Dataset Information

The impact of reduced working on mental health in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic: Results from the Understanding Society COVID-19 study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has precipitated an unpredictable economic crisis, currently affecting daily life for millions of workers. We examined the mental health impact of reduced working in a nationally representative sample of employees.

Method

We used Wave one (April 2020) of the Understanding Society UK Household Longitudinal Study (UKHLS) COVID-19 study, with linkage to baseline mental health data from the UKHLS annual survey (January 2017- December 2018). Analysis was based on adults aged 18-65 who were employees in January/February 2020 (n=8,708), with psychological distress assessed using the GHQ-12. Logistic regression examined the mental health impact of reduced working and reasons for the reduction.

Results

Forty two percent of employees reported reduced working by April 2020, with 22% furloughed. There was no evidence of an association between reduced working per se and psychological distress in the fully adjusted model (OR=1.06, 95%CI 0.91-1.23). Those permanently laid-off (less than 1% of employees) were most vulnerable to adverse mental health effects in the early months of the pandemic (OR=3.60, 95%CI 1.55-8.37). We also found evidence of higher levels of psychological distress among those sick or self-isolating, and those with reduced working due to caring responsibilities.

Limitations

While the GHQ is a widely used and validated instrument in identifying potential psychiatric disorders, it is important to note that it does not represent a clinical assessment.

Conclusions

Longitudinal examination of employment transitions and mental ill-health related to pandemic outcomes is imperative and should help inform public health responses and ongoing government policy in supporting those adversely affected.

SUBMITTER: Ferry F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9754678 | biostudies-literature | 2021 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The impact of reduced working on mental health in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic: Results from the Understanding Society COVID-19 study.

Ferry Finola F Bunting Brendan B Rosato Michael M Curran Emma E Leavey Gerard G

Journal of affective disorders 20210324

<h4>Background</h4>The COVID-19 pandemic has precipitated an unpredictable economic crisis, currently affecting daily life for millions of workers. We examined the mental health impact of reduced working in a nationally representative sample of employees.<h4>Method</h4>We used Wave one (April 2020) of the Understanding Society UK Household Longitudinal Study (UKHLS) COVID-19 study, with linkage to baseline mental health data from the UKHLS annual survey (January 2017- December 2018). Analysis wa ...[more]

PMID: 33812244

Similar Datasets

Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic had detrimental and unequal repercussions on mental health. To date there is little evidence exploring how motherhood and workplace size moderates this relationship for working women. This study aimed to estimate changes in working women's mental health at the start of each UK lockdown and estimate the effect of motherhood and workplace size on mental health. We used Understanding Society data from women in paid employment, who participated in at least: one pre-COVID-19 Wave (9 or 10/11) and one COVID-19 lockdown wave (Lockdown 1: April 2020, Lockdown 2: November 2020, Lockdown 3: January 2021). Primary outcome was probable psychological distress (i.e., score≥4 in the General Health Questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12)). In Model 1, exposure was motherhood (binary), interacting with a variable that split time in the pre-pandemic and lockdown periods. In Model 2, workplace size (Micro:1-24, Medium: 25-199, Large: More than 200 employees) was added as an exposure (3-way interaction) to investigate moderation effects. We fitted mixed-effects logistic regression models, adjusting for age, ethnicity, UK country of residence, cohabitation, educational qualifications, working hours, furlough, subjective financial difficulty and previous health condition. In the adjusted Model 1, pre-pandemic, odds of GHQ-12 caseness were lower for mothers compared to non-mothers (OR:0.89 95%CI:0.77,1.03). However post-pandemic compared to pre-pandemic, odds for mothers were higher than non-mothers, especially during lockdown 3 (Non-mothers: OR:1.93 95%CI:1.69,2.20; Mothers: OR:2.87 95%CI:2.36,3.49). In Model 2, workplace size did not modify the relationship. Pre-pandemic, there was no difference in the odds of GHQ-12 caseness by workplace size; however, the differences observed in Lockdown 3 between non-mothers and mothers, are mainly attributed to differences in medium-sized enterprises (Non-mothers: OR:1.95 95%CI:1.53,2.48; Mothers: OR:3.56 95%CI:2.54,4.99). Future policies should be designed to facilitate the working lives of mothers, but especially for medium-sized enterprises as extreme uncertainty appears to affect these employees more.

Project description:BackgroundThe threats to health, associated restrictions and economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic have been linked to increases in mental health difficulties for many. Parents, in particular, have experienced many challenges such as having to combine work with home-schooling their children and other caring responsibilities. Yet, it remains unclear how parental mental health has changed throughout the pandemic or what factors may have mitigated or compounded the impact of the pandemic on parents' mental health.MethodsWe examined monthly survey data from two linked UK-based longitudinal studies: COVID-19: Supporting Parents, Adolescents and Children during Epidemics' (Co-SPACE) and COVID-19: Supporting Parents and Young Children during Epidemics' (Co-SPYCE). Data from 5576 parents/carers of 2-17-year-old children collected between April 2020 and January 2021 was analysed using mixed-effect modelling and latent class growth (mixture) modelling.ResultsParental stress and depression, but not anxiety, were higher during the periods of restrictions. This pattern was most pronounced for parents with primary-school-aged children, those that worked at home or had other adults in the household. Being younger, reporting secondary or below education, working out of home, having secondary-school-aged children or children with special education needs (SEN)/neurodevelopmental disorders (ND) further moderated whether, how and when parental mental health symptoms changed. Although around three quarters of parents reported consistently low mental health symptoms, a substantial minority reported consistently high or increasing symptoms of anxiety, stress and depression. The latter were more likely to be parents who were younger than average, were a single adult in the household, had a pre-existing mental health diagnosis or had a child with special educational needs or a ND.ConclusionsThese findings emphasise how different personal circumstances and pre-existing inequalities shaped how parents were affected by this unprecedented global pandemic and highlight the need for support and consideration to meet the needs of families in the future.

Project description:This paper analyses the relationship between working from home (WFH) and mental well-being at different stages during the first two critical years of the COVID-19 pandemic, when governments repeatedly imposed lockdowns and enacted WFH mandates to contain the spread of the virus. Using data from a representative survey conducted at four different time periods in 2020 (first lockdown, subsequent gradual reopening), 2021 (further lockdown) and 2022 (restrictions widely lifted) in the 27 EU member states, it examines the changing role of several mediators over time: work-family conflict, family-work conflict, stability, resilience, isolation, the importance of different support networks, workload, physical risk of contracting COVID-19 at work and housing conditions. For the first lockdown, it also differentiates by previous WFH experience, in terms of WFH novices and experienced WFH workers. It likewise differentiates by gender, in order to take the potential gendered nature of COVID-19 measures into account. The results point to several important mediators: for those who work from home, less family-work conflict and isolation, but greater stability, resilience, network support from family and friends, and superior housing conditions were associated with better mental well-being. The relevance of mediators was specific to certain stages of the pandemic. Stability was the most important mediator during the first lockdown. Work-family conflict and family-work conflict were only relevant during the first lockdown, while resilience and isolation mattered especially towards the end of the pandemic. Unlike established WFH workers, WFH novices had an advantage during the first lockdown, benefiting from lower family-work conflict and more helpful networks of family and friends. Our results differ by gender: for females who undertook WFH, important mediators were work-family conflict and family-work conflict. Both were related to adjustments they had to make in work and non-work hours in response to the enforced closure of schools and childcare facilities. For males who undertook WFH, support from networks of family and friends was an important mediator during the first lockdown.

Dataset Information

The impact of reduced working on mental health in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic: Results from the Understanding Society COVID-19 study.

Background

Method

Results

Limitations

Conclusions

Publications

The impact of reduced working on mental health in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic: Results from the Understanding Society COVID-19 study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets