Search

Background Hearing and vision difficulties are some of the most common deficits experienced by older adults. Having either visual or hearing difficulty increases the risk of comorbidity, disability, and poor quality of life. So far, however, few studies have examined the association between vision and hearing difficulties on life expectancy without activities of daily living (ADL) instrumental ADL (IADL) limitations (LEWL). Methods Data came from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) and the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) in the US from 2002 to 2013. The outcome was defined as reporting 2+ limitations with ADL/IADL. Life expectancy was estimated by discrete-time multistate life table models, for hearing and vision difficulty separately as well as for combined vision and hearing difficulties, by sex and age. Results 13% of men in England and the US had ADL/IADL-limitations, whereas for women was 16% and 19% in England and the US. At all ages, either vision or hearing difficulty was associated with shorter LEWL compared to no difficulties. Dual sensory difficulty (vision and hearing) reduced LEWL by up to 12 years in both countries. At the ages of 50 and 60 in England, hearing difficulty was associated with fewer years lived without ADL/IADL-limitations than vision difficulty. In contrast, in the US, vision difficulty led to fewer years lived without ADL/IADL-limitations than hearing difficulty. Conclusions The implementation of strategies to reduce the prevalence and incidence of vision and hearing difficulties has the potential to increase the number of years spent without ADL/IADL-limitations.

Objectives Policies aiming at reducing rates of hospitalization and death from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) encouraged older people to reduce physical interactions. In England, until July 2021, provision of care for grandchildren was allowed only under very limited circumstances. Evidence also suggests that reduced face-to-face interactions took a toll on mental health during the pandemic. This study aims to investigate associations between changes in grandchild care provision during the first 8/9 months of the pandemic and grandparents’ mental health. Methods Using prepandemic data from Wave 9 (2018/2019) and the second COVID-19 substudy (November/December 2020) of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, we first describe changes in grandchild care provision during the pandemic to then investigate, using regression models, associations between changes in grandchild care provision and mental health (depression, quality of life, life satisfaction), while controlling for prepandemic levels of the outcome variables. Results About 10% of grandparents stopped looking after grandchildren altogether during the first 9 months of the pandemic, with 22% reporting an overall decrease in the amount of grandchild care provided. Compared to grandparents who mostly maintained unchanged their grandchild care provision, those who stopped altogether and those who mostly reduced the amount of grandchild care provided were more likely to report poorer mental health, even accounting for prepandemic health. Discussion While measures to limit physical contact and shield older people were necessary to reduce the spread of COVID-19, policymakers should acknowledge potential adverse consequences for mental health among grandparents who experienced changes in their roles as grandchild caregivers.

ObjectivesWe investigated associations between multiple sociodemographic characteristics (sex, age, occupational social class, education and ethnicity) and self-reported healthcare disruptions during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic.DesignCoordinated analysis of prospective population surveys.SettingCommunity-dwelling participants in the UK between April 2020 and January 2021.ParticipantsOver 68 000 participants from 12 longitudinal studies.OutcomesSelf-reported healthcare disruption to medication access, procedures and appointments.ResultsPrevalence of healthcare disruption varied substantially across studies: between 6% and 32% reported any disruption, with 1%–10% experiencing disruptions in medication, 1%–17% experiencing disruption in procedures and 4%–28% experiencing disruption in clinical appointments. Females (OR 1.27; 95% CI 1.15 to 1.40; I2=54%), older persons (eg, OR 1.39; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.72; I2=77% for 65–75 years vs 45–54 years) and ethnic minorities (excluding white minorities) (OR 1.19; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.35; I2=0% vs white) were more likely to report healthcare disruptions. Those in a more disadvantaged social class were also more likely to report healthcare disruptions (eg, OR 1.17; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.27; I2=0% for manual/routine vs managerial/professional), but no clear differences were observed by education. We did not find evidence that these associations differed by shielding status.ConclusionsHealthcare disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic could contribute to the maintenance or widening of existing health inequalities.

BackgroundHome working rates have increased since the COVID-19 pandemic’s onset, but the health implications of this transformation are unclear. We assessed the association between home working and social and mental wellbeing through harmonised analyses of seven UK longitudinal studies.MethodsWe estimated associations between home working and measures of psychological distress, low life satisfaction, poor self-rated health, low social contact, and loneliness across three different stages of the COVID-19 pandemic (T1= Apr-Jun 2020 – first lockdown, T2=Jul-Oct 2020 – eased restrictions, T3=Nov 2020-Mar 2021 – second lockdown), in seven population-based cohort studies using modified Poisson regression and meta-analyses to pool results across studies.FindingsAmong 34,131 observations spread over three time points, we found higher rates of home working at T1 and T3 compared with T2, reflecting lockdown periods. Home working was not associated with psychological distress at T1 (RR=0.92, 95%CI=0.79-1.08) or T2 (RR=0.99, 95%CI=0.88-1.11), but a detrimental association was found with psychological distress at T3 (RR=1.17, 95%CI=1.05-1.30). Poorer psychological distress associated with home working was observed for those educated to below degree level at T2 and T3. Men working from home reported poorer self-reported health at T2.InterpretationNo clear evidence of an association between home working and mental wellbeing was found, apart from greater risk of psychological distress associated with home working during the second lockdown, but differences across sub-groups may exist. Longer term shifts to home working might not have adverse impacts on population wellbeing in the absence of pandemic restrictions but further monitoring of health inequalities is required.FundingNational Core Studies, funded by UKRI, NIHR and the Health and Safety Executive.

Despite growing interest in young adult carers, little is known about trends in prevalence of caregiving among young adults aged 16-29. Also, few studies have so far investigated demographic, health, and socioeconomic inequalities in the duration of care among young carers as well as demographic differences in caregiving characteristics. Using data from 11 waves of the nationally-representative UK Household Longitudinal Study (2009-2021), we first estimated the prevalence of caregiving among 16-29 years-old adults at each wave. Results show that about 9% of those aged 16-29 provided care, and that this prevalence remained stable throughout the 2010s. Then, selecting respondents who participated for three waves of more, we assessed demographic, socioeconomic, and health characteristics associated with duration of care using ordinal regression models. Almost 52% of carers cared at two or more waves. Compared to non-carers, those who cared had more disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds, were from ethnic minorities and reported poorer health, particularly if they cared at two or more waves. Finally, focusing on carers, we tested differences by gender, age, and urbanicity in care relationships, intensity, and duration. Overall, women and those aged 25-29 cared for longer hours, for more people, and for more years than men and younger carers respectively. Put together, these findings provide an up-to-date description of young carers in the 2010s in the UK.

Despite growing interest in young adult carers, little is known about trends in prevalence of caregiving among young adults aged 16–29. Furthermore, few studies have so far investigated demographic, health, and socioeconomic inequalities in the duration of care among young carers as well as demographic differences in caregiving characteristics. Using data from 11 waves of the nationally representative UK Household Longitudinal Study (2009–2021), we first estimated the prevalence of caregiving among 16–29 years-old adults at each wave. Results show that about 9% of those aged 16–29 provided care, and that this prevalence remained stable throughout the 2010s. Then, selecting respondents who participated for three waves of more, we assessed demographic, socioeconomic, and health characteristics associated with duration of care using ordinal regression models. Almost 52% of carers cared at two or more waves. Compared to non-carers, those who cared had more disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds, were from ethnic minorities and reported poorer health, particularly if they cared at two or more waves. Finally, focusing on carers, we tested differences by sex, age, and urbanicity in care relationships, intensity, and duration. Overall, women and those aged 25–29 cared for longer hours, for more people, and for more years than men and younger carers respectively. Put together, these findings provide an up-to-date description of young carers in the 2010s in the UK.

Grandparents play a vital role in providing childcare to families. Qualitative research and evidence from parents raise concerns that it is grandparents who are socio-economically disadvantaged who provide grandchild care more regularly, perform more intensive tasks, and care out of financial necessity. However, no European studies have investigated these issues at population level. This study is based on grandparents aged 50+ who looked after grandchildren. Data are from wave 8 of the nationally representative English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (2016/2017). We exploit newly collected information on frequency of grandchild care, activities, and reasons for care. Using multinomial regressions, we first examined the extent to which grandparents' socio-economic characteristics (wealth and education) are associated with frequency of grandchild care. Second, using logistic regressions, we investigated whether wealth and education are associated with activities and reasons for grandchild care. Overall, grandparents from disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds were more likely to provide more regular childcare. Similarly, grandparents in the lowest wealth quartile were more involved in hands-on activities (cooking, taking/collecting grandchildren to/from school), whereas highly educated grandparents were more likely to help grandchildren with homework. Finally, better-off grandparents were more likely to look after grandchildren to help parents and provide emotional support and less likely to report difficulty in refusing to provide care. Our findings show that grandparental childcare varies by socio-economic status with more intensive childcare activities falling disproportionately on those with fewer resources, and this may act to exacerbate existing socio-economic inequalities in later life.The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10433-021-00675-x.

BackgroundPeople with specific health profiles and diseases (such as diabetes, lung and heart conditions) have been classified as ‘clinically vulnerable’ (CV) to COVID-19, that is, at higher risk of severe illness and mortality from COVID-19, and were targeted for shielding. However, there is as yet little evidence on how the pandemic and shielding impacted the health and social well-being of CV older people.MethodsWe used data from wave 9 (2018/2019) and the first COVID-19 substudy (June/July 2020) of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. Using logistic and linear regression models, we investigated associations between being CV and health and social well-being during the pandemic, while controlling for prepandemic levels of the outcome variables. We also explored the interactions between CV and age group (50s, 60s, 70s, 80+), and between CV and shielding.ResultsCV people were more likely to report worse health and social well-being outcomes during the pandemic, even taking into account prepandemic differences. However, changes in health were not uniform across different age groups, and CV respondents were generally at greater risks of deterioration in health and social well-being compared with those not CV in the same age group. CV respondents who were shielding reported worse outcomes compared with those not CV and not shielding.ConclusionsWhile policies focusing on shielding CV older people reduce rates of hospitalisation and death from COVID-19, policymakers should also pay attention to understanding and addressing the wider needs of this group if their long-term health and social well-being are not to be compromised.

Most research on the effects of caring has focused on older spouses or working-age carers providing care for older people, but providing care in early adulthood may have longer-term consequences, given the importance of this life stage for educational and employment transitions. This study aims to investigate the impact of informal care in early adulthood on educational attainment and employment in the UK and to test whether these associations differ by gender or socio-economic circumstances. Data are from young adults (age 16-29 at first interview, n=27,209) in the UK Household Longitudinal Study wave 1 (2009/11) to wave 10 (2018/2020). Carers are those who provide informal care either inside or outside the household. We also considered six additional aspects of caring, including weekly hours spent caring, number of people cared for, relationship to care recipient, place of care, age at which caring is first observed, and duration of care. Cox regression was used to analyse the association between caring and educational qualifications and employment transitions. We found that young adult carers were less likely to obtain a university degree and enter employment compared to young adults who did not provide care. In terms of care characteristics, weekly hours spent caring were negatively associated with the likelihood of obtaining a university degree qualification and being employed. Providing care after full-time education age negatively influenced employment entry, but having a university degree buffered the negative influence of providing care on entering employment. The influence on unemployment may be stronger for female carers than for male carers. Our results highlight the importance of supporting the needs of young adults who are providing informal care while making key life course transitions.

Older people caring at home or in the community play a vital role in supporting population health and wellbeing and in protecting health and care systems, often at cost to their own health. Yet there has been very little research or policy attention given to this group of carers during the pandemic. Exploiting longitudinal data from Wave 9 (2018/19) and the first two COVID-19 sub-studies (June/July 2020; November/December 2020) of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, we use logistic and linear regression models to investigate associations between changes in provision of informal care and mental health during the pandemic, controlling for socio-demographic characteristics, pre-pandemic physical and mental health, and social isolation measures. During the first months of the pandemic, about a quarter of older people provided informal care (with ~10% caring for members living in the same household). Those caring in the household experience worse mental health during the pandemic. Even controlling for prior characteristics and lack of social interactions, those caring for family members in the household had higher odds of reporting elevated depressive symptoms (OR=1.67, 95%CI=1.07;2.62), poor self-rated health (OR=1.73, 95%CI=1.09;2.73), anxiety (OR=2.21, 95%CI=1.20;4.06) as well as lower quality of life (B=-0.85, 95%CI=-1.66;-0.05) and life satisfaction (B=-0.43; 95%CI=-0.78;-0.09) than those who were caring for friends and family outside the household. As we aim to build back society and restore the wellbeing of our populations, policies and services should be better directed to support those people who during the pandemic struggled to cope while caring for their family members.

This article studies mothers’ employment transitions around childbirth. It argues that leaving employment around childbirth and returning after an interruption might depend on multiple influences: the micro-context of individual and household characteristics, the meso-context of women’s jobs and the macro-context of broader cultural and institutional factors. This conceptual model is tested using data from the Italian Institute of Statistics (ISTAT) ‘Family and Social Subjects (2009)’ survey. The findings confirm that mothers’ transitions out of employment are shaped by micro-characteristics such as education, meso-characteristics such as status and security of prior jobs, and macro geographical and temporal factors. Subsequent returns to employment also reflect micro and macro influences, as mothers born before 1950, with low education, and large families are less likely to return; but they seem less dependent upon prior job characteristics. The research highlights the importance of considering multiple levels of influence to understand the enabling factors of maternal employment. Publisher PDF

SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels can be used to assess humoral immune responses following SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination, and may predict risk of future infection. From cross-sectional antibody testing of 9,361 individuals from TwinsUK and ALSPAC UK population-based longitudinal studies (jointly in April-May 2021, and TwinsUK only in November 2021-January 2022), we tested associations between antibody levels following vaccination and: (1) SARS-CoV-2 infection following vaccination(s); (2) health, socio-demographic, SARS-CoV-2 infection and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination variables.Within TwinsUK, single-vaccinated individuals with the lowest 20% of anti-Spike antibody levels at initial testing had 3-fold greater odds of SARS-CoV-2 infection over the next six to nine months, compared to the top 20%. In TwinsUK and ALSPAC, individuals identified as at increased risk of COVID-19 complication through the UK “Shielded Patient List” had consistently greater odds (2 to 4-fold) of having antibody levels in the lowest 10%. Third vaccination increased absolute antibody levels for almost all individuals, and reduced relative disparities compared with earlier vaccinations.These findings quantify the association between antibody level and risk of subsequent infection, and support a policy of triple vaccination for the generation of protective antibodies.Lay summaryIn this study, we analysed blood samples from 9,361 participants from two studies in the UK: an adult twin registry, TwinsUK (4,739 individuals); and the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, ALSPAC (4,622 individuals). We did this work as part of the UK Government National Core Studies initiative researching COVID-19. We measured blood antibodies which are specific to SARS-CoV-2 (which causes COVID-19). Having a third COVID-19 vaccination boosted antibody levels. More than 90% of people from TwinsUK had levels after third vaccination that were greater than the average level after second vaccination. Importantly, this was the case even in individuals on the UK “Shielded Patient List”. We found that people with lower antibody levels after first vaccination were more likely to report having COVID-19 later on, compared to people with higher antibody levels. People on the UK “Shielded Patient List”, and individuals who reported that they had poorer general health, were more likely to have lower antibody levels after vaccination. In contrast, people who had had a previous COVID-19 infection were more likely to have higher antibody levels following vaccination compared to people without infection. People receiving the Oxford/AstraZeneca rather than the Pfizer BioNTech vaccine had lower antibody levels after one or two vaccinations. However, after a third vaccination, there was no difference in antibody levels between those who had Oxford/AstraZeneca and Pfizer BioNTech vaccines for their first two doses. These findings support having a third COVID-19 vaccination to boost antibodies.

Background: Grandparents play a vital role in providing childcare to families. However, little is known about when grandmothers and grandfathers look after grandchildren, what they do with them, and why. Objective: Using novel questions on grandparenting, we first describe the periodicity of grandchild care, activities undertaken with/for grandchildren, and motivations for such care to then assess if there are gender differences. Methods: We used wave 8 (2016/17) of the nationally-representative English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. The extent to which the periodicity, activities, and motivations are gendered was assessed using logistic regressions. Analyses were carried out on the entire sample of grandparents who provide childcare as well as on coresiding grandparent couples where both grandparents provide grandchild care. Results: More than 50% of grandparents looked after grandchildren, with the majority doing so throughout the year and about one in four during school holidays. Few gender differences were observed in the periodicity of grandchild care and reasons for looking after grandchildren, with almost two-thirds reporting that they wanted to help parents go to work and give them a break. However, when activities undertaken for/with grandchildren were analysed, clear gender differences emerged. Overall, grandmothers were more likely to report caring and helping activities (e.g., cooking, caring when sick, helping with homework, and collecting them from school) than grandfathers, even when they coresided. Contribution: Our study is the first to document, at a population level, gender differences in the periodicity of grandchild care, what grandparents do when they look after grandchildren, and why they provide such care.

Grandparents play an important role in their family’s lives. However, little is known about the demography of grandparenthood. Given dramatic recent changes in fertility, we explore the role of number of children and age at first birth in the timing of the transition into grandparenthood focusing on Italy, a country with well-known North-South fertility differentials. We used data from the 2009 Italian Survey ‘Family and Social Relations’ (N = 10,186) to estimate median ages of grandparenthood across three birth cohorts of parents (1920–29; 1930–39; 1940–49). Findings show an overall postponement of age of grandparenthood of 5 years, shifting for women from early to mid- or late-50s (in the South and North, respectively). Such postponement is largely driven by family compositional changes: although the age of grandparenthood among mothers of three or more children has not changed much over cohorts, the percentage of mothers with such characteristic decreased significantly. The heterogeneity in experiencing the transition to grandparenthood has implications for intergenerational transfers and other roles in later life.

Many countries have implemented policies to extend working lives in response to population ageing, yet there remains little understanding of what drives paid work in later life, nor how this is changing over time. This paper utilises the 1988/89 Survey of Retirement and Retirement Plans, the 1999 British Household Panel Survey and the 2008 English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, to investigate drivers of paid work in the ten years surrounding state pension age (SPA) for women and men in, comparing cohorts born in the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s. Using optimal matching analysis with logistic and multinomial regression models, the study assesses the relative importance of lifecourse histories, socio-economic circumstances and contemporaneous factors, in determining paid work in mid- and later life. Participation in paid work in the five years preceding and beyond SPA increased markedly for men and women across cohorts, with women's lifecourses and engagement with paid work changing considerably in these periods. However, for women, a lifetime history of paid work remained a crucially important predictor of paid work in later life, and this relationship has strengthened over time. Experiencing divorce has also become an important driver of paid work around SPA for the youngest cohort. Having children later, and still having a mortgage, also independently predict labour force participation for women and men. Across all cohorts and for women and men, working at these older ages was a function of higher income and better health. These findings suggest that policies which enable people to maintain ties to paid work across the lifecourse may be more effective at encouraging later-life employment than those concerned only with postponing the retirement transition.

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has led to major economic disruptions. In March 2020, the UK implemented the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme – known as furlough – to minimize the impact of job losses. We investigate associations between change in employment status and mental and social wellbeing during the early stages of the pandemic.MethodsData were from 25,670 respondents, aged 17 to 66, across nine UK longitudinal studies. Furlough and other employment changes were defined using employment status pre-pandemic and during the first lockdown (April-June 2020). Mental and social wellbeing outcomes included psychological distress, life satisfaction, self-rated health, social contact, and loneliness. Study-specific modified Poisson regression estimates, adjusting for socio-demographic characteristics and pre-pandemic mental and social wellbeing measures, were pooled using meta-analysis.ResultsCompared to those who remained working, furloughed workers were at greater risk of psychological distress (adjusted risk ratio, ARR=1.12; 95% CI: 0.97, 1.29), low life satisfaction (ARR=1.14; 95% CI: 1.07, 1.22), loneliness (ARR=1.12; 95% CI: 1.01, 1.23), and poor self-rated health (ARR=1.26; 95% CI: 1.05, 1.50), but excess risk was less pronounced than that of those no longer employed (e.g., ARR for psychological distress=1.39; 95% CI: 1.21, 1.59) or in stable unemployment (ARR=1.33; 95% CI: 1.09, 1.62).ConclusionsDuring the early stages of the pandemic, those furloughed had increased risk for poor mental and social wellbeing. However, their excess risk was lower in magnitude than that of those who became or remained unemployed, suggesting that furlough may have partly mitigated poorer outcomes.

ObjectivesPolicies aiming at reducing rates of hospitalisation and death from COVID-19 encouraged older people to reduce physical interactions. For grandparents in England, this meant that provision of care for grandchildren was allowed only under very limited circumstances. Evidence also suggests that reduced face-to-face interactions took a toll on mental health during the pandemic. This study aims to investigate whether changes in grandchild care provision during the pandemic impacted grandparents’ mental health.MethodsUsing pre-pandemic data from Wave 9 (2018/19) and the second Covid-19 sub-study (November/December 2020) of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, we first describe changes in grandparenting since the start of the pandemic to then investigate, using regression models, associations between changes in grandparenting and mental health (depression, quality of life, life satisfaction) during the pandemic, while controlling for pre-pandemic levels of the outcome variables. Results: About 10% of grandparents stopped altogether to look after grandchildren during the pandemic, with 22% reporting an overall decrease in the amount of grandchild care provided and 20% an increase or similar levels. Compared to grandparents who mostly maintained unchanged their grandchild care provision, those who stopped altogether and those who mostly reduced the amount of grandchild care provided were more likely to report poorer mental health, even accounting for pre-pandemic health.DiscussionWhile measures to limit physical contact and shield older people were necessary to reduce the spread of COVID-19, policymakers should acknowledge potential adverse consequences for mental health among grandparents who experienced changes in their roles as grandchild caregivers.

Stay-at-home and lockdown measures during the COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on health-related behaviors which in turn posed a risk to mental health, particularly among older people. In this study, we investigated how changes to health behaviors (physical activity, sleeping, eating, and drinking) impacted mental health (depression, quality of life, and life satisfaction) during and beyond the initial phase of the COVID-19 lockdown. Using data from Wave 9 (2018/19) and two COVID-19 sub-studies (June/July 2020; November/December 2020) of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing ( N = 4989), we found that health behaviors changes during lockdown were associated with poorer mental health in June/July 2020. However, in November/December 2020, higher depression, lower quality of life, and lower life satisfaction were more likely only among respondents who reported less physical activity, eating more, changes in sleep patterns, and drinking more alcohol. Public health programs should support healthy behaviors as we emerge from the pandemic.

BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, older and clinically vulnerable people were instructed to shield or stay at home. Policies restricting social contact and human interaction pose a risk to mental health, but we know very little about the impact of shielding and stay-at-home orders on the mental health of older people.AimsTo understand the extent to which shielding contributes to poorer mental health.MethodWe used longitudinal data from wave 9 (2018/2019) and two COVID-19 sub-studies (June/July 2020; November/December 2020) of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, and constructed logistic and linear regression models to investigate associations between patterns of shielding during the pandemic and mental health, controlling for sociodemographic characteristics, pre-pandemic physical and mental health, and social isolation measures.ResultsBy December 2020, 70% of older people were still shielding or staying at home, with 5% shielding throughout the first 9 months of the pandemic. Respondents who shielded experienced worse mental health. Although prior characteristics and lack of social interactions explain some of this association, even controlling for all covariates, those shielding throughout had higher odds of reporting elevated depressive symptoms (odds ratio 1.87, 95% CI 1.22–2.87) and lower quality of life (β = −1.28, 95% CI −2.04 to −0.52) than those who neither shielded nor stayed at home. Shielding was also associated with increased anxiety.ConclusionsShielding seems associated with worse mental health among older people, highlighting the need for policy makers to address the mental health needs of those who shielded, both in the current pandemic and for the future.

BackgroundDisruptions to employment status can impact smoking and alcohol consumption. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the UK implemented a furlough scheme to prevent job loss. We examine how furlough was associated with participants’ smoking, vaping and alcohol consumption behaviours in the early stages of the pandemic.MethodsData were from 27,841 participants in eight UK adult longitudinal surveys. Participants self-reported employment status and current smoking, current vaping and drinking alcohol (>4 days/week or 5+ drinks per typical occasion) both before and during the pandemic (April-July 2020). Risk ratios were estimated within each study using modified Poisson regression, adjusting for a range of potential confounders, including pre-pandemic behaviour. Findings were synthesised using random effects meta-analysis. Sub-group analyses were used to identify whether associations differed by gender, age or education.ResultsCompared to stable employment, neither furlough, no longer being employed, nor stable unemployment were associated with smoking, vaping or drinking, following adjustment for pre-pandemic characteristics. However, some sex differences in these associations were observed, with stable unemployment associated with smoking for women (ARR=1.35; 95% CI: 1.00-1.82; I2: 47%) but not men (0.84; 95% CI: 0.67-1.05; I2: 0%). No longer being employed was associated with vaping among women (ARR=2.74; 95% CI: 1.59-4.72; I2: 0%) but not men (ARR=1.25; 95% CI: 0.83-1.87; I2: 0%). There was little indication of associations with drinking differing by age, gender or education.ConclusionsWe found no clear evidence of furlough or unemployment having adverse impacts on smoking, vaping or drinking behaviours during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK, with differences in risk compared to those who remained employed largely explained by pre-pandemic characteristics.

ImportanceHow population mental health has evolved across the COVID-19 pandemic under varied lockdown measures is poorly understood, with impacts on health inequalities unclear.ObjectiveWe investigated changes in mental health and sociodemographic inequalities from before and across the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in 11 longitudinal studies.Design, Setting and ParticipantsData from 11 UK longitudinal population-based studies with pre-pandemic measures of psychological distress were jointly analysed and estimates pooled. Multi-level regression was used to examine changes in psychological distress from pre-pandemic to during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.ExposuresTrends in the prevalence of poor mental health were assessed pre-pandemic (TP0) and at three pandemic time periods: initial lockdown (TP1, Mar-June 20); easing of restrictions (TP2, July-Oct 20); and a subsequent lockdown (TP3, Nov 20-Mar 21). We stratified analyses by sex, ethnicity, education, age, and UK country.Main Outcomes and MeasuresPsychological distress was assessed using the General Health Questionnaire 12 (GHQ-12), Kessler-6, 9-item Malaise Inventory, Short Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (SMFQ), Patient Health Questionnaire-8 and 9 (PHQ-8/9), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and Centre for Epidemiological Studies – Depression (CES-D), across different studies.ResultsIn total, 49,993 adult participants (61.2% female; 8.7% Non-White) were analysed. Across the 11 studies, mental health deteriorated from pre-pandemic scores across all three pandemic time periods, but with considerable heterogeneity across the study-specific effect sizes estimated (pooled estimate TP1 Standardised Mean Difference (SMD): 0.15 (95% CI: 0.06, 0.25); TP2 SMD: 0.18 (0.09, 0.27); TP3 SMD: 0.21 (0.10, 0.32)). Changes in psychological distress across the pandemic were higher in females (TP3 SMD: 0.23 (0.11, 0.35)) than males (TP3 SMD: 0.16 (0.06, 0.26)), and lower in below-degree level educated persons at TP3 (SMD: 0.18 (0.06, 0.30)) compared to those who held degrees (SMD: 0.26 (0.14, 0.38)). Increased psychological distress was most prominent amongst adults aged 25-34 and 35-44 years compared to other age groups. We did not find evidence of changes in distress differing by ethnicity or UK country.Conclusions and RelevanceThe substantial deterioration in mental health seen in the UK during the first lockdown did not reverse when lockdown lifted, and a sustained worsening was observed across the pandemic. Mental health declines have been unequal across the population, with females, those with higher degrees, and those aged 25-44 years more affected.

Using a sample of 4,182 UK adults aged 50 and above, this study explored the association of changes in health behaviours with weight and obesity during UK lockdown in Jun/Jul and Nov/Dec 2020. Over 30% adults reported more sitting, more TV watching or less exercise. Around 20% adults were engaged in eating more or sleeping less. More alcohol drinking happened in 12.3% adults. Results suggested that more sedentariness, more TV watching, less exercise, more eating and more alcohol drinking were associated with a significant increase in weight. Meanwhile, less sedentariness or less eating significantly reduced weight in Nov/Dec 2020. A higher risk of obesity was found in adults sitting, eating, or sleeping more than usual. Considering potential health risks associated with obesity in older population, weight management is necessary nationwide.

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted lives and livelihoods, and people already experiencing mental ill health may have been especially vulnerable.AimsQuantify mental health inequalities in disruptions to healthcare, economic activity and housing.MethodWe examined data from 59 482 participants in 12 UK longitudinal studies with data collected before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Within each study, we estimated the association between psychological distress assessed pre-pandemic and disruptions since the start of the pandemic to healthcare (medication access, procedures or appointments), economic activity (employment, income or working hours) and housing (change of address or household composition). Estimates were pooled across studies.ResultsAcross the analysed data-sets, 28% to 77% of participants experienced at least one disruption, with 2.3–33.2% experiencing disruptions in two or more domains. We found 1 s.d. higher pre-pandemic psychological distress was associated with (a) increased odds of any healthcare disruptions (odds ratio (OR) 1.30, 95% CI 1.20–1.40), with fully adjusted odds ratios ranging from 1.24 (95% CI 1.09–1.41) for disruption to procedures to 1.33 (95% CI 1.20–1.49) for disruptions to prescriptions or medication access; (b) loss of employment (odds ratio 1.13, 95% CI 1.06–1.21) and income (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.06 –1.19), and reductions in working hours/furlough (odds ratio 1.05, 95% CI 1.00–1.09) and (c) increased likelihood of experiencing a disruption in at least two domains (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.18–1.32) or in one domain (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.07–1.16), relative to no disruption. There were no associations with housing disruptions (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97–1.03).ConclusionsPeople experiencing psychological distress pre-pandemic were more likely to experience healthcare and economic disruptions, and clusters of disruptions across multiple domains during the pandemic. Failing to address these disruptions risks further widening mental health inequalities.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic with its associated virus suppression measures have disrupted many domains of life for many people. Increasingly it is recognised that negative disruptive impacts of the pandemic are not experienced equally and may exacerbate existing inequalities. People already suffering from psychological distress may have been especially vulnerable to disruptions. We investigated associations between pre-pandemic psychological distress and disruptions to healthcare, economic activity, and housing, and whether these associations were moderated by age, sex, ethnicity or education. Methods Data were from 59,482 participants in 12 UK longitudinal adult population surveys with both pre-pandemic and COVID-19 surveys. Participants self-reported disruptions since the start of the pandemic to: healthcare (medication access, procedures, or appointments); economic activity (negative changes in employment, income or working hours); and housing (change of address or household composition). These were also combined into a cumulative measure indicating how many of these three domains had been disrupted. Logistic regression models were used within each study to estimate associations between pre-pandemic standardised psychological distress scores and disruption outcomes. Analyses were weighted for sampling design and attrition, and adjusted for age, sex, education, ethnicity, and UK country. Findings were synthesised using a random effects meta-analysis with restricted maximum likelihood. Effect modification by sex, education, ethnicity and age was assessed using group-difference tests during meta-analysis. Results While exact prevalence varied between studies, pre-pandemic psychological distress was generally more common among women, ethnic minorities, younger age groups, and those with less education. One standard deviation higher psychological distress was associated with raised odds of health care disruptions (OR 1.40; 95% CI: 1.29–1.51; Heterogeneity I2: 79.4%) and with experiencing disruptions in two or more of the three domains examined (OR 1.22; 95% CI: 1.14–1.31; Heterogeneity I2: 75.8%), but not specifically with disruptions to economic activity (OR 1.03; 95% CI: 0.95–1.13; Heterogeneity I2: 89.5%) or housing (OR 1.00; 95% CI: 0.97–1.03; Heterogeneity I2: 0.0%). We did not find evidence of these associations differing by sex, ethnicity, education, or age group. Conclusion Those suffering from psychological distress before the pandemic have been more likely to experience healthcare disruptions during the pandemic, and clusters of disruptions across multiple life domains. Individuals suffering from distress may need additional support to manage these disruptions, especially in relation to healthcare. Otherwise, considering psychological distress was already unequally distributed, the pandemic may exacerbate existing inequalities related to gender, ethnicity, education and age.

Levels of coresidence, residential proximity, face-to-face contacts and intergenerational support exchanges remain overall high and stable across European countries. However, to date, few studies have focused on trends in grandparent-grandchild relations. Therefore, this study aims to investigate whether and to what extent grandparent-grandchild exchanges have changed over time. We used data from the Italian Family and Social Subjects (FSS) Surveys, covering the years 1998-2016, and considered three different currencies of exchanges between grandparents and their grandchildren (coresidence, face-to-face contacts, and grandchild care provision). Our results showed stability over time in coresidence, a small reduction in daily contacts (from 47% in 1998 to 39% in 2016) and an increase in grandchildren care (from 78% in 1998 to 82% in 2016). Also, we found little changes in the associations between such indicators of intergenerational exchanges and the demographic and socio-economic determinants usually used to explain them. Despite changes among Italian grandparents such as increases in their age profile, in education, and in marital disruption, the relations between grandparents and their grandchildren have so far remained stable over time, with generally high levels of intergenerational exchanges.

The impact of long COVID is increasingly recognised, but risk factors are poorly characterised. We analysed questionnaire data on symptom duration from 10 longitudinal study (LS) samples and electronic healthcare records (EHR) to investigate sociodemographic and health risk factors associated with long COVID, as part of the UK National Core Study for Longitudinal Health and Wellbeing.MethodsAnalysis was conducted on 6,899 adults self-reporting COVID-19 from 45,096 participants of the UK LS, and on 3,327 cases assigned a long COVID code in primary care EHR out of 1,199,812 adults diagnosed with acute COVID-19. In LS, we derived two outcomes: symptoms lasting 4+ weeks and symptoms lasting 12+ weeks. Associations of potential risk factors (age, sex, ethnicity, socioeconomic factors, smoking, general and mental health, overweight/obesity, diabetes, hypertension, hypercholesterolaemia, and asthma) with these two outcomes were assessed, using logistic regression, with meta-analyses of findings presented alongside equivalent results from EHR analyses.ResultsFunctionally limiting long COVID for 12+ weeks affected between 1.2% (age 20), and 4.8% (age 63) of people reporting COVID-19 in LS. The proportion reporting symptoms overall for 12+ weeks ranged from 7.8 (mean age 28) to 17% (mean age 58) and for 4+ weeks 4.2% (age 20) to 33.1% (age 56). Age was associated with a linear increase in long COVID between age 20-70. Being female (LS: OR=1.49; 95%CI:1.24-1.79; EHR: OR=1.51 [1.41-1.61]), poor pre-pandemic mental health (LS: OR=1.46 [1.17-1.83]; EHR: OR=1.57 [1.47-1.68]) and poor general health (LS: OR=1.62 [1.25-2.09]; EHR: OR=1.26; [1.18-1.35]) were associated with higher risk of long COVID. Individuals with asthma also had higher risk (LS: OR=1.32 [1.07-1.62]; EHR: OR=1.56 [1.46-1.67]), as did those categorised as overweight or obese (LS: OR=1.25 [1.01-1.55]; EHR: OR=1.31 [1.21-1.42]) though associations for symptoms lasting 12+ weeks were less pronounced. Non-white ethnic minority groups had lower 4+ week symptom risk (LS: OR=0.32 [0.22-0.47]), a finding consistent in EHR. Associations were not observed for other risk factors. Few participants in the studies had been admitted to hospital (0.8-5.2%).ConclusionsLong COVID is clearly distributed differentially according to several sociodemographic and pre-existing health factors. Establishing which of these risk factors are causal and predisposing is necessary to further inform strategies for preventing and treating long COVID.

BackgroundHealth systems worldwide have faced major disruptions due to COVID-19 which could exacerbate health inequalities. The UK National Health Service (NHS) provides free healthcare and prioritises equity of delivery, but the pandemic may be hindering the achievement of these goals. We investigated associations between multiple social characteristics (sex, age, occupational social class, education and ethnicity) and self-reported healthcare disruptions in over 65,000 participants across twelve UK longitudinal studies.MethodsParticipants reported disruptions from March 2020 up to late January 2021. Associations between social characteristics and three types of self-reported healthcare disruption (medication access, procedures, appointments) and a composite of any of these were assessed in logistic regression models, adjusting for age, sex and ethnicity where relevant. Random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to obtain pooled estimates.ResultsPrevalence of disruption varied across studies; between 6.4% (TwinsUK) and 31.8 % (Understanding Society) of study participants reported any disruption. Females (Odd Ratio (OR): 1.27 [95%CI: 1.15,1.40]; I2=53%), older persons (e.g. OR: 1.39 [1.13,1.72]; I2=77% for 65-75y vs 45-54y), and Ethnic minorities (excluding White minorities) (OR: 1.19 [1.05,1.35]; I2=0% vs White) were more likely to report healthcare disruptions. Those in a more disadvantaged social class (e.g. OR: 1.17 [1.08, 1.27]; I2=0% for manual/routine vs managerial/professional) were also more likely to report healthcare disruptions, but no clear differences were observed by education levels.ConclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic has led to unequal healthcare disruptions, which, if unaddressed, could contribute to the maintenance or widening of existing health inequalities.

BackgroundIn March 2020 the UK implemented the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (furlough) to minimize job losses. Our aim was to investigate associations between furlough and diet, physical activity, and sleep during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe analysed data from 25,092 participants aged 16 to 66 years from eight UK longitudinal studies. Changes in employment (including being furloughed) were defined by comparing employment status pre- and during the first lockdown. Health behaviours included fruit and vegetable consumption, physical activity, and sleeping patterns. Study-specific estimates obtained using modified Poisson regression, adjusting for socio-demographic characteristics and pre-pandemic health and health behaviours, were statistically pooled using random effects meta-analysis. Associations were also stratified by sex, age, and education.ResultsAcross studies, between 8 and 25% of participants were furloughed. Compared to those who remained working, furloughed workers were slightly less likely to be physically inactive (RR:0.85, [0.75-0.97], I2=59%) and did not differ in diet and sleep behaviours, although findings for sleep were heterogenous (I2=85%). In stratified analyses, furlough was associated with low fruit and vegetable consumption among males (RR=1.11; 95%CI: 1.01-1.22; I2: 0%) but not females (RR=0.84; 95%CI: 0.68-1.04; I2: 65%). Considering change in these health behaviours, furloughed workers were more likely than those who remained working to report increased fruit and vegetable consumption, exercise, and hours of sleep.ConclusionsThose furloughed exhibited broadly similar levels of health behaviours to those who remained in employment during the initial stages of the pandemic. There was little evidence to suggest that such social protection policies if used in the post-pandemic recovery period and during future economic crises would have adverse impacts on population health behaviours.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic and its associated virus suppression measures have disrupted lives and livelihoods, potentially exacerbating inequalities. People already experiencing mental ill-health may have been especially vulnerable to disruptions. Aim Investigate associations between pre-pandemic psychological distress and disruptions during the pandemic to (1) healthcare, economic activity, and housing, (2) cumulative disruptions and 3) whether these differ by age, sex, ethnicity or education. Methods Data were from 59,482 participants in 12 UK longitudinal adult population surveys with data collected both prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants self-reported disruptions since the start of the pandemic to: healthcare (medication access, procedures, or appointments); economic activity (negative changes in employment, income or working hours); and housing (change of address or household composition). Logistic regression models were used within each study to estimate associations between pre-pandemic psychological distress scores and disruption outcomes. Findings were synthesised using a random effects meta-analysis with restricted maximum likelihood. Results Between one to two-thirds of study participants experienced at least one disruption during the pandemic, with 2.3-33.2% experiencing disruptions in 2 or more of the 3 domains examined. One standard deviation higher pre-pandemic psychological distress was associated with: (i) increased odds of any healthcare disruptions (OR=1.30; 95% CI: 1.20 to 1.40) with fully adjusted ORs ranging from 1.33 [1.20 to 1.49] for disruptions to prescriptions or medication access and 1.24 [1.09 to 1.41] for disruption to procedures; (ii) loss of employment (OR=1.13 [1.06 to 1.21]) and income (OR=1.12 [1.06 to 1.19]) and reductions in working hours/furlough (OR=1.05 [1.00 to 1.09]); (iii) no associations with housing disruptions (OR=1.00 [0.97 to 1.03]); and (iv) increased likelihood of experiencing a disruption in at least two domains (OR=1.25 [1.18 to 1.32]) or in one domain (OR=1.11 [1.07 to 1.16]) relative to experiencing no disruption. We did not find evidence of these associations differing by sex, ethnicity, education level, or age. Conclusion Those suffering from psychological distress before the pandemic were more likely to experience healthcare disruptions, economic disruptions related to unemployment and loss of income, and to clusters of disruptions across multiple domains during the pandemic. Considering mental ill-health was already unequally distributed in the UK population, the pandemic may exacerbate existing mental health inequalities. Individuals with poor mental health may need additional support to manage these pandemic-associated disruptions.

Levels of coresidence, residential proximity, face-to-face contacts and intergenerational support exchanges remain overall high and stable across European countries. However, to date, few studies have focused on trends in grandparent–grandchild relations. Therefore, this study aims to investigate whether and to what extent grandparent–grandchild exchanges have changed over time. We used data from the ItalianFamily and Social Subjects(FSS) Surveys, covering the years 1998–2016, and considered three different currencies of exchanges between grandparents and their grandchildren (coresidence, face-to-face contacts, and grandchild care provision). Our results showed stability over time in coresidence, a small reduction in daily contacts (from 47% in 1998 to 39% in 2016) and an increase in grandchildren care (from 78% in 1998 to 82% in 2016). In addition, we found little changes in the associations between such indicators of intergenerational exchanges and the demographic and socio-economic determinants usually used to explain them. Despite changes among Italian grandparents such as increases in their age profile, in education, and in marital disruption, the relations between grandparents and their grandchildren have so far remained stable over time, with generally high levels of intergenerational exchanges.

Importance How population mental health has evolved across the COVID-19 pandemic under varied lockdown measures is poorly understood, and the consequences for health inequalities are unclear.Objective To investigate changes in mental health and sociodemographic inequalities from before and across the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in 11 longitudinal studies.Design, Setting, and Participants This cohort study included adult participants from 11 UK longitudinal population-based studies with prepandemic measures of psychological distress. Analyses were coordinated across these studies, and estimates were pooled. Data were collected from 2006 to 2021.Exposures Trends in the prevalence of poor mental health were assessed in the prepandemic period (time period 0 [TP 0]) and at 3 pandemic TPs: 1, initial lockdown (March to June 2020); 2, easing of restrictions (July to October 2020); and 3, a subsequent lockdown (November 2020 to March 2021). Analyses were stratified by sex, race and ethnicity, education, age, and UK country.Main Outcomes and Measures Multilevel regression was used to examine changes in psychological distress from the prepandemic period across the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychological distress was assessed using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire, the Kessler 6, the 9-item Malaise Inventory, the Short Mood and Feelings Questionnaire, the 8-item or 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and the Centre for Epidemiological Studies–Depression across different studies.Results In total, 49 993 adult participants (12 323 [24.6%] aged 55-64 years; 32 741 [61.2%] women; 4960 [8.7%] racial and ethnic minority) were analyzed. Across the 11 studies, mental health deteriorated from prepandemic scores across all 3 pandemic periods, but there was considerable heterogeneity across the study-specific estimated effect sizes (pooled estimate for TP 1: standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.15; 95% CI, 0.06-0.25; TP 2: SMD, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.09-0.27; TP 3: SMD, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.10-0.32). Changes in psychological distress across the pandemic were higher in women (TP 3: SMD, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.11, 0.35) than men (TP 3: SMD, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.06-0.26) and lower in individuals with below–degree level education at TP 3 (SMD, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.06-0.30) compared with those who held degrees (SMD, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.14-0.38). Increased psychological distress was most prominent among adults aged 25 to 34 years (SMD, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.14-0.84) and 35 to 44 years (SMD, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.10-0.60) compared with other age groups. No evidence of changes in distress differing by race and ethnicity or UK country were observed.Conclusions and Relevance In this study, the substantial deterioration in mental health seen in the UK during the first lockdown did not reverse when lockdown lifted, and a sustained worsening was observed across the pandemic period. Mental health declines have been unequal across the population, with women, those with higher degrees, and those aged 25 to 44 years more affected than other groups.