The impact of COVID-19 on the wellbeing of the UK nursing and midwifery workforce during the first pandemic wave: A longitudinal survey study.
COVID-19
Midwives
Nurses
Pandemics
Post-traumatic stress disorders
Professional burnout
Psychological distress
Survey
Journal
International journal of nursing studies
ISSN: 1873-491X
Titre abrégé: Int J Nurs Stud
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0400675
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2022
Mar 2022
Historique:
received:
08
05
2021
revised:
30
11
2021
accepted:
03
12
2021
pubmed:
31
1
2022
medline:
11
3
2022
entrez:
30
1
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The specific challenges experienced by the nursing and midwifery workforce in previous pandemics have exacerbated pre-existing professional and personal challenges, and triggered new issues. We aimed to determine the psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the UK nursing and midwifery workforce and identify potential factors associated with signs of post-traumatic stress disorder. A United Kingdom national online survey was conducted at three time-points during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic between April and August 2020 (T1 and T2 during initial wave; T3 at three-months following the first wave). All members of the UK registered and unregistered nursing and midwifery workforce were eligible to participate. The survey was promoted via social media and through organisational email and newsletters. The primary outcome was an Impact of Events Scale-Revised score indicative of a post-traumatic stress disorder diagnosis (defined using the cut-off score ≥33). Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to assess the association between explanatory variables and post-traumatic stress disorder. We received 7840 eligible responses (T1- 2040; T2- 3638; T3- 2162). Overall, 91.6% participants were female, 77.2% were adult registered nurses, and 28.7% were redeployed during the pandemic. An Impact of Events Scale-Revised score ≥33 (probable post-traumatic stress disorder) was observed in 44.6%, 37.1%, and 29.3% participants at T1, T2, and T3 respectively. At all three time-points, both personal and workplace factors were associated with probable post-traumatic stress disorder, although some specific associations changed over the course of the pandemic. Increased age was associated with reduced probable post-traumatic stress disorder at T1 and T2 (e.g. 41-50 years at T1 odds ratio (OR) 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42-0.86), but not at T3. Similarly, redeployment with inadequate/ no training was associated with increased probable post-traumatic stress disorder at T1 and T2, but not at T3 (T1 OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.06-1.77; T3 OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.89-1.55). A lack of confidence in infection prevention and control training was associated with increased probable post-traumatic stress disorder at all three time-points (e.g. T1 OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.11-1.97). A negative psychological impact was evident 3-months following the first wave of the pandemic. Both personal and workplace are associated with adverse psychological effects linked to the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings will inform how healthcare organisations should respond to staff wellbeing needs both during the current pandemic, and in planning for future pandemics.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The specific challenges experienced by the nursing and midwifery workforce in previous pandemics have exacerbated pre-existing professional and personal challenges, and triggered new issues. We aimed to determine the psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the UK nursing and midwifery workforce and identify potential factors associated with signs of post-traumatic stress disorder.
METHODS
METHODS
A United Kingdom national online survey was conducted at three time-points during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic between April and August 2020 (T1 and T2 during initial wave; T3 at three-months following the first wave). All members of the UK registered and unregistered nursing and midwifery workforce were eligible to participate. The survey was promoted via social media and through organisational email and newsletters. The primary outcome was an Impact of Events Scale-Revised score indicative of a post-traumatic stress disorder diagnosis (defined using the cut-off score ≥33). Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to assess the association between explanatory variables and post-traumatic stress disorder.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We received 7840 eligible responses (T1- 2040; T2- 3638; T3- 2162). Overall, 91.6% participants were female, 77.2% were adult registered nurses, and 28.7% were redeployed during the pandemic. An Impact of Events Scale-Revised score ≥33 (probable post-traumatic stress disorder) was observed in 44.6%, 37.1%, and 29.3% participants at T1, T2, and T3 respectively. At all three time-points, both personal and workplace factors were associated with probable post-traumatic stress disorder, although some specific associations changed over the course of the pandemic. Increased age was associated with reduced probable post-traumatic stress disorder at T1 and T2 (e.g. 41-50 years at T1 odds ratio (OR) 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42-0.86), but not at T3. Similarly, redeployment with inadequate/ no training was associated with increased probable post-traumatic stress disorder at T1 and T2, but not at T3 (T1 OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.06-1.77; T3 OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.89-1.55). A lack of confidence in infection prevention and control training was associated with increased probable post-traumatic stress disorder at all three time-points (e.g. T1 OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.11-1.97).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
A negative psychological impact was evident 3-months following the first wave of the pandemic. Both personal and workplace are associated with adverse psychological effects linked to the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings will inform how healthcare organisations should respond to staff wellbeing needs both during the current pandemic, and in planning for future pandemics.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35093740
pii: S0020-7489(21)00300-X
doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2021.104155
pmc: PMC8673915
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
104155Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Competing Interest None.
Références
J Clin Nurs. 2020 Aug;29(15-16):2742-2750
pubmed: 32320509
Behav Res Ther. 2003 Dec;41(12):1489-96
pubmed: 14705607
J Med Internet Res. 2004 Sep 29;6(3):e34
pubmed: 15471760
Int J Nurs Stud. 2021 Jul;119:103933
pubmed: 33901940
BMJ. 2012 Mar 20;344:e1717
pubmed: 22434089
JAMA. 2020 Nov 24;324(20):2100-2102
pubmed: 33044514
EClinicalMedicine. 2020 Jun 24;24:100443
pubmed: 32766545
BMJ. 2020 Oct 28;371:m3582
pubmed: 33115726
J Intensive Care Soc. 2022 May;23(2):132-138
pubmed: 35615226
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Nov 29;16(23):
pubmed: 31795420
Lancet Psychiatry. 2021 May;8(5):416-427
pubmed: 33836148
BMJ. 2020 Aug 11;370:m3026
pubmed: 32784198
BMC Nurs. 2019 Nov 21;18:57
pubmed: 31768129
Lancet Respir Med. 2021 Apr;9(4):397-406
pubmed: 33600777
Brain Behav Immun Health. 2020 Oct;8:100144
pubmed: 32959031
BMJ Open. 2021 Jul 9;11(7):e049680
pubmed: 34244282
Lancet Glob Health. 2020 Jun;8(6):e790-e798
pubmed: 32573443
Occup Environ Med. 2020 Dec 9;:
pubmed: 33298533
BMJ Open. 2020 Aug 11;10(8):e039851
pubmed: 32788191
Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2020 Oct 16;11(1):1810903
pubmed: 33244359
Crit Care Med. 2021 Jan 1;49(1):102-111
pubmed: 33116052
Lancet Psychiatry. 2020 Jun;7(6):547-560
pubmed: 32304649
Int J Nurs Stud. 2009 Jul;46(7):894-902
pubmed: 19362309
Nature. 2020 Aug;584(7821):430-436
pubmed: 32640463
PLoS One. 2016 Jul 08;11(7):e0159015
pubmed: 27391946
BMJ. 2020 Apr 27;369:m1557
pubmed: 32341002
J Clin Med. 2016 Nov 22;5(11):
pubmed: 27879650
BMC Public Health. 2020 Aug 12;20(1):1230
pubmed: 32787815
BMJ Glob Health. 2020 Dec;5(12):
pubmed: 33277297
Can J Psychiatry. 2007 Apr;52(4):241-7
pubmed: 17500305
J Res Nurs. 2021 Aug;26(5):442-454
pubmed: 35251274
BMJ Open. 2020 Dec 18;10(12):e042930
pubmed: 33371046
BMC Res Notes. 2016 Jan 26;9:45
pubmed: 26809812
Lancet Public Health. 2020 Sep;5(9):e475-e483
pubmed: 32745512
JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Mar 2;3(3):e203976
pubmed: 32202646
BMJ. 2020 May 05;369:m1642
pubmed: 32371466
Emerg Med J. 2021 Jun;38(6):450-459
pubmed: 33832926
Can J Psychiatry. 2009 May;54(5):302-11
pubmed: 19497162
Brain Behav Immun. 2020 Aug;88:559-565
pubmed: 32330593
BMC Public Health. 2021 Jan 9;21(1):104
pubmed: 33422039
Int J Nurs Stud. 2020 Nov;111:103637
pubmed: 32919358
CMAJ. 2004 Mar 2;170(5):793-8
pubmed: 14993174
Ann Intern Med. 2020 Jul 21;173(2):120-136
pubmed: 32369541