COVID-19 related mental health issues: a narrative review of psychometric properties of scales and methodological concerns in scale development.

OBJECTIVES: The global crisis of COVID-19 and its consequential strict public health measures placed around the world have impacted mental health. New scales and tools have been developed to measure these mental health effects. This narrative review assesses the psychometric properties of these scales and tools and methodological aspects of their development. METHODS: PubMed, PubMed Central, and Google Scholar were searched for articles published from 15 May 2020 to 15 August 2020. This search used three groups of terms ("tool" OR "scale" AND "mental" OR "psychological"; AND "COVID-19" OR "coronavirus"). The identified scales were further evaluated for their psychometric properties and methodological aspects of their development. RESULTS: Though the studies developing these scales (n = 12) have demonstrated their robust psychometric properties, some methodological concerns are noteworthy. Most of the scales were validated using internet-based surveys, and detailed descriptions of the mode of administration, sampling process, response rates, and augmentation strategies were missing. CONCLUSIONS: The heterogeneous and inadequate reporting of methods adopted to evaluate the psychometric properties of the identified scales can limit their utility in clinical and research settings. We suggest developing guidelines and checklists to improve the design and testing, and result in reporting of online-administered scales to assess the mental health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Mental Health Interventions during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Conceptual Framework by Early Career Psychiatrists.

The emergence of mental health (MH) problems during a pandemic is extremely common, though difficult to address due to the complexities of pandemics and the scarcity of evidence about the epidemiology of pandemic-related MH problems and the potential interventions to tackle them. Little attention has been devoted so far to this topic from policymakers, stakeholders and researchers, resulting in a lack of replicable, scalable and applicable frameworks to help plan, develop and deliver MH care during pandemics. As a response, we have attempted to develop a conceptual framework (CF) that could guide the development, implementation, and evaluation of MH interventions during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. This CF was developed by early career psychiatrists from 16 countries that cover all the WHO regions. Their opinions were elicited via a semi-structured questionnaire. They were asked to provide their views about the current MH situation in their countries and to elaborate on existing 'myths' and misinformation. They were also asked to name the resources available and to propose solutions and approaches to provide accessible and affordable care. The CF was prepared based on the extant literature and the views discussed in this group; it illustrates the epidemiology of MH problems, preparedness plans, stage-specific plans or innovative solutions, opportunities to integrate those plans and possible outcomes at policy level. This CF can serve as a technical guide for future research regarding pandemics. It can be used to monitor trends and to optimize efforts, and to develop evidence based MH interventions. Still, further research focusing on the individual components of this framework is needed.

Management of psychiatric conditions and delirium during the COVID-19 pandemic across continents: lessons learned and recommendations.

BACKGROUND: With the uncertainties of COVID-19, people infected with coronavirus present with diverse psychiatric presentations. Some institutions have had to manage their patients with existing protocols, others have had to create them. In this article we aimed to report the challenges and good practices in the management of psychiatric conditions and delirium coexisting with COVID-19 across continents. METHODS: Early Career Psychiatrists (ECPs) from across five continents were approached to share their experiences on the management of psychiatric conditions in patients with COVID-19 during the current pandemic. RESULTS: We collected information about the experiences from sixteen countries. Commonalities were similar psychiatric presentations and poor preparedness across countries. Differences were varying adjustments made in the management of psychiatric conditions coexisting with COVID-19 and different innovations. Good practices which can be adopted by other countries are novel approaches such as telepsychiatry, proactive consultation-liaison units and enhanced community services targeted at circumventing challenges faced when providing mental health services. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the need for global preparedness in the mental health sector during outbreaks of infectious diseases, and the need for concerted efforts targeted at global and locally sensitive adaptation of existing protocols and the development of new guidelines for the management of psychiatric conditions for the present pandemic and subsequent occurrences.