RESUMO
PURPOSE: Psychometric validity/reliability of 10-item and 2-item abbreviations of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-10; CD-RISC-2) was investigated via item response theory and classic approaches. METHODS: We sampled 5023 adult American participants in a June/July 2020 survey on the COVID-19 pandemic's psychological effects. Our questionnaire incorporated the CD-RISC-10 with other validated measures. CD-RISC-10 items were ranked on item-to-scale correlations, loadings on a one-factor confirmatory factor analysis model, and item slope/threshold parameters plus information curves from a unidimensional graded response model. Concurrent validity of the highest ranked item pair was evaluated vis-à-vis the CD-RISC-10 and CD-RISC-2. Internal consistency, based on average variance extracted (AVE) and multiple reliability coefficients, was also compared. Convergent/divergent validity was tested by correlating anxiety, depression, fear of COVID-19, anxiety sensitivity, coping, and personality measures with both scales and the highest ranked item pair. Binary agreement/classification indexes assessed inter-rater reliability. RESULTS: Items 2 and 9 from CD-RISC-10 ranked the highest. Reliability coefficients were > 0.93, > 0.72, and > 0.82 for the CD-RISC-10, CD-RISC-2, vs summation of items 2 and 9. AVEs were 0.66, 0.67, and 0.77. CD-RISC abbreviations and the summation of items 2 and 9 correlated negatively with anxiety (> - 0.43), depression (> - 0.42), and fear of COVID-19 (> - 0.34); positively with emotional stability (> 0.53) and conscientiousness (> 0.40). Compared to the CD-RISC-2, summative scores of items 2 and 9 more efficiently classified/discriminated high resilience on the CD-RISC-10. CONCLUSION: We confirmed construct validity/reliability of copyrighted CD-RISC abbreviations. The CD-RISC-10's items 2 and 9 were psychometrically more salient than the CD-RISC-2.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Resiliência Psicológica , Adulto , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Análise Fatorial , Humanos , Pandemias , Psicometria , Qualidade de Vida/psicologia , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in unprecedented consequences. Transdiagnostic factors, such as anxiety sensitivity, could be an important component to understand how individuals experience COVID-19 specific fear, depression and anxiety. A US representative sample (5,023) completed measures including the Anxiety Sensitivity Index-3, the Fear of COVID-19 Scale, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 and the Patient Health Questionnaire-8. Analyses controlled for age, sex, race, marital status, education level, working status, household income, and COVID-19 exposure. Results were consistent with prediction. First, higher ASI-3 Total scores were associated with above average COVID-19 fear (ß = 0.19). Second, the ASI-3 physical concerns subscale was the strongest predictor of COVID-19 fear; one SD increase on the ASI-3 physical concerns subscale was associated with almost a twofold risk of reaching above average levels of COVID-19 (OR = 1.93). Third, higher ASI-3 Total scores were associated with higher anxiety (ß = 0.22) and depression (ß = 0.20). Finally, COVID-19 fear mediated the relationship between ASI-3 Total scores and anxiety (17% of effect mediated) as well as ASI-3 Total scores and depression (16% of effect mediated). These data support the role of anxiety sensitivity in predicting fear of COVID-19 and resulting mental health.
Assuntos
Transtornos de Ansiedade/psicologia , Ansiedade/psicologia , COVID-19/psicologia , Medo/psicologia , Saúde Mental , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Ansiedade/diagnóstico , Transtornos de Ansiedade/diagnóstico , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pandemias , Estados Unidos , Adulto JovemRESUMO
Background: Caregivers to intensive care unit survivors are vulnerable to caregiver burden, which has been demonstrated to have consequences to patients' and caregivers' mental and physical health. Potentially modifiable factors should be explored so that interventions may be developed. Methods: Ninety-one anticipated caregivers were prospectively assessed both at a southwestern trauma intensive care unit during their patient's admission and at home via remote interview 3 months after intensive care unit admission. Caregiver depression, posttraumatic stress symptoms, experiences, and perceived burden were assessed. Results: At follow up, there was a significant negative correlation betweenâ¯caregiver burden and understandingâ¯ofâ¯their patient'sâ¯conditionâ¯(P < 0.001) and intensive care unit events (P = 0.008). Caregivers with lower understanding of their patient's injury/illness had significantly greater depressive symptomsâ¯(P = 0.04). Conclusions: Education and knowledge of intensive care unit events regarding their patient may influence perceived burdenâ¯among caregivers. Interventions to orient caregivers to intensive care unit events are suggested to reduce caregiver and healthcare system burden.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Illness stigma has been observed across previous outbreaks including Ebola, SARS, HIV/AIDS, and now COVID-19. Although both the stigma of having COVID-19 as well as mental health impacts of COVID-19 have been studied, limited research exists regarding the relationship of stigma and mental health in this population. Thus, the primary purpose of the present study was to examine the relationship between stigma and mental health in adults with COVID-19. METHOD: Adult respondents with a diagnosis of COVID-19 (N = 632) completed an online questionnaire distributed between April 17, 2020, and April 18, 2021. The study measures included the Patient Health Questionnaire 8 (PHQ-8), the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item (GAD-7), and the 8-Item Stigma Scale for Chronic Illness (SSCI-8) tailored to measure perceived stigmatization from a COVID-19 diagnosis. RESULTS: Participants (mean age = 51) were mostly female (71%), White (73%), married (70%), obese (56%), and had a chronic health condition (56%). Female sex, education status, working from home or not working owing to COVID-19, previous mental health diagnosis, history of chronic illness, and being a current/former smoker were associated with higher stigma scores, whereas older age and Black race were associated with lower stigma scores. CONCLUSIONS: Greater stigma and psychological distress was observed in females with a previously diagnosed psychiatric illness and/or chronic health condition. Our findings suggest a disproportionate burden of mental health/psychiatric symptoms/sequelae, including stigma and PTSD, among COVID-19 survivors with a history of mental illness. Further studies are needed to fully characterize COVID-19 related stigma and subsequent mental health experiences. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Transtornos Mentais , Adulto , Teste para COVID-19 , Depressão/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Transtornos Mentais/epidemiologia , Transtornos Mentais/psicologia , Saúde Mental , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estigma SocialRESUMO
The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted many usual processes for recruiting and enrolling research participants. We present our experience with electronic recruitment in a survey study investigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health. Adults (≥18 years) in communities served by Baylor Scott and White Health (BSWH) were recruited via patient portal messages sent to BSWH patients with confirmed/suspected COVID-19 as part of the "COVID-19 Digital Care Journey"; BSWH social media posts; other media; referral from other BSWH COVID-19 studies; and internal BSWH communications. Of 1279 enrolled participants, 996 (77.87%) were recruited via the Digital Care Journey and 124 (9.7%) via internal communications. The remaining strategies contributed <5% each. Social media and internal communications recruited larger proportions of those aged 18 to 34 and those with advanced degrees; other media, more racially diverse participants; and the Digital Care Journey and referral from other studies, predominantly participants positive for COVID-19. In terms of volume, the COVID-19 Digital Care Journey was the most successful strategy, particularly for individuals who had COVID-19. However, its dominance contributed to the overrepresentation of white, educated, and female participants. Thus, supplemental strategies to reach individuals not enrolled/engaging with the portal are necessary to achieve representativeness.
RESUMO
The National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center estimates 294,000 people in the US live with a spinal cord injury (SCI), with approximately 17,810 new cases each year. Although the physical outcomes associated with SCI have been widely studied, the psychological consequences of sustaining a SCI remain largely unexplored. Scant research has focused on posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in this population, despite prevalence estimates suggesting that up to 60% of individuals with SCI experience PTSD post-injury, compared to only 7% of the general US population. Fortunately, prolonged exposure therapy (PE) is a well-researched and highly effective treatment for PTSD. However, no trauma focused exposure-based therapy for PTSD (e.g. PE) has not yet been tested in a SCI population. Thus, we aim to conduct the first test of an evidence-based intervention for PTSD among patients with SCI. Adults with SCI and PTSD (N = 60) will be randomly assigned to either: (1) 12-sessions of PE (2-3 sessions per week) or (2) a treatment as usual (TAU) control group who will receive the standard inpatient rehabilitation care for SCI patients. Primary outcomes will be assessed at 0, 6, 10, and 32 weeks.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Nonpharmacologic pain management strategies are needed because of the growing opioid epidemic. While studies have examined the efficacy of virtual reality (VR) for pain reduction, there is little research in adult inpatient settings, and no studies comparing the relative efficacy of standard animated computer-generated imagery (CGI) VR to Video Capture VR (360 degrees 3D/stereoscopic Video Capture VR). Here, we report on a randomized controlled trial of the relative efficacy of standard CGI VR versus Video Capture VR (matched for content) and also compared the overall efficacy of VR to a waitlist control group. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participants (N=103 hospitalized inpatients reporting pain) were randomized to 1 of 3 conditions: (1) waitlist control, (2) CGI VR, or (3) Video Capture VR. The VR and waitlist conditions were 10 minutes in length. Outcomes were assessed pretreatment, post-treatment, and after a brief follow-up. RESULTS: Consistent with hypotheses, both VR conditions reduced pain significantly more relative to the waitlist control condition (d=1.60, P<0.001) and pain reductions were largely maintained at the brief follow-up assessment. Both VR conditions reduced pain by â¼50% and led to improvements in mood, anxiety, and relaxation. Contrary to prediction, the Video Capture VR condition was not significantly more effective at reducing pain relative to the CGI VR condition (d=0.25, P=0.216). However, as expected, patients randomized to the Video Capture VR rated their experience as more positive and realistic (d=0.78, P=0.002). DISCUSSION: Video Capture VR was as effective as CGI VR for pain reduction and was rated as more realistic.
Assuntos
Realidade Virtual , Adulto , Computadores , Humanos , Pacientes Internados , Dor , Manejo da DorRESUMO
Trials of virtual reality exposure therapy (VRET) for anxiety-related disorders have proliferated in number and diversity since our previous meta-analysis that examined 13 total trials, most of which were for specific phobias (Powers & Emmelkamp, 2008). Since then, new trials have compared VRET to more diverse anxiety and related disorders including social anxiety disorder (SAD), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and panic disorder (PD) with and without agoraphobia. With the availability of this data, it is imperative to re-examine the efficacy of VRET for anxiety. A literature search for randomized controlled trials of VRET versus control or in vivo exposure yielded 30 studies with 1057 participants. Fourteen studies tested VRET for specific phobias, 8 for SAD or performance anxiety, 5 for PTSD, and 3 for PD. A random effects analysis estimated a large effect size for VRET versus waitlist (g = 0.90) and a medium to large effect size for VRET versus psychological placebo conditions (g = 0.78). A comparison of VRET and in vivo conditions did not show significantly different effect sizes (g = -0.07). These findings were relatively consistent across disorders. A meta-regression analysis revealed that larger sample sizes were associated with lower effect sizes in VRET versus control comparisons (ß = -0.007, p < 0.05). These results indicate that VRET is an effective and equal medium for exposure therapy.