Mitigating the psychological impact of covid-19 on healthcare workers: a digital learning package
Open accessAbstract
The coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) will undoubtedly have psychological impacts for healthcare workers, which could be sustained; frontline workers will be particularly at risk. Actions are needed to mitigate the impacts of COVID-19 on mental health by protecting and promoting the psychological wellbeing of healthcare workers during and after the outbreak. We developed and evaluated a digital learning package using Agile methodology within the first three weeks of UK outbreak. This e-package includes evidence-based guidance, support and signposting relating to psychological wellbeing for all UK healthcare employees. A three-step rapid development process included public involvement activities (PPIs) (STEP 1), content and technical development with iterative peer review (STEP 2), and delivery and evaluation (STEP 3). The package outlines the actions that team leaders can take to provide psychologically safe spaces for staff, together with guidance on communication and reducing social stigma, peer and family support, signposting others through psychological first aid (PFA), self-care strategies (e.g., rest, work breaks, sleep, shift work, fatigue, healthy lifestyle behaviours), and managing emotions (e.g., moral injury, coping, guilt, grief, fear, anxiety, depression, preventing burnout and psychological trauma). The e-package includes advice from experts in mental wellbeing as well as those with direct pandemic experiences from the frontline, as well as signposting to public mental health guidance. Rapid delivery in STEP 3 was achieved via direct emails through professional networks and social media. Evaluation included assessment of fidelity and implementation qualities. Essential content was identified through PPIs (n = 97) and peer review (n = 10) in STEPS 1 and 2. The most important messages to convey were deemed to be normalisation of psychological responses during a crisis, and encouragement of self-care and help-seeking behaviour. Within 7 days of completion, the package had been accessed 17,633 times, and healthcare providers had confirmed immediate adoption within their health and wellbeing provisions. Evaluation (STEP 3, n = 55) indicated high user satisfaction with content, usability and utility. Assessment of implementation qualities indicated that the package was perceived to be usable, practical, low cost and low burden. Our digital support package on ‘psychological wellbeing for healthcare workers’ is free to use, has been positively evaluated and was highly accessed within one week of release. It is available here: Supplementary Materials. This package was deemed to be appropriate, meaningful and useful for the needs of UK healthcare workers. We recommend provision of this e-package to healthcare workers alongside wider strategies to support their psychological wellbeing during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.
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?
Other online interventions mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on health, in which psychological well-being is promoted in health professionals.
“Other online interventions are known to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on health, in which psychological well-being is promoted in health professionals (Blake et al., 2020).”
From A Self-Applied Multi-Component Psychological Online Intervention Based on UX, for the Prevention of Complicated Grief Disorder in the Mexican Population During the COVID-19 Outbreak: Protocol of a Randomized Clinical Trial (2021) · cites this paper as Blake et al., 2020
The Abstract and Conclusions (pages not provided) describe a digital package designed to support healthcare workers’ psychological wellbeing during COVID-19. The evaluation found it usable and useful, but did not establish that it mitigated psychological or other health impacts; the citing sentence presents that effect as known. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThere is a need to give timely attention to psychological consequences due to COVID-19, but there is a reduction in availability to carry out in-person interventions, so psychological support at a distance through communication platforms has been opted for.
“In this way, the need arises to give timely attention to the psychological consequences due to the COVID-19 pandemic, however, we are facing a reduction in the availability to carry out these interventions in person, so it has been opted to provide psychological support at a distance through different communication platforms (Eisma et al., 2020), that help to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19”
From A Self-Applied Multi-Component Psychological Online Intervention Based on UX, for the Prevention of Complicated Grief Disorder in the Mexican Population During the COVID-19 Outbreak: Protocol of a Randomized Clinical Trial (2021) · cites this paper as Blake et al., 2020
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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 25 · Cited by 656
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- [2]Kluge H.H.P. WHO Regional Director for Europe—Statement to the Press: Physical and Mental Health Key to Resilience during COVID-19 Pandemic WHO Copenhagen, Denmark 2020
- [29]Blake H. Bermingham F. Psychological wellbeing for healthcare workers: Mitigating the impact of COVID-19 Available online: https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/toolkits/play_22794 (accessed on 17 April 2020) PMC7246821 32357424
- Authors
- Blake, H., Bermingham, F., Johnson, G., & Tabner, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Nottingham (GB)
- University of Leicester (GB)
- Royal Derby Hospital (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Blake, Holly
- Venue
- International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2020-04-26
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 2997
- ISSN
- 1660-4601 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC7246821
- OpenAlex
- W3020320167
- Cited by
- 656
- References
- 25
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 50 · 2023: 91 · 2022: 187 · 2021: 193 · 2020: 94 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 56.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- dx.doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
- Social Sciences › Education › E-Learning and COVID-19
- Keywords
- COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers, psychological well-being, mental health, psychological first aid, self-care, moral injury, burnout, psychological trauma, stigma, peer support, help-seeking, rapid development, citizen participation, implementation evaluation, frontline workers, agile methods, online learning, user satisfaction, usability, implementation fidelity
- MeSH terms
- Betacoronavirus, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Adaptation, Psychological, Anxiety, Burnout, Professional, Delivery of Health Care, Depression, Disease Outbreaks, Health Personnel, Humans, Mental Health, Pneumonia, Viral, Stress, Psychological, Coronavirus, Coronavirus Infections, 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