The mental and physical health of family mental health practitioners during COVID-19: relationships with family violence and workplace practices

Using Implementation Science to Inform Workforce and Service Development in Youth Mental Health: An Australian Case Study

Globally, mental illness and substance use disorders are the leading cause of disability and disease burden for young people. Orygen is an Australian youth mental health organisation with a mission to reduce the impact of mental ill health on young people, families and society, through research, clinical services, advocacy, and the design and delivery of youth mental health workforce and service development initiatives. Orygen is one of only a few known research and clinical centres with a dedicated knowledge translation division, which concentrates on growing the capacity of the systems, services, and professionals who support young people experiencing mental ill health. This paper provides a case study of the workforce development team within the Orygen knowledge translation, outlining how implementation science informs their work and how the division has adapted its model in the face of COVID-19. Since 2017, the team has delivered training to more than 4000 youth mental health workers across Australia, on the topics of trauma, psychosis, mood and anxiety disorders, brief interventions, cognition and other areas of youth mental health. The COVID-19 pandemic generated abrupt and dramatic changes to the delivery of workforce and service development initiatives in Australia due to significant restrictions to travel and in-person events. It also placed major delivery demands on youth mental health services. This paper outlines how the team at Orygen adapted their approach to youth mental health workforce development in response to COVID-19, offering reflections and future directions for implementation science that can support flexible models of support in a changing system.

Providing therapeutic services to women and children who have experienced intimate partner violence during the COVID-19 pandemic: Challenges and learnings

BACKGROUND

In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, many therapeutic services for children and their parents who had experienced intimate partner violence (IPV) were required to rapidly transition to telehealth.

OBJECTIVE

The current study aims to explore parents' experiences of participating in a parent-child telehealth intervention during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study also aimed at exploring clinicians' experiences of delivering the service, including key strengths and challenges.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

Participants were five mothers who took part in Berry Street's Restoring Childhood service during the COVID-19 pandemic in Melbourne, Australia, and 14 Restoring Childhood clinicians, delivering the service across metropolitan and regional sites.

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted, and data were analysed using thematic analysis to determine key themes and sub-themes within the data.

RESULTS

Parents identified several strengths and benefits of Restoring Childhood delivered via telehealth including improvements in parenting skills and confidence, parent-child relationships, and children's emotional-behavioural functioning. Both parents and clinicians noted the creativity utilised during the online approach, and the increased accessibly it offered for families. However, challenges to the telehealth approaches were also noted. Clinicians discussed important considerations for telehealth within this context including safety and confidentiality, technology challenges, and challenges working from home.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study highlights the promise of telehealth interventions for parents and children who have experienced IPV. It also poses several important considerations for the use of telehealth within this setting and emphasises the need for rigorous evaluations of telehealth services for children exposed to IPV.

Predicting Parental Mental Health During COVID-19: Economic Pressure, COVID-19 Stress, and Coping Strategies

As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, understanding connections between economic pressures and mental health experiences is critical in comprehending how stressful global events can affect families. Although economic pressures and stress can negatively impact mental health, approach coping strategies may provide reductions in negative mental health experiences for parents compared to avoidant coping strategies. Despite recent work showing that stress resulting from the pandemic can have negative implications for the mental health of parents with young children, there is little known about the mental health of parents with adolescents. This study utilized a longitudinal sample of 198 parents (194 biological parents; 103 Fathers, and 91 Mothers) of adolescents and examined the mediating impact of COVID-19 stress on the relationship between economic pressure and subsequent depressive and anxious symptoms. Additionally, approach and avoidant coping strategies were examined as potential moderators between COVID-19 stress and later mental health. Results indicated that parents who experienced economic pressure reported worsening mental health across the school semester, with COVID-19 stress mediating this pathway. Further, approach coping strategies moderated the association between COVID-19 stress and later anxiety symptoms such that higher levels of coping associated with greater rates of later anxiety symptoms, while lower levels of coping associated with less anxiety symptoms later. Avoidant coping strategies also moderated these associations, such that greater use associated with greater depressive and anxious symptomology later. These findings emphasize that parents are experiencing worsening mental health following the onset of the pandemic and that there is an urgent need for increased mental health services to assist families during this time.

Long-Term Consequences of COVID-19 at 6 Months and Above: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

We aimed to review the data available to evaluate the long-term consequences of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) at 6 months and above. We searched relevant observational cohort studies up to 9 February 2022 in Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science. Random-effects inverse-variance models were used to evaluate the Pooled Prevalence (PP) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) of long-term consequences. The Newcastle−Ottawa quality assessment scale was used to assess the quality of the included cohort studies. A total of 40 studies involving 10,945 cases of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection were included. Of the patients, 63.87% had at least one consequence at the 6 month follow-up, which decreased to 58.89% at 12 months. The most common symptoms were fatigue or muscle weakness (PP 6−12 m = 54.21%, PP ≥ 12 m = 34.22%) and mild dyspnea (Modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea Scale, mMRC = 0, PP 6−12 m = 74.60%, PP ≥ 12 m = 80.64%). Abnormal computerized tomography (CT; PP 6−12 m = 55.68%, PP ≥ 12 m = 43.76%) and lung diffuse function impairment, i.e., a carbon monoxide diffusing capacity (DLCO) of < 80% were common (PP 6−12 m = 49.10%, PP ≥ 12 m = 31.80%). Anxiety and depression (PP 6−12 m = 33.49%, PP ≥ 12 m = 35.40%) and pain or discomfort (PP 6−12 m = 33.26%, PP ≥ 12 m = 35.31%) were the most common problems that affected patients’ quality of life. Our findings suggest a significant long-term impact on health and quality of life due to COVID-19, and as waves of ASRS-CoV-2 infections emerge, the long-term effects of COVID-19 will not only increase the difficulty of care for COVID-19 survivors and the setting of public health policy but also might lead to another public health crisis following the current pandemic, which would also increase the global long-term burden of disease.