CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 895COVID-19 and Mental HealthHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutMental Health Treatment and Access

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 101 of the 114 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet.

The mental health impact of the covid-19 pandemic on healthcare workers, and interventions to help them: A rapid systematic review

Open access
Muller, Ashley Elizabeth, Hafstad, Elisabet Vivianne, Himmels, Jan Peter William, Smedslund, Geir, Flottorp, Signe, Stensland, Synne Øien, Stroobants, Stijn, Van de Velde, Stijn, Vist, Gunn Elisabeth·2020·Psychiatry Research
DOI 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113441PMC PMC7462563

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background: The covid-19 pandemic has heavily burdened, and in some cases overwhelmed, healthcare systems throughout the world. Healthcare workers are not only at heightened risk of infection, but also of adverse mental health outcomes. Identification of organizational, collegial and individual risk and resilience factors impacting the mental health of healthcare workers are needed to inform preparedness planning and sustainable response. Methods: We performed a rapid systematic review to identify, assess and summarize available research on the mental health impact of the covid-19 pandemic on healthcare workers. On 11 May 2020, we utilized the Norwegian Institute of Public Health's Live map of covid-19 evidence, the visualization of a database of 20,738 screened studies, to identify studies for inclusion. We included studies reporting on any type of mental health outcome in any type of healthcare workers during the pandemic. We described interventions reported by the studies, and narratively summarized mental health-related outcomes, as study heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis. We assessed study quality using design-specific instruments. Results: We included 59 studies, reporting on a total of 54,707 healthcare workers. The prevalence of general psychological distress across the studies ranged from 7-97% (median 37%), anxiety 9-90% (median 24%), depression 5-51% (median 21%), and sleeping problems 34-65% (median 37%). Seven studies reported on implementing mental health interventions, and most focused on individual symptom reduction, but none reported on effects of the interventions. In most studies, healthcare workers reported low interest in and use of professional help, and greater reliance on social support and contact with family and friends. Exposure to covid-19 was the most commonly reported correlate of mental health problems, followed by female gender, and worry about infection or about infecting others. Social support correlated with less mental health problems. Discussion: Healthcare workers in a variety of fields, positions, and exposure risks are reporting anxiety, depression, sleep problems, and distress during the covid-19 pandemic, but most studies do not report comparative data on mental health symptoms. before the pandemic. There seems to be a mismatch between risk factors for adverse mental health outcomes among healthcare workers in the current pandemic and their needs and preferences, and the individual psychopathology focus of current interventions. Efforts to help healthcare workers sustain healthy relationships to colleagues, family and friends over time may be paramount to safeguard what is already an important source of support during the prolonged crisis. Expanding interventions' focus to incorporate organizational, collegial and family factors to support healthcare workers responding to the pandemic could improve acceptability and efficacy of interventions. Other: The protocol for this review is available online. No funding was received.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113441

Cites

101 of 102 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 114 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Bohlken, 2020, [Experience of practice-based psychiatrists and neurologists during the COVID-19 pandemic], Psychiatr. Prax, 47, 214
  2. Cai, 2020, Psychological impact and coping strategies of frontline medical staff in Hunan between January and March 2020 during the outbreak of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID19) in Hubei, China, Med. Sci. Monitor, 26
  3. Schulte, 2020, Addressing faculty emotional responses during the COVID19 pandemic, J. Pediatr.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 701–800 of 891

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Muller, A. E., Hafstad, E. V., Himmels, J. P. W., Smedslund, G., Flottorp, S., Stensland, S. Ø., Stroobants, S., Van de Velde, S., & Vist, G. E.
Affiliations
  • Norwegian Institute of Public Health (NO)
  • Oslo University Hospital (NO)
Corresponding author
Muller, Ashley Elizabeth
ORCID
Venue
Psychiatry Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-11
Volume
293
Pages
113441
ISSN
0165-1781 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113441
PMC
PMC7462563
OpenAlex
W3081708086
Cited by
895
References
114
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 71 · 2024: 116 · 2023: 177 · 2022: 258 · 2021: 237 · 2020: 12
FWCI
13.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Psychiatry Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • medRxiv (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers, mental health, anxiety, depression, sleep disorders, psychological distress, social support, occupational exposure to COVID-19, gender differences, mental health interventions, help-seeking
MeSH terms
Occupational Stress, Betacoronavirus, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Female, Health Personnel, Humans, Male, Mental Health, Pneumonia, Viral, Risk Factors, Social Support, Coronavirus Infections, Internationality, Pandemics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review