=404)
 Under 211540.0390.1920.0040.064−0.0340.000
 21–243630.0570.2310.0410.198−0.0160.001
 25–3415030.1850.3880.2140.4100.0290.001
 35–4417530.2070.4050.2580.4370.0510.000
 45–5418640.2070.4050.2860.4520.0790.000
 55–6414060.1930.3950.1820.386−0.0110.208
 65 and over4700.1140.3170.0160.126−0.0980.000
Ethnicity (N=7528; missing=389)
 White68210.9220.2680.8910.311−0.0310.000
 Asian2370.0220.1460.0400.1970.0190.000
 Black730.0070.0810.0120.1110.0060.010
 Others3970.0490.2170.0560.2290.0060.225
Religion (N=7448; missing=469)
 Christian33820.4470.4970.4600.4980.0130.252
 Muslim600.0060.0760.0100.1000.0040.044
 Sikh160.0020.0410.0030.0510.0010.404
 Hindu800.0060.0800.0150.1200.0080.001
 Jewish350.0050.0730.0040.064−0.0010.450
 Buddhist550.0060.0800.0080.0900.0020.363
 No religion36300.5000.5000.4760.499−0.0230.043
 Others1900.0270.1630.0240.152−0.0040.306
Gender (N=7483; missing=434)
 Male12510.2130.4090.1260.331−0.0870.000
 Female62320.7870.4090.8750.3310.0870.000
Left Education (N=7507; missing=410)
 Before age 161430.0290.1670.0100.100−0.0190.000
 At age 169700.1750.3800.0870.282−0.0880.000
 At age 1811940.2070.4050.1150.319−0.0920.000
 Attended University47130.5090.5000.7360.4410.2270.000
 Prefer not to say660.0120.1100.0060.075−0.0070.002
 Others4210.0670.2510.0460.209−0.0220.000
Accommodation type (N=7515; missing=402)
 Own home54090.6940.4610.7430.4370.0490.000
 Shared accommodation1430.0180.1330.0200.1400.0020.576
 Private rented accommodation11440.1450.3520.1590.3660.0150.077
 Halls of Residence20.0010.0240.0000.000−0.0010.139
 Parent's home5940.1020.3030.0580.233−0.0440.000
 Other2230.0400.1970.0200.140−0.0210.000
Key worker (N=6114; missing=1803)
 No11290.4010.4900.0440.204−0.3570.000
 Health and Social care43020.3300.4700.9470.2230.6170.000
 Education and Childcare2770.1100.3130.0030.054−0.1070.000
 Key public services650.0260.1580.0010.028−0.0250.000
 Local and national government1150.0450.2080.0020.040−0.0440.000
 Food and other necessary goods770.0310.1740.0010.023−0.0310.000
 Public safety and national security150.0060.0790.0000.000−0.0060.000
 Transport330.0130.1140.0000.016−0.0130.000
 Utilities, Communication and financial720.0280.1640.0010.037−0.0260.000
 Prefer not to say290.0100.0970.0020.040−0.0080.000

Note: Mean is a proportion of individual in a category. If we multiply means by 100, we will get percentages. SD is standard deviation.

Summary statistics of demographics by healthcare professional. Note: Mean is a proportion of individual in a category. If we multiply means by 100, we will get percentages. SD is standard deviation. Means in age categories imply that participating HCP are proportionately higher in middle age groups than non-HCP. Professionals from White ethnic background are 3.1% lower in the sample (with statistical significance) in the HCP group than the non-HCP group; indicating higher proportions of Asian and Black ethnic minority professionals in the health sector than within the participating population. Muslims and Hindus present significantly higher in HCP, but individuals with no stated religion mostly work in the non-healthcare sector. The data shows a higher proportion of females in the healthcare profession compared to their male counterparts. Higher education is reported in higher proportions in the healthcare professions, as the data suggests 22.7% more HCP have attended University education compared to non-healthcare workers. In the sample, around 5% more HCP live in their own houses compared to non-HCP. Halls of residence, parent's home and other accommodation show statistically significant negative differences in means, implying lower proportions of the participating HCP live in this type of accommodation. The response rate on key worker status is low due to missing values. Among 4302 respondents who identified as keyworkers, most work in the health and social care sector, with only 369 in the social care sector. Among non-HCP, 33% work in the health and social care sector, implying that many respondents work in this sector, but they do not consider themselves as HCP.

Part B: about your health

Table 2 shows the summary statistics of pre-COVID health condition and wellbeing. Most of the participants (4661) have not reported pre-existing listed health problems. In theory, a person might have multiple health conditions, but in this data, we did not see that. The largest pre-existing condition reported is depression. Social phobia, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Alcohol/Drug problems, Bi-polar disorder, and Personality disorder show to be statistically and significantly lower in HCP than others, except for Anorexia. Participants who reported drinking alcohol 4 times or more a week or never are significantly lower among HCP. Drug users present as lower in the HCP group, although overall numbers are low. 2309 (32%) participants reported experiencing suicidal thoughts, with no statistical differences between the groups. Non-HCP seek help from counsellors/psychologist/psychotherapist and Community Mental Health Teams in higher proportions compared to HCP according to the data.
Table 2

Summary statistics of pre-existing health conditions and others by healthcare professional.

Non-healthcare Professional (N = 3984)(
Healthcare Professional (N = 3933)
Mean Diff.p-value
NMeanSDMeanSD
Pre-existing health condition (N=7132; missing=785)
 Anxiety4990.0700.2550.0700.2560.0010.929
 Panic Attacks1260.0200.1400.0160.124−0.0040.154
 Anorexia100.0010.0240.0020.0460.0020.079
 Psychosis40.0010.0300.0000.016−0.0010.274
 Depression12060.1680.3740.1700.3750.0010.894
 Bulimia290.0040.0640.0040.0630.0000.949
 Social phobia650.0120.1100.0060.078−0.0060.006
 Attention deficit disorder250.0040.0660.0030.052−0.0020.217
 Obsessive Compulsive Disorder1080.0140.1160.0170.1280.0030.286
 Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder2180.0360.1870.0250.157−0.0110.006
 Alcohol/Drug problems140.0030.0540.0010.033−0.0020.075
 Bi-polar disorder590.0100.1010.0060.080−0.0040.072
 Personality disorder1080.0210.1430.0100.099−0.0110.000
 None of the above46610.6350.4810.6700.4700.0350.002
Frequency of drinking alcohol (N=7402; missing=515)
 Never10480.1550.3620.1290.335−0.0260.001
 Monthly or less16100.2150.4110.2190.4140.0040.663
 2–4 times a month16200.2060.4040.2310.4210.0250.010
 2–3 times a week21040.2770.4480.2910.4540.0140.180
 4 times or more a week10200.1460.3540.1300.336−0.0160.041
Using drugs (N=7374; missing=543)
 Yes1580.0290.1680.0140.119−0.0150.000
 No72160.9710.1680.9860.1190.0150.000
Experienced suicidal thoughts (N=7360; missing=557)
 Yes23090.3200.4670.3080.462−0.0120.264
 No50510.6800.4670.6920.4620.0120.264
Having mental health support from (N=7917; missing=0)a
 No support currently65710.8250.3800.8350.3710.0100.216
 GP10410.1270.3330.1360.3430.0090.235
 Counsellor/Psychologist/Psychotherapist3590.0520.2230.0380.192−0.0140.002
 Community Mental Health Team1360.0260.1580.0090.093−0.0170.000
 Inpatient in a psychiatric hospital0
 Religious/Spiritual Leader430.0050.0710.0060.0760.0010.616
 Other1560.0220.1480.0170.129−0.0050.090

Note: Mean is a proportion of individual in a category. If we multiply means by 100, we will get percentages. SD is standard deviation.

Because of multiple responses from some individuals, total responses are 8306, which is higher than our total respondents, 7917. For example, one individual might have taken mental health support from both GP and community mental health team.

Summary statistics of pre-existing health conditions and others by healthcare professional. Note: Mean is a proportion of individual in a category. If we multiply means by 100, we will get percentages. SD is standard deviation. Because of multiple responses from some individuals, total responses are 8306, which is higher than our total respondents, 7917. For example, one individual might have taken mental health support from both GP and community mental health team.

Part C: COVID-19 information and advice

The most common sources of information about coronavirus reported are TV news programmes (18.30%), social media (10.37%), Government briefings (13.70%), News apps (9.75%), the NHS website (10.40%), Gov.uk website (9.67%), and employer (15.07%). Participants are most likely to find that social media stories make them feel worried and fearful but they are unlikely to believe the information with only about 10% noting they believe social media stories. There are multiple sources of data that are not mutually exclusive for the participants. Table 3 shows the summary statistics of attitudes and health outcomes due to coronavirus analysed by HCP. This table indicates that HCP are more compliant with government advice (several times and most of the time) and in higher proportions than others, with rare engagement in risky activities (e.g., going shops, party, and social gathering frequently) being significantly lower than the counterparts.
Table 3

Summary statistics of attitudes and health outcomes in coronavirus time by healthcare professional.

Non-healthcare Professional (N = 3984)
Healthcare Professional (N = 3933)
Mean Diff.p-value
NMeanSDMeanSD
Followed government advice (N=7917; missing=0)
 Very few time6830.1400.3470.0320.177−0.1070.000
 Some of the time1350.0160.1240.0190.1350.0030.303
 Several time13360.1530.3600.1850.3880.0320.000
 Most of the time57630.6920.4620.7640.4240.0720.000
Did risky activities (N=7917; missing=0)
 Rare75870.9640.1860.9520.213−0.0120.009
 Very few time3120.0340.1810.0450.2070.0110.011
 Some of the time80.0010.0270.0010.0360.0010.468
 Several time20.0000.0160.0000.0160.0000.993
 Most of the time80.0010.0320.0010.0320.0000.985
Patient health questionnaire (PHQ-9) (N=7917; missing=0)
 None (0–4)35010.4630.4990.4210.494−0.0420.000
 Mild (5–9)22020.2550.4360.3020.4590.0470.000
 Moderate (10–14)11460.1380.3450.1520.3590.0140.077
 Moderately Severe (15–19)6180.0740.2620.0820.2750.0080.180
 Severe (20–27)4500.0700.2560.0430.203−0.0270.000
Generalised anxiety disorder (GAD-7) (N=7917; missing=0)
 None (0–4)45450.5800.4940.5690.495−0.0110.320
 Mild (5–9)19420.2350.4240.2560.4360.0200.035
 Moderate (10–14)8160.1000.3010.1060.3080.0050.432
 Severe (15–21)6140.0850.2790.0700.255−0.0150.015
Impact of events scale-revised (IES-R) (N=7917; missing=0)
 None (0–23)58920.7410.4380.7470.4350.0060.572
 PTSD may be concern (24–32)7570.0950.2930.0960.2950.0010.882
 Probably PTSD diagnosis (33–38)3520.0420.2020.0470.2110.0040.375
 High PTSD (39 and above)9160.1210.3260.1100.313−0.0110.139
Drinking alcohol changed (N=5459; missing=2458)
 Decreased7250.1300.3360.1360.3430.0060.497
 Unchanged29250.5570.4970.5170.500−0.0410.003
 Increased18090.3130.4640.3480.4760.0340.007
Drug use changed (N=152; missing=7765)
 Decreased410.2860.4540.2410.432−0.0450.553
 Unchanged640.4390.4990.3890.492−0.0500.554
 Increased470.2760.4490.3700.4870.0950.229
Mental health support changed (N=1396; missing=6521)
 Decreased2600.2030.4030.1680.374−0.0350.090
 Unchanged9700.6940.4610.6950.4610.0010.966
 Increased1660.1020.3030.1370.3440.0340.048
Mental health affected (N=2629; missing=5288)
 No7290.2640.4410.2910.4540.0260.129
 Some of the time11180.4180.4930.4330.4960.0140.455
 Most of the time3950.1520.3600.1480.355−0.0040.750
 All of the time3870.1650.3720.1290.335−0.0360.008
Mental health changed (N=2611; missing=5306)
 Decreased14790.5650.4960.5670.4960.0020.917
 Unchanged9280.3510.4770.3600.4800.0090.623
 Increased2040.0840.2770.0720.259−0.0110.285
Suicidal thoughts changed (N=232; missing=7685)
 Yes1880.8150.3900.8020.401−0.0120.824
 No440.1850.3900.1980.4010.0120.824
Worried about corona virus (N=7917; missing=0)
 Not at all7730.1510.3580.0440.205−0.1070.000
 A little bit8590.0980.2980.1190.3240.0200.004
 Moderately25960.2940.4560.3630.4810.0690.000
 Quite a bit24660.3020.4590.3210.4670.0180.081
 Extremely12230.1550.3620.1540.361−0.0010.923

Note: Mean is a proportion of individual in a category. If we multiply means by 100, we will get percentages. SD is standard deviation.

Summary statistics of attitudes and health outcomes in coronavirus time by healthcare professional. Note: Mean is a proportion of individual in a category. If we multiply means by 100, we will get percentages. SD is standard deviation.

Part D: psychological impact

Findings in Table 3 imply that HCP have mild depression and anxiety in higher proportions than others. Alcohol intake increased in significantly higher proportions among HCP than others, but drug use remains the same in both groups. The increase in mental health support is higher among HCP than others. Non-HCP have more worries than HCP, as mean differences are significantly higher in the categories a little bit and moderately.

Part E: coping strategies

Table 4 shows the summary statistics of coping mechanisms by non-HCP and HCP. The analysis shows that daily communication with friends and family is significantly higher among HCP than others. In spite of this, they report as feeling more isolated from friends and family than non-HCP.
Table 4

Summary statistics of coping mechanisms in coronavirus time by healthcare professional.

Non-healthcare Professional (N = 3984)
Healthcare Professional (N = 3933)
Mean Diff.p-value
NMeanSDMeanSD
Communicated with friends/family (N=7917; missing=0)
 Not at all10260.1820.3860.0760.265−0.1060.000
 Every few days15950.2000.4000.2030.4030.0040.669
 Daily40570.4710.4990.5550.4970.0840.000
 Several times a day12390.1470.3540.1660.3720.0180.024
Relationships impacted (N=6796; missing=1121)
 Isolated29120.4080.4920.4460.4970.0380.002
 No change13000.2050.4040.1790.384−0.0260.007
 Feeling closer11770.1770.3810.1700.376−0.0070.473
 Having more arguments2090.0320.1750.0300.171−0.0020.690
 Talking more11980.1790.3830.1740.379−0.0040.641
Did good/coping activities (N=7917; missing=0)
 Not at all10070.1800.3840.0730.261−0.1070.000
 Every few days28110.3390.4740.3710.4830.0320.003
 Daily40510.4730.4990.5500.4980.0770.000
 Several times a day480.0070.0840.0050.071−0.0020.266
Good/coping activities changed (N=7917; missing=0)
 Decreased7900.0970.2950.1030.3040.0060.347
 Unchanged17060.2600.4390.1700.376−0.0900.000
 Increased54210.6430.4790.7270.4460.0830.000
Amount of activity time impacted (N=6794; missing=1123)
 None at all3270.0460.2100.0500.2170.0030.512
 A little7270.1050.3070.1090.3110.0030.644
 A moderate amount17240.2480.4320.2590.4380.0100.322
 A lot16950.2490.4330.2500.4330.0010.951
 A great deal23210.3510.4770.3330.471−0.0180.118
Confident on coping (N=6851; missing=1066)
 Not at all500.0120.1090.0030.055−0.0090.000
 A little bit4540.0800.2710.0540.227−0.0250.000
 Moderately16680.2670.4420.2230.416−0.0440.000
 Quite a bit29520.4140.4930.4460.4970.0330.006
 Extremely17270.2280.4200.2740.4460.0460.000

Note: Mean is a proportion of individual in a category. If we multiply means by 100, we will get percentages. SD is standard deviation.

Summary statistics of coping mechanisms in coronavirus time by healthcare professional. Note: Mean is a proportion of individual in a category. If we multiply means by 100, we will get percentages. SD is standard deviation. HCP show higher coping activities compared to others. The impact on coping activity time is the same between the two groups. However, HCP report significantly higher confidence in coping than others.

Ordered logit regressions

Table 5, Table 6, Table 7, Table 8 show results of ordered logit regressions of all outcomes listed in Tables 3 and 4. Coefficients in Table 5, Table 6, Table 7, Table 8 are changes in log-odds ratios due to changes in covariates (demographics and pre-existing health conditions and wellbeing). The signs of coefficients imply in which direction covariates affect outcomes.
Table 5

Ordered logit regressions of ordered psychological health outcomes on healthcare professionals and other covariates.

Government advice
Risky activities
PHQ-9
GAD-7
IESR
Coeff.p-valueCoeff.p-valueCoeff.p-valueCoeff.p-valueCoeff.p-value
Healthcare Professionals0.018(0.841)0.085(0.653)−0.111(0.114)−0.180⁎⁎(0.016)−0.064(0.467)
Age Category (Base: below 21)
 21–240.348(0.388)−0.214(0.751)0.268(0.538)0.137(0.674)0.226(0.495)
 25–340.430(0.271)−0.536(0.413)−0.196(0.651)−0.153(0.627)−0.122(0.706)
 35–440.766*(0.053)−1.005(0.126)−0.286(0.513)−0.202(0.524)−0.020(0.950)
 45–540.911⁎⁎(0.021)−0.828(0.206)−0.699(0.111)−0.636⁎⁎(0.046)−0.313(0.341)
 55–640.952⁎⁎(0.017)−1.123*(0.093)−0.846*(0.054)−0.791⁎⁎(0.014)−0.344(0.300)
 65 and over1.252⁎⁎(0.012)−1.128(0.200)−1.139⁎⁎(0.019)−1.053⁎⁎⁎(0.008)−0.563(0.195)
Ethnicity (Base: others)
 White0.085(0.567)0.328(0.328)0.082(0.530)0.134(0.309)0.161(0.295)
 Asian0.091(0.749)0.631(0.244)−0.256(0.286)−0.006(0.980)−0.074(0.818)
 Black−0.218(0.524)0.474(0.512)−0.532(0.119)−0.143(0.645)−0.348(0.392)
Religion (Base: others)
 Christian−0.013(0.953)−0.513(0.183)0.282(0.123)0.336*(0.067)0.232(0.285)
 Muslim−0.593(0.166)−0.504(0.615)−0.175(0.631)−0.132(0.753)0.043(0.929)
 Sikh0.038(0.955)−0.184(0.873)−0.824(0.109)−0.457(0.487)−0.816(0.505)
 Hindu−0.707(0.106)−0.566(0.486)0.262(0.492)0.454(0.200)0.599(0.205)
 Jewish−0.607(0.223)−13.924⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.128(0.802)0.020(0.965)0.108(0.839)
 Buddhist0.166(0.694)0.048(0.938)0.059(0.885)0.141(0.718)0.191(0.684)
 No religion−0.050(0.817)−0.341(0.368)0.260(0.154)0.161(0.381)0.153(0.481)
Male−0.540⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.278(0.101)−0.421⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.419⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.677⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
Left education (Base: before age 16)
 At age 160.007(0.967)0.156(0.624)0.160(0.200)0.016(0.902)0.078(0.599)
 At age 18−0.103(0.524)−0.178(0.579)0.229⁎⁎(0.048)0.086(0.472)0.045(0.751)
 Attended University−0.263*(0.072)0.064(0.814)−0.107(0.303)−0.202*(0.063)−0.171(0.184)
Accommodation (Base: others)
 Own home0.388*(0.064)−0.272(0.429)−0.566⁎⁎⁎(0.002)−0.610⁎⁎⁎(0.002)−0.533⁎⁎⁎(0.004)
 Shared0.580*(0.065)−1.221*(0.063)−0.350(0.195)−0.790⁎⁎⁎(0.006)−0.307(0.312)
 Private rented0.353(0.107)−0.382(0.294)−0.303(0.107)−0.369*(0.069)−0.299(0.128)
 Parent's home
 Own home0.318(0.188)−0.675(0.104)−0.177(0.400)−0.331(0.135)−0.285(0.200)
Keyworker (Base: no)
 Health and Social−0.201*(0.061)0.060(0.785)−0.015(0.850)0.034(0.687)−0.064(0.522)
 Education−0.036(0.839)0.030(0.930)−0.021(0.860)0.102(0.450)0.131(0.378)
 Key public services−0.839⁎⁎⁎(0.005)0.781(0.122)0.049(0.821)−0.144(0.524)−0.220(0.522)
 Local government0.236(0.399)0.096(0.841)0.076(0.653)−0.004(0.983)0.231(0.280)
 Food−0.788⁎⁎⁎(0.005)0.807*(0.058)0.579⁎⁎⁎(0.006)0.408*(0.059)0.242(0.318)
 Public safety−0.360(0.499)0.445(0.685)0.076(0.899)0.091(0.844)−0.891(0.247)
 Transport0.889(0.169)−13.793⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.248(0.549)0.272(0.541)0.501(0.147)
 Utilities−0.176(0.543)0.138(0.804)0.088(0.696)0.048(0.823)0.303(0.216)
Pre-existing health condition (Base: none)
 Anxiety0.061(0.656)−0.389(0.174)0.358⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.726⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.585⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
 Panic Attacks−0.351(0.162)−0.010(0.984)0.623⁎⁎⁎(0.000)1.214⁎⁎⁎(0.000)1.182⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
 Anorexia−0.308(0.642)−13.942⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.565(0.314)0.469(0.479)0.518(0.498)
 Psychosis−0.566(0.652)−13.416⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.547(0.589)−14.335⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.508(0.786)
 Depression−0.050(0.646)−0.162(0.462)0.834⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.757⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.617⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
 Bulimia−0.694*(0.097)−0.328(0.764)0.818*(0.057)1.081⁎⁎⁎(0.003)0.111(0.841)
 Social phobia−0.477(0.154)0.297(0.595)1.200⁎⁎⁎(0.000)1.391⁎⁎⁎(0.000)1.563⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
 Attention deficit−0.747(0.180)−0.530(0.645)1.049⁎⁎(0.013)0.918⁎⁎(0.023)0.934*(0.050)
 Obsessive0.213(0.414)−0.650(0.301)0.747⁎⁎⁎(0.002)1.127⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.860⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
 Post-Traumatic0.293(0.188)−0.481(0.241)0.956⁎⁎⁎(0.000)1.174⁎⁎⁎(0.000)1.281⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
 Alcohol/Drug0.148(0.887)0.247(0.831)0.967*(0.063)1.229⁎⁎(0.029)1.719⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
 Bi-polar disorder−0.945⁎⁎(0.016)0.776(0.134)0.471(0.208)0.117(0.751)0.372(0.380)
 Personality disorder−0.627⁎⁎(0.028)0.016(0.976)1.343⁎⁎⁎(0.000)1.193⁎⁎⁎(0.000)1.194⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
Drinking alcohol (Base: Never)
 Monthly or less0.009(0.939)0.141(0.523)0.019(0.835)0.039(0.688)−0.104(0.357)
 2–4 times a month−0.153(0.198)−0.133(0.561)−0.101(0.275)−0.068(0.476)−0.173(0.120)
 2–3 times a week−0.088(0.445)−0.211(0.349)−0.006(0.946)0.011(0.901)−0.002(0.986)
 More a week−0.277⁎⁎(0.038)0.229(0.351)0.224⁎⁎(0.030)0.241⁎⁎(0.023)0.350⁎⁎⁎(0.004)
Using drugs−0.515⁎⁎(0.015)0.810⁎⁎(0.016)0.336*(0.096)0.376*(0.063)−0.018(0.938)
Suicidal thoughts−0.261⁎⁎⁎(0.001)0.409⁎⁎⁎(0.007)0.891⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.592⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.749⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
Having mental health support from (Base: No)
 GP0.146(0.202)0.326(0.113)0.363⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.199⁎⁎(0.028)0.189⁎⁎(0.047)
 Counsellor etc.−0.216(0.169)0.271(0.315)0.414⁎⁎⁎(0.001)0.446⁎⁎⁎(0.002)0.361⁎⁎⁎(0.010)
 Community Mental0.074(0.793)−0.601(0.227)0.506*(0.070)0.526*(0.059)0.196(0.446)
 Psychiatric hospital
 Religious Leader0.013(0.975)−0.800(0.446)−0.600⁎⁎(0.042)−0.673*(0.073)−0.812*(0.078)
 Constant1−3.723⁎⁎⁎(0.000)2.146⁎⁎(0.012)−0.722(0.163)−0.160(0.713)1.041⁎⁎(0.020)
 Constant2−2.961⁎⁎⁎(0.000)5.079⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.819(0.114)1.334⁎⁎⁎(0.002)1.735⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
 Constant3−0.775(0.139)5.709⁎⁎⁎(0.000)1.997⁎⁎⁎(0.000)2.424⁎⁎⁎(0.000)2.202⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
 Constant45.997⁎⁎⁎(0.000)3.194⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
 Observations56555655565556555655
 Adjusted R20.0290.0350.0870.0770.076

Note: p-values are in parentheses.

p < 0.10.

p < 0.05.

p < 0.01.

Table 6

Ordered logit regressions of ordered health change outcomes on healthcare professionals and other demographics.

Drinking alcohol changed
drug use changed
Mental health support changed
Mental health affected
Mental health changed
Coeff.p-valueCoeff.p-valueCoeff.p-valueCoeff.p-valueCoeff.p-value
Healthcare Professionals0.056(0.511)0.666(0.446)0.126(0.532)0.087(0.462)−0.067(0.584)
Age Category (Base: below 21)
 21–240.317(0.460)20.362⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.285(0.841)0.382(0.306)0.407(0.508)
 25–340.644(0.117)20.435⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.345(0.807)−0.139(0.690)0.618(0.303)
 35–440.528(0.205)20.196⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.287(0.840)−0.275(0.437)0.655(0.277)
 45–540.122(0.769)19.381⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.064(0.964)−0.511(0.153)1.046*(0.083)
 55–64−0.112(0.788)19.373⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.194(0.891)−0.657*(0.067)1.296⁎⁎(0.033)
 65 and over0.004(0.993)0.000(.)−0.559(0.702)−0.532(0.285)1.250*(0.059)
Ethnicity (Base: others)
 White−0.026(0.855)−1.184(0.205)−0.684*(0.075)−0.208(0.335)−0.176(0.431)
 Asian−0.365(0.192)−2.936(0.691)−2.459⁎⁎⁎(0.001)0.522(0.281)−0.052(0.920)
 Black0.232(0.438)−37.276⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−2.431⁎⁎(0.029)0.010(0.990)−0.491(0.446)
Religion (Base: others)
 Christian0.220(0.317)0.908(0.521)−0.328(0.449)0.335(0.167)−0.843⁎⁎⁎(0.004)
 Muslim0.179(0.603)27.270⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−1.245(0.185)−0.224(0.668)0.127(0.828)
 Sikh−0.681(0.463)0.000(.)0.000(.)−15.683⁎⁎⁎(0.000)1.831(0.267)
 Hindu−0.039(0.931)21.338⁎⁎⁎(0.004)1.221(0.135)−0.357(0.579)−0.506(0.454)
 Jewish−0.117(0.749)0.000(.)1.645*(0.099)0.173(0.802)−2.209⁎⁎(0.011)
 Buddhist−0.226(0.685)−0.578(0.781)−0.920(0.360)1.569⁎⁎(0.015)−1.036(0.146)
 No religion0.108(0.624)1.888(0.186)−0.289(0.500)0.176(0.467)−0.745⁎⁎(0.012)
Male−0.386⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−1.059(0.165)−0.007(0.977)−0.290⁎⁎(0.047)0.043(0.765)
Left education (Base: before age 16)
 At age 160.194(0.167)−0.700(0.683)−0.274(0.446)0.118(0.550)−0.163(0.441)
 At age 180.275⁎⁎(0.043)0.690(0.707)−0.278(0.455)0.212(0.259)−0.151(0.466)
 Attended University0.122(0.312)−0.802(0.627)−0.358(0.304)−0.055(0.758)0.055(0.776)
Accommodation (Base: others)
 Own home0.179(0.310)1.198(0.393)0.158(0.698)−0.516⁎⁎(0.021)0.540*(0.055)
 Shared0.031(0.917)−1.799(0.132)0.188(0.819)−0.585*(0.063)0.331(0.464)
 Private rented0.233(0.212)−0.001(0.999)0.186(0.668)−0.491⁎⁎(0.035)0.232(0.432)
 Parent's home0.000(.)0.000(.)0.000(.)0.000(.)0.000(.)
 Own home−0.460⁎⁎(0.048)−1.694(0.142)0.324(0.526)−0.788⁎⁎⁎(0.004)0.340(0.319)
Keyworker (Base: no)
 Health and Social−0.041(0.688)−0.169(0.853)0.042(0.861)−0.153(0.261)−0.057(0.688)
 Education0.147(0.356)1.758*(0.072)−0.301(0.378)−0.230(0.245)−0.117(0.646)
 Key public services−0.007(0.981)0.000(.)−0.201(0.795)−0.001(0.999)0.268(0.558)
 Local government0.111(0.632)17.361⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.159(0.793)−0.390(0.226)0.429(0.149)
 Food−0.097(0.730)2.176⁎⁎(0.014)−0.824(0.118)0.517(0.173)−0.625(0.122)
 Public safety0.283(0.533)0.000(.)0.503(0.396)−1.019(0.121)0.847*(0.050)
 Transport0.987*(0.062)−1.401(0.400)0.836(0.732)0.404(0.442)0.195(0.857)
 Utilities0.562*(0.075)−41.473⁎⁎⁎(0.000)1.059(0.166)0.264(0.398)−0.214(0.584)
Pre-existing health condition (Base: none)
 Anxiety0.114(0.358)−1.301(0.392)0.838*(0.067)−0.188(0.347)0.306(0.117)
 Panic Attacks0.322(0.280)−2.688⁎⁎(0.038)0.558(0.317)0.287(0.304)−0.114(0.658)
 Anorexia0.851⁎⁎(0.011)0.000(.)0.580(0.311)−0.210(0.788)0.576(0.389)
 Psychosis−1.865⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.000(.)−14.658⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−1.826(0.168)2.679⁎⁎(0.011)
 Depression0.064(0.557)−0.053(0.962)0.580(0.188)−0.095(0.618)0.182(0.329)
 Bulimia−0.049(0.872)−1.074(0.727)−0.124(0.875)−0.079(0.876)−0.243(0.658)
 Social phobia0.858⁎⁎(0.019)0.038(0.985)0.281(0.675)0.462(0.206)0.092(0.797)
 Attention deficit1.671⁎⁎⁎(0.001)−2.231(0.243)0.104(0.904)0.465(0.347)−0.156(0.772)
 Obsessive0.237(0.356)0.527(0.761)0.675(0.245)0.312(0.264)−0.062(0.833)
 Post-Traumatic0.256(0.148)−1.775(0.284)−0.172(0.744)0.319(0.176)0.045(0.854)
 Alcohol/Drug0.029(0.971)−0.502(0.638)−0.900(0.398)1.203(0.109)−0.437(0.573)
 Bi-polar disorder0.030(0.935)53.481⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.335(0.643)−0.505(0.212)1.457⁎⁎⁎(0.002)
 Personality disorder0.647⁎⁎(0.045)15.750⁎⁎(0.023)0.597(0.337)0.782⁎⁎(0.020)−0.428(0.298)
Drinking alcohol (Base: Never)
 Monthly or less−0.444⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.101(0.914)−0.131(0.569)0.098(0.490)0.168(0.250)
 2–4 times a month0.430⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.796(0.473)0.045(0.852)−0.048(0.733)0.097(0.524)
 2–3 times a week1.708⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−1.256(0.157)−0.016(0.946)−0.010(0.942)0.197(0.183)
 More a week2.651⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.785(0.493)0.034(0.898)0.313*(0.061)−0.158(0.368)
Using drugs−0.048(0.870)0.000(.)−0.155(0.711)0.156(0.578)0.074(0.825)
Suicidal thoughts0.052(0.514)1.338*(0.081)−0.292*(0.055)0.087(0.323)−0.250⁎⁎⁎(0.010)
Having mental health support from (Base: No)
 GP0.101(0.361)1.044(0.249)−0.387(0.129)0.181⁎⁎(0.044)−0.227⁎⁎(0.018)
 Counsellor etc.−0.306*(0.051)0.396(0.662)0.191(0.454)0.740⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.060(0.704)
 Community Mental−0.219(0.427)17.243⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.781*(0.066)0.907⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.530*(0.096)
 Psychiatric hospital0.000(.)0.000(.)0.000(.)0.000(.)0.000(.)
 Religious Leader0.447(0.243)−35.565⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.284(0.420)0.161(0.645)−0.365(0.384)
 Constant1−0.732(0.159)18.655⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−2.590(0.118)−1.564⁎⁎⁎(0.005)0.489(0.520)
 Constant22.375⁎⁎⁎(0.000)21.836⁎⁎⁎(0.000)1.328(0.422)0.481(0.392)2.818⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
 Constant31.466⁎⁎⁎(0.009)
 Observations4238104103920242013
 Adjusted R20.1400.3460.0510.0420.042

Note: p-values are in parentheses.

p < 0.10.

p < 0.05.

p < 0.01.

Table 7

Ordered logit regressions of ordered health change outcomes on healthcare professionals and other covariates.

Suicidal thoughts changed
Worried about corona virus
Communication with family
Relationships impacted
Did good/coping activities
Coeff.p-valueCoeff.p-valueCoeff.p-valueCoeff.p-valueCoeff.p-value
Healthcare Professionals−0.322(0.657)−0.118*(0.083)0.092(0.186)−0.046(0.507)0.078(0.291)
Age Category (Base: below 21)
 21–24−16.946(.)0.342(0.290)−0.226(0.501)−0.010(0.979)0.245(0.412)
 25–34−18.254(.)0.355(0.260)−0.386(0.240)0.080(0.835)0.206(0.486)
 35–44−19.225(.)0.411(0.197)−0.695⁎⁎(0.037)0.050(0.898)0.502*(0.095)
 45–54−18.624(.)0.286(0.370)−0.915⁎⁎⁎(0.006)0.100(0.797)0.151(0.617)
 55–64−18.313(.)0.339(0.291)−0.995⁎⁎⁎(0.003)0.122(0.755)0.107(0.726)
 65 and over−1.858(.)0.139(0.731)−1.470⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.012(0.977)0.460(0.205)
Ethnicity (Base: others)
 White−0.511(0.693)−0.006(0.960)0.111(0.353)−0.324⁎⁎⁎(0.003)0.061(0.615)
 Asian18.452⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.099(0.681)−0.073(0.776)0.437⁎⁎(0.043)0.297(0.253)
 Black−1.233(0.743)0.187(0.631)0.134(0.736)−0.054(0.823)−0.278(0.427)
Religion (Base: others)
 Christian−17.903(.)0.440⁎⁎(0.019)0.310*(0.062)0.180(0.309)0.322*(0.071)
 Muslim−0.000(.)0.100(0.803)0.834⁎⁎(0.019)−0.470(0.138)1.163⁎⁎(0.012)
 Sikh−0.000(.)0.489(0.355)2.304⁎⁎⁎(0.005)−0.112(0.796)1.438*(0.084)
 Hindu−17.404(.)0.013(0.973)0.366(0.369)−0.207(0.569)0.063(0.883)
 Jewish1.374(.)−0.452(0.354)0.642(0.147)0.317(0.389)0.352(0.443)
 Buddhist−20.294⁎⁎⁎(0.001)0.221(0.520)0.191(0.565)−0.139(0.636)0.603(0.125)
 No religion−18.037(.)0.151(0.417)0.056(0.731)0.162(0.361)0.037(0.835)
Male−0.281(0.775)−0.281⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.527⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.111*(0.099)−0.096(0.225)
Left education (Base: before age 16)
 At age 16−0.150(0.926)0.212(0.101)−0.010(0.939)0.101(0.396)−0.203(0.104)
 At age 180.139(0.938)0.070(0.567)−0.043(0.717)0.075(0.515)−0.166(0.166)
 Attended University0.167(0.907)−0.239⁎⁎(0.028)0.053(0.596)0.284⁎⁎⁎(0.005)0.047(0.654)
Accommodation (Base: others)
 Own home−1.337(0.314)−0.271(0.177)0.222(0.133)0.132(0.405)0.464⁎⁎⁎(0.003)
 Shared−2.877*(0.086)−0.414(0.116)−0.214(0.373)0.112(0.663)−0.692⁎⁎⁎(0.004)
 Private rented−1.122(0.486)−0.159(0.442)0.317⁎⁎(0.045)−0.041(0.808)0.043(0.798)
 Parent's home−0.000(.)0.000(.)0.000(.)0.000(.)0.000(.)
 Own home−2.689*(0.082)0.100(0.645)0.245(0.195)0.282(0.147)−0.149(0.436)
Keyworker (Base: no)
 Health and Social−0.002(0.998)−0.109(0.159)−0.233⁎⁎⁎(0.004)−0.188⁎⁎(0.019)−0.135(0.115)
 Education1.228(0.419)−0.184(0.128)0.340⁎⁎⁎(0.009)0.107(0.423)0.410⁎⁎⁎(0.005)
 Key public services−2.395(0.149)−0.526*(0.055)−0.037(0.887)−0.190(0.509)0.327(0.247)
 Local government19.234⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.204(0.289)−0.047(0.804)−0.157(0.402)−0.095(0.622)
 Food18.211⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.146(0.523)−0.002(0.994)−0.120(0.566)−0.210(0.383)
 Public safety−0.000(.)−0.648*(0.092)0.116(0.762)−0.140(0.719)0.536(0.426)
 Transport18.945⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.187(0.571)−0.290(0.416)0.161(0.615)−0.230(0.514)
 Utilities20.100⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.342(0.203)0.199(0.416)−0.111(0.630)−0.318(0.164)
Pre-existing health condition (Base: none)
 Anxiety19.058⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.197⁎⁎(0.040)0.138(0.196)−0.098(0.400)0.022(0.841)
 Panic Attacks18.453⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.846⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.643⁎⁎(0.010)−0.008(0.971)0.001(0.995)
 Anorexia−0.000(.)0.165(0.774)0.147(0.855)0.372(0.450)−0.261(0.655)
 Psychosis−0.000(.)−1.573*(0.056)0.636(0.704)0.155(0.820)0.622(0.470)
 Depression0.722(0.453)0.309⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.046(0.593)−0.089(0.329)−0.036(0.686)
 Bulimia18.710⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.350(0.381)0.031(0.938)0.308(0.440)−0.237(0.516)
 Social phobia−1.018(0.443)0.451*(0.096)−0.461*(0.055)0.279(0.297)−0.227(0.388)
 Attention deficit17.010⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.487(0.179)−0.201(0.676)−0.645*(0.093)−0.032(0.944)
 Obsessive1.573(0.362)0.835⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.042(0.829)−0.092(0.684)0.013(0.955)
 Post-Traumatic0.574(0.510)0.206(0.183)−0.021(0.901)−0.168(0.369)0.161(0.354)
 Alcohol/Drug16.876⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.888(0.103)0.971(0.243)−0.436(0.533)0.339(0.654)
 Bi-polar disorder18.819⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.033(0.934)−0.283(0.504)−0.454(0.219)−0.188(0.599)
 Personality disorder0.463(0.678)0.147(0.576)−0.306(0.322)−0.094(0.730)−0.537⁎⁎(0.037)
Drinking alcohol (Base: Never)
 Monthly or less0.906(0.240)0.147(0.122)0.304⁎⁎⁎(0.001)−0.085(0.340)−0.014(0.884)
 2–4 times a month0.081(0.924)−0.073(0.429)0.365⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.061(0.495)0.020(0.832)
 2–3 times a week1.671*(0.089)0.040(0.652)0.410⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.096(0.266)0.278⁎⁎⁎(0.003)
 More a week1.561(0.175)−0.046(0.648)0.328⁎⁎⁎(0.001)−0.009(0.930)0.062(0.569)
Using drugs0.163(0.891)0.049(0.774)−0.357*(0.070)0.111(0.588)−0.176(0.405)
Suicidal thoughts0.000(.)0.174⁎⁎⁎(0.003)−0.317⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.233⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.148⁎⁎(0.018)
Having mental health support from (Base: No)
 GP−1.075(0.207)0.149*(0.081)0.195⁎⁎(0.039)−0.055(0.567)−0.012(0.902)
 Counsellor etc.−1.340*(0.079)0.196(0.108)0.141(0.289)−0.059(0.682)0.089(0.518)
 Community Mental0.679(0.390)0.303(0.172)−0.119(0.561)−0.424(0.102)−0.509⁎⁎(0.016)
 Psychiatric hospital−0.000(.)0.000(.)0.000(.)0.000(.)0.000(.)
 Religious Leader19.471⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.264(0.419)0.235(0.525)0.417(0.129)0.160(0.678)
 Constant139.318(.)−3.418⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−3.003⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.260(0.572)−2.155⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
 Constant2−1.594⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−1.183⁎⁎⁎(0.004)0.513(0.266)0.535(0.178)
 Constant30.262(0.538)1.550⁎⁎⁎(0.000)1.369⁎⁎⁎(0.003)5.855⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
 Constant41.980⁎⁎⁎(0.000)1.560⁎⁎⁎(0.001)
 Observations1525655565552695655
 Adjusted R20.2940.0200.0240.0100.030

Note: p-values are in parentheses.

p < 0.10.

p < 0.05.

p < 0.01.

Table 8

Ordered logit regressions of ordered coping mechanism outcomes on healthcare professionals and other demographics.

Good/coping activities changed
Amount of activity time impacted
Confident on coping
Coeff.p-valueCoeff.p-valueCoeff.p-value
Health Professionals0.028(0.747)−0.020(0.781)0.265⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
Age Category (Base: below 21)
 21–240.175(0.678)0.969⁎⁎⁎(0.008)0.636*(0.083)
 25–340.335(0.412)0.885⁎⁎(0.013)0.887⁎⁎(0.013)
 35–440.070(0.866)0.904⁎⁎(0.013)0.826⁎⁎(0.021)
 45–54−0.141(0.732)0.535(0.142)1.131⁎⁎⁎(0.002)
 55–64−0.293(0.479)0.607*(0.097)1.276⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
 65 and over−0.501(0.272)0.419(0.312)1.143⁎⁎⁎(0.005)
Ethnicity (Base: others)
 White0.022(0.877)−0.096(0.419)0.183(0.107)
 Asian0.203(0.478)0.214(0.325)−0.186(0.417)
 Black−0.175(0.576)−0.209(0.554)−0.203(0.526)
Religion (Base: others)
 Christian−0.053(0.785)0.197(0.267)−0.252(0.132)
 Muslim0.131(0.782)0.299(0.370)0.104(0.743)
 Sikh1.191(0.254)−0.201(0.611)−0.121(0.867)
 Hindu−0.538(0.187)−0.096(0.782)−0.313(0.328)
 Jewish−0.292(0.579)0.263(0.515)−0.317(0.442)
 Buddhist−0.193(0.589)−0.359(0.261)0.481(0.196)
 No religion−0.040(0.836)0.063(0.722)−0.131(0.431)
Male−0.071(0.417)−0.150⁎⁎(0.039)0.297⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
Left education (Base: before age 16)
 At age 16−0.021(0.882)−0.305⁎⁎(0.021)−0.133(0.310)
 At age 180.180(0.206)−0.155(0.195)−0.335⁎⁎⁎(0.007)
 Attended University0.272⁎⁎(0.031)−0.042(0.691)−0.063(0.566)
Accommodation (Base: others)
 Own home0.419⁎⁎(0.044)−0.194(0.250)0.680⁎⁎⁎(0.001)
 Shared0.345(0.259)−0.071(0.773)0.388(0.151)
 Private rented0.068(0.753)−0.238(0.180)0.533⁎⁎(0.014)
 Parent's home0.000(.)0.000(.)0.000(.)
 Own home0.531⁎⁎(0.036)−0.155(0.437)0.342(0.140)
Keyworker (Base: no)
 Health and Social−0.304⁎⁎⁎(0.003)−0.267⁎⁎⁎(0.001)−0.001(0.989)
 Education0.613⁎⁎⁎(0.004)0.087(0.522)−0.161(0.221)
 Key public services0.253(0.480)−0.356(0.172)0.342(0.143)
 Local government0.035(0.888)−0.005(0.980)0.068(0.727)
 Food−0.678⁎⁎⁎(0.006)−0.343(0.152)−0.185(0.393)
 Public safety−0.184(0.693)0.862(0.258)0.347(0.630)
 Transport−0.501(0.202)−0.421(0.330)−0.046(0.914)
 Utilities0.346(0.316)−0.319(0.266)−0.196(0.434)
Pre-existing health condition (Base: none)
 Anxiety−0.345⁎⁎⁎(0.007)0.160(0.119)−0.559⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
 Panic Attacks−0.468*(0.052)0.552⁎⁎(0.018)−0.561⁎⁎⁎(0.008)
 Anorexia−0.481(0.450)−0.328(0.629)0.187(0.781)
 Psychosis11.709⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−0.543(0.331)2.267*(0.090)
 Depression−0.360⁎⁎⁎(0.001)0.072(0.392)−0.466⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
 Bulimia−0.389(0.408)−0.073(0.838)−0.131(0.705)
 Social phobia−0.772⁎⁎(0.023)0.189(0.580)−0.856⁎⁎⁎(0.004)
 Attention deficit−0.900*(0.097)−0.144(0.764)0.022(0.967)
 Obsessive−0.322(0.217)−0.011(0.955)−0.577⁎⁎(0.014)
 Post-Traumatic−0.610⁎⁎⁎(0.003)0.117(0.491)−0.409⁎⁎(0.030)
 Alcohol/Drug−0.839(0.343)0.405(0.416)−1.447⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
 Bi-polar disorder−0.761⁎⁎(0.015)0.548(0.164)−0.138(0.711)
 Personality disorder−0.562*(0.072)0.589*(0.077)−0.925⁎⁎⁎(0.003)
Drinking alcohol (Base: Never)
 Monthly or less0.190*(0.063)−0.038(0.694)0.090(0.359)
 2–4 times a month0.411⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.137(0.156)0.162*(0.092)
 2–3 times a week0.655⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.253⁎⁎⁎(0.006)0.105(0.263)
 More a week0.486⁎⁎⁎(0.000)0.316⁎⁎⁎(0.002)0.068(0.536)
Using drugs−0.403*(0.053)0.117(0.546)−0.025(0.905)
Suicidal thoughts−0.260⁎⁎⁎(0.001)0.145⁎⁎(0.016)−0.584⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
Having mental health support from (Base: No)
 GP0.061(0.572)−0.089(0.325)−0.171*(0.062)
 Counsellor etc.0.142(0.401)−0.033(0.817)−0.389⁎⁎⁎(0.005)
 Community Mental−0.031(0.919)0.219(0.388)−0.542⁎⁎(0.018)
 Psychiatric hospital0.000(.)0.000(.)0.000(.)
 Religious Leader0.828*(0.066)0.147(0.682)0.408(0.173)
 Constant1−1.785⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−2.573⁎⁎⁎(0.000)−4.145⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
 Constant2−0.639(0.206)−1.227⁎⁎⁎(0.007)−1.511⁎⁎⁎(0.001)
 Constant30.106(0.813)0.463(0.301)
 Constant41.150⁎⁎(0.011)2.521⁎⁎⁎(0.000)
 Observations565552695308
 Adjusted R20.0350.0110.047

Note: p-values are in parentheses.

p < 0.10.

p < 0.05.

p < 0.01.

Ordered logit regressions of ordered psychological health outcomes on healthcare professionals and other covariates. Note: p-values are in parentheses. p < 0.10. p < 0.05. p < 0.01. Ordered logit regressions of ordered health change outcomes on healthcare professionals and other demographics. Note: p-values are in parentheses. p < 0.10. p < 0.05. p < 0.01. Ordered logit regressions of ordered health change outcomes on healthcare professionals and other covariates. Note: p-values are in parentheses. p < 0.10. p < 0.05. p < 0.01. Ordered logit regressions of ordered coping mechanism outcomes on healthcare professionals and other demographics. Note: p-values are in parentheses. p < 0.10. p < 0.05. p < 0.01. Table 5, Table 6, Table 7, Table 8 indicate that HCP have lower mental health scale scores than others. For example, being a HCP decreases log-odds ratio of severe anxiety (GAD-7) by 0.180, which is statistically significant at 5%. Below is a summary of the effects of all other demographics and pre-existing health conditions and wellbeing on those outcomes, on which statistically significant effects are seen: Age: As age increases, following government advice, coping activities, amount of coping activity time, and confidence in coping rise, but risky activities, communications with family and scores on PHQ-9 and GAD-7 fall. Ethnicity: Black and Asian minority ethnicities show lower mental health support than white and others. Black minority participants show lower drug use than others. Asian minority participants show much higher suicidal thoughts than others. Relationships with friends and family are lower among White but higher among Asians. Religion: Jewish participants report less risky activities than others. Christian participants report higher GAD-7 scores than others. Muslim and Hindu participants report higher drug use than others. Jewish participants receive higher mental health support than others. Christian participants report more worries about coronavirus than other religious groups. Sikh, then Muslims and then Christians maintained higher relations with friends and family than others, and they also had higher coping activities than others. Gender: Male participants follow government advice less than female participants, and they have lower PHQ-9, GAD-7, IES-R scores, alcohol consumption, mental health difficulties, worries about the virus, communications with friends and family, and activity time compared female counterparts. They have higher confidence in coping than females. Education: According to the data, as education increases, conformation to government advice decreases; PHQ-9, alcohol consumption, relationship with friends and family increases; GAD-7 scores, worries about the virus, coping activities, activity time, and confidence in coping decreases. Accommodation: Those who live in own home report higher compliance with government advice, coping activities, and confidence on coping and lower scores on PHQ-9, GAD-7, IES-R, and impact on mental health. Key worker: Likelihood of following government advice decreases in key workers working in health and social care, key public services, and food services. Food workers report high likelihood of doing risky activities, and transport workers, report the opposite. Food workers also report higher scores of PHQ-9 and GAD-7 compared to others. The log likelihood of drinking alcohol increases among transport and utility workers. While the drug use of most of the key workers increases, the opposite is reported by utility workers. Most of the key workers have higher likelihood of suicidal thoughts and worries about coronavirus compared to others. Health and social care workers have less communication with friends and family, and therefore, their coping activities and time of those activities have been lower than others. Education workers have been able to manage higher relations with friends and family, and higher coping activities than others. Pre-existing health conditions: Respondents with pre-existing anxiety and panic attacks are more likely to have higher scores on PHQ-9, GAD-7, IES-R scores than others, and their coping activities reduce and confidence on coping reduces too. Individuals with anorexia and psychosis have lower likelihood of doing risky activities than others, but patients with psychosis have lower likelihood of having higher scores of GAD-7 than others. Individuals with Bulimia, Bipolar disorder, and personality disorder report less likelihood of following government advice than others. Most of the individuals with pre-existing health conditions have higher scores of PHQ-9, GAD-7 and IES-R than others. Alcohol drinking increases among individuals with social phobia, attention deficit, and personality disorder. Drug use increases among respondents with Bipolar disorder and personality disorder. Suicidal thoughts increase amongst almost all individuals with pre-existing health conditions. However, coping activities and confidence on coping reduce among most of the individuals with pre-existing health conditions. Alcohol: Higher alcohol intake before COVID-19 leads to lower compliance with government advice but higher scores of PHQ-9, GAD-7 and IES-R, and also higher coping activities, communications with friends and family and confidence on coping. Drug use: Participants who report drug use have less likelihood of following government advice, communicating with friends and family, and coping activities, but higher likelihood of doing risky activities, with higher scores on PHQ-9 and GAD-7 compared to others. Suicidal thoughts: Individuals with pre-COVID-19 suicidal thoughts show lower likelihood of following government advice, communications with friends and family, coping activities, confidence on coping, but higher likelihood of doing risky activities, with higher scores on PHQ-9, GAD-7, and IES-R. Mental health support: Mental health support from GP, and counsellor largely increases with higher scores of PHQ-9, GAD-7, IES-R, but shows reduced confidence in coping.

Marginal effects

Table 9 shows marginal effects of all HCP, male HCP, and female HCP on outcomes. They are estimated from ordered logit models including all other covariates as shown in Table 5, Table 6, Table 7, Table 8. For male and female HCP, separate ordered logit models have been conducted. Marginal effects imply changes in probabilities. For example, in the case of GAD-7, if an individual is a HCP, the probability of having minimal anxiety increases by 0.039 (or, in other words, the chance of having minimal anxiety increases by 3.9 percentage points). Similarly, if an individual is a HCP, their chance of having mild, moderate, and severe anxiety decrease by 1.4, 1.2 and 1.2 percentage points, respectively. If the HCP is male, their chance of having mild, moderate, and severe anxiety decrease further by 6.5, 3.7 and 3.4 percentage points. In the case of female HCP, those decreases are not statistically significant. So, male non-HCP are more anxious than male HCP, but female non-HCP are not more or less anxious than female HCP. Other anxiety indicators, such as worries about corona virus and confidence about coping strategies show similar indication. Most of the outcomes show insignificant results.
Table 9

Marginal effects of healthcare professionals, male healthcare professionals, and female healthcare professionals on outcomes.

Followed government advice
Did risky activities
Very few timeSome of the timeSeveral timeMost of the timeRareVery few timeSome of the timeSeveral timeMost of the time
Healthcare professional−0.000−0.000−0.0020.003−0.0040.0030.0000.0000.000
(0.841)(0.841)(0.841)(0.841)(0.653)(0.653)(0.659)(0.669)(0.660)
Male−0.005−0.007−0.0380.050−0.0100.0090.0010.0000.000
(0.256)(0.281)(0.253)(0.254)(0.647)(0.633)(0.781)(.)(.)
Female0.0010.0010.005−0.006−0.0020.0020.0000.0000.000
(0.688)(0.689)(0.688)(0.688)(0.809)(0.809)(0.811)(0.816)(0.811)
Patient health questionnaire (PHQ-9)
Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD-7)
MinimalMildModerateModerate SevereSevereMinimalMildModerateSevere

Healthcare professional0.023−0.003−0.008−0.006−0.0050.039⁎⁎−0.014⁎⁎−0.012⁎⁎−0.012⁎⁎
(0.114)(0.116)(0.114)(0.114)(0.116)(0.016)(0.016)(0.016)(0.016)
Male0.094⁎⁎−0.027⁎⁎−0.030⁎⁎−0.023⁎⁎−0.014⁎⁎0.136⁎⁎⁎−0.065⁎⁎⁎−0.037⁎⁎⁎−0.034⁎⁎⁎
(0.023)(0.024)(0.026)(0.028)(0.033)(0.001)(0.001)(0.002)(0.003)
Female0.016−0.002−0.006−0.005−0.0040.026−0.009−0.008−0.009
(0.302)(0.304)(0.302)(0.302)(0.303)(0.134)(0.134)(0.134)(0.135)
Impact of events scale-revised (IES-R)
Drinking alcohol changed
NonePTSD may be concernProbably PTSD diagnosisHigh PTSDDecreasedUnchangedIncreased

Healthcare professional0.011−0.003−0.002−0.0060.010−0.006−0.004
(0.467)(0.468)(0.468)(0.467)(0.511)(0.511)(0.511)
Male0.038−0.013−0.008−0.0170.0190.009−0.028
(0.294)(0.496)(.)(0.285)(0.529)(0.532)(0.529)
Female0.007−0.002−0.001−0.004−0.009−0.0080.017
(0.676)(0.676)(0.676)(0.676)(0.296)(0.296)(0.296)
Drug use changed
Mental health support changed
Mental health affected
DecreasedUnchangedIncreasedDecreasedUnchangedIncreasedNoSome of the timeMost of the timeAll of the time

Healthcare professional−0.077−0.0000.077−0.0160.0030.013−0.0170.0010.0070.009
(0.397)(0.995)(0.526)(0.530)(0.529)(0.535)(0.462)(0.498)(0.462)(0.462)
Male0.081−0.019−0.0630.014−0.002−0.004−0.008
(0.689)(0.692)(0.699)(0.882)(0.881)(0.881)(0.882)
Female−0.0210.0040.017−0.0140.0010.0060.008
(0.414)(0.421)(0.420)(0.557)(0.602)(0.558)(0.558)
Mental health changed
Suicidal thoughts changedWorried about corona virus
DecreasedUnchangedIncreasedNot at allA little bitModeratelyQuite a bitExtremely

Healthcare professional0.015−0.011−0.0050.0330.003*0.011*0.014*−0.013*−0.015*
(0.584)(0.584)(0.584)(.)(0.085)(0.083)(0.082)(0.083)(0.082)
Male0.011*0.040*0.028*−0.045*−0.034*
(0.085)(0.067)(0.066)(0.066)(0.066)
Female0.012−0.009−0.0040.1150.0020.0070.010−0.008−0.011
(0.678)(0.678)(0.678)(.)(0.266)(0.264)(0.264)(0.264)(0.264)
Communicated with friends/family
Relationships impacted
Not at allEvery few daysDailySeveral times a dayIsolatedNo changeFeeling closerHaving more argumentsTalking more

Healthcare professional−0.005−0.0120.0050.0120.011−0.000−0.003−0.001−0.007
(0.186)(0.187)(0.187)(0.187)(0.507)(0.512)(0.507)(0.507)(0.507)
Male−0.026⁎⁎−0.055⁎⁎0.041⁎⁎0.040⁎⁎−0.014−0.0010.0040.0010.009
(0.039)(0.042)(0.040)(0.044)(0.743)(0.748)(0.743)(0.743)(0.742)
Female−0.002−0.0060.0020.0060.017−0.001−0.005−0.001−0.010
(0.548)(0.548)(0.548)(0.548)(0.353)(0.363)(0.353)(0.355)(0.353)
Did good/coping activities
Coping activities changed
Not at allEvery few daysDailySeveral times a dayDecreasedUnchangedIncreased

Healthcare professional−0.004−0.0140.0180.001−0.002−0.0030.005
(0.291)(0.291)(0.291)(0.296)(0.747)(0.747)(0.747)
Male−0.016−0.0410.0540.003−0.026−0.0370.063
(0.203)(0.209)(0.206)(0.226)(0.148)(0.135)(0.137)
Female−0.002−0.0090.0110.0000.0040.004−0.007
(0.546)(0.546)(0.546)(0.547)(0.664)(0.665)(0.664)
Amount of activity time impacted
Confident on coping
Not at allA littleA moderate amountA lotA great dealNot at allA little bitModeratelyQuite a bitExtremely

Healthcare professional0.0010.0020.002−0.000−0.004−0.001⁎⁎⁎−0.014⁎⁎⁎−0.035⁎⁎⁎0.003⁎⁎0.048⁎⁎⁎
(0.781)(0.781)(0.781)(0.781)(0.781)(0.003)(0.000)(0.000)(0.035)(0.000)
Male0.0070.0150.016−0.004−0.034−0.004*−0.030⁎⁎⁎−0.092⁎⁎⁎−0.025⁎⁎⁎0.151⁎⁎⁎
(0.385)(0.370)(0.370)(0.377)(0.372)(0.075)(0.001)(0.000)(0.006)(0.000)
Female0.0000.0010.001−0.000−0.002−0.001⁎⁎−0.009⁎⁎−0.023⁎⁎0.003⁎⁎0.030⁎⁎
(0.902)(0.902)(0.902)(0.902)(0.902)(0.045)(0.026)(0.026)(0.049)(0.026)

Note: p-values are in parentheses.

p < 0.10.

p < 0.05.

p < 0.01.

Marginal effects of healthcare professionals, male healthcare professionals, and female healthcare professionals on outcomes. Note: p-values are in parentheses. p < 0.10. p < 0.05. p < 0.01.

Discussion

This paper describes the protocol and results of the first three weeks of recruitment to the international survey: Psychological impact of COVID −19. The responses have increased with time as more organisations are joining the project. Our aim is to report periodic results as the temporal changes will be relevant considering changing government guidance that will impact on the population's responses and emotions. In the final report, using data from all participant countries, we aim to compare the cultural and political landscapes impacting on psychological response to the pandemic, thereby informing future global crisis. The survey was launched in complete lockdown, but within 3 weeks of these results, there has been minor movement. Our survey in the first three weeks has recruited mainly HCP. This is possible because the survey is supported by NHS organisations. There is a predominance of females, which is not in accordance with the general population, but considering the majority of HCP; this may be understood as there is reported majority of females in the healthcare workforce (NHS Digital, 2019). The ethnicity of respondents is not representative of the general population, but this may be a reflection of the areas where the survey was implemented in the first three weeks. The data reports that age and gender have a correlation with following government advice. This finding resonates the results from Fancourt and colleagues’ study (Fancourt et al., 2020). Vindegaard and Eriksen Benros (2020) conducted a systematic review of studies measuring psychiatric symptoms or morbidities associated with COVID-19 among infected patients and among non-infected groups, the latter divided into psychiatric patients, HCP and non-HCP. They included 43 studies, of which two papers evaluated patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection, and 41 the indirect effect of the pandemic (2 on patients with pre-existing psychiatric disorders, 20 on medical healthcare workers and 19 on the general public). 18 of the studies were case-control studies or compared to norms, while 25 of the studies had no control groups. They concluded that among healthcare workers depression/depressive symptoms, anxiety, psychological distress and poor sleep quality were increased. Regarding the public, one paper revealed lower psychological well-being compared to before COVID-19, while a longitudinal study found no difference in anxiety, depression or stress symptoms early in the pandemic compared to after four weeks. A variety of factors were associated with a higher risk of psychiatric symptoms and/or low psychological well-being of the public including female gender, front-line HCP, and poor self-rated health. In our survey three week analysis, 32% participants reported experiencing suicidal thoughts pre-COVID-19, equally distributed between HCP and non-HCP. The findings of higher rates of mild depression and anxiety in HCP are similar to other studies. However, there are dissimilarities in the findings of gender. Notably, the majority of studies in the systematic review had small numbers, except for a couple who had comparable numbers and were conducted in Asia. Our sample and results with majority HCP in the UK may also be biased by the fact that in week 3 a large proportion of the participant organisations are mental health trusts. The timing of the survey meant that the initial influx of infections had just passed. This may have affected HCPs’ levels of distress. As we continue recruitment to the study, the temporal relations in findings will be interesting as they will correspond with changes in the general landscape. We also aim to get better insights as international sites start recruiting. It is also worth noting that at the time of writing there are two events that could and will likely influence the Asian and Black ethnic group psychology – the publication of the Public Health England report (Public Health England, 2020) which states that Black and Asian Minority Ethnic groups have died at a higher proportion and once infected are more likely to die. Secondly, the ‘Black lives matter’ movement has sparked large gatherings in urban areas providing a secondary psychological effect and likely increased infections amongst these communities.

Strengths and limitations

The collaborative effort with 50 NHS organisations, universities and charities is a key strength of the study. This will allow a representative sample from a wider geography. The two-staged approach of implementing the survey again in six months will allow an analysis of change. The global aspect of the study will allow an evaluation of the cultural and political landscape influencing the differences in the psychological impact of the pandemic. The survey has used a convenience sample and therefore relies on a self-selected group of respondents who choose to complete the questionnaire. As this is a participatory study, numbers will depend on people willing to participate. However, there has been a good response so far, and we anticipate a large sample size. Another limitation of the study is that there is no control with a number of outcomes. As we have a two-staged approach, there will be some potential to evaluate change over time.

Future research

The results presented in this paper are initial responses and are likely to change as the sample size increases. We hope to gain more recruitment from the general population, and a revised communication strategy will be instrumental based on the initial results. Temporal changes will be interesting to analyze as the participant demographics may change, and responses may change based on the political and government guidance. The possibility of delayed psychological impact of the pandemic due to economic and other changes or delayed realization of how individuals had been feeling during the height of the crisis is also a possibility. We will therefore also be able to see correlations to other events that may coincide with data collation, such as mass gatherings, PHE publications, or other future national or international events. Future research will need to consider interventions to support individuals who report adverse psychological impact of the pandemic and its resultant restrictions. Improving populations’ resilience and preparedness to crisis will also need to be a priority.

Conclusion

Evidence has shown an adverse psychological impact of previous pandemics on the population, especially non-healthcare professional's wellbeing, not only during the pandemic but also in long term. Research should focus on identifying the need, preparing services, and determining the factors that enhance and build resilience.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Shanaya Rathod: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing. Saseendran Pallikadavath: Conceptualization, Methodology, Funding acquisition, Writing - review & editing. Allan H. Young: Validation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Lizi Graves: Conceptualization, Methodology, Project administration, Writing - review & editing. Mohammad Mahbubur Rahman: Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing - review & editing. Ashlea Brooks: Validation, Project administration, Writing - review & editing. Mustafa Soomro: Methodology, Writing - review & editing. Pranay Rathod: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Writing - review & editing. Peter Phiri: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Writing - review & editing.

Declaration of Competing Interest

None.
  12 in total

1.  Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in Hong Kong in 2003: stress and psychological impact among frontline healthcare workers.

Authors:  Cindy W C Tam; Edwin P F Pang; Linda C W Lam; Helen F K Chiu
Journal:  Psychol Med       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 7.723

2.  A Short Scale for Measuring Loneliness in Large Surveys: Results From Two Population-Based Studies.

Authors:  Mary Elizabeth Hughes; Linda J Waite; Louise C Hawkley; John T Cacioppo
Journal:  Res Aging       Date:  2004

3.  A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7.

Authors:  Robert L Spitzer; Kurt Kroenke; Janet B W Williams; Bernd Löwe
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2006-05-22

4.  No time for dilemma: mass gatherings must be suspended.

Authors:  Ziad A Memish; Qanta A Ahmed; Patricia Schlagenhauf; Seydou Doumbia; Anas Khan
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2020-03-30       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  COVID-19: towards controlling of a pandemic.

Authors:  Juliet Bedford; Delia Enria; Johan Giesecke; David L Heymann; Chikwe Ihekweazu; Gary Kobinger; H Clifford Lane; Ziad Memish; Myoung-Don Oh; Amadou Alpha Sall; Anne Schuchat; Kumnuan Ungchusak; Lothar H Wieler
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2020-03-17       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Patients with mental health disorders in the COVID-19 epidemic.

Authors:  Hao Yao; Jian-Hua Chen; Yi-Feng Xu
Journal:  Lancet Psychiatry       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 27.083

7.  COVID-19 pandemic and mental health consequences: Systematic review of the current evidence.

Authors:  Nina Vindegaard; Michael Eriksen Benros
Journal:  Brain Behav Immun       Date:  2020-05-30       Impact factor: 7.217

8.  Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19): The epidemic and the challenges.

Authors:  Chih-Cheng Lai; Tzu-Ping Shih; Wen-Chien Ko; Hung-Jen Tang; Po-Ren Hsueh
Journal:  Int J Antimicrob Agents       Date:  2020-02-17       Impact factor: 5.283

9.  Psychological impact of the 2015 MERS outbreak on hospital workers and quarantined hemodialysis patients.

Authors:  Sang Min Lee; Won Sub Kang; Ah-Rang Cho; Tae Kim; Jin Kyung Park
Journal:  Compr Psychiatry       Date:  2018-10-13       Impact factor: 3.735

Review 10.  The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence.

Authors:  Samantha K Brooks; Rebecca K Webster; Louise E Smith; Lisa Woodland; Simon Wessely; Neil Greenberg; Gideon James Rubin
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2020-02-26       Impact factor: 79.321

View more
  10 in total

1.  (Mis)Information, Fears and Preventative Health Behaviours Related to COVID-19.

Authors:  Carmina Castellano-Tejedor; María Torres-Serrano; Andrés Cencerrado
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-04-09       Impact factor: 4.614

2.  Psychopathological burden and coping strategies among frontline and second-line Italian healthcare workers facing the COVID-19 emergency: Findings from the COMET collaborative network.

Authors:  Gabriele Sani; Delfina Janiri; Lorenzo Moccia; Umberto Albert; Giuseppe Carrà; Claudia Carmassi; Francesca Cirulli; Bernardo Dell'Osso; Giulia Menculini; Maria Giulia Nanni; Maurizio Pompili; Umberto Volpe; Andrea Fiorillo
Journal:  J Affect Disord       Date:  2022-05-06       Impact factor: 6.533

3.  Assessment of Healthcare Professionals' Wellbeing During a Peak of the COVID-19 Pandemic in a Healthcare System in Ohio.

Authors:  Natalie L Dyer; Francoise Adan; Tyler Barnett; Jeffery A Dusek
Journal:  Glob Adv Health Med       Date:  2022-05-25

4.  An evaluation of the mental health impact of SARS-CoV-2 on patients, general public and healthcare professionals: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Peter Phiri; Rema Ramakrishnan; Shanaya Rathod; Kathryn Elliot; Tony Thayanandan; Natasha Sandle; Nyla Haque; Steven Wh Chau; Oscar Wh Wong; Sandra Sm Chan; Evelyn Ky Wong; Vanessa Raymont; Sheena K Au-Yeung; David Kingdon; Gayathri Delanerolle
Journal:  EClinicalMedicine       Date:  2021-04-06

5.  COVID-19 and dynamics of environmental awareness, sustainable consumption and social responsibility in Malaysia.

Authors:  Qaisar Ali; Shazia Parveen; Hakimah Yaacob; Zaki Zaini; Nur Anissa Sarbini
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2021-05-28       Impact factor: 5.190

6.  Impact of lockdown relaxation and implementation of the face-covering policy on mental health: A United Kingdom COVID-19 study.

Authors:  Shanaya Rathod; Saseendran Pallikadavath; Elizabeth Graves; Mohammad Mahbubur Rahman; Ashlea Brooks; Mustafa G Soomro; Pranay Rathod; Peter Phiri
Journal:  World J Psychiatry       Date:  2021-12-19

7.  The Association Between Exposure to COVID-19 and Mental Health Outcomes Among Healthcare Workers.

Authors:  Diana Czepiel; Hans W Hoek; Afra van der Markt; Bart P F Rutten; Wim Veling; Frederike Schirmbeck; Franco Mascayano; Ezra S Susser; Els van der Ven
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2022-06-10

8.  COVID-19 countermeasures at the workplace, psychological well-being, and mental health - a nationally representative latent class analysis of Luxembourgish employees.

Authors:  Philipp E Sischka; Alexander F Schmidt; Georges Steffgen
Journal:  Curr Psychol       Date:  2022-07-14

9.  The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on older adults with an intellectual disability during the first wave of the pandemic in Ireland.

Authors:  Mary McCarron; Darren McCausland; Retha Luus; Andrew Allen; Fintan Sheerin; Eilish Burke; Eimear McGlinchy; Fidelma Flannery; Philip McCallion
Journal:  HRB Open Res       Date:  2021-12-13

10.  Stress and Maladaptive Coping of Italians Health Care Professionals during the First Wave of the Pandemic.

Authors:  Paolo Grandinetti; Martina Gooney; Florian Scheibein; Roberta Testa; Gaetano Ruggieri; Paolo Tondo; Anastasia Corona; Graziella Boi; Luca Floris; Valerio F Profeta; John S G Wells; Domenico De Berardis
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2021-11-30
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.