Mean Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale Research Articles

An investigation into managerial support for the psychological wellbeing of national health service doctors during the Covid-19 pandemic: A cross sectional study.

AimThis study investigates the psychological wellbeing of United Kingdom National Health Service doctors during the Covid‐19 pandemic and evaluates how they have been supported managerially.MethodA mixed‐method sequential study design of online surveys and semi‐structured interviews was employed between July‐August 2020, with a response rate of 273/300 and 4/4 respectively. The Warwick‐Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS) and Health and Safety Executive Management Standards (HSE MS) were used as measuring tools. The Jobs Demands Resource (JD‐R) model and its relation to psychological wellbeing was determined. Survey findings informed semi‐structured interviews, coded using thematic analysis.ResultsOverall mean WEMWBS, 43.2 (SD = 9.44), was low as was mean managerial support, 2.38 (SD = 0.78). Overall mean clinical demand score was high (2.6 on reverse scale). First year female trainee respondents from frontline specialties were found to have low psychological wellbeing scores. Key correlations were found between high managerial support, low clinical demands and low psychological wellbeing (r > 0.6). Core themes emerged: (1) breakdown of leadership, (2) vulnerability of wellbeing without support, (3) suboptimal navigation through change and (4) poor physical and human resource management.ConclusionMaintaining the psychological wellbeing of doctors requires physical and psychological resources to meet clinical demands and the enhancement of fundamental managerial principles of control, communication, change management and leadership through adversity.

Early positive approaches to support for families of young children with intellectual disability: the E-PAtS feasibility RCT

Background Parents of children with intellectual disability are 1.5–2 times more likely than other parents to report mental health difficulties. There is a lack of clinically effective and cost-effective group well-being interventions designed for family carers of young children with intellectual disability. Aim To examine the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Early Positive Approaches to Support (E-PAtS) intervention. Design A feasibility study (including randomisation of families into a two-arm trial), questionnaires to assess the feasibility of proposed outcome measures (including resource use and health-related quality of life) and practitioner/family carer interviews. An additional question was included in an online UK survey of families, conducted by the research team to assess usual practice, and a survey of provider organisations. Setting Families recruited from community contexts (i.e. third sector, local authority services, special schools) and self-referral. The E-PAtS intervention was delivered by trained community-based providers. Participants Families with at least one child aged 1.5–5 years with an intellectual disability. At least one parent had to have English-language ability (spoken) for E-PAtS programme participation and participants had to provide informed consent. Interventions E-PAtS intervention – two caregivers from each family invited to eight 2.5-hour group sessions with usual practice. Usual practice – other support provided to the family, including other parenting support. Objectives To assess randomisation willingness/feasibility, recruitment of providers/parents, retention, usual practice, adherence, fidelity and feasibility of proposed outcome measures (including the Warwick–Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale as the proposed primary outcome measure, and parent anxiety/depression, parenting, family functioning/relationships, child behavioural/emotional problems and adaptive skills, child and parent quality of life, and family services receipt as the proposed secondary outcome measures). Results Seventy-four families (95 carers) were recruited from three sites (with 37 families allocated to the intervention). From referrals, the recruitment rate was 65% (95% confidence interval 56% to 74%). Seventy-two per cent of families were retained at the 12-month follow-up (95% confidence interval 60% to 81%). Exploratory regression analysis showed that the mean Warwick–Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale well-being score was 3.96 points higher in the intervention group (95% confidence interval –1.39 to 9.32 points) at 12 months post randomisation. High levels of data completeness were achieved on returned questionnaires. Interviews (n = 25) confirmed that (1) recruitment, randomisation processes and the intervention were acceptable to family carers, E-PAtS facilitators and community staff; (2) E-PAtS delivery were consistent with the logic model; and (3) researchers requesting consent in future for routine data would be acceptable. Recorded E-PAtS sessions demonstrated good fidelity (96% of components present). Adherence (i.e. at least one carer from the family attending five out of eight E-PAtS sessions) was 76%. Health-related quality-of-life and services receipt data were gathered successfully. An online UK survey to assess usual practice (n = 673) showed that 10% of families of young children with intellectual disability received any intervention over 12 months. A provider survey (n = 15) indicated willingness to take part in future research. Limitations Obtaining session recordings for fidelity was difficult. Recruitment processes need to be reviewed to improve diversity and strategies are needed to improve primary outcome completion. Conclusions Study processes were feasible. The E-PAtS intervention was well received and outcomes for families were positive. A barrier to future organisation participation is funding for intervention costs. A definitive trial to test the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of E-PAtS would be feasible. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN70419473. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 10, No. 2. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

A pre-evaluation of psychological factors may positively affect the outcomes of smoking cessation treatments: A comparison in terms of smoking behavior.

INTRODUCTIONThe aim of this study was to compare smoking behavior in out-patients in terms of psychological factors with a view to supporting cessation treatment.METHODSWe conducted a cross-sectional and analytical study through face-to-face interviews by the primary care physician with 765 volunteer participants who applied to our hospital for any reason between March and July 2019. The questionnaire administered had two parts: questions about sociodemographic characteristics and usage of tobacco and tobacco products, and questions of the UCLA Loneliness Scale, Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS), Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMBS), and Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND).RESULTSThe study was completed with 765 participants of which 53.1% (n=406) were female and 46.9% (n=359) male. Multidimensional perceived social support scale mean score of the participants was 69.9±15.2 (min=12, max=84). There was a significant relation between mean MPSS and mean WEMBS (p<0.05). As nicotine scores increased, the mean scores both in MPSS and WEMBS decreased (p<0.05).CONCLUSIONSWe suggest that the results of the psychometric preliminary evaluations should be customized for individuals applying to smoking cessation clinics and that including the individual’s close social connections in the process can facilitate the decision to quit, thus increase smoking cessation rates.

Pilot study of an integrated model of sleep support for children: a before and after evaluation

ObjectiveDespite the success of behavioural sleep support interventions in the third sector, sleep support is not universally available for families in the UK. The aim of the study was to...

GPs' mental wellbeing and psychological resources: a cross-sectional survey.

BackgroundThe negative impact of work has been the traditional focus of GP surveys. We know little about GP positive mental health and psychological resources.AimTo profile and contextualise GP positive mental health and personal psychological resources.Design and settingCross-sectional survey of GPs working in Northern Ireland (NI).MethodA questionnaire comprising the Warwick Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS) and measures of resilience, optimism, self-efficacy, and hope, and sociodemographic information was posted to 400 GPs randomly selected from a publicly available GP register.ResultsThe response rate was 55% (n = 221 out of 400). Mean value for GP wellbeing (WEMWBS) was 50.2 (standard deviation [SD] 8) compared to UK vets 48.8 (SD 9), UK teachers 47.2 (SD 9), and the population of NI 50.8 (SD 9). After adjustment for confounding, mean WEMWBS was 2.4 units (95% CI = 0.02 to 4.7) higher in female GPs than males (P = 0.05), and 4.0 units (95% CI = 0.8 to 7.3) higher in GPs ≥55 years than GPs ≤44 years (P = 0.02). Optimism was 1.1 units higher in female GPs than male GPs (95% CI = 0.1 to 2.0), and 1.56 units higher in GPs ≥55 years (95% CI = 0.2 to 2.9) than in those ≤44 years. Hope was 3 units higher in GPs ≥55 years (95% CI = 0.4 to 5.7) than in those aged 45–54 years. Correlation between WEMWBS and psychological resources was highest with hope (r = 0.65, P < 0.001).ConclusionGPs have levels of positive mental health that are comparable to the local population and better than other occupational groups, such as vets and teachers. Male and younger GPs may have most to gain from wellbeing interventions.

An exploration of physical activity and wellbeing in university employees.

The aim was to explore levels of physical activity (PA) and mental wellbeing in university employees, as well as barriers to and incentives for workplace PA. An electronic survey was distributed to all staff at one UK university. The survey consisted of a PA stages of change questionnaire, an international PA questionnaire (short-form), the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS), questions on perceived barriers to and incentives for workplace PA, questions on methods of enhancing employee wellbeing and demographics. A self-selected sample participated in two focus groups to explore key themes arising from the survey. Descriptive statistics were reported for survey data; associations between PA and wellbeing were tested for using Kruskal-Wallis with post hoc Mann-Whitney. Descriptive, thematic analysis was performed on focus group transcripts. A total of 502 surveys were completed (34% response rate); 13 staff participated in focus groups. In all, 42% of the sample reported PA below the recommended guideline amount. Females were less active than males (p < 0.005). The mean WEMWBS was 49.2 (95% confidence interval (CI): 48.3-49.9). Low PA levels were related to lower WEMWBS scores, with statistically significant differences in WEMWBS demonstrated between low and moderate PA (p = 0.05) and low and high PA (p = 0.001). Lack of time and perceived expense of facilities were common barriers to workplace PA. The main focus group finding was the impact of university culture on workplace PA and wellbeing. University staff demonstrate PA levels and a relationship between PA and wellbeing similar to the general population. Carefully designed strategies aimed at enhancing PA and wellbeing in university staff are required. The specific cultural and other barriers to workplace PA that exist in this setting should be considered. These results are being used to inform PA and wellbeing interventions whose effectiveness will be evaluated in future research.