There but not really involved: The meanings of loneliness for people with chronic illness.

Loneliness is one of the most pressing and rapidly growing contemporary social challenges around the world. Yet we still lack a good understanding of how loneliness is constituted and experienced by those most affected. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 40 people with chronic illness who were experiencing loneliness to explore what loneliness means to them and how it impacts in their daily lives. Drawing on ideas around liquidity and performativity, we identified the relational, temporal and social layers of loneliness. Our analysis revealed the interconnectedness of chronic illness and loneliness in participants' daily lives, as well as how chronic illness shifts temporal orientation, and transforms interpersonal relationships and relationship with self, contributing to the experiences of loneliness. Though participants described the many social conditions that restricted their opportunities for social participation, giving them a sense of being left behind and spectating the social life of others, a rhetoric of loneliness as a problem and responsibility of the individual was still prominent. A narrative of the need to perform social connection emerged in the absence of meaningful social bonds with others. We argue that normative ideals of wellness and positivity circulating in chronic illness communities and society more broadly are implicated in the experience of loneliness for people with chronic conditions. We conclude by considering how more expansive representations of how to live well with chronic illness may be important in reducing personal and collective loneliness.

Characterisation of the treatment provided for children with unilateral hearing loss.

Background: Children with permanent unilateral hearing loss (UHL) are an understudied population, with limited data to inform the guidelines on clinical management. There is a funding gap in healthcare provision for the children with UHL in the United Kingdom, where genetic screening, support services, and devices are not consistently provided or fully funded in all areas. They are a disparate population with regard to aetiology and their degree of hearing loss, and hence their device choice and use. Despite having one "good ear", some children with UHL can have similar outcomes, socially, behaviourally, and academically, to children with bilateral hearing loss, highlighting the importance of understanding this population. In this longitudinal cohort study, we aimed to characterise the management of the children with UHL and the gaps in the support services that are provided for the children in Nottingham, United Kingdom. Methods: A cohort study was conducted collecting longitudinal data over 17 years (2002-2019) for 63 children with permanent congenital confirmed UHL in a large tertiary regional referral centre for hearing loss in Nottingham, United Kingdom. The cases of UHL include permanent congenital, conductive, mixed, or sensorineural hearing loss, and the degree of hearing loss ranges from mild to profound. The data were taken from their diagnostic auditory brainstem responses and their two most recent hearing assessments. Descriptors were recorded of the devices trialled and used and the diagnoses including aetiology of UHL, age of first fit, degree of hearing loss, when and which type of device was used, why a device was not used, the support services provided, concerns raised, and who raised them. Results: Most children (45/63; 71%) trialled a device, and the remaining 18 children had no device trial on record. Most children (20/45; 44%) trialled a bone-conduction device, followed by contralateral routing of signal aid (15/45; 33%) and conventional hearing aids (9/45; 20%). Most children (36/45; 80%) who had a device indicated that they wore their device "all day" or every day in school. Few children (8/45; 18%) reported that they wore their device rarely, and the reasons for this included bullying (3/8), feedback from the device (2/8), and discomfort from the device (2/8). Only one child reported that the device was not helping with their hearing. The age that the children were first fitted with their hearing device varied a median of 2.5 years for hearing aids and bone-conduction devices and 7 years for a contralateral routing of signal aid. The length of time that the children had the device also varied widely (median of 26 months, range 3-135 months); the children had their bone-conduction hearing aid for the longest period of time (median of 32.5 months). There was a significant trend where more recent device fittings were happening for children at a younger age. Fifty-one children were referred by the paediatric audiologist to a support service, 72.5% (37/51) were subsequently followed up by the referred service with no issue, whilst the remaining 27.5% (14/51) encountered an issue leading to an unsuccessful provision of support. Overall, most children (65%, 41/63) had no reported concerns, and 28.5% (18/63) of the children went on to have a documented concern at some point during their audiological care: five with hearing aid difficulties, five with speech issues, four with no improvement in hearing, three facing self-image or bullying issues, and one case of a child struggling to interact socially with friends. Three of these children had not trialled a device. We documented every concern reported from the parents, clinicians, teachers of the deaf, and from the children themselves. Where concerns were raised, more than half (58.6%, 10/18) were by schools and teachers, the remaining four concerns were raised by the family, and further four concerns were raised by the children themselves. Conclusion: To discover what management will most benefit which children with permanent UHL, we first must characterise their treatment, their concerns, and the support services available for them. Despite the children with UHL being a highly disparate population-in terms of their aetiology, their device use, the degree of hearing loss, and the age at which they trial a device-the majority report they use their device mostly in school. In lieu of available data and in consideration of the devices that are available to them, it could be useful to support families and clinicians in understanding the devices which are most used and where they are used. Considering the reasons for cessation of regular device use counselling and support services would be vital to support the children with UHL.

The Psychological and Wellbeing Impacts of Quarantine on Frontline Workers during COVID-19 and Beyond.

OBJECTIVE: The current study investigated the experiences, wellbeing impacts, and coping strategies of frontline workers who participated in "Hotels for Heroes", an Australian voluntary hotel quarantine program during the COVID-19 pandemic. The program was open to those who were COVID-19 positive or exposed to COVID-19 as part of their profession. METHODS: Frontline workers who had stayed in voluntary quarantine between April 2020 and March 2021 were invited to participate in a voluntary, anonymous, cross-sectional online survey including both quantitative and qualitative responses. Complete responses were collected from 106 participants, which included data on sociodemographic and occupational characteristics, experiences of the Hotels for Heroes program, and validated mental health measures. RESULTS: Mental health problems were prevalent amongst frontline workers (e.g., moderate anxiety symptoms, severe depression symptoms, and greater than usual impact of fatigue). For some, quarantine appeared to be helpful for anxiety and burnout, but quarantine also appeared to impact anxiety, depression, and PTSD negatively, and longer stays in quarantine were associated with significantly higher coronavirus anxiety and fatigue impacts. The most widely received support in quarantine was from designated program staff; however, this was reportedly accessed by less than half of the participants. CONCLUSIONS: The current study points to specific aspects of mental health care that can be applied to participants of similar voluntary quarantine programs in the future. It seems necessary to screen for psychological needs at various stages of quarantine, and to allocate appropriate care and improve its accessibility, as many participants did not utilise the routine support offered. Support should especially target disease-related anxiety, symptoms of depression and trauma, and the impacts of fatigue. Future research is needed to clarify specific phases of need throughout quarantine programs, and the barriers for participants receiving mental health supports in these contexts.

Burn-out in the health workforce during the COVID-19 pandemic: opportunities for workplace and leadership approaches to improve well-being.

BACKGROUND: Burn-out is a long-standing problem among healthcare workers (HCWs) and leads to poorer quality and less safe patient care, lower patient satisfaction, absenteeism and reduced workforce retention. Crises such as the pandemic not only generate new challenges but also intensify existing workplace stresses and chronic workforce shortages. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, the global health workforce is burnt-out and under immense pressure, with multiple individual, organisational and healthcare system drivers. METHOD: In this article, we examine how key organisational and leadership approaches can facilitate mental health support for HCWs and identify strategies to support HCWs that are critical for supporting workforce well-being during the pandemic. RESULTS: We identified 12 key approaches at the organisational and individual levels for healthcare leadership to support workforce well-being during the COVID-19 crisis. These approaches may inform leadership responses to future crises. CONCLUSION: Governments, healthcare organisations and leaders must invest and deliver long-term measures to value, support and retain the health workforce to preserve high-quality healthcare.

SDG5 "Gender Equality" and the COVID-19 pandemic: A rapid assessment of health system responses in selected upper-middle and high-income countries.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted healthcare and societies, exacerbating existing inequalities for women and girls across every sphere. Our study explores health system responses to gender equality goals during the COVID-19 pandemic and inclusion in future policies. Methods: We apply a qualitative comparative approach, drawing on secondary sources and expert information; the data was collected from March-July 2022. Australia, Brazil, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the USA were selected, reflecting upper-middle and high-income countries with established public health and gender policies but different types of healthcare systems and epidemiological and geo-political conditions. Three sub-goals of SDG5 were analyzed: maternity care/reproductive health, gender-based violence, and gender equality/women's leadership. Results: We found similar trends across countries. Pandemic policies strongly cut into women's health, constrained prevention and support services, and weakened reproductive rights, while essential maternity care services were kept open. Intersecting gender inequalities were reinforced, sexual violence increased and women's leadership was weak. All healthcare systems failed to protect women's health and essential public health targets. Yet there were relevant differences in the responses to increased violence and reproductive rights, ranging from some support measures in Australia to an abortion ban in the US. Conclusions: Our study highlights a need for revising pandemic policies through a feminist lens.

'We are largely left out': workplace and psychosocial experiences of Australian general practitioners during the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic continues to exert a significant toll on the Australian primary healthcare system. Although wellbeing challenges faced by hospital-based healthcare workers are widely discussed, less is known about the experiences of general practitioners (GPs) during the initial phases of the pandemic. This paper reports qualitative survey data from Australian GPs, examining their workplace and psychosocial experiences during the initial months of the pandemic. METHODS: An Australia-wide, cross-sectional, online survey of frontline healthcare workers was conducted in 2020. A qualitative approach using content analysis was utilised to examine responses to four free-text questions from GPs. RESULTS: A total of 299 GPs provided 888 free-text responses. The findings reveal that general practice was overlooked and undervalued within the pandemic response, resulting in negative impacts on GP wellbeing. Four themes were identified: (1) marginalisation of GPs; (2) uncertainty, undersupported and undervalued in the workplace; (3) isolation and disrupted personal lives; and (4) strategies to support GPs during times of crises. Key concerns included poor access to personal protective equipment, occupational burnout and poor wellbeing, insufficient workplace support, and conflicting or confusing medical guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Primary healthcare constitutes an essential pillar of the Australian healthcare system. This study presents the many factors that impacted on GP wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Enabling GP voices to be heard and including GPs in decision-making in preparation for future crises will enhance the delivery of primary care, reducing the burden on hospital services, and help sustain a safe and effective health workforce long term.

Mental health symptoms in Australian general practitioners during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) play a central role during the COVID-19 pandemic, and yet awareness of their mental health is limited. METHODS: A nationwide online survey of self-identified frontline healthcare workers was conducted between 27 August and 23 October 2020. Participants were recruited through health and professional organisations, colleges, universities, government contacts, and media. A subset of the findings on GPs and hospital medical staff (HMS) was used for this study. RESULTS: Of 9518 responses, there were 389 (4%) GPs and 1966 (21%) HMS. Compared with HMS, GPs received significantly less training on personal protective equipment usage or care for COVID-19 patients, and less support or communication within their workplace. GPs were significantly more concerned about household income, disease transmission to family and being blamed by colleagues if they became infected, all of which were associated with worse psychological outcomes. Significantly more GPs reported burnout, and experienced moderate-to-severe emotional exhaustion than HMS. Both groups used similar coping strategies, except fewer GPs than HMS used digital health applications or increased alcohol consumption. Less than 25% of either group sought professional help. CONCLUSIONS: GPs are vital in our healthcare systems, yet face unique workplace challenges and mental health stressors during the pandemic. Targeted workplace and psychological support is essential to protect wellbeing among the primary care workforce.

Thoughts of suicide or self-harm among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: qualitative analysis of open-ended survey responses.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers are at higher risk of suicide than other occupations, and suicidal thoughts appear to have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. AIMS: To understand the experiences of healthcare workers with frequent thoughts of suicide or self-harm during the pandemic, including factors that contributed to their distress, and the supports that they found helpful. METHOD: We used content analysis to analyse free-text responses to the Australian COVID-19 Frontline Healthcare Workers Study, from healthcare workers who reported frequent thoughts that they would be better off dead or of hurting themselves, on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. RESULTS: A total of 262 out of 7795 healthcare workers (3.4%) reported frequent thoughts of suicide or self-harm in the preceding 2 weeks. They described how the pandemic exacerbated pre-existing challenges in their lives, such as living with a mental illness, working in an unsupportive environment and facing personal stressors like relationship violence or unwell family members. Further deterioration in their mental health was triggered by heavier obligations at home and work, amid painful feelings of loneliness. They reported that workplace demands rose without additional resources, social and emotional isolation increased and many healthful activities became inaccessible. Tokenistic offers of support fell flat in the face of multiple barriers to taking leave or accessing professional help. Validation of distress, improved access to healthcare and a stronger sense of belonging were identified as helpful supports. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the need for better recognition of predisposing, precipitating, perpetuating and protective factors for thoughts of suicide and self-harm among healthcare workers.

Differences in psychosocial distress among rural and metropolitan health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: The Australian COVID-19 Frontline Healthcare Workers study examined the prevalence and severity of mental health symptoms during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. This substudy examined the differences in psychological well-being between rural and metropolitan health care workers (HCWs). DESIGN: A nationwide survey conducted between August and October 2020. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Australian HCWs were recruited through multiple strategies. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographics, mental health outcomes (anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder [PTSD] and burnout). RESULTS: Complete responses were included from 7846 participants, with 1473 (18.8%) in regional or remote ('rural') areas and 81.2% in metropolitan areas. Rural participants were older, more likely to work in allied health, nursing or in health administration, and had worked longer in their profession than metropolitan participants. Levels of resilience were similar (p = 0.132), but there was significantly higher prevalence of pre-COVID-19 pandemic mental illness in the rural workforce (p < 0.001). There were high levels of current mental health issues: moderate-severe PTSD (rural 38.0%; metropolitan 41.0% p = 0.031); high depersonalisation (rural 18.1%; metropolitan 20.7% p = 0.047); and high emotional exhaustion (rural 46.5%; metropolitan 43.3% p = 0.002). Among rural participants, mental health symptoms were associated with younger age, worry about being blamed if they contracted COVID-19, fear of transmitting COVID-19 to their family, experiencing worsening relationships and working in primary care or allied health. CONCLUSION: Despite having low COVID-19 case numbers in rural Australian health services compared with metropolitan counterparts over the course of 2020, there were widespread mental health impacts on the workforce. Rural health services need specific and flexible training, education, work policies and practices that support psychological well-being now in preparedness for ongoing or future crises.

Cross-sectional survey of COVID-19-related impacts on mental health of nurses: occupational disruption, organisational preparedness, psychological harm, and moral distress.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has presented unprecedented levels of prolonged strain on healthcare systems and healthcare workers (HCWs) globally, with nurses at the forefront.Objectives: To describe types and prevalence of occupational disruptions and exposure to COVID-19, and their impacts on mental health, moral distress, coping strategies, and help-seeking behaviours of Australian nurses.Design: A cross-sectional online anonymous survey distributed amongst Australian HCWs between 27 August and 23 October 2020.Methods: Data was collected on demographics, workplace disruption, personal relationships, and mental health. Predictors of mental health impacts and coping strategies were identified through multivariate regression analyses.Results: 7845 complete responses were returned, of which 3082 (39.3%) were from nurses and 4763 (60.7%) were from all other professions ('other HCWs'). Occupational disruption was common, with nurses specifically reporting additional paid hours (p < 0.001). Nurses were exposed to, and infected with, COVID-19 more frequently than other HCWs (p < 0.001) and were more likely to report concerns around stigmatisation from the broader community (p < 0.001). Symptoms of mental illness (anxiety, depression, PTSD and burnout) were significantly more prevalent in nurses than other HCWs, despite both groups scoring high on resilience. Common predictors of mental health symptoms included exposure to COVID-19 and worsening of personal relationships. Nurses reported a variety of coping strategies and were more likely than other HCWs to increase alcohol consumption. Engagement with formal support services was low for both groups. Personal and professional predictors for coping strategy use were identified.Conclusions: Urgent action is needed to address staff shortages and burnout which have been exacerbated by COVID-19. Initiatives that recognise the importance of nursing staff and incentivise current and future nurses to join and remain in the workforce are essential.

The Workplace and Psychosocial Experiences of Australian Senior Doctors during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had significant mental health impacts among healthcare workers (HCWs), related to resource scarcity, risky work environments, and poor supports. Understanding the unique challenges experienced by senior doctors and identifying strategies for support will assist doctors facing such crises into the future. A cross-sectional, national, online survey was conducted during the second wave of the Australian COVID-19 pandemic. Inductive content analysis was used to examine data reporting workplace and psychosocial impacts of the pandemic. Of 9518 responses, 1083 senior doctors responded to one or more free-text questions. Of the senior doctors, 752 were women and 973 resided in Victoria. Four themes were identified: (1) work-life challenges; (2) poor workplace safety, support, and culture; (3) poor political leadership, planning and support; and (4) media and community responses. Key issues impacting mental health included supporting staff wellbeing, moral injury related to poorer quality patient care, feeling unheard and undervalued within the workplace, and pandemic ill-preparedness. Senior doctors desired better crisis preparedness, HCW representation, greater leadership, and accessible, authentic psychological wellbeing support services from workplace organisations and government. The pandemic has had significant impacts on senior doctors. The sustainability of the healthcare system requires interventions designed to protect workforce wellbeing.

The workplace and psychosocial experiences of Australian junior doctors during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Junior doctors experience high levels of psychological distress and emotional exhaustion. The current Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in significant changes to healthcare globally, with quantitative studies demonstrating increased fatigue, depression and burnout in junior doctors. However, there has been limited qualitative research to examine junior doctors' experiences, challenges and beliefs regarding management of future crises. AIMS: To investigate the workplace and psychosocial experiences of Australian junior doctors working during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Australian healthcare workers were invited to participate in a nationwide, voluntary, anonymous, single time point, online survey between 27 August and 23 October 2020. A qualitative descriptive study of responses to four free-text questions from 621 junior doctors was undertaken, with responses analysed using inductive content analysis. RESULTS: Participants were predominantly female (73.2%), aged 31-40 years (48.0%) and most frequently reported working in medical specialties (48.4%), emergency medicine (21.7%) or intensive care medicine (11.4%). Most (51.9%) participants had 0-5 years of clinical experience since medical graduation. Junior doctors described experiences related to four key themes: a hierarchical, difficult workplace culture; challenging working conditions; disrupted training and career trajectories; and broader psychosocial impacts. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated longstanding, workplace issues and stressors for junior doctors and highlighted the threat that crises pose to medical workforce retention. There is an urgent need for authentic, positive workplace cultural interventions to engage, validate and empower junior doctors. CONCLUSIONS: Challenging workplace cultures and conditions, which have worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic, are associated with poor psychological well-being in junior doctors. There exists a need for long-term, widespread improvements in workplace culture and working conditions to ensure junior doctors' well-being, facilitate workforce retention and enhance the safety and quality of patient care in Australia.

Thoughts of suicide or self-harm among Australian healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the prevalence and predictors of (a) thoughts of suicide or self-harm among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic and (b) help-seeking among those healthcare workers with thoughts of suicide or self-harm. METHOD: Analysis of data from the Australian COVID-19 Frontline Healthcare Workers Study, an online survey of healthcare workers conducted during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia. Outcomes of interest were thoughts of suicide or self-harm as measured through the Patient Health Questionnaire for depression and help-seeking behaviours. RESULTS: Overall, 819 (10.5%) of 7795 healthcare workers reported thoughts of suicide or self-harm over a 2-week period. Healthcare workers with these thoughts experienced higher rates of depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder and burnout than their peers. In multivariable models, the odds of suicide or self-harm thoughts were higher among workers who had friends or family infected with COVID-19 (odds ratio = 1.24, 95% confidence interval = [1.06, 1.47]), were living alone (odds ratio = 1.32, 95% confidence interval = [1.06, 1.64]), younger (⩽30 years cf. >50 years; odds ratio = 1.70, 95% confidence interval = 1.36-2.13), male (odds ratio = 1.81, 95% confidence interval = [1.49, 2.20]), had increased alcohol use (odds ratio = 1.58, 95% confidence interval = [1.35, 1.86]), poor physical health (odds ratio = 1.62, 95% confidence interval = [1.36, 1.92]), increased income worries (odds ratio = 1.81, 95% confidence interval = [1.54, 2.12]) or prior mental illness (odds ratio = 3.27, 95% confidence interval = [2.80, 3.82]). Having dependent children was protective (odds ratio = 0.75, 95% confidence interval = [0.61, 0.92]). Fewer than half (388/819) of the healthcare workers who reported thoughts of suicide or self-harm sought professional support. Healthcare workers with thoughts of suicide or self-harm were more likely to seek support if they were younger (⩽30 years cf. >50 years; odds ratio = 1.78, 95% confidence interval = [1.13, 2.82]) or had prior mental health concerns (odds ratio = 4.47, 95% confidence interval = [3.25, 6.14]). CONCLUSION: One in 10 Australian healthcare workers reported thoughts of suicide or self-harm during the pandemic, with certain groups being more vulnerable. Most healthcare workers with thoughts of suicide or self-harm did not seek professional help. Strong and sustained action to protect the safety of healthcare workers, and provide meaningful support, is urgently needed.

Differential Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Mental Health Symptoms and Working Conditions for Senior and Junior Doctors in Australian Hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated severity, prevalence, and predictors of workplace disruption and mental health symptoms in Australian junior and senior hospital medical staff during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey collected data on demographics, workplace disruption, personal relationships, and mental health. RESULTS: One thousand twenty-one (62.1%) senior and 745 (37.9%) junior medical staff, located primarily in Victoria, completed the survey. Work disruptions were common but varied by seniority, withjunior staff more frequently exposed to COVID- 19 (P < 0.001). Symptoms of anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and burnout were common but significantly higher in junior doctors (P  = 0.011 to < 0.001). Common predictors for experiencing mental health symptoms were identified, including prior mental health diagnoses and worsening personal relationships. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 has had significant but varied impacts on junior and senior doctors, with junior doctors particularly susceptible to harm to mental health. Interventions to safeguard hospital medical staff and prevent attrition of this important workforce are urgently needed.

Mental Health Symptoms and Workplace Challenges among Australian Paramedics during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Paramedics are vital to the health system response to the COVID-19 pandemic; however, the pressures on this workforce have been intense and challenging. This study reports on mental health symptoms and the working environment among Australian paramedics during the COVID-19 pandemic and explores their experiences of work and wellbeing during this time. METHODS: An anonymous, online survey of frontline healthcare workers examined work environment, psychological wellbeing, and contained four open-ended qualitative items. Using a mixed method approach, quantitative data were analysed descriptively and qualitative data were analysed using content analysis. RESULTS: This paper reports findings from 95 paramedics who provided complete quantitative data and 85 paramedics who provided free-text responses to at least one qualitative item. Objectively measured mental health symptoms were common among paramedics, and almost two thirds of paramedics self-reported experiencing burnout. Qualitative analysis highlighted key issues of safety and risk in the workplace, uncertainty and upheaval at work and at home, and lack of crisis preparedness. Qualitative analysis revealed four themes; 'the pervasiveness of COVID-19 disruptions across all life domains'; 'the challenges of widespread disruption at work'; 'risk, uncertainty and feeling unsafe at work', and 'the challenges of pandemic (un)preparedness across the health system'. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in considerable occupational disruption for paramedics and was associated with significant negative impacts on mental health. Findings emphasise the need for more adaptive working conditions, mental health support for paramedics, and enhanced crisis preparedness across the health system for future crises.

COVID-19 infection and the broader impacts of the pandemic on healthcare workers.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) disease or COVID-19 pandemic is associated with more than 230 million cases and has challenged healthcare systems globally. Many healthcare workers (HCWs) have acquired the infection, often through their workplace, with a significant number dying. The epidemiology of COVID-19 infection in HCWs continues to be explored, with manifold exposure risks identified, leading to COVID-19 being recognised as an occupational disease for HCWs. The physical illness due to COVID-19 in HCWs is similar to the general population, with some HCWs experiencing a long-term illness, which may impact their ability to return to work. HCWs have also been affected by the immense workplace and psychosocial disruption caused by the pandemic. The impacts on the psychological well-being of HCWs globally have been profound, with high prevalence estimates for mental health symptoms, including emotional exhaustion. Globally, governments, healthcare organisations and employers have key responsibilities, including: to be better prepared for crises with comprehensive disaster response management plans, and to protect and preserve the health workforce from the physical and psychological impacts of the pandemic. While prioritising HCWs in vaccine rollouts globally has been critical, managing exposures and outbreaks occurring in healthcare settings remains challenging and continues to lead to substantial disruption to the health workforce. Safeguarding healthcare workforces during crises is critical as we move forward on the new path of 'COVID normal'.