RESUMO
BACKGROUND: There remains uncertainty about the impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on mental health. This umbrella review provides a comprehensive overview of the association between the pandemic and common mental disorders. We qualitatively summarized evidence from reviews with meta-analyses of individual study-data in the general population, healthcare workers, and specific at-risk populations. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A systematic search was carried out in 5 databases for peer-reviewed systematic reviews with meta-analyses of prevalence of depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms during the pandemic published between December 31, 2019 until August 12, 2022. We identified 123 reviews of which 7 provided standardized mean differences (SMDs) either from longitudinal pre- to during pandemic study-data or from cross-sectional study-data compared to matched pre-pandemic data. Methodological quality rated with the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews checklist scores (AMSTAR 2) instrument was generally low to moderate. Small but significant increases of depression, anxiety, and/or general mental health symptoms were reported in the general population, in people with preexisting physical health conditions, and in children (3 reviews; SMDs ranged from 0.11 to 0.28). Mental health and depression symptoms significantly increased during periods of social restrictions (1 review; SMDs of 0.41 and 0.83, respectively) but anxiety symptoms did not (SMD: 0.26). Increases of depression symptoms were generally larger and longer-lasting during the pandemic (3 reviews; SMDs depression ranged from 0.16 to 0.23) than those of anxiety (2 reviews: SMDs 0.12 and 0.18). Females showed a significantly larger increase in anxiety symptoms than males (1 review: SMD 0.15). In healthcare workers, people with preexisting mental disorders, any patient group, children and adolescents, and in students, no significant differences from pre- to during pandemic were found (2 reviews; SMD's ranging from -0.16 to 0.48). In 116 reviews pooled cross-sectional prevalence rates of depression, anxiety, and PTSD symptoms ranged from 9% to 48% across populations. Although heterogeneity between studies was high and largely unexplained, assessment tools and cut-offs used, age, sex or gender, and COVID-19 exposure factors were found to be moderators in some reviews. The major limitations are the inability to quantify and explain the high heterogeneity across reviews included and the shortage of within-person data from multiple longitudinal studies. CONCLUSIONS: A small but consistent deterioration of mental health and particularly depression during early pandemic and during social restrictions has been found in the general population and in people with chronic somatic disorders. Also, associations between mental health and the pandemic were stronger in females and younger age groups than in others. Explanatory individual-level, COVID-19 exposure, and time-course factors were scarce and showed inconsistencies across reviews. For policy and research, repeated assessments of mental health in population panels including vulnerable individuals are recommended to respond to current and future health crises.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Transtornos de Estresse Pós-Traumáticos , Criança , Masculino , Adolescente , Humanos , Saúde Mental , Estudos Transversais , Pandemias , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Transtornos de Estresse Pós-Traumáticos/epidemiologia , Transtornos de Estresse Pós-Traumáticos/psicologia , Ansiedade/epidemiologia , Depressão/epidemiologiaRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a serious health risk, especially in vulnerable populations. Even before the pandemic, people with mental disorders had worse physical health outcomes compared to the general population. This umbrella review investigated whether having a pre-pandemic mental disorder was associated with worse physical health outcomes due to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Following a pre-registered protocol available on the Open Science Framework platform, we searched Ovid MEDLINE All, Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL, and Web of Science up to the 6th of October 2021 for systematic reviews on the impact of COVID-19 on people with pre-existing mental disorders. The following outcomes were considered: risk of contracting the SARS-CoV-2 infection, risk of severe illness, COVID-19 related mortality risk, risk of long-term physical symptoms after COVID-19. For meta-analyses, we considered adjusted odds ratio (OR) as effect size measure. Screening, data extraction and quality assessment with the AMSTAR 2 tool have been done in parallel and duplicate. RESULTS: We included five meta-analyses and four narrative reviews. The meta-analyses reported that people with any mental disorder had an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR: 1.71, 95% CI 1.09-2.69), severe illness course (OR from 1.32 to 1.77, 95%CI between 1.19-1.46 and 1.29-2.42, respectively) and COVID-19 related mortality (OR from 1.38 to 1.52, 95%CI between 1.15-1.65 and 1.20-1.93, respectively) as compared to the general population. People with anxiety disorders had an increased risk of SAR-CoV-2 infection, but not increased mortality. People with mood and schizophrenia spectrum disorders had an increased COVID-19 related mortality but without evidence of increased risk of severe COVID-19 illness. Narrative reviews were consistent with findings from the meta-analyses. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: As compared to the general population, there is strong evidence showing that people with pre-existing mental disorders suffered from worse physical health outcomes due to the COVID-19 pandemic and may therefore be considered a risk group similar to people with underlying physical conditions. Factors likely involved include living accommodations with barriers to social distancing, cardiovascular comorbidities, psychotropic medications and difficulties in accessing high-intensity medical care.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Transtornos Mentais , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Transtornos Mentais/complicações , Transtornos Mentais/epidemiologia , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , SARS-CoV-2 , Revisões Sistemáticas como Assunto , Metanálise como AssuntoRESUMO
Background: A comprehensive picture is lacking of the impact of early childhood (age 0-5) risk factors on the subsequent development of mental health symptoms. Objective: In this systematic review, we investigated which individual, social and urban factors, experienced in early childhood, contribute to the development of later anxiety and depression, behavioural problems, and internalising and externalising symptoms in youth. Methods: Embase, MEDLINE, Scopus, and PsycInfo were searched on the 5th of January 2022. Three additional databases were retrieved from a mega-systematic review source that focused on the identification of both risk and protective indicators for the onset and maintenance of prospective depressive, anxiety and substance use disorders. A total of 46,450 records were identified and screened in ASReview, an AI-aided systematic review tool. We included studies with experimental, quasi-experimental, prospective and longitudinal study designs, while studies that focused on biological and genetical factors, were excluded. Results: Twenty studies were included. The majority of studies explored individual-level risk factors (N = 16). Eleven studies also explored social risk factors and three studied urban risk factors. We found evidence for early predictors relating to later psychopathology measures (i.e., anxiety and depression, behavioural problems, and internalising and externalising symptoms) in childhood, adolescence and early adulthood. These were: parental psychopathology, exposure to parental physical and verbal violence and social and neighbourhood disadvantage. Conclusions: Very young children are exposed to a complex mix of risk factors, which operate at different levels and influence children at different time points. The urban environment appears to have an effect on psychopathology but it is understudied compared to individual-level factors. Moreover, we need more research exploring the interaction between individual, social and urban factors.