Understanding the lived experiences of healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic: An interpretative phenomenological analysis
Open accessAbstract
Background: Little research has examined the impact of working within the context of COVID-19 on UK healthcare professionals (HCPs) mental health and well-being, despite previous pandemic findings indicating that HCPs are particularly vulnerable to suffering PTSD and other mental health difficulties due to the nature of healthcare work. Specifically, it appears that no research has employed qualitative methodologies to explore the effects of working amidst COVID-19 on mental health for HCPs in the UK.Objective: To qualitatively examining the lived experiences of HCPs in Northern Ireland, working during the early stages of the pandemic and lockdown period (14.04.20 and 29.04.20).Method: Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) was used to explore the experiences of healthcare professionals, who were working during the COVID-19 outbreak. Ten HCPs were recruited via a social media campaign and snowball sampling. All interviews were conducted via telephone and transcribed verbatim.Results: Three superordinate themes with subordinate themes were elicited through the analysis. Theme one centred on specific challenges of HCPs working during the pandemic, such as redeployment, isolation from loved ones, infection concerns, lack of PPE and impact on patient interpersonal care. Theme two offered insights into the mental health and wellbeing of HCPs, while many experienced feelings of fear, sadness and hypervigilance, all also demonstrated a marked resilience. Finally, many felt undervalued and misunderstood, and wished to press upon the general public seriousness of the disease.Conclusion: To the authors’ knowledge this is the first study to explore in depth, the unique experiences of frontline HCPs in Northern Ireland, offering a detailed account of the challenges confronted in these unprecedented circumstances and highlighting support needs within this cohort.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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?
Wider team discussions took place to discuss findings, researcher reflections and to aid the selection of quotes.
“Wider team discussions also took place to discuss findings, researcher reflections and to aid the selection of quotes that attempt to fully reflect the lived experience of the participants (McGlinchey et al., 2021).”
From Experiences and Impacts of Intimate Partner Violence Against Men in Northern Ireland: Qualitative Findings from the Male Experiences of Intimate Partner Violence Study (2026) · cites this paper as McGlinchey et al., 2021
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 44 · Cited by 57
- Authors
- McGlinchey, E., Hitch, C., Butter, S., McCaughey, L., Berry, E., & Armour, C.
- Affiliations
- Queen's University Belfast (GB)
- Stress Trauma and Related Conditions (STARC) Research Lab, School of Psychology, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK
- Corresponding author
- McGlinchey, Emily
- Venue
- European Journal of Psychotraumatology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2021-01
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1904700-1904700
- ISSN
- 2000-8066 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC8820784
- OpenAlex
- W3132511429
- Cited by
- 57
- References
- 44
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 4
- FWCI
- 7.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- European Journal of Psychotraumatology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Ulster University Research Portal (Ulster University) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
- Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- no
- 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 › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare Systems and Challenges
- Keywords
- COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers, mental health, well-being, frontline workers, lived experience, redeployment, infection risk, personal protective equipment, hypervigilance, resilience, fear, Northern Ireland
- MeSH terms
- COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Adult, Emotions, Female, Health Personnel, Humans, Male, Mental Health, Middle Aged, Northern Ireland, Qualitative Research
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