Mental health first aid in the workplace

A reflexive thematic analysis of UK workers’ experiences

Bibliographic Data

ID24231433
AuthorsOpeyemi Atanda (0000-0001-8820-6596, London South Bank University), Eleni Vangeli (0000-0003-4016-4520, London South Bank University), Steven D Brown (0000-0003-2880-9242, Nottingham Trent University), Patrick Callaghan (0000-0003-3175-5361, London South Bank University), Graham Durcan (0000-0001-7947-0651, Centre for Mental Health), Kerry Wood (0000-0002-8523-3182, London South Bank University), Tim Carter (0000-0001-5699-7426, University of Nottingham), Nick O’Shea (Nottingham Trent University), Sarah White (0000-0003-2468-6193, St George's, University of London), Paula Reavey (0000-0002-0903-9097, London South Bank University)
Year2026
Volume21
Issue1
Pages2706909-2706909
Publication date2026-12-31
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueInternational Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1748-2623 • E-ISSN: 1748-2631
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/17482631.2026.2706909
PMID42482327
OpenAlexW7170057785
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited34

BACKGROUND: Mental Health First Aid (MHFA) is used in workplaces to improve mental health literacy, reduce stigma, and promote help-seeking. This paper explores how employees perceive and engage with MHFA in work settings. METHODS: This qualitative study was embedded within the EMPOWER cluster randomised controlled trial (Atanda et al., 2020). Twenty-four participants, including Mental Health First Aiders, recipients of MHFA support, employees, and senior managers, took part in semi-structured interviews. Guided by a relativist epistemological position, data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.(Atanda et al., 2020). FINDINGS: Three themes were identified: (1) ambiguity surrounding the purpose of MHFA; (2) uncertainty and scepticism regarding the role and effectiveness of MHFA (subthemes: Anticipated Stigma, MHFA not addressing core concerns affecting staff well-being); and (3) risks to personal relationships following disclosure. Participants questioned the purpose, boundaries, and organisational value of MHFA, contributing to reluctance to engage. Disclosure decisions were shaped by concerns about stigma, confidentiality, and potential impacts on workplace relationships and career progression. DISCUSSION: The findings suggest MHFA is most effective when part of a broader organisational commitment to employee wellbeing. Clarifying MHFA's purpose, addressing workplace stigma, and tackling organisational sources of distress may improve engagement and strengthen mental health initiatives. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04311203. Registered on 17 March 2020, protocol published in 2020.

Confidentiality · disclosure · employee experience · employee well-being · Help-seeking · mental health first aid · Mental health literacy · Organizational commitment · Stigma · workplace mental health · workplace relationships · Mental Health Treatment and Access · Occupational Health and Burnout · Workplace Health and Well-being

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access