The perceived helpfulness and acceptability of a bespoke psychological therapy service for registered nurses experiencing psychological distress: A qualitative study.

AIM: To understand the perceived helpfulness and acceptability of a bespoke psychological therapy service for registered nurses. The service provided a free and confidential specialist mental health service to all healthcare professionals, including nurses and nursing students. DESIGN: An exploratory study using a descriptive qualitative approach. METHODS: A purposive sample of 20 registered nurses accessing a bespoke psychological therapy service in Wales participated in audio-recorded semi-structured interviews in January 2022. Transcribed data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Four interrelated themes were identified from the data analysis: COVID [SARS-CoV-2] changed things; You're a nurse, you're human; I've got 'me' back; and pretty close to miracle workers. CONCLUSION: Participants attempted to live up to an idealized image of a nurse, generating self-stigmatizing beliefs that negatively affected their mental health. The psychological therapy service enabled participants to put their roles into perspective, that is, separate themselves from their role, be vulnerable, and develop confidence and adaptive coping strategies. Participants valued the minimal barriers and ease of access to support. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: The complex relationship between nurse identity and the challenges of the workplace needs to be central to nurse education. Nurses can benefit from rapid access to a timely, confidential, and independent self-referring psychological therapy service. IMPACT: This qualitative study explored the helpfulness and accessibility of psychological support for nurses. The main themes were that COVID changed things; You're a nurse, you're human; I've got 'me' back; and pretty close to miracle workers. The findings will impact how nurses are supported in the United Kingdom and worldwide. REPORTING METHOD: This report adheres to the standards for reporting qualitative research (SRQR). PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

Definitions and measures of long COVID fatigue in adults: a scoping review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this scoping review is to investigate how fatigue is defined and measured in adults with long COVID. INTRODUCTION: Following COVID-19 infection, 10% to 20% of individuals experience persisting symptoms for a minimum of 3 months; this is commonly known as long COVID. Fatigue is one of the most prevalent symptoms of long COVID, but there is currently no consistently applied definition of long COVID fatigue. To advance our understanding of long COVID fatigue, we must first identify the current definitions and measures being used to describe and mesure this condition. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will consider published and unpublished studies involving adults (≥18 years) that define and/or measure long COVID fatigue. Papers using quantitative or qualitative designs will be included. Conference abstracts, editorials, and opinion papers will be excluded. METHODS: Published studies from January 2020 onwards will be searched for across MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Embase (Ovid), Scopus, PsycINFO (Ovid), Web of Science Core Collection, Epistemonikos, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Dimensions, Overton, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses will be searched for unpublished literature. Eligible records will be de-duplicated, and 2 independent reviewers will carry out title, abstract, and full-text screening. A data extraction tool will be pilot tested on a small number of papers, then modified as necessary, with any modifications detailed in the scoping review. Findings will be presented in tables and charts, supported by a narrative summary. REVIEW REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework https://osf.io/hnf8z.

The Role of Medication Beliefs in COVID-19 Vaccine and Booster Uptake in Healthcare Workers: An Exploratory Study.

Illness and medication beliefs have shown to predict COVID-19 vaccination behaviour in the general population, but this relationship has yet to be demonstrated in healthcare staff. This research aimed to explore the potential explanatory value of illness and medication beliefs on the COVID-19 vaccination uptake of a sample of patient-facing healthcare workers (HCWs). A web-based questionnaire-measuring beliefs about vaccinations (the BMQ), perceptions of COVID-19 (the BIPQ), vaccine hesitancy, and vaccine uptake-was targeted to HCWs via social media platforms between May-July 2022. Open text responses allowed participants to provide explanations for any delay in vaccine uptake. A total of 91 participants completed the questionnaire. Most respondents (77.1%, n = 64) had received three doses of the COVID-19 vaccination, and vaccination uptake (number of doses received) was predicted by Vaccine Concerns, Vaccine Hesitancy, and their Necessity-Concerns Differential score. Vaccine Hesitancy was predicted by Necessity, Concerns, and Overuse scores, as well as Necessity-Concerns Differential scores. Delay in Vaccine Uptake could only be predicted for Dose 3 (Booster). Qualitative data revealed that hesitant respondents were "unable to take time off work" for vaccination and that some had concerns over vaccine safety. In conclusion, illness and medication beliefs have potential value in predicting vaccine hesitancy and uptake in healthcare workers. Interventions to improve vaccination uptake in this population should address concerns about vaccine safety and releasing staff for vaccination booster appointments should be prioritised. Future research should further investigate the relationship between illness and medication beliefs and COVID-19 vaccine uptake in a larger sample of healthcare workers.