Background Evidence-based mental health interventions to support healthcare workers (HCWs) in crisis settings are scarce. Objective To evaluate the capacity of a mental health intervention in reducing anxiety and depression symptoms in HCWs, relative to enhanced care as usual (eCAU), amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods We conducted an analyst-blind, parallel, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. We recruited HCWs with psychological distress from Madrid and Catalonia (Spain). The intervention arm received a stepped-care programme consisting of two WHO-developed interventions adapted for HCWs: Doing What Matters in Times of Stress (DWM) and Problem Management Plus (PM+). Each intervention lasted 5 weeks and was delivered remotely by non-specialist mental health providers. HCWs reporting psychological distress after DWM completion were invited to continue to PM+. The primary endpoint was self-reported anxiety/depression symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-Anxiety and Depression Scale) at week 21. Findings Between 3 November 2021 and 31 March 2022, 115 participants were randomised to stepped care and 117 to eCAU (86% women, mean age 37.5). The intervention showed a greater decrease in anxiety/depression symptoms compared with eCAU at the primary endpoint (baseline-adjusted difference 4.4, 95% CI 2.1 to 6.7; standardised effect size 0.8, 95% CI 0.4 to 1.2). No serious adverse events occurred. Conclusions Brief stepped-care psychological interventions reduce anxiety and depression during a period of stress among HCWs. Clinical implications Our results can inform policies and actions to protect the mental health of HCWs during major health crises and are potentially rapidly replicable in other settings where workers are affected by global emergencies. Trial registration number NCT04980326.

During the initial COVID-19 outbreak, health systems faced unprecedented organizational stress. Meanwhile, reports of episodes of discrimination and violence towards healthcare workers increased globally. This study explores the association between perceived discrimination and mental health outcomes in a large sample of healthcare workers in Spain. Healthcare workers from inpatient and outpatient facilities (N=2053) filled an on-line questionnaire in May or June 2020. Mental health outcomes included depression symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-9]), psychological distress (General Health Questionnaire [GHQ-12]) and death thoughts (Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale [C-SSRS]). We also measured perceived discrimination and/or stigmatization due to being a healthcare worker since pandemic onset. Regression models adjusted for potential confounding sources (age, sex, history of a mental health diagnosis and type of job) were fitted. Thirty percent of the respondents reported discrimination and/or stigmatization. Perceived discrimination was associated with higher depression (B=2.4, 95 percent CI: 1.8, 2.9) and psychological distress (B=1.1, 95 percent CI: 0.7, 1.4) scores, and with a 2-fold increase in risk of reporting death thoughts (OR=2.0, 95 percent CI: 1.4, 3.1). Perceived discrimination is a modifiable driver of mental health problems among healthcare workers. Mass media, legislators, and healthcare institutions must put in place prevention and restoration strategies to limit discrimination towards healthcare workers and reduce its mental health impact.

Background and aims: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has challenged health services worldwide, with a worsening of healthcare workers’ mental health within initial pandemic hotspots. In early 2022, the Omicron variant is spreading rapidly around the world. This study explores the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a stepped-care programme of scalable, internet-based psychological interventions for distressed health workers on self-reported anxiety and depression symptoms.Methods: We present the study protocol for a multicentre (two sites), parallel-group (1:1 allocation ratio), analyst-blinded, superiority, randomised controlled trial. Healthcare workers with psychological distress will be allocated either to care as usual only or to care as usual plus a stepped-care programme that includes two scalable psychological interventions developed by the World Health Organization: A guided self-help stress management guide (Doing What Matters in Times of Stress) and a five-session cognitive behavioural intervention (Problem Management Plus). All participants will receive a single-session emotional support intervention, namely psychological first aid. We will include 212 participants. An intention-to-treat analysis using linear mixed models will be conducted to explore the programme's effect on anxiety and depression symptoms, as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire – Anxiety and Depression Scale summary score at 21 weeks from baseline. Secondary outcomes include post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms, resilience, quality of life, cost impact and cost-effectiveness.Conclusions: This study is the first randomised trial that combines two World Health Organization psychological interventions tailored for health workers into one stepped-care programme. Results will inform occupational and mental health prevention, treatment, and recovery strategies.Registration details: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04980326.

Introduction: Mentalization or reflective functioning (RF) is the capacity to interpret oneself or the others in terms of internal mental states. Its failures have been linked to several mental disorders and interventions improving RF have a therapeutic effect. Mentalizing capacity of the parents influences the children’s attachment. The Reflective Functioning Questionnaire (RFQ-8) is a widely used tool for the assessment of RF. No instrument is available to assess general RF in Spanish-speaking samples. The aim of this study is to develop a Spanish version of the RFQ-8 and to evaluate its reliability and validity in the general population and in individuals with personality disorders. Methods: 602 non-clinical and 41 personality disordered participants completed a Spanish translation of the RFQ and a battery of self-reported questionnaires assessing several RF related constructs (alexithymia, perspective taking, identity diffusion and mindfulness), psychopathology (general and specific) and interpersonal problems. Temporal stability was tested in a non-clinical sub-sample of 113 participants. Results: Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses suggested a one-factor structure in the Spanish version of the RFQ-8. RFQ-8 understood as a single scale was tested, with low scorings reflecting genuine mentalizing, and high scorings uncertainty. The questionnaire showed good internal consistence in both samples and moderate temporal stability in non-clinical sample. RFQ correlated significantly with identity diffusion, alexithymia, and general psychopathology in both samples; and with mindfulness, perspective taking, and interpersonal problems in clinical sample. Mean values of the scale were significantly higher in the clinical group. Discussion: This study provides evidence that the Spanish version of the RFQ-8, understood as a single scale, has an adequate reliability and validity assessing failures in reflective functioning (i.e., hypomentalization) in general population and personality disorders.