Medium-term and peri-lockdown course of psychosocial burden during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal study on patients with pre-existing mental disorders.

While the COVID-19 pandemic continues, patients with pre-existing mental disorders are increasingly recognized as a risk group for adverse outcomes. However, data are conflicting and cover only short time spans so far. Here, we investigate the medium-term and peri-lockdown-related changes of mental health outcomes in such patients in a longitudinal study. A cohort of 159 patients comprising all major mental disorders (ICD-10 F0-F9) were interviewed twice with the Goettingen psychosocial Burden and Symptom Inventory (Goe-BSI) to evaluate psychosocial burden, psychiatric symptoms and resilience at the end of the first (April/May 2020) and the second lockdown in Germany (November/December 2020). For the primary outcome "psychosocial burden" ratings also comprised retrospective pre-pandemic (early 2020) and very early states during the pandemic (March 2020). For all diagnostic groups, psychosocial burden varied significantly over time (p < 0.001) with an increase from the pre-pandemic to the initial phase (p < 0.001), followed by a steady decrease across both lockdowns, normalizing in November/December 2020. Female gender, high adjustment disorder symptom load at baseline and psychiatric comorbidities were risk factors for higher levels and an unfavorable course of psychosocial burden. Most psychiatric symptoms changed minimally, while resilience decreased over time (p = 0.044 and p = 0.037). The longitudinal course of psychosocial burden indicates an initial stress response, followed by a return to pre-pandemic levels even under recurrent lockdown conditions, mimicking symptoms of an adjustment disorder. Strategies for proactive, specific and continuous treatment have to address resilience capacities before their depletion in the pandemic aftermath, especially for patients with additional risk factors.

Establishment of a teaching hospital-based dementia consultation service for rurally-based regional district general hospitals.

Objective: The treatment of patients with dementia poses a considerable challenge to regional district general hospitals, particularly in rural areas. Here we report the establishment and initial evaluation of a dementia-specific consultation service provided by a teaching hospital-based Psychiatry Department to regional district general hospitals in surrounding smaller towns. Methods: The consultation service was provided to patients with pre-existing or newly suspected dementia, who were in acute hospital care for concurrent conditions. An evaluation of 61 consultations - 49 on-site and 12 via telemedicine - was performed to assess the needs of the participating hospitals and the specific nature of the referrals to the consultation service. Results: Suspected dementia or cognitive dysfunction was the primary reason for consultation requests (>50% of cases). Other common requests concerned suspected delirium, behavioral symptoms, and therapeutic recommendations. During the consultations, a diagnosis of dementia was reached in 52.5% of cases, with other common diagnoses including delirium and depression. Recommendations related to pharmacotherapy were given in 54.1% of consultations. Other recommendations included referral for outpatient neurological or psychiatric follow-up, further diagnostic assessment, or assessment in a memory clinic. Geriatric psychiatric inpatient treatment was recommended in only seven cases (11.5 %). Conclusion: Our initial evaluation demonstrates the feasibility of providing a dementia-specific consultation service in rural areas. The service has the potential to reduce acute transfers to inpatient geriatric psychiatry and enables older patients with dementia or delirium to be treated locally by helping and empowering rurally-based regional hospitals to manage these problems and associated complications.