Blog

I cannot say enough about the stress of what the pandemic has put on the workplace. Furthermore, HCPs had to intensify their work pace so that they could provide their usual care in addition to providing supports that would typically be given by visitors/family members. Witnessing patient loneliness and lack of social supports during serious and sometimes life-altering hospitalizations alone was emotionally draining. Participants indicated that social time was so important to de-stress during difficult times. While necessary to limit the spread of COVID-19, it disrupted social patterns and the taken-for-granted emotional support provided during rest breaks. Staff call in sick more, staff are stressed more, there is more crying, they are more upset and there are more thoughts of inability to care for people … It’s almost as if you think you are not good enough.

Regarding visit convenience, patients overall found both in-person and telehealth visits were convenient, inconsistent with the authors’ hypothesis. Only 2 (16.7%) providers felt telehealth appointments were “somewhat inconvenient” and endorsed Mental health providers during COVID-19 equipment, internet, and software problems as inconveniences. All 12 provider respondents conducted both in-person and telehealth visits during the pandemic. First, all providers were asked about both types of appointments (telehealth and in-person), because as providers, they had conducted both. Finally, anxiety and depression were probed with 2 items that asked the participant to rank their symptoms on a 5-point scale from “much less anxiety/depression than normal for me” to “much more anxiety/depression than normal for me.” Participants were also given a “prefer not to answer” option for these items.

The disproportionate impact may reflect this groupʼs elevated COVID-19 risk and, consequently, more perceived stress and fear of infection, but it could also reflect disruptions of regular healthcare services. Three meta-analyses, pooling data from between 11 and 61 studies and involving ~50,000 individuals or more13,14,15, compared levels of self-reported mental health problems during the COVID-19 pandemic with those before the pandemic. And still others aim to educate and support primary care providers (PCPs), the frontline physicians who treat most mental health patients. While the increased use of telehealth mental health services during the pandemic has been well known, the study is the first to show that the magnitude of the increased use of telehealth more than made up for the decline in in-person treatment. Telehealth services for common mental health problems surged 16 to 20 fold during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, more than making up for a drop in in-person care that occurred during the period for a number of conditions, according to a new RAND Corporation study.

Challenges to Better Integration of Digital Technologies in the Organization of Health Care

• The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author.
• And on a final note, despite the ubiquity of telehealth in mental health practices across the past 18 months, it is not yet clear whether telehealth opportunities have done much to expand treatment accessibility beyond populations who already had no difficulty reaching mental health care prior to the pandemic.
• In three studies, worrying about family members being infected was a risk factor (Cai et al., 2020; Louie et al., 2020) (G Li et al., 2020).
• We found no significant differences in symptoms of depression, anxiety, or PTSD over the entire study period (S6 Table A) between HCWs working in designated COVID-19 patient care and those in non-COVID patient care.

To understand how COVID-19 continues to shape mental health in the longer term, fine-grained, well-controlled longitudinal data at the (neuro)biological, individual and societal levels remain essential. Despite a small increase in self-reported mental health problems, this has (so far) not translated into objectively measurable increased rates of mental disorders, self-harm or suicide rates at the population level. The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has threatened global mental health, both indirectly via disruptive societal changes and directly via neuropsychiatric sequelae after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Following a positive result, the physician can walk the patient down the hall to a behavioral care manager (BCM) — usually a psychologist or social worker — who can further explore the patient’s symptoms.

Mental health needs of special populations

Three studies with patients 32, 35, 44 highlighted that changes in services delivered remotely jeopardised patients’ privacy due to the lack of private space for receiving care for patients. Care providers reported that changes in service delivery mode together with changes in privacy and remote diagnostics positively impacted their relationships with patients and were seen as a comfortable way of providing care 58, 59, 61, 63. Patients and clinicians were able to increase hours of care provision due to improved capacity for delivering mental health services 38, 45, 53, 54. Remote diagnostics and assessment were reported in three studies where patients experienced improvement in accessing assessment services 31, 36, 42. Accessibility is found as the central feature of telemental health for the predominant number of patients which is supported by high satisfactory rates .

In addition to the shift towards virtual service delivery with clients, many providers have also navigated a shift to virtual supervision . In addition to provider-focused strategies to prevent burnout, it is also imperative for agencies and organizations to foster supportive environments for staff. Such approaches can be integrated into service delivery settings like CMH, with the potential to improve provider support and quality of life . The challenges of assessing a client without being able to observe them are also echoed in recent literature , and for those treating psychosis, observation of symptoms is an essential component . For example, providers described challenges in assessing affect without seeing facial expressions, client experience and response to internal stimuli, and overall noted greater question evasion by clients.