Housing conditions and changes in professional activity during lockdown and the risk of prevalent and incident depression: Findings from the CONSTANCES cohort.

BACKGROUND: Material conditions of lockdown and changes in regular functioning may have played a role on depressive manifestations. We aimed to examine the association between housing conditions and changes in professional activity and depression during the first COVID-19 outbreak in France. METHOD: Participants of the CONSTANCES cohort were followed online. A first questionnaire covered the lockdown period (assessing housing conditions and changes in professional activity), and a second the post-lockdown period (assessing depression using the Center of Epidemiologic Studies Depression-Scale (CES-D)). Incident depression was also estimated (with a previous CES-D measure). Logistic regression models were applied. RESULTS: 22,042 participants (median age 46 years, 53.2 % women) were included and 20,534 had a previous CES-D measure. Depression was associated with female gender, lower household income and past history of depression. A negative gradient between the number of rooms and the likelihood of depression was consistently observed (OR = 1.55 95 % [1.19-2.00] for one room, OR = 0.76 [0.65-0.88] for seven rooms), while a U-shape relationship was observed with the number of people living together (OR = 1.62 [1.42-1.84] for living alone, OR = 1.44 [1.07-1.92] for six persons). These associations were also observed with incident depression. Changes in professional activity were associated with depression (Started distance working (OR = 1.33 [1.17-1.50]). Starting distance working was also associated with incident depression (OR = 1.27 [1.08-1.48]). LIMITATION: A cross-sectional design was used. CONCLUSION: The consequences of lockdown on depression may vary depending on living conditions and changes in professional activity, including distance working. These results could help to better identify vulnerable people to promote mental health.

Risk of death in individuals hospitalized for COVID-19 with and without psychiatric disorders: an observational multicenter study in France.

BACKGROUND: Prior research suggests that psychiatric disorders could be linked to increased mortality among patients with COVID-19. However, whether all or specific psychiatric disorders are intrinsic risk factors of death in COVID-19, or whether these associations reflect the greater prevalence of medical risk factors in people with psychiatric disorders, has yet to be evaluated. METHODS: We performed an observational multicenter retrospective cohort study to examine the association between psychiatric disorders and mortality among patients hospitalized for laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 at 36 Greater Paris University hospitals. RESULTS: Of 15,168 adult patients, 857 (5.7%) had an ICD-10 diagnosis of psychiatric disorder. Over a mean follow-up of 14.6 days (SD=17.9), death occurred in 326/857 (38.0%) patients with a diagnosis of psychiatric disorder versus 1,276/14,311 (8.9%) in patients without such a diagnosis (OR=6.27; 95%CI=5.40-7.28; p<0.01). When adjusting for age, sex, hospital, current smoking status, and medications according to compassionate use or as part of a clinical trial, this association remained significant (AOR=3.27; 95%CI=2.78-3.85; p<0.01). However, additional adjustments for obesity and number of medical conditions resulted in a non-significant association (AOR=1.02; 95%CI=0.84-1.23; p=0.86). Exploratory analyses following the same adjustments suggest that a diagnosis of mood disorders was significantly associated with reduced mortality, which might be explained by the use of antidepressants. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the increased risk of COVID-19-related mortality in individuals with psychiatric disorders hospitalized for COVID-19 might be explained by the greater number of medical conditions and the higher prevalence of obesity in this population, but not by the underlying psychiatric disease.

Factors Associated with Self-Reported Changes in Alcohol Use among Young Adults during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Comparative Analysis between Canada and France.

While the COVID-19 pandemic impacted young adults' alcohol use patterns, little is known about how changes in alcohol use may differ across different settings. Our objective was to identify and compare factors associated with changes in alcohol use among young adults in Canada and France during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted an online cross-sectional survey in October-December 2020 with young adults aged 18-29 (n = 5185) in Canada and France. In each country, weighted multinomial logistic regressions were performed to identify factors associated with self-reported decrease and increase in alcohol use separately (reference: no change). Respectively, 33.4% and 21.4% reported an increase in alcohol use in Canada and France, while 22.9% and 33.5% reported a decrease. Being 25-29 was a predictor of decrease in Canada, while living away from family was associated with an increase in France. In both countries, participants were more likely to report an increase if they reported depressive symptoms, smoking tobacco, or cannabis use. Conversely, those who had been tested for COVID-19 and those who were highly compliant with COVID-19 preventive measures were more likely to report a decrease. Efforts are needed to develop alcohol use interventions for young adults, including in ways that prioritize those with mental health challenges.

Observational study of haloperidol in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Haloperidol, a widely used antipsychotic, has been suggested as potentially useful for patients with COVID-19 on the grounds of its in-vitro antiviral effects against SARS-CoV-2, possibly through sigma-1 receptor antagonist effect. METHODS: We examined the associations of haloperidol use with intubation or death and time to discharge home among adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19 at Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP) Greater Paris University hospitals. Study baseline was defined as the date of hospital admission. The primary endpoint was a composite of intubation or death and the secondary endpoint was discharge home among survivors in time-to-event analyses. In the primary analyses, we compared these two outcomes between patients receiving and not receiving haloperidol using univariate Cox regression models in matched analytic samples based on patient characteristics and other psychotropic medications. Sensitivity analyses included propensity score analyses with inverse probability weighting and multivariable Cox regression models. RESULTS: Of 15,121 adult inpatients with a positive COVID-19 PT-PCR test, 39 patients (0.03%) received haloperidol within the first 48 hours of admission. Over a mean follow-up of 13.8 days (SD = 17.9), 2,024 patients (13.4%) had a primary end-point event and 10,179 patients (77.6%) were discharged home at the time of study end on May 1st. The primary endpoint occurred in 9 patients (23.1%) who received haloperidol and 2,015 patients (13.4%) who did not. The secondary endpoint of discharge home occurred in 16 patients (61.5%) who received haloperidol and 9,907 patients (85.8%) who did not. There were no significant associations between haloperidol use and the primary (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.62, p = 0.531) and secondary (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.74 to 2.28, p = 0.355) endpoints. Results were similar in multiple sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Findings from this multicenter observational study suggest that haloperidol use prescribed at a mean dose of 4.5 mg per day (SD = 5.2) for a mean duration of 8.4 days (SD = 7.2) may not be associated with risk of intubation or death, or with time to discharge home, among adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

Observational Study of Chlorpromazine in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Chlorpromazine has been suggested as being potentially useful in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the grounds of its potential antiviral and anti-inflammatory effects. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the association between chlorpromazine use and mortality among adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted an observational, multicenter, retrospective study at Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP) Greater Paris University hospitals. Study baseline was defined as the date of first prescription of chlorpromazine during hospitalization for COVID-19. The primary endpoint was death. Among patients who had not been hospitalized in intensive care units (ICUs), we compared this endpoint between those who received chlorpromazine and those who did not, in time-to-event analyses adjusted for patient characteristics, clinical markers of disease severity, and other psychotropic medications. The primary analysis used a Cox regression model with inverse probability weighting. Multiple sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Of the 14,340 adult inpatients hospitalized outside ICUs for COVID-19, 55 patients (0.4%) received chlorpromazine. Over a mean follow-up of 14.3 days (standard deviation [SD] 18.2), death occurred in 13 patients (23.6%) who received chlorpromazine and 1289 patients (9.0%) who did not. In the primary analysis, there was no significant association between chlorpromazine use and mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 2.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.75-5.40; p = 0.163). Sensitivity analyses included a Cox regression in a 1:5 ratio matched analytic sample that showed a similar result (HR 1.67, 95% CI 0.91-3.06; p = 0.100) and a multivariable Cox regression that indicated a significant positive association (HR 3.10, 95% CI 1.31-7.34; p = 0.010). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that chlorpromazine prescribed at a mean daily dose of 70.8 mg (SD 65.3) was not associated with reduced mortality.

Association between antidepressant use and reduced risk of intubation or death in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: results from an observational study.

A prior meta-analysis showed that antidepressant use in major depressive disorder was associated with reduced plasma levels of several pro-inflammatory mediators, which have been associated with severe COVID-19. Recent studies also suggest that several antidepressants may inhibit acid sphingomyelinase activity, which may prevent the infection of epithelial cells with SARS-CoV-2, and that the SSRI fluoxetine may exert in-vitro antiviral effects on SARS-CoV-2. We examined the potential usefulness of antidepressant use in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in an observational multicenter retrospective cohort study conducted at AP-HP Greater Paris University hospitals. Of 7230 adults hospitalized for COVID-19, 345 patients (4.8%) received an antidepressant within 48 h of hospital admission. The primary endpoint was a composite of intubation or death. We compared this endpoint between patients who received antidepressants and those who did not in time-to-event analyses adjusted for patient characteristics, clinical and biological markers of disease severity, and other psychotropic medications. The primary analysis was a multivariable Cox model with inverse probability weighting. This analysis showed a significant association between antidepressant use and reduced risk of intubation or death (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.43-0.73, p < 0.001). This association remained significant in multiple sensitivity analyses. Exploratory analyses suggest that this association was also significant for SSRI and non-SSRI antidepressants, and for fluoxetine, paroxetine, escitalopram, venlafaxine, and mirtazapine (all p < 0.05). These results suggest that antidepressant use could be associated with lower risk of death or intubation in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Double-blind controlled randomized clinical trials of antidepressant medications for COVID-19 are needed.