The Mental Health Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic Second Wave on Shielders and Their Family Members

Mental health and life satisfaction among those advised to shield during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: a secondary analysis of the Understanding Society longitudinal study

Introduction

During the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK, those considered most vulnerable to adverse outcomes from infection were designated "clinically extremely vulnerable" and advised to "shield." This involved prolonged confinement at home with strict limits on face-to-face contact, beyond national restrictions. Shielding ended in September 2021 and was considered likely to have harmed mental health and wellbeing. As the UK moved toward a new phase of "living with COVID-19" the mental health and wellbeing experiences of those advised to shield may have diverged from the general population.

Methods

This study is a secondary analysis of nine "COVID-19 Survey" waves of Understanding Society, a longitudinal study of UK participants covering April 2020 to September 2021 alongside pre-pandemic baseline data. The prevalence of clinically significant psychological distress (General Health Questionnaire 12) and low life satisfaction were examined at each wave for participants with longitudinal responses across all waves, stratified by receipt of shielding guidance (Received n = 410, Not received n = 6,878). Mixed effects regression modeling examined associations between shielding guidance receipt and mental health and life satisfaction when adjusting for potential confounders including age and sex, pre-pandemic mental health/life satisfaction, and loneliness.

Results

Those who received shielding guidance were more likely to experience poor mental health and low life satisfaction during the pandemic. However, this largely reflected differences in pre-pandemic baselines. Variation between waves broadly coincided with the changing burden of COVID-19 and associated restrictions, with similar patterns regardless of shielding guidance receipt. Regression modeling combining data across all waves indicated that receipt of shielding guidance did not independently predict adverse outcomes. However, poor pre-pandemic mental health and low life satisfaction, and frequent loneliness, as well as demographic factors including sex and age, consistently predicted adverse pandemic mental health and wellbeing.

Discussion

While those who received shielding guidance did on average experience poorer mental health and life satisfaction during the pandemic, this study suggests this largely reflects existing inequalities. Drawing on data throughout the shielding program, it addresses an existing evidence gap. These findings reinforce the importance of addressing existing mental health inequalities in the recovery from the current pandemic and for future preparedness.

Mental Health in the Post-Lockdown Scenario: A Scientometric Investigation of the Main Thematic Trends of Research

Since the outbreak of COVID-19, researchers and clinicians have published scientific articles on the SARS-CoV-2 virus and its medical, organizational, financial, and psychological implications. However, many effects have been observed in the post-lockdown scenario. In this study, we adopted a scientometric-bibliometric approach to drawing the state of the art regarding the emotional and psychological effects of the pandemic after the lockdown. In Scopus, we found 791 papers that were subsequently analyzed using CiteSpace. The document co-citation analysis (DCA) computation generated a network of eight major clusters, each representing a central area of investigation. Specifically, one major cluster-cluster no. 1-focuses on the long-term effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and individuals' ability to develop adaptive coping mechanisms and resilience. The results allow us to frame the fields covered by researchers more precisely and the areas that still need more investigation.

Intolerance of uncertainty, fear of contamination and perceived social support as predictors of psychological distress in NHS healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic

Psychological distress has been repeatedly quantified over the course of the pandemic, however this has not always included broader healthcare workers, and has mostly focused on prevalence and occupational factors. This study investigated intolerance of uncertainty (IOU), fear of contamination and perceived social support as key predictors of psychological distress in healthcare professionals, between the 10^th and 23 June 2020, during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study was a cross-sectional, online survey design. Opportunity sampling was used to recruit to the study, primarily using social media sites and snowballing techniques. The final sample included 342 National Health Service (NHS) healthcare workers. IU (p < .001), gender (p < .001), fear of contamination (p = .007), perceived social support (p = .012), and age (p = .017) significantly predicted psychological distress in the sample and accounted for 36.2% of variance in psychological distress scores. IOU accounted for 28.2% of this variance. A two-way post hoc ANOVA, looking at gender and profession, showed a significant main effect of gender on psychological distress scores (F(1,218) = 7.156, p = .008, η_p² = .032), with females reporting significantly higher psychological distress scores compared to males. In conclusion, higher levels of intolerance of uncertainty, fear of contamination and lower levels of perceived social support significantly influenced higher scores of psychological distress. These factors should be considered when adapting and delivering evidence-based interventions to healthcare staff during this crisis.

Fear of contamination among older adults in the post-COVID-19 era

This study assesses older adults' fear of contamination in the post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) era, examining the factors associated with this fear and investigating its effects on their well-being and use of primary healthcare, considering the moderating effects of activities of daily living (ADL) and multimorbidity in these two relationships. A cross-sectional study was conducted in primary healthcare centers in three regions in Saudi Arabia with a convenience sample of 444 older adults diagnosed with chronic diseases. The results indicated that 77.9% of older adults had high contamination fear, predicted by their age, education level, gender, ADL, and previous COVID-19 infection experience. Subjective well-being and the number of primary healthcare visits in the post-COVID-19 era were negatively affected by contamination fear and both ADL and multimorbidity moderated these relationships. In conclusion, the study confirmed the need to focus on older adults' contamination fear to mitigate its negative effects on well-being and critical primary healthcare visits.