Scalability of digital psychological innovations for refugees: A comparative analysis in Egypt, Germany, and Sweden

E-mental health interventions may offer innovative means to increase access to psychological support and improve the mental health of refugees. However, there is limited knowledge about how these innovations can be scaled up and integrated sustainably into routine services. This study examined the scalability of a digital psychological intervention called Step-by-Step (SbS) for refugees in Egypt, Germany, and Sweden. We conducted semi-structured interviews (n = 88) with Syrian refugees, and experts in SbS or mental health among refugees in the three countries. Data collection and analysis were guided by a system innovation perspective. Interviewees identified three contextual factors that influenced scalability of SbS in each country: increasing use of e-health, the COVID-19 pandemic, and political instability. Nine factors lay at the interface between the innovation and potential delivery systems, and these were categorised by culture (ways of thinking), structure (ways of organising), and practice (ways of doing). Factors related to culture included: perceived need and acceptability of the innovation. Acceptability was influenced by mental health stigma and awareness, digital trust, perceived novelty of self-help interventions, and attitudes towards non-specialist (e-helper) support. Factors related to structure included financing, regulations, accessibility, competencies of e-helpers, and quality control. Factors related to practice were barriers in the initial and continued engagement of end-users. Many actors with a potential stake in the integration of SbS across the three countries were identified, with nineteen stakeholders deemed most powerful. Several context-specific integration scenarios were developed, which need to be tested. We conclude that integrating novel e-mental health interventions for refugees into routine services will be a complex task due to the many interrelated factors and actors involved. Multi-stakeholder collaboration, including the involvement of end-users, will be essential.

COVID-19 and common mental health symptoms in the early phase of the pandemic: An umbrella review of the evidence.

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.

Treating depression with a smartphone-delivered self-help cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia: a parallel-group randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite its efficacy in treating comorbid insomnia and depression, cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) is limited in its accessibility and, in many countries, cultural compatibility. Smartphone-based treatment is a low-cost, convenient alternative modality. This study evaluated a self-help smartphone-based CBT-I in alleviating major depression and insomnia. METHODS: A parallel-group randomized, waitlist-controlled trial was conducted with 320 adults with major depression and insomnia. Participants were randomized to receive either a 6-week CBT-I via a smartphone application, proACT-S, or waitlist condition. The primary outcomes included depression severity, insomnia severity, and sleep quality. The secondary outcomes included anxiety severity, subjective health, and acceptability of treatment. Assessments were administered at baseline, post-intervention (week 6) follow-up, and week 12 follow-up. The waitlist group received treatment after the week 6 follow-up. RESULTS: Intention to treat analysis was conducted with multilevel modeling. In all but one model, the interaction between treatment condition and time at week 6 follow-up was significant. Compared with the waitlist group, the treatment group had lower levels of depression [Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D): Cohen's d = 0.86, 95% CI (-10.11 to -5.37)], insomnia [Insomnia Severity Index (ISI): Cohen's d = 1.00, 95% CI (-5.93 to -3.53)], and anxiety [Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - Anxiety subscale (HADS-A): Cohen's d = 0.83, 95% CI (-3.75 to -1.96)]. They also had better sleep quality [Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI): Cohen's d = 0.91, 95% CI (-3.34 to -1.83)]. No differences across any measures were found at week 12, after the waitlist control group received the treatment. CONCLUSION: proACT-S is an efficacious sleep-focused self-help treatment for major depression and insomnia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04228146. Retrospectively registered on 14 January 2020. http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04228146.

CBT treatment delivery formats for panic disorder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Several in-person and remote delivery formats of cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) for panic disorder are available, but up-to-date and comprehensive evidence on their comparative efficacy and acceptability is lacking. Our aim was to evaluate the comparative efficacy and acceptability of all CBT delivery formats to treat panic disorder. To answer our question we performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CENTRAL, from inception to 1st January 2022. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA). The protocol was published in a peer-reviewed journal and in PROSPERO. We found a total of 74 trials with 6699 participants. Evidence suggests that face-to-face group [standardised mean differences (s.m.d.) -0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.87 to -0.07; CINeMA = moderate], face-to-face individual (s.m.d. -0.43, 95% CI -0.70 to -0.15; CINeMA = Moderate), and guided self-help (SMD -0.42, 95% CI -0.77 to -0.07; CINeMA = low), are superior to treatment as usual in terms of efficacy, whilst unguided self-help is not (SMD -0.21, 95% CI -0.58 to -0.16; CINeMA = low). In terms of acceptability (i.e. all-cause discontinuation from the trial) CBT delivery formats did not differ significantly from each other. Our findings are clear in that there are no efficacy differences between CBT delivered as guided self-help, or in the face-to-face individual or group format in the treatment of panic disorder. No CBT delivery format provided high confidence in the evidence at the CINeMA evaluation.

Risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, severe COVID-19 illness and COVID-19 mortality in people with pre-existing mental disorders: an umbrella review.

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.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic and Associated Control Measures on the Mental Health of the General Population : A Systematic Review and Dose-Response Meta-analysis.

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).

Mood disorders in higher education in Flanders during the 2nd and 3rd COVID-19 wave: Prevalence and help-seeking: Findings from the Flemish College Surveys (FLeCS).

To examine the prevalence of 12-month mood disorders and receipt of mental health treatment among a volunteer sample of higher education students during the 2nd and 3rd COVID-19 wave in the Flanders region. Web-based self-report surveys were obtained from 9101 students in higher education in the Flemish College Surveys (FLeCS) in Flanders, Belgium. As part of the World Health Organization's World Mental Health-International College Student Initiative, we screened for 12-month mood disorders (major depressive episode (MDE), mania/hypomania), and service use. We used poststratification weights to generate population-representative data on key socio-demographic characteristics. 50.6% of the respondents screened positive for 12-month mood disorders (46.8% MDE, of which 22.9% with very severe impact). Use of services was very low, with estimates of 35.4% for MDE, 31.7% for mania, and 25.5% for hypomania. Even among students with very severe disorders, treatment rates were never higher than 48.3%. Most common barriers for not using services were: the preference to handle the problem alone (83.4%) and not knowing where to seek professional help (79.8%). We found a high unmet need for mood problems among college students; though caution is needed in interpreting these findings given the volunteer nature of the sample. A reallocation of treatment resources for higher education students should be considered, particulary services that focus on innovative, low-threshold, and scalable interventions.

Pilot randomised controlled trial of a remotely delivered online intervention for adolescent mental health problems in India: lessons learned about low acceptability and feasibility during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: 'POD Adventures' is a gamified problem-solving intervention delivered via smartphone app, and supported by non-specialist counsellors for a target population of secondary school students in India during the COVID-19 pandemic. AIMS: To evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of undertaking a randomised controlled trial of POD Adventures when delivered online with telephone support from counsellors. METHOD: We conducted a parallel, two-arm, individually randomised pilot-controlled trial with 11 secondary schools in Goa, India. Participants received either the POD Adventures intervention delivered over 4 weeks or usual care comprising information about local mental health services and national helplines. Outcomes were assessed at two timepoints: baseline and 6 weeks post-randomisation. RESULTS: Seventy-nine classroom sensitisation sessions reaching a total of 1575 students were conducted. Ninety-two self-initiated study referrals (5.8%) were received, but only 11 participants enrolled in the study. No intervention arm participants completed the intervention. Outcomes at 6 weeks were not available for intervention arm participants (n = 5), and only four control arm participants completed outcomes. No qualitative interviews or participant satisfaction measures were completed because participants could not be reached by the study team. CONCLUSIONS: Despite modifications to address barriers arising from COVID-19 restrictions, online delivery was not feasible in the study context. Low recruitment and missing feasibility and acceptability data make it difficult to draw conclusions about intervention engagement and indicative clinical outcomes. Prior findings showing high uptake, adherence and engagement with POD Adventures when delivered in a school-based context suggest that an online study and delivery posed the biggest barriers to study participation and engagement.

Study protocol for pragmatic trials of Internet-delivered guided and unguided cognitive behavior therapy for treating depression and anxiety in university students of two Latin American countries: the Yo Puedo Sentirme Bien study.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder (MDD) and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) are highly prevalent among university students and predict impaired college performance and later life role functioning. Yet most students do not receive treatment, especially in low-middle-income countries (LMICs). We aim to evaluate the effects of expanding treatment using scalable and inexpensive Internet-delivered transdiagnostic cognitive behavioral therapy (iCBT) among college students with symptoms of MDD and/or GAD in two LMICs in Latin America (Colombia and Mexico) and to investigate the feasibility of creating a precision treatment rule (PTR) to predict for whom iCBT is most effective. METHODS: We will first carry out a multi-site randomized pragmatic clinical trial (N = 1500) of students seeking treatment at student mental health clinics in participating universities or responding to an email offering services. Students on wait lists for clinic services will be randomized to unguided iCBT (33%), guided iCBT (33%), and treatment as usual (TAU) (33%). iCBT will be provided immediately whereas TAU will be whenever a clinic appointment is available. Short-term aggregate effects will be assessed at 90 days and longer-term effects 12 months after randomization. We will use ensemble machine learning to predict heterogeneity of treatment effects of unguided versus guided iCBT versus TAU and develop a precision treatment rule (PTR) to optimize individual student outcome. We will then conduct a second and third trial with separate samples (n = 500 per arm), but with unequal allocation across two arms: 25% will be assigned to the treatment determined to yield optimal outcomes based on the PTR developed in the first trial (PTR for optimal short-term outcomes for Trial 2 and 12-month outcomes for Trial 3), whereas the remaining 75% will be assigned with equal allocation across all three treatment arms. DISCUSSION: By collecting comprehensive baseline characteristics to evaluate heterogeneity of treatment effects, we will provide valuable and innovative information to optimize treatment effects and guide university mental health treatment planning. Such an effort could have enormous public-health implications for the region by increasing the reach of treatment, decreasing unmet need and clinic wait times, and serving as a model of evidence-based intervention planning and implementation. TRIAL STATUS: IRB Approval of Protocol Version 1.0; June 3, 2020. Recruitment began on March 1, 2021. Recruitment is tentatively scheduled to be completed on May 30, 2024. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04780542 . First submission date: February 28, 2021.

Effects of a WHO-guided digital health intervention for depression in Syrian refugees in Lebanon: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Most displaced people with mental disorders in low- and middle-income countries do not receive effective care, and their access to care has deteriorated during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Digital mental health interventions are scalable when digital access is adequate, and they can be safely delivered during the COVID-19 pandemic. We examined whether a new WHO-guided digital mental health intervention, Step-by-Step, in which participants were supported by a nonspecialist helper, was effective in reducing depression among displaced people in Lebanon. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a single-blind, 2-arm pragmatic randomized clinical trial, comparing guided Step-by-Step with enhanced care as usual (ECAU) among displaced Syrians suffering from depression and impaired functioning in Lebanon. Primary outcomes were depression (Patient Health Questionnaire, PHQ-9) and impaired functioning (WHO Disability Assessment Schedule-12, WHODAS) at posttreatment. Secondary outcomes included subjective well-being, anxiety, post-traumatic stress, and self-described problems. A total of 569 displaced people from Syria with depression (PHQ-9 ≥ 10) and impaired functioning (WHODAS > 16) were randomized to Step-by-Step (N = 283; lost to follow-up: N = 167) or ECAU (N = 286; lost to follow-up: 133). Participants were considered to be lost to follow-up when they did not fill in the outcome measures at posttest or follow-up. Recruitment started on December 9, 2019 and was completed on July 9, 2020. The last follow-up assessments were collected in December 2020. The study team had access to the online platform, where they could see treatment arm assignment for each participant. All questionnaires were completed by participants online. Intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses showed intervention effects on depression (standardized mean differences [SMDs]: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.26; 0.70; p < 0.001), impaired functioning (SMD: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.14; 0.56; p < 0.001), post-traumatic stress (SMD: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.16; 0.56; p < 0.001), anxiety (SMD: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.24; 0.68; p < 0.001), subjective well-being (SMD: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.26; 0.68; p < 0.001), and self-identified personal problems (SMD: 0.49; 95% CI 0.28; 0.70; p < 0.001). Significant effects on all outcomes were maintained at 3 months follow-up. During the trial, one serious adverse event occurred, unrelated to the intervention. The main limitation of the current trial is the high dropout rate. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that a guided, digital intervention was effective in reducing depression in displaced people in Lebanon. The guided WHO Step-by-Step intervention we examined should be made available to communities of displaced people that have digital access. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03720769.

Guided digital health intervention for depression in Lebanon: randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Most people with mental disorders in communities exposed to adversity in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) do not receive effective care. Digital mental health interventions are scalable when digital access is adequate, and can be safely delivered during the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of a new WHO-guided digital mental health intervention, Step-by-Step, supported by a non-specialist helper in Lebanon, in the context of concurring economic, humanitarian and political crises, a large industrial disaster and the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a single-blind, two-arm pragmatic randomised trial, comparing guided Step-by-Step with enhanced care as usual (ECAU) among people suffering from depression and impaired functioning. Primary outcomes were depression (Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9)) and impaired functioning (WHO Disability Assessment Schedule-12 (WHODAS)) at post-treatment. FINDINGS: 680 people with depression (PHQ-9>10) and impaired functioning (WHODAS>16) were randomised to Step-by-Step or ECAU. Intention-to-treat analyses showed effects on depression (standardised mean differences, SMD: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.97), impaired functioning (SMD: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.65), post-traumatic stress (SMD: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.27 to 0.79), anxiety (SMD: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.49 to 0.99), subjective well-being (SMD: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.62) and self-identified personal problems (SMD: 0.56; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.83). Significant effects on all outcomes were retained at 3-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Guided digital mental health interventions can be effective in the treatment of depression in communities exposed to adversities in LMICs, although some uncertainty remains because of high attrition. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Guided digital mental health interventions should be considered for implementation in LMICs. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03720769.

Impact of major disease outbreaks in the third millennium on adolescent and youth sexual and reproductive health and rights in low and/or middle-income countries: a systematic scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (SRHR) of young people continue to present a high burden and remain underinvested. This is more so in low and middle-income countries (LMICs), where empirical evidence reveals disruption of SRHR maintenance, need for enhancement of programmes, resources and services during pandemics. Despite the importance of the subject, there is no published review yet combining recent disease outbreaks such as (H1N1/09, Zika, Ebola and SARS-COV-2) to assess their impact on adolescents and youth SRHR in LMICs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will adopt a four-step search to reach the maximum possible number of studies. In the first step, we will carry out a limitedpreliminary search in databases for getting relevant keywords (appendix 1). Second, we will search in four databases: Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Embase and PsycINFO. The search would begin from the inception of the first major outbreak in 2009 (H1N1/09) up to the date of publication of the protocol in early 2022. We will search databases using related keywords, screen title & abstract and review full texts of the selected titles to arrive at the list of eligible studies. In the third stage, we will check their eligibility to the included article's reference list. In the fourth stage, we will check the citations of included papers in phase 2 to complete our study selection. We will include all types of original studies and without any language restriction in our final synthesis. Our review results will be charted for each pandemic separately and include details pertaining to authors, year, country, region of the study, study design, participants (disaggregated by age and gender), purpose and report associated SRHR outcomes. The review will adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guideline (PRISMA-ScR). PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: Patients or public were not involved in this study. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical assessment is not required for this study. The results of the study will be presented in peer-reviewed publications and conferences on adolescent SRHR.

Depressive symptoms and psychological distress from antenatal to postnatal period in women with high-risk pregnancy: A prospective study during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on mental disorders in postnatal period remains unknown. AIM: The study aimed to determine the extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic may aggravate depressive symptoms and psychological distress of women with high-risk pregnancy in postnatal period. METHODS: This prospective cross-sectional study was conducted on women with complicated pregnancies from antenatal to postnatal period. In the first phase, from December 2019 to January 2020 (before the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic), 122 pregnant women filled in the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) and Brief Symptom Inventory 53-items (BSI-53). In the second phase, with the start of the COVID-19 pandemic from February to June, 30% of the participants (41/122) completed three questionnaires: EPDS, BSI-53, and the posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) scale in postpartum period. RESULTS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, from antenatal to postnatal period, the depression score of EPDS, total scores, all the subscales of BSI-53, and global severity index-53 increased in women with high-risk pregnancy. Furthermore, the persistence of antenatal depression occurred in 85.7% of the participants, and the onset of postnatal depression occurred in 80% of them. About 12% of the women also experienced PTSD symptoms during the postnatal period. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic may aggravate the prevalence and persistence of postnatal depression in women with high-risk pregnancy. The study calls for clinical implementation to identify and help women with mental disorders in postnatal period, especially women experiencing complicated pregnancies.

Digital interventions for the treatment of depression: A meta-analytic review.

The high global prevalence of depression, together with the recent acceleration of remote care owing to the COVID-19 pandemic, has prompted increased interest in the efficacy of digital interventions for the treatment of depression. We provide a summary of the latest evidence base for digital interventions in the treatment of depression based on the largest study sample to date. A systematic literature search identified 83 studies (N = 15,530) that randomly allocated participants to a digital intervention for depression versus an active or inactive control condition. Overall heterogeneity was very high (I2 = 84%). Using a random-effects multilevel metaregression model, we found a significant medium overall effect size of digital interventions compared with all control conditions (g = .52). Subgroup analyses revealed significant differences between interventions and different control conditions (WLC: g = .70; attention: g = .36; TAU: g = .31), significantly higher effect sizes in interventions that involved human therapeutic guidance (g = .63) compared with self-help interventions (g = .34), and significantly lower effect sizes for effectiveness trials (g = .30) compared with efficacy trials (g = .59). We found no significant difference in outcomes between smartphone-based apps and computer- and Internet-based interventions and no significant difference between human-guided digital interventions and face-to-face psychotherapy for depression, although the number of studies in both comparisons was low. Findings from the current meta-analysis provide evidence for the efficacy and effectiveness of digital interventions for the treatment of depression for a variety of populations. However, reported effect sizes may be exaggerated because of publication bias, and compliance with digital interventions outside of highly controlled settings remains a significant challenge. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Symptom monitoring in cancer and fully automated advice on supportive care: Patients' perspectives on self-management strategies and the eHealth self-management application Oncokompas.

OBJECTIVE: The web-based application Oncokompas was developed to support cancer patients to self-manage their symptoms. This qualitative study was conducted to obtain insight in patients' self-management strategies to cope with cancer and their experiences with Oncokompas as a fully automated behavioural intervention technology. METHODS: Data were collected from semi-structured interviews with 22 participants (10 head and neck cancer survivors and 12 incurably ill patients). Interview questions were about self-management strategies and experiences with Oncokompas. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Participants applied several self-management strategies, among which trying to stay in control and make the best of their situation. They described Oncokompas' added value: being able to monitor symptoms and having access to a personal online library. Main reasons for not using Oncokompas were concentration problems, lack of time or having technical issues. Recommendations were made for further development of Oncokompas, relating to its content, technical and functional aspects. CONCLUSIONS: Survivors and incurably ill patients use various self-management strategies to cope with cancer. The objectives of self-management interventions as Oncokompas correspond well with these strategies: taking a certain responsibility for your well-being and being in charge of your life as long as possible by obtaining automated information (24/7) on symptoms and tailored supportive care options.

A longitudinal study of mental health before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in Syrian refugees.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in increased anxiety and depression around the world. Refugees may be particularly vulnerable to the mental health effects of the pandemic because of their higher rates of mental health disorders, trauma histories, and daily stressors. Objectives: This study used data from a controlled trial of a brief behavioural intervention for psychological distress in Syrian refugees living in Azraq Camp in Jordan to examine the psychological effects of the pandemic on refugee mental health. Method: A total of 410 participants were randomized to either the intervention or control arms of the trial and were assessed at baseline and 3-month follow-up. Half the sample (199; 48.5%) completed their 3-month follow-up assessment after the pandemic restrictions began in Jordan and 211 (51.5%) completed the assessment prior to the pandemic. Refugees were independently assessed for symptoms of PTSD, anxiety, and depression at baseline and follow-up, and pandemic-related worries were assessed at follow-up for those who completed their assessment during the pandemic. Results: The most commonly reported worries were economic difficulties (82.4%), shortage of essential supplies (71.3%), and infecting others (59.7%) or themselves (51.9%). Refugees who were assessed during the pandemic had less severe PTSD symptoms than those assessed prior to the pandemic. Significant predictors of pandemic-related worries were lower levels of depression prior to the pandemic and greater anxiety during the pandemic. Conclusion: These findings highlight the specific needs of refugees during the pandemic and suggest that pre-existing mental health issues may not necessarily be the key risk factors for who will experience major mental health issues or worries during the pandemic.

Antecedentes: La ansiedad y la depresión alrededor del mundo se han incrementado como consecuencia de la pandemia por la COVID-19. Los refugiados pueden ser particularmente vulnerables a los efectos de la pandemia sobre la salud mental a sus tasas más altas de trastornos de salud mental, de antecedentes de trauma y de estresores diarios.Objetivos: Este estudio empleó los datos del ensayo controlado de una intervención conductual breve para la angustia psicológica en refugiados sirios que vivían en el campo Azraq en Jordania. Se buscó evaluar los efectos psicológicos de la pandemia sobre la salud mental de los refugiados.Método: Un total de 410 participantes fueron asignados aleatoriamente, bien al grupo de intervención o bien al grupo de control del ensayo, y fueron evaluados al inicio y a los 3 meses de seguimiento. La mitad de la muestra (199; 48,5%) completó la evaluación a los 3 meses de seguimiento después de que comenzaran las restricciones de la pandemia en Jordania, mientras que 211 (51,5%) completaron esta evaluación antes de la pandemia. Los refugiados fueron evaluados de forma independiente para detectar síntomas del TEPT, de la ansiedad y de la depresión al inicio y en el seguimiento. Las preocupaciones relacionadas a la pandemia se evaluaron durante el seguimiento en aquellos que completaron su evaluación durante la pandemia.Resultados: Las preocupaciones más comúnmente reportadas fueron las dificultades económicas (82,4%), la escasez de suministros esenciales (71,3%) y la infección de otros (59,7%) o de ellos mismos (51,9%). Los refugiados que fueron evaluados durante la pandemia tenían síntomas de TEPT menos severos que aquellos que fueron evaluados antes de la pandemia. Los predictores significativos de las preocupaciones relacionados con la pandemia fueron niveles más bajos de depresión antes de la pandemia y mayor ansiedad durante la pandemia.Conclusiones: Estos hallazgos destacan las necesidades especificas de los refugiados durante la pandemia y sugieren que los problemas de salud mental preexistentes no necesariamente pueden ser los factores de riesgo clave para aquellos que experimentarán los principales problemas de salud mental o preocupaciones durante la pandemia.

A Guided Internet-Based Problem-Solving Intervention Delivered Through Smartphones for Secondary School Pupils During the COVID-19 Pandemic in India: Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: "POD Adventures" is a gamified mental health intervention delivered via a smartphone app and supported by counsellors for a target population of secondary school students in India. This paper describes the protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial of a remotely delivered version of the intervention in the context of COVID-19 restrictions. OBJECTIVE: Our objectives are to assess the feasibility of research procedures and intervention delivery and to generate preliminary estimates of the effectiveness of the intervention to inform the sample size calculation of a full-scale trial. METHODS: We will conduct a parallel, 2-arm, individually randomized pilot controlled trial in 11 secondary schools in Goa, India. This pilot trial aims to recruit 70 participants with a felt need for psychological support. Participants will receive either the POD Adventures intervention delivered over 4 weeks or usual care comprising information about local mental health services and national helplines. Outcomes will be assessed at two timepoints: baseline and 6 weeks post randomization. RESULTS: The first participant was enrolled on January 28, 2021, and 6-week assessment completed on April 4, 2021. Owing to a second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in India, schools in Goa were closed on April 22, 2021. Trial participants are currently receiving the intervention or completing follow-up assessments. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot trial will help understand the feasibility of implementing and evaluating a remotely delivered digital mental health intervention in a low-resource setting. Our findings will be used to design future trials that can address difficulties of accessing psychosocial support in-person and support wider efforts to scale up evidence-based mental health interventions for young people. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04672486; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04672486. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/30339.

A Web-Based Group Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Intervention for Symptoms of Anxiety and Depression Among University Students: Open-Label, Pragmatic Trial.

BACKGROUND: Anxiety and depression are common among university students, and university counseling centers are under pressure to develop effective, novel, and sustainable interventions that engage and retain students. Group interventions delivered via the internet could be a novel and effective way to promote student mental health. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a pragmatic open trial to investigate the uptake, retention, treatment response, and level of satisfaction with a remote group cognitive behavioral therapy intervention designed to reduce symptoms of anxiety and depression delivered on the web to university students during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Preintervention and postintervention self-reported data on anxiety and depression were collected using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 and Patient Health Questionnaire-9. Satisfaction was assessed postintervention using the Client Satisfaction with Treatment Questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 175 students were enrolled, 158 (90.3%) of whom initiated treatment. Among those initiating treatment, 86.1% (135/158) identified as female, and the mean age was 22.4 (SD 4.9) years. The mean number of sessions attended was 6.4 (SD 2.8) out of 10. Among participants with clinically significant symptoms at baseline, mean symptom scores decreased significantly for anxiety (t56=11.6; P<.001), depression (t61=7.8; P<.001), and composite anxiety and depression (t60=10.7; P<.001), with large effect sizes (d=1-1.5). Remission rates among participants with clinically significant baseline symptoms were 67.7%-78.9% and were not associated with baseline symptom severity. High overall levels of satisfaction with treatment were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study serve as a proof of concept for the use of web-based group cognitive behavioral therapy to promote the mental health of university students.

DetectaWeb-Distress Scale: A Global and Multidimensional Web-Based Screener for Emotional Disorder Symptoms in Children and Adolescents.

Emotional disorder symptoms are highly prevalent and a common cause of disability among children and adolescents. Screening and early detection are needed to identify those who need help and to improve treatment outcomes. Nowadays, especially with the arrival of the COVID-19 outbreak, assessment is increasingly conducted online, resulting in the need for brief online screening measures. The aim of the current study was to examine the reliability and different sources of validity evidence of a new web-based screening questionnaire for emotional disorder symptoms, the DetectaWeb-Distress Scale, which assesses mood (major depression and dysthymic disorder), anxiety (separation anxiety, generalized anxiety, social phobia, panic disorder/agoraphobia, and specific phobia), obsessive-compulsive disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, suicidality (suicidal ideation, plans, and attempts), and global distress. A total of 1,499 participants (aged 8-18) completed the DetectaWeb-Distress Scale and specific questionnaires for emotional disorder symptoms, suicidal behaviors, and well-being through a web-based survey. Results indicated that a structural model of 10 correlated factors fits reasonably better in comparison to the remaining models; measurement invariance for age and gender; good internal consistency (McDonald's ω ranging from 0.65 to 0.94); and significant positive correlation with other measures of anxiety, depression, PTSD, or distress, and negative correlation with well-being measures, displaying support for convergent-discriminant validity. We also found that girls scored higher than boys on most of the subscales, and children had higher scores for social anxiety, specific phobia, panic disorder, and obsessive-compulsive symptoms, whereas adolescents scored higher on depressive symptoms, suicidality, and generalized anxiety, but the effect sizes were small to medium for all comparisons. The DetectaWeb-Distress Scale is a valid, innovative, and useful online tool for the screening and evaluation of preventive programs for mental health in children and adolescents.