Interpersonal style, a key component of personality and personality disorder, has emerged as an important characteristic that is relevant to aggressive behavior by patients in psychiatric hospitals. However, studies examining the relationship between interpersonal style and aggression have thus far only been conducted with patients with personality disorder and/or mild and stable symptoms of mental illness. This study explored the relative importance of patients' interpersonal style, psychiatric symptoms, and perceptions of staff coercion on aggression and self-harm during acute psychiatric hospitalization. One hundred and fifty-two patients (M = 38.32 years, SD = 12.06; 56.8% males and 43.2% females) admitted for short-term assessment and treatment to the acute units of a civil and a forensic psychiatric hospital were administered the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, Impact Message Inventory, and MacArthur Admission Experience Survey. Participants' files were reviewed and nursing staff were interviewed at the end of each patient's hospital stay to determine whether participants had self-harmed or acted aggressively towards others. Initial univariate analyses showed that thought disorder and dominant and hostile-dominant interpersonal styles predicted aggression. Using multiple regression and controlling for gender and age, only a hostile-dominant interpersonal style predicted aggression (β = .258, p < .05). No factors were significantly related to self-harm. These results suggest that measures of interpersonal style are sensitive to those aspects of interpersonal functioning that are critical to patient's responses to the demands of psychiatric in-patient treatment. Procedures to assess risk and engage and manage potentially aggressive patients, including limit-setting styles and de-escalation strategies, should take into account the interpersonal style of patients and the interpersonal behavior of staff.

Women are predicted to be disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic due to increased carer responsibilities, loss of income, worry about the virus and a predominantly female healthcare workforce. Whilst there is emerging evidence that negative mental health impacts associated with the COVID-19 pandemic may be more pronounced for women than men, less attention has focussed on changes to health behaviours and health seeking experienced by women. Similarly, the impact of the pandemic in rural areas has not been investigated in detail. Our research questions were ‘have females residing in rural areas experienced changes in alcohol consumption, unhealthy food consumption, smoking, exercise or health seeking during the COVID-19 pandemic?’ and ‘are there differences in health behaviour changes between rural females living with or without children?’. Net increases (scale of 0–1) in consumption of unhealthy food (95% CI 0.05, 0.22) and alcohol (95% CI 0.12, 0.29) were observed. Net decreases (scale of −1 to 0) in visits to the doctor (95% CI −0.23, −0.35) and other health professionals (95% CI −0.40, −0.54) were observed. Compared with females living without children, females who lived with children were significantly associated with increased alcohol consumption (OR 2.4 (95% CI 1.4, 4.1), decreased visits to the doctor (OR 1.9 (95% CI 1.1, 3.2) and decreased visits to other health professionals (OR 1.9 (95% CI 1.1, 3.3). Results suggest that public health approaches may be required to support females residing in rural areas to optimise their health behaviours during the pandemic, particularly for those living with children. Policies must be gender responsive to counteract worsening health and social inequities both during and after the pandemic.

Changes in health-seeking behaviours and challenges in accessing care have been reported during the COVID-19 pandemic. This qualitative study examines Australian experiences related to healthcare access during the early months of the pandemic. The study aimed to identify key areas of concern as well as opportunities for services to prevent, manage and treat health concerns when normal access was disrupted. Fifty-nine semi-structured interviews were analysed. Participants were interviewed between August and December in 2020 over telephone or Zoom and were located across Australia. Rapid identification of themes with an audio recordings technique was used to generate themes from the data. Participants described a variety of influences on their health-seeking behaviours, resulting in decisions to delay care or being unable to reach care. Many individuals accessed health services via telehealth and offered a range of perceptions and views on its effectiveness and appropriateness. The findings illustrate that maintenance of health and access to healthcare and psychosocial support were compromised for some individuals, leading to negative impacts on both mental and physical health. This highlights the need to provide mechanisms to facilitate a person’s ability to access care in a timely manner during a pandemic.

Objective To investigate students' perceptions of the impact of coronavirus SARS‐CoV‐2 on rural and remote placements facilitated by 16 University Departments of Rural Health in Australia in 2020. Design A mixed‐method design comprising an online survey and semi‐structured interviews. Setting Australia. Participants Allied health, nursing and medical students with a planned University Departments of Rural Health‐facilitated rural or remote placement between February and October 2020. Intervention A planned rural or remote placement in 2020 facilitated by a University Departments of Rural Health, regardless of placement outcome. Main outcome measures Questionnaire included placement outcome (completed or not), discipline of study (nursing, allied health, medicine), and Likert measures of impact to placement (including supervision, placement tasks, location, accommodation, client contact and student learning) and placement experience (overall, support, supervision, university support). Semi‐structured interviews asked about placement planning, outcome, decisions, experience and student perceptions. Results While coronavirus SARS‐CoV‐2 reportedly impacted on the majority of planned placements, most students (80%) were able to complete their University Departments of Rural Health‐facilitated placement in some form and were satisfied with their placement experience. Common placement changes included changes to tasks, setting, supervisors and location. Allied health students were significantly more likely to indicate that their placement had been impacted and also felt more supported by supervisors and universities than nursing students. Interview participants expressed concerns regarding the potential impact of cancelled and adapted placements on graduation and future employment. Conclusions The coronavirus SARS‐CoV‐2 pandemic was reported to impact the majority of University Departments of Rural Health‐facilitated rural and remote placements in 2020. Fortunately, most students were able to continue to undertake a rural or remote placement in some form and were largely satisfied with their placement experience. Students were concerned about their lack of clinical learning and graduating on time with adequate clinical competence.

No abstract