Housing environment and mental health of Europeans during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-country comparison.

Many studies have investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health. Throughout the pandemic, time spent at home increased to a great extent due to restrictive measures. Here we set out to investigate the relationship between housing conditions and the mental health of populations across European countries. We analyzed survey data collected during spring 2020 from 69,136 individuals from four cohorts from Denmark, France, and the UK. The investigated housing conditions included household density, composition, and crowding, access to outdoor facilities, dwelling type, and urbanicity. The outcomes were loneliness, anxiety, and life satisfaction. Logistic regression models were used, and results were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. In the meta-analysis, living alone was associated with higher levels of loneliness (OR = 3.08, 95% CI 1.87-5.07), and lower life satisfaction (OR = 1.27, 95% CI 1.05-0.55), compared to living with others. Not having access to an outdoor space and household crowding were suggestively associated with worse outcomes. Living in crowded households, living alone, or lacking access to outdoor facilities may be particularly important in contributing to poor mental health during a lockdown. Addressing the observed fundamental issues related to housing conditions within society will likely have positive effects in reducing social inequalities, as well as improving preparedness for future pandemics.

Time trends in mental health indicators during the initial 16 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Denmark

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic and its associated national lockdowns have been linked to deteriorations in mental health worldwide. A number of studies analysed changes in mental health indicators during the pandemic;however, these studies generally had a small number of timepoints, and focused on the initial months of the pandemic. Furthermore, most studies followed-up the same individuals, resulting in significant loss to follow-up and biased estimates of mental health and its change. Here we report on time trends in key mental health indicators amongst Danish adults over the course of the pandemic (March 2020-July 2021) focusing on subgroups defined by gender, age, and self-reported previously diagnosed chronic and/or mental illness. Methods: We used time-series data collected by Epinion (N=8,261) with 43 timepoints between 20 March 2020 and 22 July 2021. Using a repeated cross-sectional study design, independent sets of individuals were asked to respond to the Copenhagen Corona-Related Mental Health questionnaire at each timepoint, and data was weighted to population proportions. The six mental health indicators examined were loneliness, anxiety, social isolation, quality of life, COVID-19-related worries, and the mental health scale. Gender, age, and the presence of previously diagnosed mental and/or chronic illness were used to stratify the population into subgroups for comparisons. Results: Poorer mental health were observed during the strictest phases of the lockdowns, whereas better outcomes occurred during reopening phases. Women, young individuals (<34 yrs), and those with a mental- and/or chronic illness demonstrated poorer mean time-series than others. Those with a pre-existing mental illness further had a less reactive mental health time-series. The greatest differences between women/men and younger/older age groups were observed during the second lockdown. Conclusions: People with mental illness have reported disadvantageous but stable levels of mental health indicators during the pandemic thus far, and they seem to be less affected by the factors that result in fluctuating time-series in other subgroups. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Mental health indicators in pregnant women compared with women in the general population during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in Denmark.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the associated regulations issued to minimize risk of disease transmission seem to have had an impact on general mental health in most populations, but it may have affected pregnant women even more because of pregnancy-related uncertainties, limited access to healthcare resources, and lack of social support. We aimed to compare the mental health response among pregnant women with that in similarly aged women from the general population during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From April 14 to July 3, 2020, 647 pregnant women in their second trimester were enrolled in this study. For comparison, 858 women from the general Danish population (20-46 years) were sampled from an ongoing observational study. Participants responded to a questionnaire including six mental health indicators (concern level, perceived social isolation, quality of life, anxiety, mental health, and loneliness). Loneliness was measured using the UCLA Three-item Loneliness Scale and anxiety by the Common Mental Health Disorder Questionnaire 4-item Anxiety Subscale. RESULTS: The pregnant women had better scores during the entire study period for all mental health indicators, and except for concerns, social isolation, and mental health, the differences were also statistically significant. Pregnant women were more concerned about becoming seriously ill (40.2% vs. 29.5%, p < 0.001), whereas the general population was more concerned about economic consequences and prospects. Many pregnant women reported negative feelings associated with being pregnant during the COVID-19 pandemic and concerns regarding social isolation and regulation-imposed partner absence during hospital appointments and childbirth. All mental health indicators improved as Denmark began to reopen after the first wave of the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women exhibited lower rates of poor mental health compared with the general population. However, they were more concerned about becoming seriously ill, expressed negative feelings about being pregnant during the pandemic, and were worried about the absence of their partner due to imposed regulations. These finding may be taken into account by policy-makers during pandemics to balance specific preventive measures over the potential mental health deterioration of pregnant women.

Loneliness, worries, anxiety, and precautionary behaviours in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal analysis of 200,000 Western and Northern Europeans.

BACKGROUND: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, governments around the world instituted various public-health measures. Our project aimed to highlight the most significant similarities and differences in key mental-health indicators between four Western and Northern European countries, and identify the population subgroups with the poorest mental-health outcomes during the first months of the pandemic. METHODS: We analysed time-series survey data of 205,084 individuals from seven studies from Denmark, France, the Netherlands, and the UK to assess the impact of the pandemic and associated lockdowns. All analyses focused on the initial lockdown phase (March-July 2020). The main outcomes were loneliness, anxiety, and COVID-19-related worries and precautionary behaviours. FINDINGS: COVID-19-related worries were consistently high in each country but decreased during the gradual reopening phases. While only 7% of the respondents reported high levels of loneliness in the Netherlands, percentages were higher in the rest of the three countries (13-18%). In all four countries, younger individuals and individuals with a history of mental illness expressed the highest levels of loneliness. INTERPRETATION: The pandemic and associated country lockdowns had a major impact on the mental health of populations, and certain subgroups should be closely followed to prevent negative long-term consequences. Younger individuals and individuals with a history of mental illness would benefit from tailored public-health interventions to prevent or counteract the negative effects of the pandemic. Individuals across Western and Northern Europe have thus far responded in psychologically similar ways despite differences in government approaches to the pandemic. FUNDING: See the Funding section.