Dataset Information

Policies on mental health in the workplace during the COVID-19 pandemic: A scoping review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on both mental health and working conditions. Workplaces are conducive spaces for implementing strategies and interventions to promote mental health. In addition to this, they are preventing, identifying, and managing mental disorders effectively. Although international agencies have identified some guidelines for the management of mental health in the workplace in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, a more precise characterization of both the components of the policies, their implementation, and evidence of the outcome is required to provide useful information for decision-makers.

Objectives

This study aims to synthesize scientific information regarding national and local policies focusing on preventing or improving, directly or indirectly, mental health problems in the workplace during COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Our study is a scoping review. The Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase databases and PubMed search engine were used. Original and reviewed articles published from January 1, 2020 to October 14, 2021 were included in the research. Articles with abstract or full text in English, Spanish, German and Portuguese were also included. Our strategy is based on identifying policies (intervention) which focuses on directly or indirectly preventing or ameliorating mental health problems in the workplace during COVID-19 pandemic (participants).

Results

A total of 6,522 records were identified, and only four studies were included in the scoping review, which were of low quality. That is, we found limited evidence evaluating mental health policies using primary or secondary data (empirical evaluation). Among the policies that have been identified are the increase of mental health resources, the promotion of mental health and self-care support programs, and the reduction of barriers to access to mental health treatment.

Conclusion

Our research finds that there is limited evidence available to evaluate national and local policies aimed at directly or indirectly preventing or ameliorating mental health problems at work during COVID-19 pandemic. This forces decision-makers to use different criteria to guide the allocation of resources and budgets. Therefore, there is a need for health intelligence teams in health systems to be able to assess the impact of policies as an important input for decision-makers.

SUBMITTER: Villarreal-Zegarra D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9333324 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has imposed substantial burdens on clinicians and there is a need to better understand the impact on mental health and well-being. This scoping review investigates the prevalence of mental health concerns in anaesthetists, risk and protective factors for mental well-being, and anaesthetists' pandemic-related concerns and support. We searched online databases for articles published between January 2020 and May 2022, using search terms related to: anaesthesia; burnout, well-being, mental health or stress; and COVID-19. We identified 20 articles comprising 19 different populations of anaesthetists (n = 8680) from 14 countries. Studies identified the prevalence of the following condition in anaesthetists: burnout (14-59%); stress (50-71%); anxiety (11-74%); depression (12-67%); post-traumatic stress (17-25%); psychological distress (52%); and insomnia (17-61%). Significant risk factors for poorer mental health included: direct COVID-19-related issues (fear of self and family exposure to infection; requirement for quarantine); practitioner health factors (insomnia; comorbidities); psychosocial factors (loneliness; isolation; perceived lack of support at home and work); demographic factors (female gender; non-white ethnicity; LGBTQIA+); and workplace factors (redeployment outside area of clinical practice; increased work effort; personal protective equipment shortages). Protective factors identified included: job satisfaction; perceived organisational justice; older age; and male sex. Anaesthetists' self-reported concerns related to: personal protective equipment; resource allocation; fear of infection; fear of financial loss; increased workload; and effective communication of protocols for patient treatment. Support from family, colleagues and hospital management was identified as an important coping mechanism. Findings from this review may support the design of interventions to enhance anaesthetists' psychological health during pandemic conditions and beyond. Future research should include consistent psychological outcome measures and rigorous experimental design beyond cross-sectional studies.

Project description:BackgroundRestricted visitation policies in acute care settings because of the COVID-19 pandemic have negative consequences. The objective of this scoping review is to identify impacts of restricted visitation policies in acute care settings, and describe perspectives and mitigation approaches among patients, families, and healthcare professionals.MethodsWe searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Healthstar, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials on January 01/2021, unrestricted, for published primary research records reporting any study design. We included secondary (e.g., reviews) and non-research records (e.g., commentaries), and performed manual searches in web-based resources. We excluded records that did not report primary data. Two reviewers independently abstracted data in duplicate.ResultsOf 7810 citations, we included 155 records. Sixty-six records (43%) were primary research; 29 (44%) case reports or case series, and 26 (39%) cohort studies; 21 (14%) were literature reviews and 8 (5%) were expert recommendations; 54 (35%) were commentary, editorial, or opinion pieces. Restricted visitation policies impacted coping and daily function (n = 31, 20%) and mental health outcomes (n = 29, 19%) of patients, families, and healthcare professionals. Participants described a need for coping and support (n = 107, 69%), connection and communication (n = 107, 69%), and awareness of state of well-being (n = 101, 65%). Eighty-seven approaches to mitigate impact of restricted visitation were identified, targeting families (n = 61, 70%), patients (n = 51, 59%), and healthcare professionals (n = 40, 46%).ConclusionsPatients, families, and healthcare professionals were impacted by restricted visitation polices in acute care settings during COVID-19. The consequences of this approach on patients and families are understudied and warrant evaluation of approaches to mitigate their impact. Future pandemic policy development should include the perspectives of patients, families, and healthcare professionals.Trial registrationThe review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020221662) and a protocol peer-reviewed prior to data extraction.

Project description:Background: In response to the potentially concurrent mental health crisis due to the COVID-19 outbreak, there have been ongoing mental health policies put in place in China. This review aims to systematically synthesize the implemented national-level mental health policies released by the Chinese government during the COVID-19 outbreak, and summarize the implementation of those mental health policies. Methods: Six databases and two websites were systematically searched, including published studies and gray literature published between December 1, 2019 and October 29, 2020. Results: A total of 40 studies were included. Among them, 19 were national-level policies on mental health released by the Chinese government, and 21 studies reported data on the implementation of those mental health policies. Mental health policies were issued for COVID-19 patients, suspected cases, medical staff, the general population, patients with mental illness, and mental institutions. In the early stage of the COVID-19 epidemic, attention was paid to psychological crisis intervention. In the later stage of the epidemic, the government focused mainly on psychological rehabilitation. During the COVID-19 outbreak, more than 500 psychiatrists from all over China were sent to Wuhan, about 625 hotlines were notified in 31 provinces, several online psychological consultation platforms were established, social software such as TikTok, Weibo, and WeChat were used for psychological education, and many books on mental health were published. Responding quickly, maximizing the use of resources, and emphasizing the importance of policy evaluation and implementation quality were characteristics of the mental health policies developed during the COVID-19 outbreak. Challenges facing China include a low rate of mental health service utilization, a lack of evaluation data on policy effects, and no existing national-level emergency response system and designated workforce to provide psychological crisis interventions during a national emergency or disaster. Conclusions: This review suggests that China has responded quickly and comprehensively to a possible mental health crisis during the COVID-19 outbreak, appropriate mental health policies were released for different members of the population. As the epidemic situation continues to change, the focus of mental health policies has been adjusted accordingly. However, we should note that there has been a lack of separate policies for specific mental health issues during the COVID-19 outbreak.

Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 has challenged health systems worldwide, especially the health workforce, a pillar crucial for health systems resilience. Therefore, strengthening health system resilience can be informed by analyzing health care workers' (HCWs) experiences and needs during pandemics. This review synthesizes qualitative studies published during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic to identify factors affecting HCWs' experiences and their support needs during the pandemic. This review was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews. A systematic search on PubMed was applied using controlled vocabularies. Only original studies presenting primary qualitative data were included.Results161 papers that were published from the beginning of COVID-19 pandemic up until 28th March 2021 were included in the review. Findings were presented using the socio-ecological model as an analytical framework. At the individual level, the impact of the pandemic manifested on HCWs' well-being, daily routine, professional and personal identity. At the interpersonal level, HCWs' personal and professional relationships were identified as crucial. At the institutional level, decision-making processes, organizational aspects and availability of support emerged as important factors affecting HCWs' experiences. At community level, community morale, norms, and public knowledge were of importance. Finally, at policy level, governmental support and response measures shaped HCWs' experiences. The review identified a lack of studies which investigate other HCWs than doctors and nurses, HCWs in non-hospital settings, and HCWs in low- and lower middle income countries.DiscussionThis review shows that the COVID-19 pandemic has challenged HCWs, with multiple contextual factors impacting their experiences and needs. To better understand HCWs' experiences, comparative investigations are needed which analyze differences across as well as within countries, including differences at institutional, community, interpersonal and individual levels. Similarly, interventions aimed at supporting HCWs prior to, during and after pandemics need to consider HCWs' circumstances.ConclusionsFollowing a context-sensitive approach to empowering HCWs that accounts for the multitude of aspects which influence their experiences could contribute to building a sustainable health workforce and strengthening health systems for future pandemics.