Explore the vast range of titles available.

Inequities in mental health service use (MHSU) and treatment are influenced by social stratification processes linked to socially contextualised interactions between individuals, organisations and institutions. These complex relations underpin observed inequities and their experience by people at the intersections of social statuses. Discrimination is one important mechanism influencing such differences. We compared inequities in MHSU/treatment through single and intersectional status analyses, accounting for need. We assessed whether past-year discrimination differentially influences MHSU/treatment across single and intersecting statuses. Data came from a population survey (collected 2014–2015) nationally representative of English households (N = 7546). We used a theory and datadriven approach (latent class analysis) which identified five intersectional groups in the population comprising common combinations of social statuses. Single status analyses identified characteristics associated with MHSU/treatment (being a sexual minority (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.65 95% CI:1.09-2.50), female (AOR 1.71, 95% CI:1.45–2.02), economically inactive (AOR 2.02, 95% CI:1.05–3.90), in the most deprived quintile (AOR 1.33, 95% CI:1.02–1.74), and Black (AOR 0.36 95% CI:0.20–0.66)). Intersectional analyses detected patterns not apparent from single status analyses. Compared to the most privileged group (“White British, highly educated, employed, high social class”), “Retired White British” had greater odds of MHSU/treatment (AOR 1.88, 95% CI:1.53-2.32) while “Employed migrants” had lower odds (AOR 0.39, 95% CI:0.27–0.55). Past-year discrimination was associated with certain disadvantaged social statuses and greater MHSU/treatment but—except for sexual minorities—adjusting for discrimination had little influence using either analytic approach. Observing patterns only by single social statuses masks potentially unanticipated and contextually varying inequities. The latent class approach offers policy-relevant insights into patterns and mechanisms of inequity but may mask other key intersectional patterns by statuses less common or under represented in surveys (e.g. UK-born ethnic minority groups). We propose multiple, context-relevant, theory-driven approaches to intersectional understanding of mental health inequalities.

Harassment and discrimination in the National Health Service (NHS) has steadily increased over the past 5 years with London being the worst performing region. There is a lack of data and research on the impact this is having on staff health and job satisfaction. Such data are necessary to inform the development of effective workplace interventions to mitigate the effects these experiences have on staff. Examine the impact of harassment and discrimination on NHS staff working in London trusts, utilising data from the 2019 TIDES cross-sectional survey. In total, 931 London-based healthcare practitioners participated in the TIDES survey. Regression analysis was used to examine associations between the sociodemographic characteristics of participants, exposure to discrimination and harassment, and how such exposures are associated with physical and mental health, job satisfaction and sickness absence. Women, Black ethnic minority staff, migrants, nurses and healthcare assistants were most at risk of discrimination and/or harassment. Experiencing either of the main exposures was associated with probable anxiety or depression. Experiencing harassment was also associated with moderate-to-severe somatic symptoms. Finally, both witnessing and experiencing the main exposures were associated with low job satisfaction and long periods of sickness absence. NHS staff, particularly those working in London trusts, are exposed to unprecedented levels of discrimination and harassment from their colleagues. Within the context of an already stretched and under-resourced NHS, in order to combat poor job satisfaction and high turnover rates, the value of all healthcare practitioners must be visibly and continuously reinforced by all management and senior leaders.

Despite a preponderance of evidence and considerable resources, health and social inequities persist, and in many cases, are widening. These inequities are not simply the result of passive structural and economic conditions but are actively maintained through institutional processes, norms, and ideologies that uphold the status quo. Reform within health inequities research, policy, and health and social care practice is therefore critical to disrupting these entrenched systems and catalysing both bottom-up and top-down change. We aimed to develop agreement for an iterative set of guiding principles underpinning ways of working for a newly formed Health and Social Equity Collective comprising researchers, community leaders, policymakers, and health and care professionals, seeking to address inequity by identifying and engaging the levers of change within and across institutions. The principles aim to inform a more inclusive and translational knowledge base through research practices, tackling entrenched inequalities in education, training, and capacity-building; and centring communities affected by health inequities through engagement and advocacy. We carried out a modified Delphi consensus process between March and September 2022 with Collective members and networks through online workshops and surveys. Out of 24 consensus statements developed and refined over a workshop and three successive survey rounds, we identified eleven key principles agreed upon by a majority of respondents. Two of these were rated high priority by over 75% of respondents, four by over 60% and five by over 50%. These could be grouped into three main topics detailing ways of working and change needed within: ‘Knowledge and framing of health and social inequities, and incorporation into practice’, ‘Community engagement, involvement and peer research’, and ‘Organisational culture change’, respectively. Given the pressing need to address inequities, these principles offer a grounding for future consensus building initiatives which also incorporate a wider diversity of perspectives, and which should be iteratively updated with ongoing learning from health equity initiatives nationally and internationally.

We investigated whether women who participated in a household survey in England were more likely to screen positive for possible generalised anxiety disorder and depression during and after menopause. We used logistic regression in secondary cross-sectional analyses of 1413 participants from the 2014 Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey data, adjusting for potential confounders (including age, deprivation score and chronic disease). We found that participants who were post-menopausal were more likely to screen positive for possible depression compared with participants who were pre-menopausal (3.9% v. 1.7%; adjusted odds ratio 3.91, 95% CI 1.23–12.46), but there was no association with perimenopause. We found no evidence of an association between menopausal stage and possible generalised anxiety disorder or symptom score. Clinicians should be aware of the association between menopause and depression, to best support women. Future research could focus on to what extent associations are driven by somatic features, and how this might be modified.

Home working has increased since the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic's onset with concerns that it may have adverse health implications. We assessed the association between home working and social and mental wellbeing among the employed population aged 16 to 66 through harmonised analyses of 7 UK longitudinal studies. We estimated associations between home working and measures of psychological distress, low life satisfaction, poor self-rated health, low social contact, and loneliness across 3 different stages of the pandemic (T1 = April to June 2020 -first lockdown, T2 = July to October 2020 -eased restrictions, T3 = November 2020 to March 2021 -second lockdown) using modified Poisson regression and meta-analyses to pool results across studies. We successively adjusted the model for sociodemographic characteristics (e.g., age, sex), job characteristics (e.g., sector of activity, pre-pandemic home working propensities), and pre-pandemic health. Among respectively 10,367, 11,585, and 12,179 participants at T1, T2, and T3, we found higher rates of home working at T1 and T3 compared with T2, reflecting lockdown periods. Home working was not associated with psychological distress at T1 (RR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.79 to 1.08) or T2 (RR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.88 to 1.11), but a detrimental association was found with psychological distress at T3 (RR = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.30). Study limitations include the fact that pre-pandemic home working propensities were derived from external sources, no information was collected on home working dosage and possible reverse association between change in wellbeing and home working likelihood. No clear evidence of an association between home working and mental wellbeing was found, apart from greater risk of psychological distress during the second lockdown, but differences across subgroups (e.g., by sex or level of education) may exist. Longer term shifts to home working might not have adverse impacts on population wellbeing in the absence of pandemic restrictions but further monitoring of health inequalities is required.

Understanding how different Black and other racially minoritised communities thrive is an emerging priority area in mental health promotion. Literature demonstrates health benefits of social capital (social resources embedded within social networks). However, its effects are not always positive, particularly for certain subpopulations who are already disadvantaged.The CONtributions of social NEtworks to Community Thriving (CONNECT) study will use Participatory Action Research (PAR) to investigate social capital as a resource that benefits (or hinders) racially minoritised communities and their mental health. The CONNECT study was designed within a partnership with community organisations and responds to local policy in two South-East London Boroughs, thereby providing potential channels for the action component of PAR. Taking an anti-racism lens, we acknowledge the underpinning role of racism in creating health inequities. We apply an intersectional framework to be considerate of overlapping forms of oppression such as age, gender, socioeconomic status, and sexual orientation as an essential part of developing effective strategies to tackle health inequities. Key components of this mixed methods PAR study include (1) involving racialised minority community members as peer researchers in the team (2) collecting and analysing primary qualitative data via interviews, photovoice, and community mapping workshops, (3) developing relevant research questions guided by peer researchers and collaborating organisations and analysing secondary quantitative data accordingly, (4) integrating qualitative and quantitative phases, and (5) working closely with community and policy partners to act on our findings and use our research for social change.The PAR approach will allow us to engage community (voluntary sector and government) and academic partners in decision making and help address imbalances in power and resource allocation. Knowledge generated through this collaborative approach will contribute to existing community initiatives, policies, and council strategies. This will ensure the views and experiences of racially minoritised communities drive the changes we are collaboratively committed to achieving.

Following the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, a record number of people became economically inactive in the UK. We investigated the association between coronavirus infection and subsequent economic inactivity among people employed pre-pandemic, and whether this association varied between self-report versus healthcare recorded infection status. We pooled data from five longitudinal studies (1970 British Cohort Study, English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, 1958 National Child Development Study, Next Steps, and Understanding Society), in two databases: the UK Longitudinal Linkage Collaboration (UKLLC), which links study data to NHS England records, and the UK Data Service (UKDS), which does not. The study population were aged 25-65 years between April 2020 to March 2021. The outcome was economic inactivity measured at the time of the last survey (November 2020 to March 2021). The exposures were COVID-19 status, indicated by a positive SARS-CoV-2 test in NHS records (UKLLC sample only), or by self-reported measures of coronavirus infection (both samples). Logistic regression models estimated odds ratios (ORs) adjusting for potential confounders including sociodemographic variables and pre-pandemic health. Within the UKLLC sample (N = 8,174), both a positive SARS-CoV-2 test in NHS records (5.9% of the sample; OR 1.08, 95%CI 0.68-1.73) and self-reported positive tests (6.5% of the sample; OR 1.07, 95%CI 0.68-1.69), were marginally and non-significantly associated with economic inactivity (5.3% of the sample) in adjusted analyses. Within the larger UKDS sample (n = 13,881) reliant on self-reported ascertainment of infection (6.4% of the sample), the coefficient indicated a null relationship (OR 0.98, 95%CI 0.68-1.40) with economic inactivity (5.0% of sample). Among people employed pre-pandemic, testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 was not associated with increased economic inactivity, although we could not exclude small effects. Ascertaining infection through healthcare records or self-report made little difference to results. However, processes related to record linkage may introduce small biases.

As we endeavour to examine rates of viral suppression in PLHIV, reliable data on ART adherence are needed to distinguish between the respective contributions of poor adherence and treatment failure on high viral load. Self-reported data are susceptible to response bias and although biomarker data on drug presence and concentration can provide a superior, alternative method of measurement, complications due to drug-drug interactions and genetic variations can cause some inaccuracies. We investigate the feasibility of combining both biomarker and self-report data to produce a potentially more accurate measure of ART adherence. Data were taken from a large general-population survey in the Manicaland province, Zimbabwe, conducted in 2009-2011. HIV-infected adults who had initiated ART (N = 560) provided self-report data on adherence and dried blood spot samples that were analysed for traces of ART medication. A new three-category measure of ART adherence was constructed, based on biomarker data but using self-report data to adjust for cases with abnormally low and high drug concentrations due to possible drug-drug interactions and genetic factors, and was assessed for plausibility using survey data on socio-demographic correlates. 94.3% (528/560) and 92.7% (519/560) of the sample reported faithful adherence to their medication and had traces of ART medication, respectively. The combined measure estimated good evidence of ART adherence at 69% and excellent evidence of adherence at 53%. The regression analysis results showed plausible patterns of ART adherence by socio-demographic status with men and younger participants being more likely to adhere poorly to medication, and higher socio-economic status individuals and those living in more urban locations being more likely to adhere well. Biomarker and self-reported measures of adherence can be combined in a meaningful way to produce a potentially more accurate measure of ART adherence. Results indicate that ART adherence in Manicaland is at best 69%, which not only allows for considerable room for improvement but also suggests that the area may be falling short of the UNAIDS' 90% target regarding viral suppression. Increased efforts are needed to improve ART adherence particularly amongst the young male population in rural areas of east Zimbabwe.

IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic has had profound effects on the working lives of healthcare workers (HCWs), but the extent to which their well-being and mental health have been affected remains unclear. This longitudinal cohort study aims to recruit a cohort of National Health Service (NHS) HCWs, conducting surveys at regular intervals to provide evidence about the prevalence of symptoms of mental disorders, and investigate associated factors such as occupational contexts and support interventions available.Methods and analysisAll staff, students and volunteers working in the 18 participating NHS Trusts in England will be sent emails inviting them to complete a survey at baseline, with email invitations for the follow-up surveys sent 6 months and 12 months later. Opening in late April 2020, the baseline survey collects data on demographics, occupational/organisational factors, experiences of COVID-19, validated measures of symptoms of poor mental health (eg, depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder), and constructs such as resilience and moral injury. These surveys will be complemented by in-depth psychiatric interviews with a sample of HCWs. Qualitative interviews will also be conducted, to gain deeper understanding of the support programmes used or desired by staff, and facilitators and barriers to accessing such programmes.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval for the study was granted by the Health Research Authority (reference: 20/HRA/210, IRAS: 282686) and local Trust Research and Development approval. Cohort data are collected via Qualtrics online survey software, pseudonymised and held on secure university servers. Participants are aware that they can withdraw from the study at any time, and there is signposting to support services if participants feel they need it. Only those consenting to be contacted about further research will be invited to participate in further components. Findings will be rapidly shared with NHS Trusts, and via academic publications in due course.

Background In recent years, WHO has made major changes to its guidance on the provision of HIV care and treatment services. We conducted a longitudinal study from 2013 to 2015 to establish how these changes have been translated into national policy in Zimbabwe and to measure progress in implementation within local health facilities. Methods National HIV programme policy guidelines published between 2003 and 2013 ( n  = 9) and 2014 and 2015 ( n  = 5) were reviewed to assess adoption of WHO recommendations on HIV testing services, prevention of mother-to-child transmission (PMTCT) of HIV, and provision of antiretroviral therapy (ART). Changes in local implementation of these policies over time were measured in two rounds of a survey conducted at 36 health facilities in Eastern Zimbabwe in 2013 and 2015. Results High levels of adoption of WHO guidance into national policy were recorded, including adoption of new recommendations made in 2013–2015 to introduce PMTCT Option B+ and to increase the threshold for ART initiation from CD4 ≤ 350 cells/mm 3 to ≤ 500 cells/mm 3 . New strategies to implement national HIV policies were introduced such as the decentralisation of ART services from hospitals to clinics and task-shifting of care from doctors to nurses. The proportions of health facilities offering free HIV testing and counselling, PMTCT (including Option B+) and ART services increased substantially from 2013 to 2015, despite reductions in numbers of health workers. Provision of provider-initiated HIV testing remained consistently high. At least one test-kit stock-out in the prior year was reported in most facilities (2013: 69%; 2015: 61%; p  = 0.44). Stock-outs of first-line ART and prophylactic drugs for opportunistic infections remained low. Repeat testing for HIV-negative individuals within 3 months decreased (2013: 97%; 2015: 72%; p  = 0.01). Laboratory testing remained low across both survey rounds, despite policy and operational guidelines to expand coverage of diagnostic services. Conclusions Good progress has been made in implementing international guidance on HIV service delivery in Zimbabwe. Further novel implementation strategies may be needed to achieve the latest targets for universal ART eligibility.