You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Workplace
Original research
Trajectories of mental health among UK university staff and postgraduate students during the pandemic
  1. Ewan Carr1,
  2. Carolin Oetzmann2,
  3. Katrina Davis2,
  4. Gabriella Bergin-Cartwright2,
  5. Sarah Dorrington2,
  6. Grace Lavelle2,
  7. Daniel Leightley2,
  8. Catherine Polling2,3,
  9. Sharon A M Stevelink2,4,
  10. Alice Wickersham2,
  11. Valentina Vitiello5,
  12. Reza Razavi5,
  13. Matthew Hotopf2,3
  1. 1 Department of Biostatistics and Health Informatics, Institute of Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
  2. 2 Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
  3. 3 South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
  4. 4 King's Centre for Military Health Research, Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
  5. 5 School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, King's College London, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Ewan Carr, Department of Biostatistics & Health Informatics, Institute of Psychology, Psychiatry & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK; ewan.carr{at}kcl.ac.uk

Abstract

Objectives The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the social and working lives of many. Past studies have highlighted worsening mental health during the pandemic, but often rely on small samples or infrequent follow-up. This study draws on fortnightly assessments from a large occupational cohort to describe differing trajectories of mental health between April 2020 and April 2021 and individual characteristics associated with these trajectory types.

Methods King’s College London Coronavirus Health and Experiences of Colleagues at King’s is an occupational cohort study at a large university in London, UK. Participants (n=2241) completed online questionnaires fortnightly between April 2020 and April 2021. Symptoms of anxiety and depression were assessed using Generalised Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9).

Results On average, participants reported low levels of anxiety and depression (GAD-7 and PHQ-9 scores of 0–9, consistent with ‘none’, ‘minimal’ or ‘mild’ symptoms) throughout the year, with symptoms highest in April 2020 and decreasing over the summer months when no lockdown measures were in place. However, we observed more severe and variable symptoms among subgroups of participants. Four trajectory types for anxiety and depression were identified: ‘persistent high severity’ (6%–7% of participants), ‘varying symptoms, opposing national cases’ (4%–8%), ‘varying symptoms, consistent with national cases’ (6%–11%) and ‘persistent low severity’ (74%–84%). Younger age, female gender, caring responsibilities and shielding were associated with higher severity trajectory types.

Conclusions These data highlight differing individual responses to the pandemic and underscore the need to consider individual circumstances when assessing and treating mental health. Aggregate trends in anxiety and depression may hide greater variation and symptom severity among subgroups.

  • mental health
  • COVID-19
  • occupational health

Data availability statement

Deidentified participant data are available for research purposes on request to the study authors, subject to approval. Please see https://kcl-check.org for further information.

This article is made freely available for personal use in accordance with BMJ’s website terms and conditions for the duration of the covid-19 pandemic or until otherwise determined by BMJ. You may use, download and print the article for any lawful, non-commercial purpose (including text and data mining) provided that all copyright notices and trade marks are retained.

https://bmj.com/coronavirus/usage

https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2021-108097

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Data availability statement

    Deidentified participant data are available for research purposes on request to the study authors, subject to approval. Please see https://kcl-check.org for further information.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Twitter @twitter.com/ewancarr, @COetzmann

    • EC and CO contributed equally.

    • Contributors All authors contributed to the design of the study. EC and CO carried out the data analysis and wrote the manuscript. All authors made substantive revisions to and approved the final manuscript. KD, GB-C, GL, DL, CO, CP, VV and AW carried out the data collection. SS, RR and MH supervised the project. EC is the guarantor of the study.

    • Funding This paper represents independent research part-funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King’s College London. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

    • Disclaimer The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

    • Competing interests MH receives funding from Janssen as part of the RADAR-CNS consortium, which includes a project on depression. He is a principal investigator of RADAR-CNS, a precompetitive public private partnership co-funded by Innovative Medicines Initiative (European Commission) and European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA). He has also been an independent expert witness in group litigations instructed by claimants against pharmaceutical companies for alleged harmful effects of their products. Authors have no other conflict of interest to declare.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.