The Association between Dysnatraemia during Hospitalisation and Post-COVID-19 Mental Fatigue.

COVID-19 may induce short- and long-term cognitive failures after recovery, but the underlying risk factors are still controversial. Here, we investigated whether (i) the odds of experiencing persistent cognitive failures differ based on the patients' disease course severity and sex at birth; and (ii) the patients' electrolytic profile in the acute stage represents a risk factor for persistent cognitive failures. We analysed data from 204 patients suffering from COVID-19 and hospitalised during the first pandemic wave. According to the 7-point WHO-OS scale, their disease course was classified as severe or mild. We investigated the presence of persistent cognitive failures collected after hospital discharge, while electrolyte profiles were collected during hospitalisation. The results showed that females who suffered from a mild course compared to a severe course of COVID-19 had a higher risk of presenting with persistent mental fatigue after recovery. Furthermore, in females who suffered from a mild course of COVID-19, persistent mental fatigue was related to electrolyte imbalance, in terms of both hypo- and hypernatremia, during hospitalisation in the acute phase. These findings have important implications for the clinical management of hospitalised COVID-19 patients. Attention should be paid to potential electrolyte imbalances, mainly in females suffering from mild COVID-19.

Online Short-Term Mindfulness-Based Intervention During COVID-19 Quarantine in Italy: Effects on Wellbeing, Stress, and Anxiety

To limit the first spread of COVID-19 in March 2020, the Italian government imposed strict lockdown measures to the population. Despite necessary to reduce the virus transmission and the burden to the hospitals, social isolation has caused detrimental effects on psychological wellbeing and mental health. Moreover, during this period, it was also difficult to deliver psychological treatments and psychiatric assistance. A short (a weekly session for 9 weeks) mindfulness-based meditation program, named Integral Meditation (IM), was administered entirely online to healthy adults from Italy. This is a two-groups pre–post-quasi-experimental study in which the two groups, treated and control, were not randomized. Through matching procedures aimed at overcoming the absence of randomization, we analyzed a sample of 84 subjects (42 for each group). By applying linear mixed effect models, we tested the hypothesis of a beneficial effect of IM on wellbeing, perceived stress, and state anxiety, as measured by three self-reported questionnaires (WEMWBS, PSS, and STAI-X1, respectively), assuming that this effect could be different according to the level of baseline trait anxiety, as measured by STAI-X2. The results showed a statistically significant effect of STAI-X1 (β = −8.24 [95%CI −15.39;−1.09], p = 0.02) and WEMWBS (β = 4.61 [95%CI 0.94;8.29], p = 0.01) in the higher trait anxiety subgroup only. No statistically significant effect of IM was observed for PSS. These results suggest that our IM, delivered online, may increase mental wellbeing and decrease anxiety specifically in subjects with higher trait anxiety.

Health emergencies and interoceptive sensibility modulate the perception of non-evidence-based drug use: Findings from the COVID-19 outbreak.

Scientific evidence plays an important role in the therapeutic decision-making process. What happens when physicians are forced to make therapeutic decisions under uncertainty? The absence of scientific guidelines at the beginning of a pandemic due to an unknown virus, such as COVID-19, could influence the perceived legitimacy of the application of non-evidence-based therapeutic approaches. This paper reports on a test of this hypothesis, in which we administered an ad hoc questionnaire to a sample of 64 Italian physicians during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy (April 2020). The questionnaire statements regarding the legitimacy of off-label or experimental drugs were framed according to three different scenarios (Normality, Emergency and COVID-19). Furthermore, as the perception of internal bodily sensations (i.e., interoception) modulates the decision-making process, we tested participants' interoceptive sensibility using the Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness (MAIA). The results showed that participants were more inclined to legitimate non-evidence-based therapeutic approaches in the COVID-19 and Emergency scenarios than the Normality scenario. We also found that scores on the MAIA Trusting subscale positively predicted this difference. Our findings demonstrate that uncertain medical scenarios, involving a dramatic increase in patient volume and acuity, can increase risk-taking in therapeutic decision-making. Furthermore, individual characteristics of health care providers, such as interoceptive ability, should be taken into account when constructing models to prevent the breakdown of healthcare systems in cases of severe emergency.

Cognitive and behavioral manifestations in SARS-CoV-2 infection: not specific or distinctive features?

Patients with COVID-19 are increasingly reported to suffer from a wide range of neurological complications, affecting both the central and peripheral nervous system. Among central manifestations, cognitive and behavioral symptoms are to date not exhaustively detailed. Furthermore, it is not clear whether these represent a combination of non-specific complications of a severe systemic disease, not differing from those usually seen in patients suffering from heterogenous pathological conditions affecting the central nervous system, or instead, they are a peculiar expression of COVID-19 neurotropism; in other words, if the infection has a coincidental or causal role in such patients. We examined both hypotheses, reporting opposite points of view, with the aim to stimulate discussion and raise awareness of the topic.