Inequality on the frontline: A multi-country study on gender differences in mental health among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Healthcare workers (HCWs) were at increased risk for mental health problems during the COVID-19 pandemic, with prior data suggesting women may be particularly vulnerable. Our global mental health study aimed to examine factors associated with gender differences in psychological distress and depressive symptoms among HCWs during COVID-19. Across 22 countries in South America, Europe, Asia and Africa, 32,410 HCWs participated in the COVID-19 HEalth caRe wOrkErS (HEROES) study between March 2020 and February 2021. They completed the General Health Questionnaire-12, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and questions about pandemic-relevant exposures. Consistently across countries, women reported elevated mental health problems compared to men. Women also reported increased COVID-19-relevant stressors, including insufficient personal protective equipment and less support from colleagues, while men reported increased contact with COVID-19 patients. At the country level, HCWs in countries with higher gender inequality reported less mental health problems. Higher COVID-19 mortality rates were associated with increased psychological distress merely among women. Our findings suggest that among HCWs, women may have been disproportionately exposed to COVID-19-relevant stressors at the individual and country level. This highlights the importance of considering gender in emergency response efforts to safeguard women's well-being and ensure healthcare system preparedness during future public health crises.

Risk factors for suicide reattempt: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Suicide is one of the main external causes of death worldwide. People who have already attempted suicide are at high risk of new suicidal behavior. However, there is a lack of information on the risk factors that facilitate the appearance of reattempts. The aim of this study was to calculate the risk of suicide reattempt in the presence of suicidal history and psychosocial risk factors and to estimate the effect of each individual risk factor. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following the PRISMA-2020 guidelines. Studies on suicide reattempt that measured risk factors were searched from inception to 2022. The risk factors studied were those directly related to suicide history: history of suicide prior to the index attempt, and those that mediate the transition from suicidal ideation to attempt (alcohol or drug misuse, impulsivity, trauma, and non-suicidal self-injury). RESULTS: The initial search resulted in 11 905 articles. Of these, 34 articles were selected for this meta-analysis, jointly presenting 52 different effect sizes. The pooled effect size across the risk factors was significant (OR 2.16). Reattempt risk may be increased in presence of any of the following risk factors: previous history, active suicidal ideation, trauma, alcohol misuse, and drug misuse. However, impulsivity, and non-suicidal self-injury did not show a significant effect on reattempt. CONCLUSION: Most of the risk factors traditionally associated with suicide are also relevant when talking about suicide reattempts. Knowing the traits that define reattempters can help develop better preventive and intervention plans.

Adverse childhood experiences and cognition: A cross-sectional study in Xhosa people living with schizophrenia and matched medical controls.

BACKGROUND: Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are associated with impaired cognitive function in adult life in the general population as well as in people living with schizophrenia (PLS). Research on cognitive function in PLS in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) is, however, limited. The objectives of this study were to investigate the association between ACE types and various cognitive domains in a sample of PLS and matched medical controls, and to determine the moderating effect of group membership (PLS vs. medical controls) on these associations, in the South African setting. METHODS: Participants (n PLS = 520; n medical controls = 832) completed the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire-Short Form, the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID-I), and the University of Pennsylvania Computerized Neurocognitive Battery (PennCNB). An efficiency or speed score was used to assess performance across 9 cognitive domains. The association between exposure to different ACE types and 9 cognitive domains was examined using partial correlations and multiple linear regression models, adjusting for sex, age and education years. Finally, potential moderating effects of group membership (PLS vs. medical controls) on the association between ACEs and cognitive domains were tested. RESULTS: In the entire sample, emotional and physical abuse predicted worse performance on sensorimotor and emotion identification domains. Also, emotional abuse was negatively associated with motor function, physical abuse was negatively associated with spatial processing, and physical neglect was negatively associated with face memory and emotion identification. In contrast, emotional neglect was related to better performance on abstraction and mental flexibility. No moderating effect of group membership was found on any of these associations. CONCLUSION: Exposure to ACEs was associated with social and non-social cognition in adulthood, although the magnitude of these relationships was small and similar between PLS and matched medical controls. The nature of these associations differed across ACE subtype, suggesting the need for a nuanced approach to studying a range of mechanisms that may underlie different associations. However, a number of ACE subtypes were associated with worse performance on emotional identification, indicating that some underlying mechanisms may have more transversal impact. These findings contribute to the sparse body of literature on ACEs and cognition in PLS in LMIC.

Addressing mental health problems among persons without stable housing in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: study protocol for a randomised trial. RESPOND - France.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact on population-wide mental health and well-being. Although people experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage may be especially vulnerable, they experience barriers in accessing mental health care. To overcome these barriers, the World Health Organization (WHO) designed two scalable psychosocial interventions, namely the web-based Doing What Matters in Times of Stress (DWM) and the face-to-face Problem Management Plus (PM+), to help people manage stressful situations. Our study aims to test the effectiveness of a stepped-care program using DWM and PM + among individuals experiencing unstable housing in France - a majority of whom are migrant or have sought asylum. METHODS: This is a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of a stepped-care program using DWM and PM + among persons with psychological distress and experiencing unstable housing, in comparison to enhanced care as usual (eCAU). Participants (N = 210) will be randomised to two parallel groups: eCAU or eCAU plus the stepped-care program. The main study outcomes are symptoms of depression and anxiety measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety and Depression Scale (PHQ-ADS). DISCUSSION: This randomised controlled trial will contribute to a better understanding of effective community-based scalable strategies that can help address the mental health needs of persons experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage, whose needs are high yet who frequently have limited access to mental health care services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: this randomised trial has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under the number NCT05033210.

Effectiveness of a scalable, remotely delivered stepped-care intervention to reduce symptoms of psychological distress among Polish migrant workers in the Netherlands: study protocol for the RESPOND randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively affected the mental health of international migrant workers (IMWs). IMWs experience multiple barriers to accessing mental health care. Two scalable interventions developed by the World Health Organization (WHO) were adapted to address some of these barriers: Doing What Matters in times of stress (DWM), a guided self-help web application, and Problem Management Plus (PM +), a brief facilitator-led program to enhance coping skills. This study examines whether DWM and PM + remotely delivered as a stepped-care programme (DWM/PM +) is effective and cost-effective in reducing psychological distress, among Polish migrant workers with psychological distress living in the Netherlands. METHODS: The stepped-care DWM/PM + intervention will be tested in a two-arm, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial (RCT) among adult Polish migrant workers with self-reported psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale; K10 > 15.9). Participants (n = 212) will be randomized into either the intervention group that receives DWM/PM + with psychological first aid (PFA) and care-as-usual (enhanced care-as-usual or eCAU), or into the control group that receives PFA and eCAU-only (1:1 allocation ratio). Baseline, 1-week post-DWM (week 7), 1-week post-PM + (week 13), and follow-up (week 21) self-reported assessments will be conducted. The primary outcome is psychological distress, assessed with the Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety and Depression Scale (PHQ-ADS). Secondary outcomes are self-reported symptoms of depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), resilience, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. In a process evaluation, stakeholders' views on barriers and facilitators to the implementation of DWM/PM + will be evaluated. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this is one of the first RCTs that combines two scalable, psychosocial WHO interventions into a stepped-care programme for migrant populations. If proven to be effective, this may bridge the mental health treatment gap IMWs experience. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch trial register NL9630, 20/07/2021, https://www.onderzoekmetmensen.nl/en/trial/27052.

Use of psychological interventions among healthcare workers over the 2-year period following the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal study.

INTRODUCTION: Although healthcare workers (HCWs) have reported mental health problems since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, they rarely use psychological support. Here, we described the use of psychological support among HCWs in Spain over the 2-year period following the initial pandemic outbreak and explore its association with workplace- and COVID-19-related factors measured at baseline, in 2020. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal study on HCWs working in Spain. We used an online survey to collect information on sociodemographic characteristics, depressive symptoms, workplace- and COVID-19-related variables, and the use of psychological support at three time points (2020, 2021, and 2022). Data was available for 296, 294, and 251 respondents, respectively at time points 1, 2, and 3. RESULTS: Participants had a median age of 43 years and were mostly females (n = 242, 82%). The percentage of HCWs using psychological support increased from 15% in 2020 to 23% in 2022. Roughly one in four HCWs who did not use psychological support reported symptoms compatible with major depressive disorder at follow up. Baseline predictors of psychological support were having to make decisions about patients' prioritisation (OR 5.59, 95% CI 2.47, 12.63) and probable depression (wave 2: OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.06, 1.19; wave 3: OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.04, 1.16). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that there is call for implementing mental health promotion and prevention strategies at the workplace, along with actions to reduce barriers for accessing psychological support.

Effectiveness of a mental health stepped-care programme for healthcare workers with psychological distress in crisis settings: a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based mental health interventions to support healthcare workers (HCWs) in crisis settings are scarce. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the capacity of a mental health intervention in reducing anxiety and depression symptoms in HCWs, relative to enhanced care as usual (eCAU), amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted an analyst-blind, parallel, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. We recruited HCWs with psychological distress from Madrid and Catalonia (Spain). The intervention arm received a stepped-care programme consisting of two WHO-developed interventions adapted for HCWs: Doing What Matters in Times of Stress (DWM) and Problem Management Plus (PM+). Each intervention lasted 5 weeks and was delivered remotely by non-specialist mental health providers. HCWs reporting psychological distress after DWM completion were invited to continue to PM+. The primary endpoint was self-reported anxiety/depression symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-Anxiety and Depression Scale) at week 21. FINDINGS: Between 3 November 2021 and 31 March 2022, 115 participants were randomised to stepped care and 117 to eCAU (86% women, mean age 37.5). The intervention showed a greater decrease in anxiety/depression symptoms compared with eCAU at the primary endpoint (baseline-adjusted difference 4.4, 95% CI 2.1 to 6.7; standardised effect size 0.8, 95% CI 0.4 to 1.2). No serious adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Brief stepped-care psychological interventions reduce anxiety and depression during a period of stress among HCWs. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Our results can inform policies and actions to protect the mental health of HCWs during major health crises and are potentially rapidly replicable in other settings where workers are affected by global emergencies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04980326.

Views and experiences of migrants and stakeholders involved in social and health care for migrants in Italy during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had major and potentially long-lasting effects on mental health and wellbeing across populations worldwide. However, these impacts were not felt equally, leading to an exacerbation of health inequalities, especially affecting vulnerable populations such as migrants, refugees and asylum seekers. Aiming to inform the adaptation and implementation of psychological intervention programmes, the present study investigated priority mental health needs in this population group. METHODS: Participants were adult asylum seekers, refugees and migrants (ARMs) and stakeholders with experience in the field of migration living in Verona, Italy, and fluent in Italian and English. A two-stage process was carried out to examine their needs using qualitative methods including free listing interviews and focus group discussions, according to Module One of the DIME (Design, Implementation, Monitoring, and Evaluation) manual. Data were analyzed using an inductive thematic analyses approach. RESULTS: A total of 19 participants (12 stakeholders, 7 ARMs) completed the free listing interviews and 20 participants (12 stakeholders and 8 ARMs) attended focus group discussions. Salient problems and functions that emerged during free listing interviews were discussed during the focus group discussions. During the COVID-19 pandemic, ARMs struggled with many everyday living difficulties in their resettlement country due to social and economic issues, revealing a strong influence of contextual factors in determining mental health. Both ARMs and stakeholders highlighted a mismatch between needs, expectations and interventions as factors that may hamper proper implementation of health and social programmes. CONCLUSIONS: The present findings could help in the adaptation and implementation of psychological interventions targeting the needs of asylum seekers, refugees and migrants aiming to find a match between needs, expectations, and the corresponding interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration number 2021-UNVRCLE-0106707, February 11 2021.

The Spanish version of the reflective functioning questionnaire: Validity data in the general population and individuals with personality disorders.

INTRODUCTION: Mentalization or reflective functioning (RF) is the capacity to interpret oneself or the others in terms of internal mental states. Its failures have been linked to several mental disorders and interventions improving RF have a therapeutic effect. Mentalizing capacity of the parents influences the children's attachment. The Reflective Functioning Questionnaire (RFQ-8) is a widely used tool for the assessment of RF. No instrument is available to assess general RF in Spanish-speaking samples. The aim of this study is to develop a Spanish version of the RFQ-8 and to evaluate its reliability and validity in the general population and in individuals with personality disorders. METHODS: 602 non-clinical and 41 personality disordered participants completed a Spanish translation of the RFQ and a battery of self-reported questionnaires assessing several RF related constructs (alexithymia, perspective taking, identity diffusion and mindfulness), psychopathology (general and specific) and interpersonal problems. Temporal stability was tested in a non-clinical sub-sample of 113 participants. RESULTS: Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses suggested a one-factor structure in the Spanish version of the RFQ-8. RFQ-8 understood as a single scale was tested, with low scorings reflecting genuine mentalizing, and high scorings uncertainty. The questionnaire showed good internal consistence in both samples and moderate temporal stability in non-clinical sample. RFQ correlated significantly with identity diffusion, alexithymia, and general psychopathology in both samples; and with mindfulness, perspective taking, and interpersonal problems in clinical sample. Mean values of the scale were significantly higher in the clinical group. DISCUSSION: This study provides evidence that the Spanish version of the RFQ-8, understood as a single scale, has an adequate reliability and validity assessing failures in reflective functioning (i.e., hypomentalization) in general population and personality disorders.

Effectiveness of a stepped-care programme of WHO psychological interventions in migrant populations resettled in Italy: Study protocol for the RESPOND randomized controlled trial.

Introduction: Migrant populations, including workers, undocumented migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, internationally displaced persons, and other populations on the move, are exposed to a variety of stressors and potentially traumatic events before, during, and after the migration process. In recent years, the COVID-19 pandemic has represented an additional stressor, especially for migrants on the move. As a consequence, migration may increase vulnerability of individuals toward a worsening of subjective wellbeing, quality of life, and mental health, which, in turn, may increase the risk of developing mental health conditions. Against this background, we designed a stepped-care programme consisting of two scalable psychological interventions developed by the World Health Organization and locally adapted for migrant populations. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of this stepped-care programme will be assessed in terms of mental health outcomes, resilience, wellbeing, and costs to healthcare systems. Methods and analysis: We present the study protocol for a pragmatic randomized study with a parallel-group design that will enroll participants with a migrant background and elevated level of psychological distress. Participants will be randomized to care as usual only or to care a usual plus a guided self-help stress management guide (Doing What Matters in Times of Stress, DWM) and a five-session cognitive behavioral intervention (Problem Management Plus, PM+). Participants will self-report all measures at baseline before random allocation, 2 weeks after DWM delivery, 1 week after PM+ delivery and 2 months after PM+ delivery. All participants will receive a single-session of a support intervention, namely Psychological First Aid. We will include 212 participants. An intention-to-treat analysis using linear mixed models will be conducted to explore the programme's effect on anxiety and depression symptoms, as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire-Anxiety and Depression Scale summary score 2 months after PM+ delivery. Secondary outcomes include post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms, resilience, quality of life, resource utilization, cost, and cost-effectiveness. Discussion: This study is the first randomized controlled trial that combines two World Health Organization psychological interventions tailored for migrant populations with an elevated level of psychological distress. The present study will make available DWM/PM+ packages adapted for remote delivery following a task-shifting approach, and will generate evidence to inform policy responses based on a more efficient use of resources for improving resilience, wellbeing and mental health. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT04993534.

Risk of suicide attempt repetition after an index attempt: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the risk of suicide attempt repetition among individuals with an index attempt. It also aims to study the role of risk factors and prevention programme in repetition. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in keeping with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Studies on attempt repetition (both cohort studies and intervention studies) were searched from inception to 2022. RESULTS: A total of 110 studies comprising 248,829 attempters was reviewed. The overall repetition rate was 0.20 (0.17, 0.22). Repetition risk linearly increased over time. A higher risk of attempt repetition was associated with female sex and index attempts in which self-cutting methods were used. Moreover, a mental disorder diagnosis was associated with an increasing repetition risk (OR = 2.02, p < .01). The delivery of a preventive programme reduced the repetition risk, OR = 0.76, p < .05; however, this effect was significant for psychotherapy interventions, OR = 0.38, p < .01. CONCLUSION: One in five suicide attempters will engage in a new suicide attempt. An elevated repetition risk is associated with being female, more severe index methods and psychiatric disorder diagnosis. Preventive programmes, particularly psychotherapy, may contribute to reducing repetition risk and eventually save lives.

Coping with COVID: risk and resilience factors for mental health in a German representative panel study.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic might affect mental health. Data from population-representative panel surveys with multiple waves including pre-COVID data investigating risk and protective factors are still rare. METHODS: In a stratified random sample of the German household population (n = 6684), we conducted survey-weighted multiple linear regressions to determine the association of various psychological risk and protective factors assessed between 2015 and 2020 with changes in psychological distress [(PD; measured via Patient Health Questionnaire for Depression and Anxiety (PHQ-4)] from pre-pandemic (average of 2016 and 2019) to peri-pandemic (both 2020 and 2021) time points. Control analyses on PD change between two pre-pandemic time points (2016 and 2019) were conducted. Regularized regressions were computed to inform on which factors were statistically most influential in the multicollinear setting. RESULTS: PHQ-4 scores in 2020 (M = 2.45) and 2021 (M = 2.21) were elevated compared to 2019 (M = 1.79). Several risk factors (catastrophizing, neuroticism, and asking for instrumental support) and protective factors (perceived stress recovery, positive reappraisal, and optimism) were identified for the peri-pandemic outcomes. Control analyses revealed that in pre-pandemic times, neuroticism and optimism were predominantly related to PD changes. Regularized regression mostly confirmed the results and highlighted perceived stress recovery as most consistent influential protective factor across peri-pandemic outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We identified several psychological risk and protective factors related to PD outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. A comparison of pre-pandemic data stresses the relevance of longitudinal assessments to potentially reconcile contradictory findings. Implications and suggestions for targeted prevention and intervention programs during highly stressful times such as pandemics are discussed.

Association between perceived discrimination and mental health outcomes among health workers during the initial COVID-19 outbreak.

BACKGROUND: During the initial COVID-19 outbreak, health systems faced unprecedented organizational stress. Meanwhile, reports of episodes of discrimination and violence towards healthcare workers increased globally. This study explores the association between perceived discrimination and mental health outcomes in a large sample of healthcare workers in Spain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Healthcare workers from inpatient and outpatient facilities (N=2,053) filled an on-line questionnaire in May or June 2020. Mental health outcomes included depression symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-9]), psychological distress (General Health Questionnaire [GHQ-12]) and death thoughts (Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale [C-SSRS]). We also measured perceived discrimination and/or stigmatization due to being a healthcare worker since pandemic onset. Regression models adjusted for potential confounding sources (age, sex, history of a mental health diagnosis and type of job) were fitted. RESULTS: Thirty percent of the respondents reported discrimination and/or stigmatization. Perceived discrimination was associated with higher depression (B=2.4, 95 percent CI: 1.8, 2.9) and psychological distress (B=1.1, 95 percent CI: 0.7, 1.4) scores, and with a 2-fold increase in risk of reporting death thoughts (OR=2.0, 95 percent CI: 1.4, 3.1). CONCLUSIONS: Perceived discrimination is a modifiable driver of mental health problems among healthcare workers. Mass media, legislators, and healthcare institutions must put in place prevention and restoration strategies to limit discrimination towards healthcare workers and reduce its mental health impact.

Intervención basada en mindfulness a través de una app móvil para personas con cáncer colorrectal en espera de cirugía: ensayo clínico aleatorizado / Mindfulness based intervention through mobile app for colorectal cancer people awaiting surgery: A randomized clinical trial

Introducción: El cáncer colorrectal representa el tercer cáncer con mayor incidencia en ambos sexos. Un tercio de los pacientes con cáncer experimentan sintomatología ansiosa o depresiva. El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar la eficacia de una intervención de reducción de estrés basada en mindfulness a través de una aplicación móvil (En calma en el quirófano). Método: Es un ensayo controlado, aleatorizado, con evaluador ciego y multicéntrico, que compara la eficacia de una aplicación de entrenamiento en mindfulness para móviles (rama experimental) con tratamiento habitual (rama control), en 3tiempos de medida (T0 o línea base, T1 o alta a domicilio, T2 o un mes tras cirugía). Se evaluó la sintomatología ansiosa y depresiva (HADS), la calidad de vida (WHOQOL), la escala de dolor (EVA) y la escala de satisfacción (CSQ). Resultados: Hubo un total de 270 derivaciones. Fueron analizadas 82 personas: 39 personas utilizaron la app y 43 continuaron su tratamiento habitual. No hubo cambios significativos entre grupos ni tiempos de medida. Se observó una ligera tendencia en la que el grupo experimental tuvo menos síntomas de depresión y ansiedad entre T0 y T2 (B?= −0,2; IC 95%: 8,8-9,2). Conclusiones: Nuestra población mostraba una edad media alta (65 años), niveles bajos de ansiedad y depresión, y niveles medios de calidad de vida en T0. Estos factores podrían haber interactuado y limitado la eficacia de la app. Nuevas líneas de investigación tienen que ir dirigidas a evaluar la eficacia de las apps para pacientes con enfermedades quirúrgicas en poblaciones más jóvenes. (AU)

Introduction: Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer worldwide that occurs both in men and women. Around one-third of patients with cancer will suffer from anxiety or depression symptoms. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a mindfulness-based stress reduction intervention through a mobile application («en calma en el quirófano»). Method: This study is a multicenter, single-blind (evaluator), controlled, randomized trial that compares the effectiveness of a mindfulness training through a mobile application (intervention group) and treatment as usual (control group) in 3different moments (T0 or baseline, T1 or hospital discharge and T2 or one month after surgery). Hospital Anxiety and depression Scale (HADS), quality of life (WHOQOL), pain (VAS) and satisfaction (CSQ) were assessed. Results: In all, there were 270 referred patients. Among them, 39 and 43 were assigned to the intervention and control groups respectively; 82 patients were analyzed: 39 patients used the app, and 43 patients continued with the treatment as usual. There were no significant changes between groups and time. We observed a slight trend in which intervention group had less depression and anxiety symptoms since T0 and T2 (B=−0.2; 95% CI: 8.8-9.2). Conclusions: The sample of this study had a high mean age (65 years old), and low levels of anxiety and depression and medium levels of pre-surgery quality of life in baseline. These factors could have influenced limiting the effectiveness of the app. Prospective research lines should focus on evaluating the effectiveness of mobile applications for younger patients with surgical pathologies. (AU)

Impact of work arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health in France.

•Symptoms of anxiety/depression were found in 28.8% of the participants at least once.•Unemployment and financial difficulties were associated with anxiety/depression.•Targeted mental health support could lessen mental health impact.

Effectiveness of a stepped-care programme of internet-based psychological interventions for healthcare workers with psychological distress: Study protocol for the RESPOND healthcare workers randomised controlled trial.

Background and aims: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has challenged health services worldwide, with a worsening of healthcare workers' mental health within initial pandemic hotspots. In early 2022, the Omicron variant is spreading rapidly around the world. This study explores the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a stepped-care programme of scalable, internet-based psychological interventions for distressed health workers on self-reported anxiety and depression symptoms. Methods: We present the study protocol for a multicentre (two sites), parallel-group (1:1 allocation ratio), analyst-blinded, superiority, randomised controlled trial. Healthcare workers with psychological distress will be allocated either to care as usual only or to care as usual plus a stepped-care programme that includes two scalable psychological interventions developed by the World Health Organization: A guided self-help stress management guide (Doing What Matters in Times of Stress) and a five-session cognitive behavioural intervention (Problem Management Plus). All participants will receive a single-session emotional support intervention, namely psychological first aid. We will include 212 participants. An intention-to-treat analysis using linear mixed models will be conducted to explore the programme's effect on anxiety and depression symptoms, as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire - Anxiety and Depression Scale summary score at 21 weeks from baseline. Secondary outcomes include post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms, resilience, quality of life, cost impact and cost-effectiveness. Conclusions: This study is the first randomised trial that combines two World Health Organization psychological interventions tailored for health workers into one stepped-care programme. Results will inform occupational and mental health prevention, treatment, and recovery strategies. Registration details: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04980326.

Mindfulness based intervention through mobile app for colorectal cancer people awaiting surgery: A randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer worldwide both in men and women. Around one-third of patients with cancer will suffer from anxiety or depression symptoms. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a Mindfulness-based stress reduction intervention through a mobile application ("En Calma en el Quirófano"). METHOD: This study is a multicenter, single-blind (evaluator), controlled, randomised trial that compares the effectiveness of a mindfulness training through a mobile application (intervention group) and treatment as usual (control group) in three different moments (T0 or baseline, T1 or hospital discharge and T2 or one month after surgery). Anxiety and depression symptoms (HADS), quality of life (WHOQOL), pain, (VAS) and satisfaction (CSQ) were assessed. RESULTS: In all, there were 270 referred patients. Among them, 39 and 43 were assigned to the intervention and control groups respectively. 82 patients were analyzed: 39 patients used the app, and 43 patients continued with the treatment as usual. There were no significant changes between groups and time. We observed a slight trend in which intervention group had less depression and anxiety symptoms since T0 and T2 (B = -0.2; 95% CI between 8.8 and 9.2). CONCLUSIONS: The sample of this study had a high mean age (65 years old), and low levels of anxiety and depression and medium levels of pre-surgery quality of life in baseline. These factors could have influenced limiting the effectiveness of the app. Prospective research lines should focus on evaluating the effectiveness of mobile applications for younger patients with surgical pathologies.