The effects of potentially traumatic events on the recovery from pre-existing anxiety and depression symptomatology and the risk of PTSD.

AIM: The extent to which recent potentially traumatic events (PTEs) hinder the recovery from pre-existing mental health problems is largely unknown. The same applies to the extent to which non-recovery from pre-existing mental health problems increases the risk of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The aim of the present study is to gain insight in these effects. METHODS: Data were extracted from six annual surveys of the Dutch population-based Victims in Modern Society (VICTIMS) study. Of the adult respondents who participated in two subsequent surveys (labeled T1 and T2, n = 6942), those with severe anxiety and depression symptoms (ADS) at T1 (n = 487) were selected. We distinguished respondents exposed to PTEs (PTE-group, n = 162) and not exposed to PTEs (comparison group, n = 325) between T1 and T2. We applied five indicators of recovery [based on the Reliable Change Index (RCI), degrees of symptom reduction, and the cut-off score at T2]. Differences in the recovery from ADS and probable PTSD at T2 were examined using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: The PTE group less often recovered from severe ADS between T1 and T2 than the comparison group according to all five indicators of recovery, while controlling for 11 different variables (0.40 ≤ adjusted OR's ≤ 0.66). Those in the PTE group who did not recover, considerably more often suffered from probable PTSD at T2 (63%-82%) than those who did recover (0%-29%; 8.96 ≤ adjusted OR ≤ 26.33). CONCLUSION: Recent potentially traumatic events hinder the recovery from pre-existing anxiety and depression symptomatology and thereby increase the risk of probable PTSD.

Differences in mental health problems, coping self-efficacy and social support between adults victimised before and adults victimised after the COVID-19 outbreak: population-based prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Victims of violence, accidents and threats are at risk for mental health problems. Lower coping self-efficacy and social support levels increase this risk. Although highly relevant, it is unknown if the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic amplifies these risks. AIMS: To examine if the prevalence, incidence and/or mean scores for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety and depression symptoms, general mental health problems, coping self-efficacy, lack of emotional support and social acknowledgement are higher among adults victimised in the year after the COVID-19 outbreak compared with adults victimised in a similar period before the outbreak. Also, to compare symptoms, problems and support within non-victims during the same period. METHOD: Data was extracted from four surveys of the VICTIMS study (March 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021), based on a random sample of the Dutch population. Multivariate logistic regression analyses and mixed-effects models were used to examine differences between the two victim groups (2019: n = 421, 2021: n = 319) and non-victims (n = 3245). RESULTS: Adults victimised after the outbreak more often had PTSD, anxiety and depression symptoms, general mental health problems and lower coping self-efficacy than those victimised before. They did not differ in lack of support and acknowledgement. Both victim groups differed from non-victims, where mental health problems and lack of support levels were much lower and almost stable. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic had a negative impact on the mental health and coping self-efficacy levels of victims, whereas mental health problems among non-victims remained virtually stable. Mental healthcare workers, general practitioners and victim services should take this impact into account.

Chronic mental health problems and use of mental health services among adults with and without adverse childhood experiences: a 6-year longitudinal population-based study.

BACKGROUND: The negative effects of single and multiple adverse childhood experiences (ACE) on adult mental health are well-documented. However, little is known about the prevalence of chronic mental health problems (MHPs) and use of mental health services (MHSs) compared to adults without an ACE history. AIMS: Examine differences in the prevalence of chronic MHP and MHS use between adults without and with a single and multiple ACE history, and MHS use among ACE and no-ACE adults with chronic MHP. METHOD: A 6-year longitudinal study was conducted based on a random sample of the Dutch adult population (n = 2427). RESULTS: Multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that adults with a single (n = 280) and multiple ACE (n = 92) history suffered more often from chronic MHP such as chronic depressive and anxiety symptoms. Both ACE subgroups also made greater use of MHS than no-ACE adults (n = 2055). Multiple ACE compared to single ACE, increased the risk of MHP. However, among those with chronic MHP respondents with and without an ACE history did not differ in MHS use. CONCLUSIONS: ACE history is strongly related to chronic MHP and persistent use of MHS. However, MHS use among those with chronic MHP is not related to an ACE history.

Victims of medical errors and the problems they face: a prospective comparative study among the Dutch population.

BACKGROUND: A large number of studies are devoted to medical errors, but only a few focused on the problem's victims of these errors face. Prospective comparative studies on this topic are absent. The aim of this prospective comparative study is to fill this gap of scientific knowledge that may help to improve the care for victims. METHODS: Data were collected in the Longitudinal Internet studies for the Social Sciences panel, based on a random sample of the Dutch population. Surveys were conducted in March-April 2018 (T1response = 82.1%) and March-April 2019 (T2response = 80.1%). We assessed medical errors and potentially traumatic or stressful events between T1 and T2, and mental health, work, financial, religious, family, legal/administrative and physical problems at T1 and T2 (Ntotal = 4711). RESULTS: In total, 79 respondents were affected by medical errors between T1 and T2, and 2828 were not affected by any event. Of the victims, 28% had high PTSD symptom levels at T2. Stepwise multivariate logistic regression entering all problems at T1 and demographics showed that victims compared with controls significantly more often had all assessed problems at T2, except family problems. For instance, victims more often had mental health problems (29.5% vs. 9.3%; adj. OR = 3.04, P = 0.002) and financial problems (30.4% vs. 6.6%; adj. OR = 4.82, P < 0.001) at T2. CONCLUSIONS: Victims of medical errors more often face various non-physical problems than others. Care for victims should therefore, besides physical health, also include the assessment and targeting of their problems regarding mental health, work, religion, legal issues and finance.

Data of the multi-wave population-based prospective Victims in Modern Society (VICTIMS) study on potential traumatic events, social support, mental health, coping self-efficacy and services use.

We present the data of the first six annual surveys of the large prospective population-based Dutch VICTIMS-study that started in 2018. Each survey systematically examines exposure to potential traumatic events in the past 12 months, including time of event and amount of stress during the event. Furthermore, each survey assesses anxiety and depression symptomatology, lack of social support, physical, mental, work, partner/family, religious, legal, administrative and financial problems, and problem-related services use. Among the by potentially traumatic events (PTEs) affected respondents, current PTSD-symptomatology, social acknowledgement, events-related contacts with various professional, and coping self-efficacy related to the (most stressful) PTE in the past 12 months was examined. This multi-wave study is conducted using the Dutch Longitudinal Internet studies for the Social Sciences panel (LISS panel) that is based on a large traditional probability sample of the Dutch population (16+). People cannot register themselves as a panel member which minimizes the risks of selection bias. Panel members receive a financial compensation for each completed questionnaire, which has a positive effect on the response rate. Households that would otherwise be unable to participate are provided with a simple, remotely managed computer and internet connection. The set-up of the LISS panel in 2007 was funded by the Dutch Research Council and is managed by Centerdata, a non-profit institute housed at the campus of Tilburg University (The Netherlands). The number of invited (adult) panel members for the VICTIM-study varies between 6119 and 7096 across the years, and the response rate varies between 82.4 % and 87.9 %. The data of the VICTIMS-study can efficiently be linked with archived data of all other (past or future) studies conducted with the LISS panel, such as the annual Core studies on Health and Personality, and the 300+ Assembled studies conducted with the LISS panel. This offers unique opportunities for researchers to address numerous research questions related to potential traumatic and stressful life-events.

To what extent do post-traumatic mental health and other problems reflect pre-existing problems? Findings from the prospective comparative population-based VICTIMS-study.

BACKGROUND: Findings from prospective studies question the assumption that mental health problems observed in traumatized adults mainly reflect the effects of potentially traumatic events. AIMS: Aim of the present comparative prospective study is to clarify the extent to which victims of potentially traumatic events with mental health, social, financial, and/or legal problems, already suffered from such problems before these events. METHOD: Data was extracted from three surveys of the prospective VICTIMS-study (T1 = 2018, T2 = 2019, T3 = 2020), conducted with the population-based longitudinal LISS-panel. Differences between victims (n = 340, victimized by violence, accidents, and serious threats in the 12 months before T3) and nonvictims (n = 3,872, not victimized by such events in this period), were examined using multivariate logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: The large majority of victims with current (at T3) anxiety and depression symptomatology (74%), general mental health problems (71%), partner/family (67%), financial (76%), and legal problems (58%), and lack of support (79%), already had these problems (at T1 and/or at T2). A similar pattern was observed among nonvictims. Of the victims with current probable PTSD (at T3), 87% already had any mental health problem. At T3, among both groups, the incidence of problems was substantially lower than their prevalence. The large majority of victims with post-event mental health, social, financial, and legal problems already suffered from these problems in the past. CONCLUSIONS: When victims seek help for their problems, professional care providers should be aware that in most cases, as among nonvictims, these problems are chronic/re-current rather than new problems.

The prevalence of anxiety and depression symptoms (ADS), persistent and chronic ADS among the adult general population and specific subgroups before and during the COVID-19 pandemic until December 2021.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear to what extent the prevalence of moderate and severe anxiety and depression symptoms (ADS) is higher during the first 20 months after the COVID-19 outbreak than before the outbreak. The same holds for persistent and chronic ADS among the adult general population and subgroups (such as employed, minorities, young adults, work disabled). METHODS: Data were extracted from six surveys conducted with the Dutch longitudinal LISS panel, based on a traditional probability sample (N = 3493). Biographic characteristics and ADS (MHI-5 scores) were assessed in March-April 2019, November-December 2019, March-April 2020, November-December 2020, March-April 2021, and November-December 2021. Generalized estimating equations were conducted to examine differences in the prevalence of post-outbreak ADS, persistent and chronic ADS compared to the pre-outbreak prevalence in similar periods. The Benjamini-Hochberg correction for multiple testing was applied. RESULTS: Among the general population chronic moderate ADS increased significantly but slightly in the period March-April 2020 to March-April 2021 compared to a similar period before the pandemic (11.9 % versus 10.9 %, Odds Ratio = 1.11). In the same period a somewhat larger significant increase in chronic moderate ADS was observed among 19-24 years old respondents (21.4 % versus 16.7 %, Odds Ratio = 1.35). After the Benjamini-Hochberg correction several other differences were no longer significant. LIMITATIONS: No other mental health problems were assessed. CONCLUSIONS: The Dutch general population and most of the assessed subgroups were relatively resilient given the limited increase or absence of increases in (persistent and chronic) ADS. However, young adults suffered from an increase of chronic ADS.

The impact of pre- and post-trauma financial problems on posttraumatic stress symptoms, anxiety and depression symptoms, and emotional support: A prospective population-based comparative study.

Potentially traumatic events (PTEs) are associated with a higher risk of mental health problems and a lack of emotional support. The extent to which pre- and/or post-trauma financial problems further increase this risk, while controlling for pre-trauma mental health problems and lack of support and compared to nonvictims, is largely unknown. To better understand this risk, data was extracted from four surveys of VICTIMS study using the Dutch population-based longitudinal LISS-panel. Multivariate logistic regression analyses (MLRA) showed that nonvictims (nnonvictims total=5003) with persistent financial problems (present at T1 and present at T2 one year later) more often suffered from severe anxiety and depression symptoms (ADS; Adjusted OR (aOR)= 1.72) and lack of emotional support (aOR=1.96) than nonvictims without these problems, and that victims of PTEs (nvictims total=872) with persistent financial problems more often suffered moderate ADS (aOR=2.10) than nonvictims with persistent financial problems. MLRA showed that victims with pre- and/or post-trauma financial problems were more at risk of probable PTSD than victims without financial problems (aORs ≥ 2.02). Victim services and (mental) health care professionals should screen for pre- and post-trauma financial problems and, when found, refer the victims to relevant professionals since these problems can significantly hinder recovery.

The use of professional help and predictors of unmet needs for dealing with mental health to legal problems among victims of violence, accidents, theft and threat, and nonvictims in the general population.

AIMS: Victims of violence, accidents, theft, and serious threat (hereafter abbreviated as victims) are more than nonvictims at risk for problems in different domains, varying from mental health to legal problems. However, the extent to which victims with these problems compared to nonvictims with similar problems receive problem-related professional or formal help is unclear. It is unknown if predictors of unmet needs differ between victims and nonvictims. Aim of the present study is to fill this gap of knowledge. METHODS: Data was extracted from surveys of the VICTIMS-study (2018, 2019 and 2020), conducted with the Dutch population-based longitudinal LISS panel. Each survey assessed 1.) experiences with physical violence, accidents, theft, and serious threat and other traumatic or stressful events in the past 12 months and 2.) various problems and use of professional help, e.g. do receive help, do not need help, could use help but do not use it, cannot find or afford help for these problems. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to assess differences in problems, in the use of problem-related professional help, and in predictors of unmet needs between victims (N = 1,756) and nonvictims (N = 5,000). RESULTS: Victims more often had assessed problems than nonvictims. Victims compared to nonvictims with similar problems had 1.5 to 2 times more often unmet needs: they could not find or afford professional help for their mental, physical, partner/family, financial and legal problems. In addition, victims less often received help for legal and administrative problems. Most predictors of unmet needs, e.g. could use help but do not use it, cannot find or afford help, were not significant and hardly differed between both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The findings that victims compared to nonvictims more often have various problems and more often cannot find or afford problem-related professional help, suggest that there is room for improvement for victims services.

From Health to Financial Problems: Multiproblems Among Victims of Partner and Non-Partner Physical Violence, and Matched Nonvictims.

Previous research suggests that victims of partner physical violence (PPV) often face multiple distinct problems, but comparative population-based studies focusing on the prevalence of multiple problems are lacking. Aim of the present study is to gain insight in the prevalence of multiple problems among individuals victimized by PPV in the past 12 months, compared with matched nonvictims and victims of non-partner physical violence (non-PPV). For this purpose, data were extracted from two population-based surveys conducted in 2018 and 2019 on potentially traumatic events in the Netherlands. We focused on problems identified in previous studies on PPV and non-PPV and related problems, varying from physical health, mental health, financial and legal problems, to lack of social support and being exposed to other potentially traumatic and stressful life events (LFEs). In total, 49 respondents were victimized by PPV and 89 by non-PPV in the past 12 months. They were compared with pairwise matched groups not affected by any traumatic or stressful LFEs in this period (nPPV victims comparison group = 245, nnon-PPV comparison group = 445). Results showed that PPV victims significantly more often faced all 12 distinct problems than matched nonvictims (2.31 ≤ odds ratio [OR] ≤ 15.48) and non-PPV victims (2.12 ≤ OR ≤ 4.52). PPV victims more often had any problem than non-PPV victims (OR = 8.19), but no significant differences were found between PPV and non-PPV victims with regard to mental health problems. Findings stress the necessity of a multidisciplinary coordinated community response to help PPV victims.

Anxiety and depression symptoms, the recovery from symptoms, and loneliness before and after the COVID-19 outbreak among the general population: Findings from a Dutch population-based longitudinal study.

OBJECTIVES: Examine the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health and loneliness in the general population. More specifically, the study focused on prevalence of anxiety and depression symptoms, the extent to which individuals with existing symptoms recovered or not, the prevalence of subtypes of loneliness, and the extent to which loneliness before and during this pandemic was associated with anxiety and depression symptoms. METHODS: Data was extracted from the longitudinal LISS panel, based on a probability sample of the Dutch population, with assessments on loneliness in October 2019 (T1) and June 2020 (T4), and anxiety and depression symptoms in November 2019 (T2), March 2020 (T3) and June 2020 (T4; Ntotal = 4,084). Loneliness was examined with the De Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale and anxiety and depression symptoms with the Mental Health Inventory (MHI-5). RESULTS: Repeated measures multivariate logistic regression analyses (RMMLRA) showed a statistical significant lower prevalence of anxiety and depression symptoms after the outbreak (T4 = 15.3%) than before (T2 = 16.8%) and during the COVID-19 outbreak (T3 = 17.2%). According to the Reliable Change Index, the distribution of recovery categories (remission, improvement, unchanged and worsening symptoms) after the outbreak did not differ significantly from the distribution of these categories before the outbreak. RMMLRA revealed that the prevalence of emotional loneliness increased significantly after the outbreak (T1 = 18.4%, T4 = 24.8%). Among individuals who were not lonely before and after the outbreak the prevalence of symptoms decreased significantly (T2 = 7.0%, T4 = 4.4%) and, likewise, among those who were not lonely anymore after the outbreak (T2 = 21.5%, T4 = 14.5%). However, the prevalence of symptoms increased significantly among those who became lonely during the pandemic (T2 = 17.9%, T4 = 26.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that this pandemic did not negatively affect the prevalence of anxiety and depression symptoms nor the normal recovery of symptoms among the general population during the first four months, but that emotional loneliness increased.

Does pre-event lack of emotional support increase the risk of post-event PTSD, anxiety, depression symptoms and lack of support? A comparative population-based study among victims of threat and violence.

Our knowledge about the effects of perceived emotional support on PTSD, anxiety and depressive symptoms after serious threat and violence is primarily based on post-event studies. Very little is known about the extent to which (1) victims lacking pre-event emotional support are more at risk of post-event symptoms and lack of post-event support than victims with pre-event emotional support, and (2) victims with pre-event emotional support and victims lacking emotional support are more at risk of post-event anxiety and depressive symptoms than nonvictims with similar pre-event support levels. For this purpose, we conducted a 2-wave prospective study (VICTIMS) using the Dutch population-based longitudinal LISS panel. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted, controlling for pre-event demographics, symptoms, and physical, work-related and financial problems. As hypothesized, victims (Nvictims total = 187) lacking pre-event support more often had high post-event PTSD, anxiety and depressive symptoms than victims with pre-event support. No significant differences were found between victims and nonvictims with pre-event emotional support (Nnonvictims total = 2,828, not exposed to any event). Since victims and nonvictims with pre-event support did not differ in post-event symptoms and support, the findings offer strong evidence for the buffering hypothesis of emotional support.

Anxiety and depression symptoms, and lack of emotional support among the general population before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. A prospective national study on prevalence and risk factors.

BACKGROUND: The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health and emotional support among the general population are unclear. We therefore assessed if the prevalence of high Anxiety and Depression Symptoms (ADS) levels and lack of Emotional Support (ES) increased, and if risk factors of ADS and ES changed. METHODS: Data was extracted from surveys conducted with the Dutch longitudinal population-based LISS panel (N = 3,983). ADS and ES were assessed in March 2019 and 2020. Risk factors for ADS and ES were extracted from surveys in November 2018 and 2019. These were: ADS, gender, education, domestic situation, employment, age, ethnicity, lung and heart problems, and diabetes. RESULTS: The prevalence of high ADS levels and lack of ES did not increase compared to the pre-outbreak prevalence. ADS, non-native ethnic background, (partial) work disabilities and lung problems were predictive of both ADS and lack of ES in March 2019 and 2020. Job seekers, students and those who take care of housekeeping were more at risk for ADS in March 2020, but not in 2019. While 35-49 years old respondents were less at risk for ADS in March 2019, they were more at risk in 2020. Parents with child(ren) at home and those who take care of housekeeping more often lacked ES in March 2020, but not in 2019. LIMITATIONS: No other mental health problems were assessed. CONCLUSIONS: No increase in the prevalence of ADS and lack of ES was found. Some risk factors remained significant after the outbreak, while others changed notably.

Which groups affected by Potentially Traumatic Events (PTEs) are most at risk for a lack of social support? A prospective population-based study on the 12-month prevalence of PTEs and risk factors for a lack of post-event social support.

OBJECTIVES: Little is known about the 12-month prevalence of potentially traumatic events (PTEs) and to what extent the type of PTE is a risk factor for post-event lack of social support. In addition, it is largely unknown if pre-event mental health problems and loneliness, and demographics are risk factors for a lack of support. Aim of the present prospective study is to fill these gaps in evidence-based knowledge. METHODS: A survey was conducted among a large random sample of the Dutch adult population (i.e. the longitudinal LISS panel) in March-April 2018, and linked with pre-event mental health and loneliness data from surveys conducted in 2016 (n = 5,879). We distinguished four forms of perceived social support: emotional and esteem support, and social recognition and general disapproval. RESULTS: Loss of a significant other and/or colleague (28%) was the most prevalent 12-month PTE. The 12-month prevalence of violence, accidents and/or, and theft-related events was 13%. Multivariate logistic regression analyses revealed no differences in lack of emotional and esteem support, or in lack of recognition across non-death PTEs and death-related PTEs. However, victims of threat and physical (sexual) violence more often faced disapproval than those affected by burglary and accidents. Results furthermore showed that pre-event mental health problems, pre-event loneliness and stress during the PTE were important independent predictors of forms of support and acknowledgment. Affected individuals with a non-Western background more often lacked support and acknowledgment. CONCLUSIONS: Many adults are confronted with a PTE during a year. In general, pre-event factors and stress during the event are better predictors of a perceived lack of support and acknowledgment than type of event. Early screening programs should especially assess pre-event mental health and loneliness, besides levels of stress during the event, to identify affected people who are at risk for a lack of social support and acknowledgment.