Increased generalized anxiety, depression and distress during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Since the first cases of the novel coronavirus disease SARS-CoV-2 were reported in December 2019 in China, the virus has spread in most countries. The aim of the present study was to assess initial data on the mental health burden of the German public during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in Germany and collected complete datasets from 15 704 German residents aged 18 years and over. Besides demographics, generalized anxiety (GAD-7), depression (PHQ-2) and psychological distress (DT) were assessed. Furthermore, COVID-19-related fear, trust in governmental actions to face COVID-19 and the subjective level of information regarding COVID-19 were covered. RESULTS: Significantly increased symptoms were highly prevalent in all dimensions: generalized anxiety (44.9%), depression (14.3%), psychological distress (65.2%) and COVID-19-related fear (59%). Females and younger people reported higher mental burden. Trust in governmental actions to face COVID-19 and the subjective level of information regarding COVID-19 are negatively associated with mental health burden. However, the subjective level of information regarding COVID-19 is positively associated with increased COVID-19-related fear. CONCLUSIONS: The provision of appropriate psychological interventions for those in need and the provision of transparency and comprehensible information are crucial during the current pandemic.

Psychological burden of healthcare professionals in Germany during the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic: differences and similarities in the international context.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare professionals (HPs) are the key figures to keep up the healthcare system during the COVID-19 pandemic and thus are one of the most vulnerable groups in this. To this point, the extent of this psychological burden, especially in Europe and Germany, remains unclear. This is the first study investigating German HPs after the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: We performed an online-based cross-sectional study after the COVID-19 outbreak in Germany (10-31 March 2020). In total, 2224 HPs (physicians n = 492, nursing staff n = 1511, paramedics n = 221) and 10 639 non-healthcare professionals (nHPs) were assessed including generalized anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-2), current health status (EQ-5D-3L), COVID-19-related fear, subjective level of information regarding COVID-19. RESULTS: HPs showed less generalized anxiety, depression and COVID-19-related fear and higher health status and subjective level of information regarding COVID-19 than the nHPs. Within the HP groups, nursing staff were the most psychologically burdened. Subjective levels of information regarding COVID-19 correlated negatively with generalized anxiety levels across all groups. Among HPs, nursing staff showed the highest and paramedics the lowest generalized anxiety levels. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of COVID-19, German HPs seem to be less psychological burdened than nHPs, and also less burdened compared with existing international data.

Not all world leaders use Twitter in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: impact of the way of Angela Merkel on psychological distress, behaviour and risk perception.

At a time of growing governmental restrictions and 'physical distancing' in order to decelerate the spread of COVID-19, psychological challenges are increasing. Social media plays an important role in maintaining social contact as well as exerting political influence. World leaders use it not only to keep citizens informed but also to boost morale and manage people's fears. However, some leaders do not follow this approach; an example is the German Chancellor. In a large online survey, we aimed to determine levels of COVID-19 fear, generalized anxiety, depression, safety behaviour, trust in government and risk perception in Germany. A total of 12 244 respondents participated during the period of restraint and the public shutdown in March 2020. Concurrent with the German Chancellor's speech, a reduction of anxiety and depression was noticeable in the German population. It appears that, in addition to using social media platforms like Twitter, different-and sometimes more conservative-channels for providing information can also be effective.

Severely increased generalized anxiety, but not COVID-19-related fear in individuals with mental illnesses: A population based cross-sectional study in Germany.

The COVID-19 pandemic affected individuals, governments, and health care centers all around the globe. Social isolation obligation, restricted working shifts, and curfews posed unprecedented challenges for the population. Social isolation, boredom, and financial problems have been shown to stress peoples' mental health in previous comparable pandemics and even in regular situations. Individuals with a mental illness may particularly be at risk due to an already instable mental health status. While research mainly focused on the pandemic's impact on somatic health care and risk group patients, psychological obstacles caused by legal restrictions and their impact on already mentally affected individuals have been discussed, but so far only scarcely been investigated in a large sample. For this study, 12,028 people completed an online-survey during that time in Germany, when the COVID-19 outbreak gained momentum with a surge in cases and death rates as well as a lockdown of the public life. Generalized anxiety (GAD-7), depression (PHQ-2), distress (distress thermometer) and COVID-19-specific items, especially COVID-19-related fear, were assessed in healthy individuals, patients suffering from mental illnesses, and in patients with chronic somatic diseases, known to be at risk for an unfavorable course of COVID-19. Results show that the COVID-19-pandemic significantly worsens psychometric scores throughout the population - individuals with already heightened levels, like people with mental illnesses now reach concerning levels. Surprisingly, even though generalized anxiety, depressive symptoms, and perceived distress are elevated in individuals with mental illness, these individuals seem to be less affected by explicit COVID-19-related fear, than the general population or individuals with chronic somatic diseases. This study thus objectively quantifies the psychological impact of COVID-19 in a large sample and provides evidence for not only the public, but also critically affected individuals with a mental illness.

The Impact of Psychological Resources on Body Mass Index in Obesity Surgery Candidates.

BACKGROUND: Obesity surgery is the therapy of choice for severely obese patients. The results are promising, but at the same time obesity surgery represents a physical and psychological challenge for patients and care givers. In order to give psychosocial support adequately, more knowledge of effects of psychological profiles is required. Research is often deficit and symptom oriented. Psychological resources (competences) of individuals are often neglected. However, after surgery patients have to cope with the altered anatomic condition and therefore psychological resources are essential for a successful development and my influence also the surgical outcome. The interplay of eating behavior, depression, and psychological resources and their influence on weight are yet undetermined. METHODS: A cross-sectional study in consecutive obesity surgery candidates was performed. One hundred twenty-seven participants were included (90 female, 37 male; mean BMI 49.85 kg/m²; range 36.7-84.2 kg/m²). After conducting semi-structured clinical interviews psychological resources, depression and eating behavior were assessed via three questionnaires: Essener Ressourcen-Inventar (ERI), Patient Health Questionnaire depression module (PHQ-d), and Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire (EDE-Q). To evaluate the influence of psychological resources on BMI mediation models and path analyses were performed. RESULTS: Psychological resources do not influence BMI directly. Path analyses revealed depression as well as depression/eating behavior as mediating dimension. A first path showed that higher psychological resources are associated with less depressive symptoms and lower BMI. On the other side, a second path showed that higher psychological resources are related to less depression and by means of more conscious and controlled eating behavior to a lower BMI. CONCLUSION: Psychological resources seem to be relevant in the context of obesity surgery. Good psychological resources show plausible associations with less depression and a more adequate eating behavior. The evaluation of psychological resources in obesity surgery candidates allows the identification of patients at risk. Competences of patients should be addressed in the context of surgery. Our findings build a foundation for a more individualized supportive treatment for obesity surgery candidates. Improving impaired psychological resources may help in the coping process after surgery and is supposed to lead to an even higher weight loss.

Sleep disturbances, fear, and generalized anxiety during the COVID-19 shut down phase in Germany: relation to infection rates, deaths, and German stock index DAX.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic impacts the whole world. So far, nothing is known about the course of psychological disturbances, such as fear, anxiety, and sleep disturbances of this pandemic over time in Europe. METHODS: Aim of this web-based survey was to assess the mental health burden of the German public over a period of 50 days after the COVID-19 outbreak. 16,245 individuals responded regarding sleep disturbances, COVID-19-fear, and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD-7). Data were put in relation to infection rates, number of deaths and the German stock index. RESULTS: The specific fear increased rapidly in concordance with infection numbers. However, no relation to the number of deaths was found, COVID-19-fear developed reversed to the stock index. Initially, 13.5% of the respondents reported a reduced sleep quality, and 7.2% a moderate generalized anxiety; proceeding simultaneously with high peaks. Finally, more than twice as many respondents showed psychological burdens. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19-fear decreased within six weeks to the level before the shutdown, indicating a habituation to the threatening situation. However, generalized anxiety remained elevated over time. Sleep disturbances, generalized anxiety as well as economical stock alterations develop in advance to infectiological trends which demands consequent and comprehensible information policies.

Mental Health Burden of the COVID-19 Outbreak in Germany: Predictors of Mental Health Impairment.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 is causing an enormous psychological burden for most people. This study aims to assess individual changes in mental health and health status before and after the COVID-19 outbreak, and to explore potential predictors of change. METHODS: A cross-sectional study in Germany (n = 15 037) were conducted. Demographics, depression and anxiety symptoms (PHQ-2, GAD-2), distress (DT), and health status (EQ-5D-3L) were assessed. Additionally, all instruments used were adapted to measure the participants' mental health and health status before the COVID-19 outbreak. COVID-19-related fear, trust in governmental actions to face COVID-19, and the subjective level of information about COVID-19 were examined. RESULTS: Overall, the participants showed a significant increase in depression and anxiety symptoms, and distress, while health status deteriorated since the COVID-19 outbreak. Impairment in mental health was predicted by COVID-19-related fear. Pre-existing mental illness predicted an increase in depression symptoms and a deterioration in health status. Trust in governmental actions and the subjective level of information predicted less increase in psychological burden. CONCLUSIONS: Our data revealed that there have been changes in mental health and health status at an individual level since the outbreak of COVID-19. In order to maintain mental health, the observed predictors should be addressed.

E-mental health mindfulness-based and skills-based 'CoPE It' intervention to reduce psychological distress in times of COVID-19: study protocol for a bicentre longitudinal study.

INTRODUCTION: The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic poses immense challenges for national and international healthcare systems. Especially in times of social isolation and governmental restrictions, mental health should not be neglected. Innovative approaches are required to support psychologically burdened people. The e-mental health intervention 'CoPE It' has been developed to offer manualised and evidence-based psychotherapeutic support adapted to COVID-19-related issues in order to overcome psychological distress. In our study, we aim to assess the efficacy of the e-mental health intervention 'CoPE It' in terms of reducing distress (primary outcome), depression and anxiety symptoms as well as improving self-efficacy, quality of life and mindfulness (secondary outcomes). Furthermore, we want to evaluate the programme's usability, feasibility and participants' satisfaction with 'CoPE It' (tertiary outcome). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The e-mental health intervention 'CoPE It' consists of four 30 min modules, conducted every other day, involving psychotherapeutic techniques of mindfulness-based stress reduction and cognitive-behavioural therapy. The widely applied and previously established content has been adapted to the context of the COVID-19 pandemic by experts in psychosomatic medicine and stress prevention. In our longitudinal study, adult participants-with adequate German language and computer skills, and who have provided informed consent-will be recruited via emergency support hotlines in Germany. Flyers will be distributed, and online channels will be used. Participants will complete a baseline assessment (T0), a postintervention assessment (T1) and assessments 1 and 3 months later (T2 and T3, respectively). We will perform repeated measures analysis of covariance, mixed linear models, standard analyses of variance and regression, and correlation coefficients. In case of binary outcome variables, either mixed logistic regression or χ² tests will be used. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Ethics Committees of the University of Duisburg-Essen (20-9243-BO) and University of Tübingen (469/2020BO) approved the study. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00021301.

COVID-19-Related Fear and Health-Related Safety Behavior in Oncological Patients.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess cancer patients' psychological burden during the COVID-19 pandemic by investigating distress (distress-thermometer), health status (EQ-5D-3L), general anxiety (GAD-7), COVID-19-related fear and associated behavioral changes and comparing these to matched healthy controls, using propensity score matching (PSM). METHODS: During the first days of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany, March 16 to 30, 2020, 150 actually treated cancer patients and 150 matched healthy controls participated in this study. Participants completed an anonymous online survey assessing health status, distress, general anxiety, COVID-19-related fear and behavioral changes (i.e., adherent safety behavior and dysfunctional safety behavior). RESULTS: Cancer patients showed no elevated level of distress, U = 10,657.5, p = 0.428, general anxiety U = 10,015.5, p = 0.099, or COVID-19-related fear compared to healthy controls, U = 10,948, p = 0.680. Both groups showed elevated COVID-19-related fear. Cancer patients reported more adherent safety behavior, such as washing hands more often or avoiding public places, U = 8,285, p < 0.001, d = 0.468. They also reported more dysfunctional safety behavior such as buying larger quantities of basic food, compared to healthy controls U = 9,599, p = 0.029, d = 0.256. Adherent safety behavior could be significantly explained by cancer diagnosis, increased COVID-19-related fear and subjective level of information about COVID-19, R 2 = 0.215, F(3) = 27.026, p < 0.001. CONCLUSION: This suggests that cancer patients are more likely to utilize adherent safety behavior. Cancer patients reported comparable levels of distress and anxiety compared to healthy controls. Still, the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with elevated COVID-19-related fear. Therefore, specific interventions are needed to prevent anxiety and improve mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic.

A Systematic Review of the Effect of Neurofeedback in Cancer Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Neurofeedback (NF) or electroencephalogram (EEG)-Biofeedback is a drug-free form of brain training to directly alter the underlying neural mechanisms of cognition and behavior. It is a technique that measures a subject's EEG signal, processes it in real time, with the goal to enable a behavioral modification by modulating brain activity. The most common application of the NF technology is in epilepsies, migraine, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, autism spectrum disorder, affective disorders, and psychotic disorders. Few studies have investigated the use of NF in context of psychosomatic illnesses. Little is known about the use in cancer patients or postcancer survivors despite the high number of this patient group. OBJECTIVES: We here provide a systematic review of the use and effect of NF on symptoms and burden in cancer patients and long-term cancer survivors. METHODS: In conducting this systematic review, we followed the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) Statement. RESULTS: Our search resulted in only 3 experimental studies, 1 observational study, and 2 case reports. Given the heterogeneity of the intervention systems and protocols, no meta-analysis was conducted. CONCLUSION: Altogether, there is initial evidence that NF is a complementary, drug-free, and noninvasive therapy that has the potential to ameliorate symptoms in this patient group, such as pain, fatigue, depression, and sleep. Further studies are highly needed.

Effects of acute psychological stress on placebo and nocebo responses in a clinically relevant model of visceroception.

There is evidence to suggest a role of emotions in placebo and nocebo effects, but whether acute psychological stress changes the magnitude of placebo or nocebo responses has not been tested. In a clinically relevant model of visceroception, we assessed effects of acute psychological stress on changes in urgency and pain in response to positive or negative treatment suggestions. In 120 healthy volunteers, perceived urge-to-defecate and pain in response to individually calibrated rectal distensions were measured with visual analogue scales during a BASELINE. Participants then underwent the Trier Social Stress Test (N = 60) or a simple cognitive task (control, N = 60) and were randomized to positive (placebo), negative (nocebo), or neutral treatment information regarding intravenous administration of saline. The series of distensions was repeated, and changes in visual analogue scales from BASELINE to TEST were compared between groups using analysis of covariance and planned post hoc tests. Treatment information emerged as a main factor (P <0.001), supporting treatment information effects for both urgency and pain. Effects for urgency were modulated by stress (interaction effect: P <0.05): Positive information reduced urgency (P = 0.025), while negative information increased urgency (P = 0.026) only in stressed groups. For pain, effects of stress emerged for nocebo responses, which were only evident in stressed groups (P = 0.009). This is the first experimental study supporting effects of acute psychological stress on placebo and nocebo responses in visceroception. Results call for mechanistic as well as patient studies to assess how psychological stress shapes patients' treatment expectations and thereby affects health outcomes.