Charlotte E. Hall

Background: Meningitis outbreaks require the rapid implementation of prophylaxis to limit transmission and reduce severe health outcomes. Evidence from similar outbreaks indicates that uptake (i.e. initiation of) and adherence to (i.e. completion of) prophylaxis can vary substantially, with implications for outbreak control. Aim: To synthesise evidence on uptake of, and adherence to, prophylactic antibiotics and vaccination during meningitis outbreaks globally and the factors associated with these health behaviours. Method: This rapid review was pre-registered (https://osf.io/mwdch). Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycInfo, and Web of Science on 01 April 2026. PRISMA and synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) guidelines and NICE recommendations for risk of bias assessment were followed. Data were extracted on study context and population, outbreak characteristics, and rates and factors associated with uptake and adherence. Results: Of 8,370 records screened, 21 studies were included. Reported rates of uptake and adherence differed widely between studies. Studies consistently identified higher uptake among younger people, women/females (vs men/males), and those with higher socioeconomic status. Social and structural factors, particularly education settings, parental influence, and trust in healthcare providers affected behaviours. No patterns were observed by serotype. Evidence on adherence, particularly for antibiotics, was limited. Conclusion: The consistent finding of higher uptake in younger groups contrasts with other outbreak contexts and highlights the importance of risk perception during outbreaks. During meningitis outbreaks, older people and those who consider themselves at low risk are less likely to follow prophylaxis regimes. Accessible delivery and risk-based communication may help address this.

Background: A recent research project sought to explore the experience of UK response-focused civil servants asked to work from home during the COVID-19 pandemic and to create a series of recommendations for future public health emergencies requiring response-focused homeworking. In general, civil servants from one select government organisation were able to convey a plethora of lessons learnt, reflections on experience, and suggestions for future support offers should another public health emergency require homeworking. Recommendations were derived from the evidence, but it remained important to ensure that the recommendations were useful, fit for purpose, and actionable. This required collaboration with experts in appropriate fields (in this case, mental health, occupational health, and government affiliated individuals). Method: This Delphi study sought to refine and operationalise evidence-based recommendations designed to support the mental health and wellbeing of future UK response-focused civil servants asked to work from home during public health emergencies. A total of 32 experts were recruited into the study; these individuals provided feedback and rated recommendations over three iterative rounds. Results: A total of 19 recommendations reached consensus at a > 90% level of agreement. In line with feedback from experts, these were categorised into preparedness and response focused recommendations to aid with implementation. Collectively, these recommendations establish the importance of organisation/employer level initiatives to protect mental health and wellbeing in response-focused civil servants working from home. Conclusion: The key outcome of this work has been the importance of employees, managers, and organisations retaining flexibility when working from home, as a range of factors (e.g., living circumstances, others in household, relationships with colleagues) can influence experience, and each employee will face theird own barriers and facilitators to working from home.

This pre-registered systematic review aimed to examine whether online support groups affect the health and wellbeing of individuals with a chronic condition, and what mechanisms may influence such effects. In September 2024, literature searches were conducted across electronic databases (Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, Web of Science and Google Scholar), pre-publication websites (MedRxiv and PsyArXiv) and grey literature websites. Qualitative and quantitative studies were included if they explored the impact of online support groups on the health and wellbeing outcomes of individuals with a chronic condition. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used to appraise the quality of the included studies. In total 100 papers met the inclusion criteria with their findings presented in a thematic synthesis. Health and wellbeing outcomes were categorised as: physical health, mental health, quality of life, social wellbeing, behaviour and decision-making, and adjustment. Mechanisms reported in these studies related to exchanging support, sharing experiences, content expression, and social comparison. User and group characteristics were also explored. The included studies suggest that online support groups can have a positive impact on social wellbeing, behaviour, and adjustment, with inconclusive findings for physical health and quality of life. However, there is also the possibility of a negative effect on anxiety and distress, particularly when exposed to other group members’ difficult experiences. Research comparing different online group features, such as platforms, size, and duration is needed. In particular, future research should be experimental to overcome the limitations of some of the cross-sectional designs of the included studies. The review was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Protection Research in Emergency Preparedness and Response. Pre-registration ID: CRD42023399258

Background: Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) Resolution is a UK-based charity that provides treatment for military veterans, reservists and their families. However, there is little contemporary evaluation of their clinical outcomes to inform commissioners or potential service users. Aims: To establish whether treatment by PTSD Resolution therapists resulted in positive outcomes at the end of therapy and follow-up; to establish risk and resilience factors associated with positive treatment outcomes; and to the extent possible, compare PTSD Resolution with National Health Service (NHS)—Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) services. Methods: A sample of 211 closed cases from the service provider between April 2022 and May 2023 were utilized. Clients provided demographic data and completed a series of mental health screening tools. Follow-up data were also collected where possible. Paired t-tests, univariable binary logistic regressions and chi-squared tests were used in the analysis. Results: Around 6% of clients attended only one session, with 82% having a planned ending. This service evaluation suggests that veterans who enter therapy with PTSD Resolution appear to experience similar rates of recovery to IAPT users. Analysis of follow-up data revealed that clients scores slightly increased following the completion of therapy but remained below caseness thresholds and significantly lower than entry-level scores. Conclusions: These data suggest that veterans who choose to engage with PTSD Resolution for their mental health difficulties should expect to experience a similar benefit to that they would have experienced if they had sought outpatient care from the NHS.

Introduction: The experiences of UK Government response-focused employees, who were considered frontline workers during the coronavirus response, are missing from current literature. Meeting the demands of being on the frontline, whilst also adjusting from a normal and practiced way of working to having to work from within one’s home, may bring a plethora of new barriers and facilitators associated with providing an effective pandemic response. Method: This interview study collected and analysed data from 30 UK Civil servants who worked on the COVID-19 pandemic response from their own homes. Interviews aimed to: (1) explore UK Government employee’s experiences of working from home whilst contributing to the pandemic response; and, (2) establish what support and guidance employees were offered, and what they would recommend for future public health emergencies requiring homeworking. Results: Seven themes were extracted from the data: overall experience of working from home; preparedness for working from home; experience of contributing to the response effort; work life balance; relationships with colleagues; space and equipment; and, inclusivity. Findings suggested that during the pandemic, participants reported feeling a strong sense of purpose and achievement for contributing to the response. But, the work was demanding, particularly for those who had to rapidly, and unexpectedly, transition from office or lab work to home working. More generally, the nature of their homeworking experience depended on a range of practical (e.g., space in the home), organisational (e.g., relationships with managers) and personal factors (e.g., caring responsibilities). Many participants were underprepared to work from home, but participants provided a plethora of information relating to what support offers they would find useful during future work on the frontline from their own homes. Conclusion: The results of this study demonstrate that frontline UK Civil servants may need more tailored and flexible multilevel support (i.e., from peers, managers, organisations) during future public health emergencies when they are required to work from home. A series of data-informed recommendations are created and discussed.

Objective: This study investigates perceptions of homeworking in UK Government response-focused employees that contributed to the COVID-19 pandemic response. Method: A cross-sectional online survey with open-ended questions was conducted. Free-text responses detailing participants’ perceptions of barriers, facilitators, advantages, and disadvantages were analyzed using content analysis. Results: A total of 1943 free-text responses (from 150 participants) were analyzed. There were many conflicting advantages and disadvantages provided by participants, but crudely more positive statements were provided than negative. Flexibility associated with working from home was the most common positive factor, and the isolation and impact on working relationships was the most reported negative factor of working from home. Conclusions: We suggest a ‘one size fits all’ approach to supporting staff working from home is not fit for purpose due to individual circumstances and contextual factors.

Background: Working from home (WFH) is becoming more common, but little is known about how it specifically affects neuro-divergent workers’ psychological and occupational well-being. Aims: This review aimed to explore the experiences of neuro-divergent staff WFH, including the challenges they face; the potential benefits of homeworking for this specific population and the support systems they require. Methods: We searched six electronic databases, as well as reference lists of included papers, one preprint server and Google, for literature on neuro-divergent workers’ experiences of WFH. Results were synthesized using thematic analysis. Results: We reviewed 25 studies (mostly based on data collected during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic), finding very little research statistically analysing the impact of WFH on well-being or productivity, or comparing the impact of WFH across neuro-divergent and neuro-typical populations. The (mostly qualitative) findings showed that neuro-divergent participants described various benefits and challenges of the sensory environment at home; the reduction of commuting; increased flexibility and lack of routine when homeworking; the reduction of ‘masking’ behaviours; lack of in-person social contact and increased use of technology. Conclusions: The findings emphasize the importance of not assuming a one-size-fits-all approach to homeworking and suggest managers should be mindful of workers’ individual preferences for working whilst ensuring that all employees are appropriately supported. The results can inform future research and provide insights for employers to help them create more inclusive work environments.

Introduction: Working on the frontline during the COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with increased risk to mental health and wellbeing in multiple occupations and contexts. The current study aimed to provide an insight into the rate of probable mental health problems amongst United Kingdom (UK) Government employees who contributed to the COVID-19 response whilst working from home, and to ascertain what factors and constructs, if any, influence mental health and wellbeing in the sample population.Method: This paper reports on the findings from two studies completed by UK Government employees. Study 1: A cross-sectional online survey, containing standardised and validated measures of common mental health disorders of staff who actively contributed to the COVID-19 response from their own homes. Binary logistic regression was used to assess factors associated with mental health outcomes. Study 2: A secondary data analysis of cross-sectional survey data collected across three timepoints (May, June, and August) in 2020 focusing on the wellbeing of employees who worked from home during the COVID-19 pandemic.Results: Study 1: 17.9% of participants met the threshold criteria for a probable moderate anxiety disorder, moderate depression, or post-traumatic stress disorder. Younger, less resilient, less productive individuals, with lower personal wellbeing and less enjoyment of working from home, were more likely to present with poorer mental health. Study 2: Found lower wellbeing was consistently associated with having less opportunities to look after one’s physical and mental health, and having unsupportive line managers and colleagues.Conclusion: It is important to ensure UK Government employees’ psychological needs are met whilst working from home and responding to enhanced incidents. It is recommended that workplaces should be seeking to continually build and improve employee resilience (e.g., through opportunities to increase social ties and support networks), essentially ensuring employees have necessary resources and skills to support themselves and others.

Effective and safe vaccines against COVID-19 are essential to achieve global control of the coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Using faith centres may offer a promising route for promoting higher vaccine uptake from certain minority ethnic groups known to be more likely to be vaccine hesitant. This cross-sectional study explored attendees’ perceptions, experiences of being offered, and receiving COVID-19 vaccination in a local mosque in Woking, Surrey, UK. About 199 attendees completed a brief questionnaire on experiences, views, motivations about attending the mosque and vaccination on site. The most common ethnic groups reported were White British (39.2%) and Pakistani (22.6%); 36.2% identified as Christian, 23.6% as Muslim, 5.5% as Hindu, and 17.1% had no religion. Genders was relatively equal with 90 men (45.2%) and 98 women (49.2%), and 35–44-year-olds represented the most common age group (28.1%). Views and experiences around receiving vaccinations at the mosque were predominantly positive. Primary reasons for getting vaccinated at the mosque included convenience, accessibility, positive aspects of the venue’s intercultural relations, and intentions to protect oneself against COVID-19, regardless of venue type. Negative views and experiences in regards to receiving the vaccination at the mosque were less common (7% expressed no intention of recommending the centre to others), and disliked aspects mostly referred to the travel distance and long waiting times. Offering COVID-19 vaccination in faith centres appears acceptable for different faith groups, ensuring convenient access for communities from all religions and ethnic backgrounds. What is already known on this topic Effective and safe vaccines against COVID-19 are essential to achieve global control of the coronavirus Using faith centres for providing access to health services may offer a promising route for promoting higher vaccine uptake from certain minority ethnic groups known to be more likely to be vaccine hesitant. What this study adds Convenience, accessibility, positive aspects of the venue, the importance of promoting intercultural relations, and getting vaccinated to protect oneself against COVID-19 appear to be major influencers relevant for the specific type of venue where the vaccine was offered, i.e. a mosque. Long travel distance and waiting times were barriers to recommending the centre to others. How this study might affect research, practice or policy Offering COVID-19 vaccination in faith centres appears acceptable for different faith groups. Vaccine uptake can be maximized by ensuring convenient access to the centre for communities from all religions and ethnic backgrounds. Future research should continue to explore COVID-19 vaccination behaviours and underlying beliefs in larger ethnic minority samples. Faith centres could provide an alternative location for preventative healthcare offers, such as vaccines, in local communities, therefore representing a promising approach to maximize public health impacts.

Introduction: The concept of “working from home” is extremely topical following the COVID-19 pandemic; therefore, it is unsurprising that there has been an increased interest in collating research related to homeworking. This has been carried out by multiple reviews, all with slightly different research aims and methodologies. Collating the findings from the available reviews is therefore highly beneficial to establish the experience of homeworking to create recommendations for the future of home-based work. Methods: An umbrella review was carried out. In June 2022, literature searches were conducted across 4 electronic databases. Published reviews of literature that used a systematic process, were focused on working from home populations, and detailed factors that could be related to the personal experience of homeworking (eg, barriers, facilitators, advantages, disadvantages) were included. Results: A total of 1930 records were screened and 6 review articles were included. Results report on the following sections: working environment (eg, workplace design, space conditions), personal impact (eg, satisfaction, career impact), and health (eg, physical health, well-being) including a total of 19 themes. Mixed findings were apparent for nearly all included themes, highlighting the need to consider individual and contextual circumstances when researching working from home. Conclusions: This review establishes the importance of retaining flexibility while homeworking for employees, managers, and organizations. Essentially, a one-size-fits-all approach to working from home is impractical as individual circumstances limit application. Eight recommendations for the future of working from home are suggested.