Brief Report: Frequency and Perceived Effectiveness of Mental Health Providers’ Coping Strategies during COVID-19 (Preprint)
Authors: Reilly Shannon , Souillard Zachary A. , McCuddy William T. , Mahoney III James J. 
Published: October 2020

BACKGROUND

There has been an emphasis on understanding detrimental effects of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on individuals’ mental health, including increased mood symptoms, sleep and appetite disturbance, and substance use. U.S. mental health practitioners have responded by adjusting their practices, particularly related to increasing tele-mental health treatment. Healthcare workers may experience increased emotional and behavioral health concerns to a greater degree even than the general public. Mental health practitioners are not immune to psychological distress and simultaneously have an ethical imperative to maintain their wellbeing.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the present study was to descriptively examine the frequency with which U.S. mental health practitioners use various coping strategies and the perceived effectiveness of these strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic. Further, the study explored how use of coping strategies and their perceived effectiveness differed for mental health providers across career stages (i.e., trainees versus licensed practitioners [LPs]).

METHODS

Qualtrics survey data were collected from mental health practitioners (N = 888) as part of a larger study surveying responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants were asked about the strategies they were using to manage COVID-19-associated anxiety/distress and how effective they perceived their chosen strategies to be (1 = very ineffective to 5 = very effective). Bonferroni-adjusted chi-square tests and t-tests were conducted to assess differences by career stage.

RESULTS

Overall, respondents used various coping strategies to manage COVID-19-related anxiety/distress. Behavioral strategies were most common, particularly distraction/engaging in an enjoyable activity (88.63%), spending time with loved ones (77.82%), and exercise (72.64%). Respondents reported engaging other professionals both for work-related matters (e.g., peer consultation, 56.76%) and personal matters (e.g., individual therapy or counseling, 16.10%). Over one-quarter reported using alcohol to cope (28.27%). Overall, respondents generally perceived the strategies they employed to be “somewhat” to “very effective” in managing their COVID-19-related anxiety/distress; no strategies were generally perceived as ineffective. Compared to licensed practitioners, trainees were significantly more likely to manage COVID-19-related anxiety/distress using supervision (p < .001) and substances other than alcohol or tobacco (p = .001). There were no statistically significant differences in how effective trainees and LPs perceived each strategy.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, a vast majority of U.S. mental health practitioners – trainees and LPs alike – reported using predominantly behavioral coping strategies, which they perceived to be effective, during the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic. During and after the pandemic, it will be important for mental health providers to continue to practice effective coping strategies and other forms of self-care in order to provide optimal services to their clients. The present study offers specific ways in which institutions and employers may help mental health practitioners during this stressful time, such as checking in on their wellbeing and offering substance use education, particularly to trainees.