A qualitative study about the mental health and wellbeing of older adults in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Objectives

The objective of this study was to examine factors that threatened and protected the wellbeing of older adults living in the UK during social distancing restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Semi-structured telephone or video interviews with 20 adults aged over 70. Purposive sampling methods were used to increase diversity within the group. Transcripts were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

Results

Participants described potential threats to their wellbeing during the pandemic, including fears for mortality, grieving normal life, and concerns for the future. Participants also described activities and behaviours that helped to protect their mental health, including adopting a slower pace of life, maintaining routine, socialising, and using past coping skills. Many participants drew on their resilience and life experience to self-manage fear and uncertainty associated with the pandemic, using their time during lockdown to reflect or organise end-of-life affairs.

Discussion

This study provides UK-based evidence that while some older adults experienced challenges during the first wave of COVID-19, many were resilient throughout social distancing restrictions despite early reported concerns of mental health consequences among the older adult population. Our findings highlight the importance of maintaining access to essentials to promote feelings of normality and use of social support to help reduce uncertainty in times of pandemics.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-021-02367-8.

Related collections

Most cited references 38

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Characteristics of and Important Lessons From the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outbreak in China: Summary of a Report of 72 314 Cases From the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention

Zunyou Wu, Jennifer M. McGoogan (2020)

0 comments Cited 8414 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups.

A Tong, P SAINSBURY, J. Craig (2007)

Qualitative research explores complex phenomena encountered by clinicians, health care providers, policy makers and consumers. Although partial checklists are available, no consolidated reporting framework exists for any type of qualitative design. To develop a checklist for explicit and comprehensive reporting of qualitative studies (in depth interviews and focus groups). We performed a comprehensive search in Cochrane and Campbell Protocols, Medline, CINAHL, systematic reviews of qualitative studies, author or reviewer guidelines of major medical journals and reference lists of relevant publications for existing checklists used to assess qualitative studies. Seventy-six items from 22 checklists were compiled into a comprehensive list. All items were grouped into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. Duplicate items and those that were ambiguous, too broadly defined and impractical to assess were removed. Items most frequently included in the checklists related to sampling method, setting for data collection, method of data collection, respondent validation of findings, method of recording data, description of the derivation of themes and inclusion of supporting quotations. We grouped all items into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. The criteria included in COREQ, a 32-item checklist, can help researchers to report important aspects of the research team, study methods, context of the study, findings, analysis and interpretations.

0 comments Cited 8112 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence

Samantha K. Brooks, Rebecca K Webster, Louise E. Smith … (2022)

Summary The December, 2019 coronavirus disease outbreak has seen many countries ask people who have potentially come into contact with the infection to isolate themselves at home or in a dedicated quarantine facility. Decisions on how to apply quarantine should be based on the best available evidence. We did a Review of the psychological impact of quarantine using three electronic databases. Of 3166 papers found, 24 are included in this Review. Most reviewed studies reported negative psychological effects including post-traumatic stress symptoms, confusion, and anger. Stressors included longer quarantine duration, infection fears, frustration, boredom, inadequate supplies, inadequate information, financial loss, and stigma. Some researchers have suggested long-lasting effects. In situations where quarantine is deemed necessary, officials should quarantine individuals for no longer than required, provide clear rationale for quarantine and information about protocols, and ensure sufficient supplies are provided. Appeals to altruism by reminding the public about the benefits of quarantine to wider society can be favourable.

0 comments Cited 5424 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

A. R. McKinlay: a.mckinlay@ucl.ac.uk

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): BMC Geriatr

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): BMC Geriatr

Title: BMC Geriatrics

Publisher: BioMed Central (London )

ISSN (Electronic): 1471-2318

Publication date (Electronic): 26 July 2021

Publication date PMC-release: 26 July 2021

Publication date Collection: 2021

Volume: 21

Electronic Location Identifier: 439

Affiliations

GRID grid.83440.3b, ISNI 0000000121901201, Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, , Institute of Epidemiology & Health Care, University College London, ; 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB UK

Article

Publisher ID: 2367

DOI: 10.1186/s12877-021-02367-8

PMC ID: 8312210

PubMed ID: 34311710

SO-VID: 1331d65b-4c7d-4ec5-b3e2-6dc8b3b63efb

License:

Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

History

Date received : 14 January 2021

Date accepted : 29 June 2021

Custom metadata

ScienceOpen disciplines: Geriatric medicine

Keywords: older adults,mental health,social support,covid-19

Data availability:

ScienceOpen disciplines: Geriatric medicine

Keywords: older adults, mental health, social support, covid-19

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Cited by 34

See all cited by

Most referenced authors 3,357

See all reference authors

- Version 1