Cited by 29COVID-19 and Mental HealthWorkplace Health and Well-beingHealthcare Systems and Challenges

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on sickness absence for mental ill health in National Health Service staff

Open access

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To explore the patterns of sickness absence in National Health Service (NHS) staff attributable to mental ill health during the first wave of the COVID-19 epidemic in March-July 2020. DESIGN: Case-referent analysis of a secondary dataset. SETTING: NHS Trusts in England. PARTICIPANTS: Pseudonymised data on 959 356 employees who were continuously employed by NHS trusts during 1 January 2019 to 31 July 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Trends in the burden of sickness absence due to mental ill health from 2019 to 2020 according to demographic, regional and occupational characteristics. RESULTS: Over the study period, 164 202 new sickness absence episodes for mental ill health were recorded in 12.5% (119 525) of the study sample. There was a spike of sickness absence for mental ill health in March-April 2020 (899 730 days lost) compared with 519 807 days in March-April 2019; the surge was driven by an increase in new episodes of long-term absence and had diminished by May/June 2020. The increase was greatest in those aged >60 years (227%) and among employees of Asian and Black ethnic origin (109%-136%). Among doctors and dentists, the number of days absent declined by 12.7%. The biggest increase was in London (122%) and the smallest in the East Midlands (43.7%); the variation between regions reflected the rates of COVID-19 sickness absence during the same period. CONCLUSION: Although the COVID-19 epidemic led to an increase in sickness absence attributed to mental ill health in NHS staff, this had substantially declined by May/June 2020, corresponding with the decrease in pressures at work as the first wave of the epidemic subsided.

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 · 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054533

Cites

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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Edge, 2021, Changing patterns of sickness absence among healthcare workers in England during the COVID-19 pandemic, J Public Health
  2. van der Plaat D , Madan I , Coggon D . Occupational risks of COVID-19 in NHS workers in England. medRxiv 2021. · DOI
  3. Boorman S . NHS health and well-being final report November 2009. Leeds, UK: The Health and Well-Being Review Team, 2009.
  4. 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)15949-7 · DOI
  5. 10.1007/s00127-004-0830-9 · DOI
  6. 10.1017/S0033291704002715 · DOI
  7. Bignall T , Jeraj S , Helsby E . Racial disparities in mental health: literature and evidence review. London: Race equality Foundation, 2019.

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
van der Plaat, D. A., Edge, R., Coggon, D., van Tongeren, M., Muiry, R., Parsons, V., Cullinan, P., & Madan, I.
Affiliations
  • Imperial College London (GB)
  • Lancaster University (GB)
  • MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit (GB)
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • King's College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Cullinan, Paul
Venue
BMJ Open
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2021-11
Volume
11
Issue
11
Pages
e054533
ISSN
2044-6055 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3209365492
Cited by
29
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 5
FWCI
2.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMJ Open (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nd)
Funders
Colt Foundation (N/A)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Workplace Health and Well-being
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare Systems and Challenges
Keywords
COVID-19 pandemic, sick leave, mental illness, healthcare workers, long-term absence, workplace mental health, ethnic minority health disparities, age differences, regional variation, occupational stress
MeSH terms
COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Humans, Mental Health, State Medicine, 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