Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 2.508
Filter
1.
Ann Intern Med ; 175(11): 1560-1571, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2203117

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To what extent the COVID-19 pandemic and its containment measures influenced mental health in the general population is still unclear. PURPOSE: To assess the trajectory of mental health symptoms during the first year of the pandemic and examine dose-response relations with characteristics of the pandemic and its containment. DATA SOURCES: Relevant articles were identified from the living evidence database of the COVID-19 Open Access Project, which indexes COVID-19-related publications from MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase via Ovid, and PsycInfo. Preprint publications were not considered. STUDY SELECTION: Longitudinal studies that reported data on the general population's mental health using validated scales and that were published before 31 March 2021 were eligible. DATA EXTRACTION: An international crowd of 109 trained reviewers screened references and extracted study characteristics, participant characteristics, and symptom scores at each timepoint. Data were also included for the following country-specific variables: days since the first case of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the stringency of governmental containment measures, and the cumulative numbers of cases and deaths. DATA SYNTHESIS: In a total of 43 studies (331 628 participants), changes in symptoms of psychological distress, sleep disturbances, and mental well-being varied substantially across studies. On average, depression and anxiety symptoms worsened in the first 2 months of the pandemic (standardized mean difference at 60 days, -0.39 [95% credible interval, -0.76 to -0.03]); thereafter, the trajectories were heterogeneous. There was a linear association of worsening depression and anxiety with increasing numbers of reported cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection and increasing stringency in governmental measures. Gender, age, country, deprivation, inequalities, risk of bias, and study design did not modify these associations. LIMITATIONS: The certainty of the evidence was low because of the high risk of bias in included studies and the large amount of heterogeneity. Stringency measures and surges in cases were strongly correlated and changed over time. The observed associations should not be interpreted as causal relationships. CONCLUSION: Although an initial increase in average symptoms of depression and anxiety and an association between higher numbers of reported cases and more stringent measures were found, changes in mental health symptoms varied substantially across studies after the first 2 months of the pandemic. This suggests that different populations responded differently to the psychological stress generated by the pandemic and its containment measures. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Swiss National Science Foundation. (PROSPERO: CRD42020180049).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/psychology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Depression/psychology , Mental Health , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
2.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(21): e25945, 2021 May 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2191011

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: To investigate the prevalence of anxiety and depressive symptoms and the associated risk factors among first-line medical staff in Wuhan during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic.From March 5 to 15, 2020, the Hamilton Anxiety Scale and Hamilton Depression scale were used to investigate the anxiety and depression status of medical staff in Wuhan Cabin Hospital (a Hospital). Two hundred seventy-six questionnaires were received from 96 doctors and 180 nurses, including 79 males and 197 females.During the COVID-19 epidemic, the prevalence rate of anxiety and depression was 27.9% and 18.1%, respectively, among 276 front-line medical staff in Wuhan. The prevalence rate of anxiety and depression among doctors was 19.8% and 11.5%, respectively, and the prevalence rate of anxiety and depression among nurses was 32.2% and 21.7%, respectively. Females recorded higher total scores for anxiety and depression than males, and nurses recorded higher scores for anxiety and depression than doctors.During the COVID-19 epidemic, some first-line medical staff experienced mental health problems such as depression and anxiety. Nurses were more prone to anxiety and depression than doctors. Effective strategies toward to improving the mental health should be provided to first-line medical staff, especially female medical staff and nurses.


Subject(s)
Anxiety/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Depression/epidemiology , Medical Staff/psychology , Mobile Health Units/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Anxiety/psychology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19/transmission , China/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/psychology , Fear , Female , Humans , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional , Male , Medical Staff/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Prevalence , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Self Report/statistics & numerical data , Sex Factors , Workload/psychology
3.
BMC Psychiatry ; 22(1): 737, 2022 Nov 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2139205

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in serious mental health conditions, particularly among older adults. This research explored the prevalence of COVID-19-related anxiety and its associated factors among older adults residing in Bangladesh. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted among 1,045 older Bangladeshi adults aged ≥ 60 years through telephone interviews in September 2021. A semi-structured interview schedule was used to collect data on participants' characteristics and COVID-19-related anxiety. The anxiety level was measured using the Bengali version of the five-point Coronavirus Anxiety Scale (CAS). A linear regression model explored the factors associated with COVID-19-related anxiety. RESULTS: Overall, the prevalence of COVID-19-related anxiety was 23.2%. The regression analysis revealed that the average COVID-19-related anxiety score was significantly higher among females (ß: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.81), and among those who faced difficulty getting medicine (ß: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.97), felt isolated (ß: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.24 to 0.95), and felt requiring additional care during the pandemic (ß: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.91). Alternatively, the average COVID-19-related anxiety score was significantly lower among those who were widowed (ß: -0.46, 95% CI: -0.87 to -0.04) and living distant from the health centre (ß: -0.48, 95% CI: -0.79 to -0.17). CONCLUSION: The findings of the present study suggest providing immediate psychosocial support package to the older adults, particularly females and those who are vulnerable to receive health and social care support during the COVID-19 pandemic in Bangladesh.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Female , Humans , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Pandemics , Bangladesh/epidemiology , Anxiety/epidemiology
4.
JMIR Public Health Surveill ; 7(8): e29029, 2021 08 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2141331

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Widespread fear surrounding COVID-19, coupled with physical and social distancing orders, has caused severe adverse mental health outcomes. Little is known, however, about how the COVID-19 crisis has impacted LGBTQ+ youth, who disproportionately experienced a high rate of adverse mental health outcomes before the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to address this knowledge gap by harnessing natural language processing methodologies to investigate the evolution of conversation topics in the most popular subreddit for LGBTQ+ youth. METHODS: We generated a data set of all r/LGBTeens subreddit posts (n=39,389) between January 1, 2020 and February 1, 2021 and analyzed meaningful trends in anxiety, anger, and sadness in the posts. Because the distribution of anxiety before widespread social distancing orders was meaningfully different from the distribution after (P<.001), we employed latent Dirichlet allocation to examine topics that provoked this shift in anxiety. RESULTS: We did not find any differences in LGBTQ+ youth anger and sadness before and after government-mandated social distancing; however, anxiety increased significantly (P<.001). Further analysis revealed a list of 10 anxiety-provoking topics discussed during the pandemic: attraction to a friend, coming out, coming out to family, discrimination, education, exploring sexuality, gender pronouns, love and relationship advice, starting a new relationship, and struggling with mental health. CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, LGBTQ+ teens increased their reliance on anonymous discussion forums when discussing anxiety-provoking topics. LGBTQ+ teens likely perceived anonymous forums as safe spaces for discussing lifestyle stressors during COVID-19 disruptions (eg, school closures). The list of prevalent anxiety-provoking topics in LGBTQ+ teens' anonymous discussions can inform future mental health interventions in LGBTQ+ youth.


Subject(s)
Anxiety/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , Natural Language Processing , Pandemics , Sexual and Gender Minorities/psychology , Social Media/statistics & numerical data , Social Media/trends , Adolescent , COVID-19/epidemiology , Emotions , Female , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Sexual and Gender Minorities/statistics & numerical data
5.
J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad ; 34(Suppl 1)(3): S703-S706, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2146944

ABSTRACT

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic is a viral infection that spreads through different mediums and has a high rate of mortality. At its initial stages, there is no particular medicine that can cure patients of COVID-19. The aim of the present study was to understand the COVID-19 knowledge, perception, and its effects in terms of anxiety and depression among frontline health care workers of Ayub Teaching Hospital, Abbottabad. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted in Ayub Teaching Hospital, Abbottabad from June to July 2021 in which data was collected from 200 hospital healthcare workers who have performed duties in COVID isolation wards through standard questionnaire. SPSS version 24.0 was used for data analysis. Results: Out of 200 participants in the study 100 (50.0%) were male. Regarding safety measures taken during COVID -19, 144 (72.0%) individuals reported that they have not been given training to handle known or suspected cases of COVID-19. Moderate anxiety and depression was found in 153 (76.5%) healthcare workers, mild in 25 (12.5%) and 22 (11.0%) had severe anxiety and depression at the time of COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusion: This study revealed that a significant anxiety and depression was found in frontline healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, a more extensive study should be conducted which involves many other hospitals like Ayub Teaching Hospital.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Male , Female , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Pakistan/epidemiology , Pandemics , Health Personnel , Hospitals, Teaching , Anxiety/epidemiology , Perception
6.
Health Promot Chronic Dis Prev Can ; 42(10): 421-430, 2022 10 12.
Article in English, French | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2146154

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: This study explores the relationship between emotional support, perceived risk and mental health outcomes among health care workers, who face high rates of burnout and mental distress since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A cross-sectional, multicentred online survey of health care workers in the Greater Toronto Area, Ontario, Canada, during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic evaluated coping strategies, confidence in infection control, impact of previous work during the 2003 SARS outbreak and emotional support. Mental health outcomes were assessed using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale, the Impact of Event Scale - Revised and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). RESULTS: Of 3852 participants, 8.2% sought professional mental health services while 77.3% received emotional support from family, 74.0% from friends and 70.3% from colleagues. Those who felt unsupported in their work had higher odds ratios of experiencing moderate and severe symptoms of anxiety (odds ratio [OR] = 2.23; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.84-2.69), PTSD (OR = 1.88; 95% CI: 1.58-2.25) and depression (OR = 1.88; 95% CI: 1.57-2.25). Nearly 40% were afraid of telling family about the risks they were exposed to at work. Those who were able to share this information demonstrated lower risk of anxiety (OR = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.48-0.69), PTSD (OR = 0.48; 95% CI: 0.41-0.56) and depression (OR = 0.55; 95% CI: 0.47-0.65). CONCLUSION: Informal sources of support, including family, friends and colleagues, play an important role in mitigating distress and should be encouraged and utilized more by health care workers.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Psychological Distress , Anxiety/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Ontario/epidemiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
7.
Front Public Health ; 10: 1003876, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2142340

ABSTRACT

Background: Over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, previous studies have shown that the physical as well as the mental health of children and adolescents significantly deteriorated. Future anxiety caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and its associations with quality of life has not previously been examined in school children. Methods: As part of a cross-sectional web-based survey at schools in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Germany, two years after the outbreak of the pandemic, school children were asked about COVID-19-related future anxiety using the German epidemic-related Dark Future Scale for children (eDFS-K). Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was assessed using the self-reported KIDSCREEN-10. The eDFS-K was psychometrically analyzed (internal consistency and confirmatory factor analysis) and thereafter examined as a predictor of HRQoL in a general linear regression model. Results: A total of N = 840 8-18-year-old children and adolescents were included in the analysis. The eDFS-K demonstrated adequate internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.77), and the confirmatory factor analysis further supported the one-factor structure of the four-item scale with an acceptable model fit. Over 43% of students were found to have low HRQoL. In addition, 47% of the students sometimes to often reported COVID-19-related fears about the future. Children with COVID-19-related future anxiety had significantly lower HRQoL (B = - 0.94, p < 0.001). Other predictors of lower HRQoL were older age (B = - 0.63, p < 0.001), and female (B = - 3.12, p < 0.001) and diverse (B = - 6.82, p < 0.001) gender. Conclusion: Two years after the outbreak of the pandemic, school-aged children continue to exhibit low HRQoL, which is further exacerbated in the presence of COVID-19-related future anxiety. Intervention programs with an increased focus on mental health also addressing future anxiety should be provided.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Quality of Life , Child , Humans , Adolescent , Female , Quality of Life/psychology , Cross-Sectional Studies , COVID-19/epidemiology , Surveys and Questionnaires , Reproducibility of Results , Pandemics , Anxiety/epidemiology
8.
Front Public Health ; 10: 999795, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2142336

ABSTRACT

Objectives: This study explores the inter-relationship between emotional distress in adults and gender, quarantine experiences, pandemic duration, and employment. Methods: An online cross-sectional online survey comprised 943 Israelis. The link to the survey was distributed via different personal and academic social networking sites (e.g., Facebook, WhatsApp, and Twitter). The survey was administered using the online survey portal Google Forms. Participants addressed questions about their socio-demographic characteristics (e.g., gender, age, family status, employment, and quarantine experiences) and ranked their levels of stress, anxiety, and depression using the Hebrew version of the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale-DASS-21. Results: The majority of the respondents (72%) were women, 39% experienced quarantine, and 55% were unemployed. About 42% experienced a short-term pandemic (one lockdown), and the rest experienced a continuous pandemic (two lockdowns). The MANCOVA results, controlling for family status, indicated that women and unemployed participants reported higher stress, anxiety, and depression levels than men and employed participants. Participants who experienced individual quarantine reported higher anxiety and depression. Furthermore, there was a significant interaction between gender, employment, and pandemic duration. The experience of individual quarantine intensified the stress, anxiety, and depression for both employed and unemployed women. Conversely, the quarantine intensified stress, anxiety, and depression only for unemployed men, whereas the quarantine did not affect stress, anxiety, and depression among employed men. Conclusions: Employment is a critical factor regarding men's emotional state during such stressful situations as the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, individual quarantine and long-term pandemics are associated with opposite outcomes regarding individual mental health. The individual quarantine is associated with increased anxiety and depression, while a long-term, continuous pandemic is associated with decreased stress.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Humans , Adult , Female , Male , Quarantine , COVID-19/epidemiology , Depression/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Stress, Psychological/epidemiology , Stress, Psychological/psychology , Communicable Disease Control , Anxiety/epidemiology , Employment
9.
PLoS One ; 17(6): e0269496, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2140422

ABSTRACT

Recent evidence suggests that both personality traits (PT) and emotion regulation (ER) strategies play an important role in the way people cope with the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was two folded. First, to longitudinally investigate the psychological distress (depression, anxiety, and stress levels) taking in consideration PT and ER strategies in 3 different moments: during the first lockdown period (April/20), at the first deconfinement (May/20) and 1-month after the first deconfinement (Jun/20)-Experiment I. Second, to cross-sectionally evaluate the impact of the pandemic in psychological distress and the correlates with PT and ER 6-months after the first deconfinement November/20 to February/21 -Experiment II. A total of 722 volunteers (Experiment I = 180; Experiment II = 542) aged 18 years or older participated in this online survey. The findings from Experiment I show that psychological distress decreased after the lockdown period, however, neuroticism traits predicted higher levels of depression, anxiety and stress symptoms, while difficulties in ER strategies were identified as a risk factor for depression and stress. For experiment II, neuroticism traits and being infected with COVID-19 were associated to higher levels of symptomatology, while unemployment and the use of emotional suppression strategies to cope with emotional situations were associated to depressive and anxiety symptoms. Although the psychological impact of the COVID-19 outbreak decreased over time in our sample, the current findings suggest that difficulties in emotional regulation and high levels of neuroticism traits might be potential risk factors for psychiatric symptomatology during the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, people with difficulties in ER and neuroticism traits would benefit from psychological interventions that provide personality-appropriate support and promote emotion regulation skills during stressful events, such as the case of the global pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emotional Regulation , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/psychology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control , Humans , Pandemics , Personality , Portugal/epidemiology
10.
J Affect Disord ; 310: 422-428, 2022 08 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2131259

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To analyze whether resilience modulates the levels of depression, anxiety, stress and the impact of events in physiotherapists who work with COVID-19 patients with those who do not. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted from August 2020 up to October 2020. A total of 519 physiotherapists were enrolled and divided according to resilience and whether they worked with COVID-19 patients. Volunteers answered sociodemographic questionnaires, rating their depression, anxiety, and stress on a scale (DASS-21). The impact of event scale revised (IES-R) and 14-item resilience scale (14-RS) were also used. RESULTS: Physiotherapists with low resilience present scores significantly high of depression, anxiety, stress and impact of event compared to the high resilience group (P < .001). Additionally, working with COVID-19 patients also resulted in increased levels of depression, anxiety, stress, and impact of event compared with the NO COVID-19 group (P < .001). These responses were modulated by age, sex, number of absences from work, whether or not personal protective equipment was received, host leadership, and the practice and maintenance of regular physical activity. LIMITATIONS: The responses to the questionnaires were anonymous and self-administered. We cannot assess whether these people had a previous diagnosis of depression, anxiety and stress. CONCLUSIONS: Low resilience and work with COVID-19 patients were associated with high levels of depression, anxiety, and stress and worse psychological impacts of events. Several aspects modulate these responses and can contribute to improving the resilience and mental health of physiotherapists who are responsible for the care of COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Physical Therapists , Resilience, Psychological , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/psychology , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/psychology , Humans , Mental Health , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
11.
J Affect Disord ; 310: 384-395, 2022 08 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2131258

ABSTRACT

Studies conducted during the pandemic revealed strong associations between gender and COVID-19 related fear and anxiety. Females perceive coronavirus as a greater threat to personal health and population than males. The aim of the current meta-analysis is to estimate gender difference in COVID-19 related fear and anxiety. The second purpose of this study is to clarify the role of potential moderators in COVID-19 fear and anxiety. For these reasons, studies published between March 2020 and October 2021 were searched in various databases (Web of Science, SCOPUS, PubMed, and Google Scholar). In total, 315 studies met the inclusion criteria, and 60 studies for COVID-19 related fear and 23 studies for COVID-19 related anxiety were included in the current study. Cohen's d effect size values were calculated based on these individual studies showing the difference between males and females in terms of COVID-19 related fear and anxiety. Results revealed that gender has a moderate and statistically significant effect on COVID-19 related fear (ES = 0.307) and anxiety (ES = 0.316) in favor of females. Moderator analyses showed that continent variable was a statistically significant moderator of gender difference in COVID-19 related fear and anxiety. The highest effect size of gender differences in COVID-related fear and anxiety were obtained from the studies conducted in Europe. However, other moderators (the average age of sample, culture, timing, and population) were not statistically significant. Although this meta-analysis has a few limitations, the findings showed that COVID-19 outbreak negatively affected females more.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety Disorders/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Fear , Female , Humans , Male
12.
Front Public Health ; 10: 1004558, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2123476

ABSTRACT

Background: Any infectious disease outbreak may lead to a negative detrimental psychological impact on individuals and the community at large, however; there was no systematic review nor meta-analysis that examined the relationship between the psychological/mental health impact of SARS and COVID-19 outbreak in Asia. Methods and design: A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases from 1/1/2000 to 1/6/2020. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we analyzed the psychological impact on confirmed/suspected cases, healthcare workers and the general public during the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) outbreak and Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemics. Primary outcomes included prevalence of depression, anxiety, stress, post-traumatic stress disorder, aggression, sleeping problems and psychological symptoms. Result: Twenty-three eligible studies (N = 27,325) were included. Random effect model was used to analyze the data using STATA. Of these studies, 11 were related to the SARS outbreak and 12 related to COVID-19 outbreaks. The overall prevalence rate of anxiety during SARS and COVID-19 was 37.8% (95% CI: 21.1-54.5, P < 0.001, I2 = 96.9%) and 34.8% (95% CI: 29.1-40.4), respectively. For depression, the overall prevalence rate during SARS and COVID-19 was 30.9% (95% CI: 18.6-43.1, P < 0.001, I2 = 97.3%) and 32.4% (95% CI: 19.8-45.0, P < 0.001, I2 = 99.8%), respectively. The overall prevalence rate of stress was 9.4% (95% CI: -0.4 -19.2, P = 0.015, I2 = 83.3%) and 54.1% (95% CI: 35.7-72.6, P < 0.001, I2 = 98.8%) during SARS and COVID-19, respectively. The overall prevalence of PTSD was 15.1% (95% CI: 8.2-22.0, P < 0.001) during SARS epidemic, calculated by random-effects model (P < 0.05), with significant between-study heterogeneity (I2 = 93.5%). Conclusion: The SARS and COVID-19 epidemics have brought about high levels of psychological distress to individuals. Psychological interventions and contingent digital mental health platform should be promptly established nationwide for continuous surveillance of the increasing prevalence of negative psychological symptoms. Health policymakers and mental health experts should jointly collaborate to provide timely, contingent mental health treatment and psychological support to those in need to reduce the global disease burden. Systematic review registration: CRD42020182787, identifier PROSPER.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/epidemiology , Anxiety/epidemiology , Prevalence
13.
Front Public Health ; 10: 996386, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2123474

ABSTRACT

Background: Nurses are at high risk for depression and anxiety symptoms after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to assess the network structure of anxiety and depression symptoms among Chinese nurses in the late stage of this pandemic. Method: A total of 6,183 nurses were recruited across China from Oct 2020 to Apr 2021 through snowball sampling. We used Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale-7 (GAD-7) to assess depression and anxiety, respectively. We used the Ising model to estimate the network. The index "expected influence" and "bridge expected influence" were applied to determine the central symptoms and bridge symptoms of the anxiety-depression network. We tested the stability and accuracy of the network via the case-dropping procedure and non-parametric bootstrapping procedure. Result: The network had excellent stability and accuracy. Central symptoms included "restlessness", "trouble relaxing", "sad mood", and "uncontrollable worry". "Restlessness", "nervous", and "suicidal thoughts" served as bridge symptoms. Conclusion: Restlessness emerged as the strongest central and bridge symptom in the anxiety-depression network of nurses. Intervention on depression and anxiety symptoms in nurses should prioritize this symptom.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Depression , Humans , Depression/epidemiology , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Anxiety Disorders/epidemiology , Anxiety/epidemiology
14.
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol ; 57(12): 2481-2490, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2116958

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Cross-sectional studies found high levels of depression and anxiety symptoms, and loneliness during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Reported increases were lower in longitudinal population-based findings. Studies including positive outcomes are rare. This study analyzed changes in mental health symptoms, loneliness, and satisfaction. METHODS: Respondents of the German Socio-Economic Panel (N = 6038) were surveyed pre-pandemic (2017/2019) and during the first (June 2020) and second wave (January and February 2021) of the pandemic. Self-report screeners assessed depression and anxiety symptoms, loneliness, life and health satisfaction. Difference scores were analysed using ANCOVAs focusing on time, gender, age groups. RESULTS: Depression and anxiety symptoms and health satisfaction increased from pre-pandemic to the first wave, but declined in the second pandemic wave. Loneliness increased and life satisfaction decreased during the first and the second wave of the pandemic. Young adults and women reported more distress and loneliness, even after controlling for pre-pandemic scores, education, and income. All effects remained stable when controlling for self-reported previous diagnosis of depression or region of residence. CONCLUSION: Increases and decreases in mental health symptoms and health satisfaction showed little variation. Of concern are the strong increases of loneliness and decreased life satisfaction being important targets for interventions. Main risk factors are young age and female gender.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Young Adult , Humans , Female , Loneliness/psychology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/psychology , Personal Satisfaction , Cross-Sectional Studies , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/psychology
15.
Psychiatry Res ; 317: 114900, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2116853

ABSTRACT

The present study investigated psychosocial predictors of psychosis-risk, depression, anxiety, and stress in Croatia during the COVID-19 pandemic. Given Croatia's recent transgenerational war trauma and the relative lack of available prodromal data, this study presents a unique opportunity to examine the impact of loneliness and other psychosocial factors on psychosis-risk and mental health in this population. 404 Croatian participants completed an anonymous online survey of physical and mental health questions. 48 participants met the criteria for elevated psychosis-risk on prodromal questionnaire (PQ-16). Loneliness had a significant impact on psychosis-risk. Exposure to trauma was associated with psychosis-risk and loneliness, while domestic abuse/violence was associated only with the distress surrounding psychotic-like symptoms. COVID concern was also associated with psychosis-risk. Lastly, the associations between psychosis-risk and depression, anxiety, and stress were robust. These findings highlight the important role of loneliness in psychosis-proneness in Croatia. Depression, anxiety, and stress were also closely related to elevated psychosis-risk. Loneliness is a highly salient issue for individuals with psychosis and it is important to target loneliness within a multi-faceted psychosocial intervention for those at risk for schizophrenia.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Psychotic Disorders , Humans , Loneliness/psychology , Pandemics , Croatia/epidemiology , Psychotic Disorders/psychology , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/psychology , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/psychology
16.
J Womens Health (Larchmt) ; 31(11): 1529-1539, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2116851

ABSTRACT

Objective: The COVID-19 pandemic influences mental health drastically. Therefore, our aim was to investigate whether biological sex and gender-related factors are associated with mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and Methods: The International COVID-19 Awareness and Responses Evaluation Study is an international multiwave cross-sectional observational cohort study of public awareness, attitudes, and responses to public health policies (www.mbmc- cmcm.ca/covid19). The study is led by the Montreal Behavioural Medicine Centre in collaboration with 200 international collaborators from 42 countries. It has received research ethics board approval from the Comité d'éthique de recherche du CIUSSS-NIM (Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux du Nord- de-l'île-de-Montréal), approval no.: 2020-2099/25-03-2020. Recruitment began on March 27, 2020, and the survey is available in 34 languages. The associations between biological sex, sociocultural gender, and mental health were assessed in multivariate logistic regression models only for the European population (n = 12,300). Results: Positive correlations were found between female sex and "feeling nervous, anxious or worried" (OR = 3.2, p < 0.001, 95% CI 1.87-5.63) and "feeling sad, depressed or hopeless" (OR 1.8, p = 0.031, CI 1.05-3.05). Male sex was related to more frequently "feeling irritable, frustrated, and angry" (OR = 1.8, p = 0.04, 95% CI 1.03-2.99). Concerning gender, a negative correlation between being employed and "feeling lonely or isolated" (OR = 0.26, p < 0.001, 95% CI 0.11-0.59) was observed in the female cohort. Conclusion: Sex and gender differences exist in the emotional responses during the COVID-19 pandemic. Especially, within the female cohort, unemployment is negatively associated with mental health. Therefore, this study suggests more targeted psychological and social support for females during the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Male , Female , Humans , Cross-Sectional Studies , Mental Health , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/psychology
17.
J Occup Environ Med ; 64(10): 874-880, 2022 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2116545

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Mental distress of employees from the financial, public transport, public service, and industrial sector was examined in a cross-sectional study during the second COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) wave in Germany and retrospectively at its beginning. METHODS: Mental distress in terms of anxiety and depression symptoms was assessed with the Patient Health Questionnaire-4. High and potential occupational SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) infection risk (OSIR) was defined based on job information from 1545 non-health care workers. RESULTS: The risks for more severe mental distress symptoms increased threefold and twofold, respectively, among employees with high and potential OSIR compared with employees without OSIR. Mental distress severity differed by the extent of work-privacy conflicts, perceived job protection, interactions with colleagues, and overcommitment. CONCLUSIONS: Reducing COVID-19 exposure through workplace protective measures, strengthening interactions among colleagues, and supporting employees with work-privacy conflicts could help better protect employees' mental health.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Anxiety/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Health Personnel , Humans , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
18.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(22)2022 Nov 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2116212

ABSTRACT

This research examines the influences of perceived severity, anxiety, and self-isolation intention, amid the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19), on panic food purchasing. The research adopted a quantitative approach using a pre-examined instrument, which was self-administered by the research team (with support from a data collection-specialised company) to consumers who were urgently shopping for food in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). The results of structural equation modelling (SEM) using analysis of a moment structures (AMOS) software showed a significant positive impact of perceived severity on consumers' anxiety and self-isolation intention amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Self-isolation intention was found to have a significant positive impact on the anxiety of consumers amid the pandemic. Additionally, perceived severity, anxiety, and self-isolation have a significant positive impact on panic food purchasing. Both anxiety and self-isolation were found to have partial mediating effects in the link between perceived severity and panic purchasing intention. The results of the current research contribute to a better understanding of factors that influence panic purchasing behaviour, especially amid a pandemic. This will help policymakers to deal with this behaviour when such issues arise in the future. Other implications for scholars and policy makers are discussed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety Disorders , Panic
19.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(22)2022 Nov 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2116130

ABSTRACT

(1) Background: Although physical activity has been widely recognized as an effective way to improve anxiety and depression, we lack a systematic summary of research on improving anxiety and depression during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study aims to systematically analyze how physical activity impacts on this situation in college students during COVID-19. (2) Methods: Both Chinese and English databases (PubMed the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang) were analyzed. All the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about physical activity intervention for this were included. We received eight eligible RCT experiments before the retrieval time (4 October 2022) in the meta-analysis. (3) Results: Physical activity benefits for college students with significant anxiety were (SMD = -0.50; 95% CI = -0.83 to -0.17; I2 = 84%; p < 0.001; Z = 2.98;) and depression (SMD = -0.62; 95% CI = -0.99 to -0.25; I2 = 80.7%; p < 0.001; Z = 3.27). Subgroup analyses showed physical activity of different intensities significantly impacted on improving college students' depression and anxiety, but physical activity of 6 < 9 Mets intensity had a greater effect on anxiety than on depression. Interventions of eight weeks or less performed better than those of over eight weeks while interventions less than four times per week had a significant effect on improving the situation. The overall effect of a single intervention of 30 min was more effective than one of over 60 min. (4) Conclusion: Physical activities can effectively improve the situation of anxiety and depression for college students during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, a higher quality RCT experiment is needed to prove it.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/prevention & control , Universities , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/prevention & control , Exercise , Students
20.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(22)2022 Nov 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2116114

ABSTRACT

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes coronavirus disease (COVID-19), was first identified in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. As of 20 October 2020, the virus had infected 8,202,552 people, with 220,061 deaths in US, and in countries around the world, over 38 million people have become infected and over one million have died. The virus usually spreads via respiratory droplets from an infected person. At the time of compiling this paper, while countries around the world are still striving to find a "pharmaceutical intervention (PI)", including treatments and vaccines, they are left with only "non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs)", such as physical distancing, wearing masks, and maintaining personal hygiene. In the US, all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and five US territories issued mandatory stay-at-home orders between March 1 and 31 May 2020 to lower the risk of virus transmission. This study empirically examined how social connectedness and anxiety interact with shelter-in-place compliance and advisories during the pandemic. The study collected information from 494 adults using an online survey during April and July 2020.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Social Media , Adult , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Physical Distancing , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Emergency Shelter , SARS-CoV-2 , Anxiety/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL