Cited by 75COVID-19 and Mental HealthDigital Mental Health InterventionsHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout

Psychological support interventions for healthcare providers and informal caregivers during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review of the literature

Open access
Bertuzzi, Vanessa, Semonella, Michelle, Bruno, Denise, Manna, Chiara, Edbrook-Childs, Julian, Giusti, Emanuele M., Castelnuovo, Gianluca, Pietrabissa, Giada·2021·International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Abstract

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare providers and informal caregivers were at an increased risk of adverse mental health effects. This systematic review provides a summary of the available evidence on the content and efficacy of the psychological support interventions in increasing mental health among healthcare providers and informal caregivers during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: PubMed, Google Scholar, PsychINFO, and Scopus databases were systematically searched for relevant articles, and the methodological quality of selected articles was assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. RESULTS: A search of electronic databases identified five reports based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. All psychological support interventions for caregivers were delivered digitally. Despite the large heterogeneity of the selected studies, the findings support the efficacy of mental health interventions in reducing distress and burnout, while promoting self-efficacy and well-being in both healthcare providers and informal caregivers. CONCLUSION: Since mental health problems are expected to increase during, and as a result of, the COVID-19 pandemic, and digital tools might offer a range of mental health treatments to meet the unique and immediate needs of people, further research is needed to test the cost-effectiveness of digital psychological interventions.

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 · 10.3390/ijerph18136939

Cites

60 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 1 not checkable

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.

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?

  • Results from systematic reviews indicate that psychological interventions could be effective in the management of EDs in the context of COVID-19 conditions.

    “Results from these systematic reviews indicate that psychological interventions could be effective in the management of EDs in the context of COVID-19 conditions, however, some needs are not properly addressed.”

    From Unified Protocol for the transdiagnostic treatment of emotional disorders in people with post COVID-19 condition: study protocol for a multiple baseline n-of-1 trial (2023) · cites this paper as Bertuzzi et al., 2021

    The Abstract and Discussion report that psychological interventions during COVID-19 could improve mental health among healthcare providers and informal caregivers. But the Results (§3.3) discuss an educational intervention for caregivers of young people with eating disorders, not treatment of the eating disorders themselves; that study found no significant reduction in caregivers’ anxiety or depression. The review therefore does not establish effectiveness in managing EDs. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Psychological interventions are available in the context of COVID-19 for the general population, students, professionals, informal caregivers, relatives, and COVID-19 patients.

    “Different systematic reviews indicated that psychological interventions are available in the context of COVID-19 for the general population and students (D’Onofrio et al., 2022; Komariah et al., 2022), professionals and informal caregivers (Bertuzzi et al., 2021), relatives (Yue et al., 2020), or even COVID-19 patients (Rahmati and Khalili, 2022).”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [60]Rubin J. Chisnell D. How to plan, design, and conduct effective tests Handbook Of Usability Testing Wiley Hoboken, NJ, USA 2008

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bertuzzi, V., Semonella, M., Bruno, D., Manna, C., Edbrook-Childs, J., Giusti, E. M., Castelnuovo, G., & Pietrabissa, G.
Affiliations
  • Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore (IT)
  • Bar-Ilan University (IL)
  • Evidence-Based Practices Unit, University College London and Anna Freud National Centre for Children and Families, London N1 6EB, UK
Corresponding author
  • Giusti, Emanuele M.
  • Pietrabissa, Giada
Venue
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2021-06-28
Volume
18
Issue
13
Pages
6939
ISSN
1660-4601 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3174669183
Cited by
75
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 5 · 2017: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
2.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • PubliCatt (Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Keywords
psychological support interventions, healthcare workers, informal caregivers, COVID-19 pandemic, mental health, burnout, distress, self-efficacy, well-being, digital interventions, telemedicine
MeSH terms
COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Health Personnel, Humans, Caregivers, 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