Respiratory symptoms are ubiquitous and impair health-related quality of life in people with respiratory disease. This European Respiratory Society (ERS) task force aimed to provide recommendations for symptomatic treatment in people with serious respiratory illness. The ERS task force comprised 16 members, including representatives of people with serious respiratory illness and informal caregivers. Seven questions were formulated, six in the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) format, which were addressed with full systematic reviews and evidence assessed using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). One question was addressed narratively. An “evidence-to-decision” framework was used to formulate recommendations. To treat symptoms in people with serious respiratory illness, the task force suggests the use of graded exercise therapy (conditional recommendation, low certainty of evidence); and suggests the use of a multicomponent services, handheld fan and breathing techniques (conditional recommendations, very low certainty of evidence). The task force suggests not to use opioids (conditional recommendation, very low certainty of evidence); and suggests either administering or not administering supplemental oxygen therapy (conditional recommendation, low certainty of evidence). The task force suggests that needs assessment tools may be used as part of a comprehensive needs assessment, but do not replace patient-centred care and shared decision making (conditional recommendation, low certainty of evidence). The low certainty of evidence, modest impact of interventions on patient-centred outcomes, and absence of effective strategies to ameliorate cough highlight the need for new approaches to reduce symptoms and enhance wellbeing for individuals who live with serious respiratory illness.

Background: Sudden changes in clinical practice and the altered ability to care for patients due to the COVID-19 pandemic have been associated with moral distress and mental health concerns in healthcare workers internationally. This study aimed to investigate the severity, prevalence, and predictors of moral distress experienced by Australian healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A nationwide, voluntary, anonymous, single time-point, online survey of self-identified frontline healthcare workers was conducted between 27th August and 23rd October 2020. Participants were recruited through health organisations, professional associations, or colleges, universities, government contacts, and national media. Results: 7846 complete responses were received from nurses (39.4%), doctors (31.1%), allied health staff (16.7%), or other roles (6.7%). Many participants reported moral distress related to resource scarcity (58.3%), wearing PPE (31.7%) limiting their ability to care for patients, exclusion of family going against their values (60.2%), and fear of letting co-workers down if they were infected (55.0%). Many personal and workplace predictors of moral distress were identified, with those working in certain frontline areas, metropolitan locations, and with prior mental health diagnoses at particular risk of distress. Moral distress was associated with increased risk of anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and burnout. Conversely, feeling appreciated by the community protected against these risks in healthcare workers. Conclusions: Safeguarding healthcare workforces during crises is important for both patient safety and workforce longevity. Targeted interventions are required to prevent or minimise moral distress and associated mental health concerns in healthcare workers during COVID-19 and other crises.

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.

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.

Background: The COVID-19 crisis has caused prolonged and extreme demands on healthcare services. This study investigates the types and prevalence of occupational disruptions, and associated symptoms of mental illness, among Australian frontline healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A national cross-sectional online survey was conducted between 27 August and 23 October 2020. Frontline healthcare workers were invited to participate via dissemination from major health organisations, professional associations or colleges, universities, government contacts, and national media. Data were collected on demographics, home and work situations, and validated scales of anxiety, depression, PTSD, and burnout. Results: Complete responses were received from 7846 healthcare workers (82.4%). Most respondents were female (80.9%) and resided in the Australian state of Victoria (85.2%). Changes to working conditions were common, with 48.5% reporting altered paid or unpaid hours, and many redeployed (16.8%) or changing work roles (27.3%). Nearly a third (30.8%) had experienced a reduction in household income during the pandemic. Symptoms of mental illness were common, being present in 62.1% of participants. Many respondents felt well supported by their workplaces (68.3%) and believed that workplace communication was timely and useful (74.4%). Participants who felt well supported by their organisation had approximately half the risk of experiencing moderate to severe anxiety, depression, burnout, and PTSD. Half (50.4%) of respondents indicated a need for additional training in using personal protective equipment and/or caring for patients with COVID-19. Conclusions: Occupational disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic occurred commonly in health organisations and were associated with worse mental health outcomes in the Australian health workforce. Feeling well supported was associated with significantly fewer adverse mental health outcomes. Crisis preparedness focusing on the provision of timely and useful communication and support is essential in current and future crises.