Article Text
PDF
Abstract
Background COVID-19 overwhelmed healthcare systems worldwide. Its impact on clinical staff is well documented, but little is known about the effects on ancillary staff (cleaners, porters and caterers).
Aim To identify the evidence of the impact of COVID-19 on ancillary staff at National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in England.
Design Systematic review and narrative synthesis.
Data sources Databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL Ultimate, APA PsycINFO, APA PsycArticles and Academic Search Ultimate). Reference lists were searched. Four independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts against inclusion criteria. Data were extracted from included papers and studies were critically assessed using relevant critical appraisal tools.
Results 8/178 studies were included, of which 5 quantitative, 2 qualitative and 1 mixed methods. Ancillary staff had higher rates of past and present COVID-19 infection. Participants felt that the work of ancillary staff had been insufficiently recognised by managers and that they had little voice within the NHS. They also experienced inequity regarding available support and safe working practices due to largely digital modes of communication which they rarely, if ever, used. In an evaluation of a personal protective equipment support ‘helper’ programme, ancillary workers were more positive about it than nurses, allied health practitioners, and doctors.
Conclusion Few studies included ancillary staff. As reported, ancillary staff at NHS hospitals had a higher prevalence of COVID-19 infection but felt marginalised and poorly supported. They valued training when offered. Additional research is needed to understand better the impact of COVID-19 on ancillary key workers, and how best to support them in future similar circumstances.
- COVID-19
Data availability statement
Data are available in a public, open access repository. All data are previously published and publicly available
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Data availability statement
Data are available in a public, open access repository. All data are previously published and publicly available
Footnotes
X @MJJohnson_HYMS
Contributors Concept SLK; Design SLK, LW, MJJ and AB; Literature search SLK; Screening, data extraction and quality appraisal SLK, MJJ, LW and AB; first draft of manuscript SLK; Critical revision and approval of final version all authors: all authors accepted full responsibility for the finished article, had access to any data and controlled the decision to publish as guarantors. The corresponding author attests that all listed authors meet authorship criteria and that no others meeting the criteria have been omitted. SLK is the guarantor.
Funding This work is part of a PhD studentship funded by the University of Hull.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.