Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol ; 2023 03 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2273444

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The current study aimed to investigate the rates of anxiety, clinical depression, and suicidality and their changes in health professionals during the COVID-19 outbreak. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data came from the larger COMET-G study. The study sample includes 12,792 health professionals from 40 countries (62.40% women aged 39.76 ± 11.70; 36.81% men aged 35.91 ± 11.00 and 0.78% non-binary gender aged 35.15 ± 13.03). Distress and clinical depression were identified with the use of a previously developed cut-off and algorithm, respectively. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics were calculated. Chi-square tests, multiple forward stepwise linear regression analyses, and Factorial Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) tested relations among variables. RESULTS: Clinical depression was detected in 13.16% with male doctors and 'non-binary genders' having the lowest rates (7.89 and 5.88% respectively) and 'non-binary gender' nurses and administrative staff had the highest (37.50%); distress was present in 15.19%. A significant percentage reported a deterioration in mental state, family dynamics, and everyday lifestyle. Persons with a history of mental disorders had higher rates of current depression (24.64% vs. 9.62%; p < 0.0001). Suicidal tendencies were at least doubled in terms of RASS scores. Approximately one-third of participants were accepting (at least to a moderate degree) a non-bizarre conspiracy. The highest Relative Risk (RR) to develop clinical depression was associated with a history of Bipolar disorder (RR = 4.23). CONCLUSIONS: The current study reported findings in health care professionals similar in magnitude and quality to those reported earlier in the general population although rates of clinical depression, suicidal tendencies, and adherence to conspiracy theories were much lower. However, the general model of factors interplay seems to be the same and this could be of practical utility since many of these factors are modifiable.

2.
Psychiatry Res ; 315: 114702, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1914933

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: During the COVID-19 pandemic various degrees of lockdown were applied by countries around the world. It is considered that such measures have an adverse effect on mental health but the relationship of measure intensity with the mental health effect has not been thoroughly studied. Here we report data from the larger COMET-G study pertaining to this question. MATERIAL AND METHODS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, data were gathered with an online questionnaire from 55,589 participants from 40 countries (64.85% females aged 35.80 ± 13.61; 34.05% males aged 34.90±13.29 and 1.10% other aged 31.64±13.15). Anxiety was measured with the STAI, depression with the CES-D and suicidality with the RASS. Distress and probable depression were identified with the use of a previously developed cut-off and algorithm respectively. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: It included the calculation of Relative Risk (RR), Factorial ANOVA and Multiple backwards stepwise linear regression analysis RESULTS: Approximately two-thirds were currently living under significant restrictions due to lockdown. For both males and females the risk to develop clinical depression correlated significantly with each and every level of increasing lockdown degree (RR 1.72 and 1.90 respectively). The combined lockdown and psychiatric history increased RR to 6.88 The overall relationship of lockdown with severity of depression, though significant was small. CONCLUSIONS: The current study is the first which reports an almost linear relationship between lockdown degree and effect in mental health. Our findings, support previous suggestions concerning the need for a proactive targeted intervention to protect mental health more specifically in vulnerable groups.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Suicide , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/psychology , Communicable Disease Control , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/psychology , Female , Humans , Male , Pandemics
3.
Eur Neuropsychopharmacol ; 54: 21-40, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1466347

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: There are few published empirical data on the effects of COVID-19 on mental health, and until now, there is no large international study. MATERIAL AND METHODS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, an online questionnaire gathered data from 55,589 participants from 40 countries (64.85% females aged 35.80 ± 13.61; 34.05% males aged 34.90±13.29 and 1.10% other aged 31.64±13.15). Distress and probable depression were identified with the use of a previously developed cut-off and algorithm respectively. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics were calculated. Chi-square tests, multiple forward stepwise linear regression analyses and Factorial Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) tested relations among variables. RESULTS: Probable depression was detected in 17.80% and distress in 16.71%. A significant percentage reported a deterioration in mental state, family dynamics and everyday lifestyle. Persons with a history of mental disorders had higher rates of current depression (31.82% vs. 13.07%). At least half of participants were accepting (at least to a moderate degree) a non-bizarre conspiracy. The highest Relative Risk (RR) to develop depression was associated with history of Bipolar disorder and self-harm/attempts (RR = 5.88). Suicidality was not increased in persons without a history of any mental disorder. Based on these results a model was developed. CONCLUSIONS: The final model revealed multiple vulnerabilities and an interplay leading from simple anxiety to probable depression and suicidality through distress. This could be of practical utility since many of these factors are modifiable. Future research and interventions should specifically focus on them.


Subject(s)
Anxiety/epidemiology , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/psychology , Depression/epidemiology , Mental Health , Adult , Anxiety/etiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Depression/etiology , Female , Global Burden of Disease , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Stress, Psychological/etiology , Suicidal Ideation
4.
J Affect Disord ; 295: 173-182, 2021 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1370555

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare self-reported changes on lifestyle behaviors during two phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain, and to evaluate clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with lifestyles. METHODS: Two cross-sectional web surveys were conducted during lockdown (April 15-May 15, 2020) and seven months later (November 16-December 16, 2020). Lifestyle behaviors were self-reported by a multidimensional scale (SMILE-C). Two separate samples of respondents were analyzed. A multivariate regression model was performed to evaluate the association of SMILE-C scores with demographic and clinical variables. RESULTS: The sample comprised, 3412 participants from the first survey (S1) and in the S1 and 3635 from the second (S2). SMILE-C score decreased across surveys (p < 0.001). The rates of positive screenings for depression and anxiety were similar between the surveys, whereas those for alcohol abuse decreased (p < 0.001). Most participants in S2 reported that their lifestyle had not changed compared to those before the pandemic. Variables independently associated with an unhealthier lifestyle were working as an essential worker, lower educational level, previous mental disease, worse self-rated health, totally/moderate changes on diet, sleep or social support, as well as positive screenings for alcohol abuse, anxiety and depression. LIMITATIONS: The cross-sectional design and recruitment by non-probabilistic methods limit inferring causality and the external validity of the results. CONCLUSIONS: Overall lifestyle worsened seven months after the lockdown in Spain. Several demographic and clinical factors were associated with lifestyle scores. The contribution of common mental disorders to unhealthier lifestyles should be considered in order to prevent the negative impact of the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Anxiety , Communicable Disease Control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression , Humans , Life Style , Mental Health , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
5.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(15)2021 Jul 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1335077

ABSTRACT

Few studies have used a multidimensional approach to describe lifestyle changes among undergraduate students during the COVID-19 pandemic or have included controls. This study aimed to evaluate lifestyle behaviors and mental health of undergraduate students and compare them with an age and sex-matched control group. A cross-sectional web survey using snowball sampling was conducted several months after the beginning of COVID-19 pandemic in Spain. A sample of 221 students was recruited. The main outcome was the total SMILE-C score. Students showed a better SMILE-C score than controls (79.8 + 8.1 vs. 77.2 + 8.3; p < 0.001), although these differences disappeared after controlling for covariates. While groups did not differ in the screenings of depression and alcohol abuse, students reported lower rates of anxiety (28.5% vs. 37.1%; p = 0.042). A lower number of cohabitants, poorer self-perceived health and positive screening for depression and anxiety, or for depression only were independently associated (p < 0.05) with unhealthier lifestyles in both groups. History of mental illness and financial difficulties were predictors of unhealthier lifestyles for students, whereas totally/moderate changes in substance abuse and stress management (p < 0.05) were predictors for the members of the control group. Several months after the pandemic, undergraduate students and other young adults had similar lifestyles.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Anxiety , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Humans , Life Style , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain/epidemiology , Students , Young Adult
6.
Am J Geriatr Psychiatry ; 28(12): 1287-1298, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-746015

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Main aims of the study are to examine the early psychological correlates associated with the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown on the mental health of a Spanish older adult sample and to analyze the influence of past mental disorder (PMD) and current mental disorder (CMD) on those correlates. METHODS: Cross-sectional study based on an online snowball recruiting questionnaire. Psychological correlates assessed with the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21) and Impact of Event Scale (IES). Binary and multinomial logistic regression models were used to identify risk and protective factors. RESULTS: Final sample included 2,194 individuals aged 60 years or more (mean age [SD]: 65.62 [5.05]; females: 1,198 [54.6%]). There were 342 (15.6%) individuals who reported a PMD and 162 (7.4%) who reported a CMD. Avoidant (32.1%) and depressive (25.6%) styles were the most prevalent, regardless of mental health status. Main risk factors for negative affectivity were female gender and history CMD or PMD. However, job stability and the ability to enjoy free time were generally associated with better outcomes. No differences were found in psychological correlates between those with no lifetime history of mental disorder versus PMD on the DASS-21 or IES. However, CMD was associated with higher anxiety scores on the DASS-21 (odds ratio: 1.838, p < .001). CONCLUSION: Regardless of mental status, avoidant and depressive styles were the most prevalent in this older adult sample. Main protective factor in all subgroups was the ability to enjoy free time, whereas the main risk factors were being female and current or past history of mental disorder.


Subject(s)
Avoidance Learning , Coronavirus Infections , Depression , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Mental Health/trends , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Stress, Psychological , Aged , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/psychology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/diagnosis , Depression/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Medical History Taking , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/psychology , Prevalence , Protective Factors , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain/epidemiology , Stress, Psychological/epidemiology , Stress, Psychological/etiology , Stress, Psychological/prevention & control
7.
Aging Ment Health ; 25(7): 1297-1304, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-738043

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Given the lack of information on the psychological impact of COVID-19 on people aged ≥60, we aimed to describe their psychological responses to this pandemic and lockdown situation and compare them with those under 60 years of age. METHODS: Secondary analysis of a larger online cross-sectional study designed to determine the psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown across Spain. We analyzed a total of 1690 respondents aged ≥60 years and compared them with 13,363 respondents under 60 years of age. We employed the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale and the Impact of Event Scale to evaluate psychological responses. RESULTS: In all, 52.6% of women and 34.3% of men were found to be probable cases of any emotional distress (p < 0.001). In both sexes, the most common psychological response was avoidance behavior (34.7% and 23.8%, respectively), followed by depression (28.5 and 14.2%). Older women and men were considered probable cases of any emotional distress less often than younger ones (women: 52.6% vs. 72.3%, p < 0.001; men: 34.3% vs. 50.6%, p < 0.001). Finally, the results of the binary logistic regression showed that only depressive and stress responses are psychological factors associated with age group [age ≥ 60 years, O.R. = 0.617 (95% CI = 0.501 - 0.759) and 0.437 (95% CI = 0.334 - 0.573), respectively]. CONCLUSION: Contrary to our hypothesis and despite the high percentage of emotional distress we found in older adults, especially women, they are actually at lower risk of developing depressive and stress consequences from COVID-19 and lockdown than those under 60 years of age. That said, we believe our results highlight the need for expert guidance in this age group, especially older women living alone.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Aged , Anxiety , Communicable Disease Control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression , Female , Humans , Male , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain , Stress, Psychological
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL