Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 25
Filter
1.
BMJ Ment Health ; 26(1)2023 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20239597

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based mental health interventions to support healthcare workers (HCWs) in crisis settings are scarce. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the capacity of a mental health intervention in reducing anxiety and depression symptoms in HCWs, relative to enhanced care as usual (eCAU), amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted an analyst-blind, parallel, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. We recruited HCWs with psychological distress from Madrid and Catalonia (Spain). The intervention arm received a stepped-care programme consisting of two WHO-developed interventions adapted for HCWs: Doing What Matters in Times of Stress (DWM) and Problem Management Plus (PM+). Each intervention lasted 5 weeks and was delivered remotely by non-specialist mental health providers. HCWs reporting psychological distress after DWM completion were invited to continue to PM+. The primary endpoint was self-reported anxiety/depression symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-Anxiety and Depression Scale) at week 21. FINDINGS: Between 3 November 2021 and 31 March 2022, 115 participants were randomised to stepped care and 117 to eCAU (86% women, mean age 37.5). The intervention showed a greater decrease in anxiety/depression symptoms compared with eCAU at the primary endpoint (baseline-adjusted difference 4.4, 95% CI 2.1 to 6.7; standardised effect size 0.8, 95% CI 0.4 to 1.2). No serious adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Brief stepped-care psychological interventions reduce anxiety and depression during a period of stress among HCWs. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Our results can inform policies and actions to protect the mental health of HCWs during major health crises and are potentially rapidly replicable in other settings where workers are affected by global emergencies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04980326.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Psychological Distress , Humans , Female , Adult , Male , Mental Health , Pandemics , Health Personnel/psychology
2.
BMC Public Health ; 23(1): 1016, 2023 05 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20232318

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic as a public health crisis has led to a significant increase in mental health difficulties. Smoking is strongly associated with mental health conditions, which is why the pandemic might have influenced the otherwise decline in smoking rates. Persons belonging to socioeconomically disadvantaged groups may be particularly affected, both because the pandemic has exacerbated existing social inequalities and because this group was more likely to smoke before the pandemic. We examined smoking prevalence in a French cohort study, focusing on differences between educational attainment. In addition, we examined the association between interpersonal changes in tobacco consumption and educational level from 2018 to 2021. METHODS: Using four assessments of smoking status available from 2009 to 2021, we estimated smoking prevalence over time, stratified by highest educational level in the TEMPO cohort and the difference was tested using chi2 test. We studied the association between interpersonal change in smoking status between 2018 and 2021 and educational attainment among 148 smokers, using multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS: Smoking prevalence was higher among those with low education. The difference between the two groups increased from 2020 to 2021 (4.8-9.4%, p < 0.001). Smokers with high educational level were more likely to decrease their tobacco consumption from 2018 to 2021 compared to low educated smokers (aOR = 2.72 [1.26;5.89]). CONCLUSION: Current findings showed a widening of the social inequality gap in relation to smoking rates, underscoring the increased vulnerability of persons with low educational level to smoking and the likely inadequate focus on social inequalities in relation to tobacco control policies during the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Humans , Cohort Studies , Public Health , COVID-19/epidemiology , Socioeconomic Factors , Educational Status , Smoking/epidemiology , Prevalence
3.
BMC Psychol ; 11(1): 164, 2023 May 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2324568

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had major and potentially long-lasting effects on mental health and wellbeing across populations worldwide. However, these impacts were not felt equally, leading to an exacerbation of health inequalities, especially affecting vulnerable populations such as migrants, refugees and asylum seekers. Aiming to inform the adaptation and implementation of psychological intervention programmes, the present study investigated priority mental health needs in this population group. METHODS: Participants were adult asylum seekers, refugees and migrants (ARMs) and stakeholders with experience in the field of migration living in Verona, Italy, and fluent in Italian and English. A two-stage process was carried out to examine their needs using qualitative methods including free listing interviews and focus group discussions, according to Module One of the DIME (Design, Implementation, Monitoring, and Evaluation) manual. Data were analyzed using an inductive thematic analyses approach. RESULTS: A total of 19 participants (12 stakeholders, 7 ARMs) completed the free listing interviews and 20 participants (12 stakeholders and 8 ARMs) attended focus group discussions. Salient problems and functions that emerged during free listing interviews were discussed during the focus group discussions. During the COVID-19 pandemic, ARMs struggled with many everyday living difficulties in their resettlement country due to social and economic issues, revealing a strong influence of contextual factors in determining mental health. Both ARMs and stakeholders highlighted a mismatch between needs, expectations and interventions as factors that may hamper proper implementation of health and social programmes. CONCLUSIONS: The present findings could help in the adaptation and implementation of psychological interventions targeting the needs of asylum seekers, refugees and migrants aiming to find a match between needs, expectations, and the corresponding interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration number 2021-UNVRCLE-0106707, February 11 2021.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Transients and Migrants , Adult , Humans , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Qualitative Research , Health Services Accessibility
4.
J Affect Disord ; 311: 214-223, 2022 08 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2308608

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Little is known about changes of mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic in potentially disadvantaged groups. We investigated changes in anxiety and depression symptoms during the first year of the pandemic in six European countries and Australia by prior mental disorders and migration status. METHODS: Overall, 4674 adults answered a web-based survey in May-June 2020 and were followed by three repeated surveys up to February 2021. Information on psychosocial, financial and demographic, living conditions, prior mental disorders, depression and anxiety symptoms during the pandemic and migration status was collected. Weighted general estimation equations modelling was used to investigate the association between prior mental disorders, migration status, and symptoms over time. RESULTS: Most participants were <40 years old (48%), women (78%) and highly educated (62%). The baseline prevalence of depressive and anxiety symptoms ranged between 19%-45% and 13%-35%, respectively. In most countries, prevalence rates remained unchanged throughout the pandemic and were higher among people with prior mental disorders than without even after adjustment for several factors. We observed interactions between previous mental disorders and symptoms of anxiety or depression over time in two countries. No difference by migration status was noted. LIMITATIONS: Convenience sampling limits generalizability. Self-assessed symptoms of depression and anxiety might involve some misclassification. CONCLUSIONS: Depression and anxiety symptoms were worse among individuals with prior mental disorders than without, but there was no clear trend of worsening mental health in the observed groups during the observed period.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Adult , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/psychology , Anxiety Disorders/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/psychology , Female , Humans
5.
Front Public Health ; 11: 1100546, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2277112

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Migrant populations, including workers, undocumented migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, internationally displaced persons, and other populations on the move, are exposed to a variety of stressors and potentially traumatic events before, during, and after the migration process. In recent years, the COVID-19 pandemic has represented an additional stressor, especially for migrants on the move. As a consequence, migration may increase vulnerability of individuals toward a worsening of subjective wellbeing, quality of life, and mental health, which, in turn, may increase the risk of developing mental health conditions. Against this background, we designed a stepped-care programme consisting of two scalable psychological interventions developed by the World Health Organization and locally adapted for migrant populations. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of this stepped-care programme will be assessed in terms of mental health outcomes, resilience, wellbeing, and costs to healthcare systems. Methods and analysis: We present the study protocol for a pragmatic randomized study with a parallel-group design that will enroll participants with a migrant background and elevated level of psychological distress. Participants will be randomized to care as usual only or to care a usual plus a guided self-help stress management guide (Doing What Matters in Times of Stress, DWM) and a five-session cognitive behavioral intervention (Problem Management Plus, PM+). Participants will self-report all measures at baseline before random allocation, 2 weeks after DWM delivery, 1 week after PM+ delivery and 2 months after PM+ delivery. All participants will receive a single-session of a support intervention, namely Psychological First Aid. We will include 212 participants. An intention-to-treat analysis using linear mixed models will be conducted to explore the programme's effect on anxiety and depression symptoms, as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire-Anxiety and Depression Scale summary score 2 months after PM+ delivery. Secondary outcomes include post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms, resilience, quality of life, resource utilization, cost, and cost-effectiveness. Discussion: This study is the first randomized controlled trial that combines two World Health Organization psychological interventions tailored for migrant populations with an elevated level of psychological distress. The present study will make available DWM/PM+ packages adapted for remote delivery following a task-shifting approach, and will generate evidence to inform policy responses based on a more efficient use of resources for improving resilience, wellbeing and mental health. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT04993534.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Transients and Migrants , Humans , Psychosocial Intervention , Pandemics , Quality of Life , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
6.
Frontiers in public health ; 11, 2023.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2234584

ABSTRACT

Introduction Migrant populations, including workers, undocumented migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, internationally displaced persons, and other populations on the move, are exposed to a variety of stressors and potentially traumatic events before, during, and after the migration process. In recent years, the COVID-19 pandemic has represented an additional stressor, especially for migrants on the move. As a consequence, migration may increase vulnerability of individuals toward a worsening of subjective wellbeing, quality of life, and mental health, which, in turn, may increase the risk of developing mental health conditions. Against this background, we designed a stepped-care programme consisting of two scalable psychological interventions developed by the World Health Organization and locally adapted for migrant populations. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of this stepped-care programme will be assessed in terms of mental health outcomes, resilience, wellbeing, and costs to healthcare systems. Methods and analysis We present the study protocol for a pragmatic randomized study with a parallel-group design that will enroll participants with a migrant background and elevated level of psychological distress. Participants will be randomized to care as usual only or to care a usual plus a guided self-help stress management guide (Doing What Matters in Times of Stress, DWM) and a five-session cognitive behavioral intervention (Problem Management Plus, PM+). Participants will self-report all measures at baseline before random allocation, 2 weeks after DWM delivery, 1 week after PM+ delivery and 2 months after PM+ delivery. All participants will receive a single-session of a support intervention, namely Psychological First Aid. We will include 212 participants. An intention-to-treat analysis using linear mixed models will be conducted to explore the programme's effect on anxiety and depression symptoms, as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire—Anxiety and Depression Scale summary score 2 months after PM+ delivery. Secondary outcomes include post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms, resilience, quality of life, resource utilization, cost, and cost-effectiveness. Discussion This study is the first randomized controlled trial that combines two World Health Organization psychological interventions tailored for migrant populations with an elevated level of psychological distress. The present study will make available DWM/PM+ packages adapted for remote delivery following a task-shifting approach, and will generate evidence to inform policy responses based on a more efficient use of resources for improving resilience, wellbeing and mental health. Clinical trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT04993534.

7.
BMC Psychiatry ; 22(1): 808, 2022 12 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2196133

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic have been profound. This paper outlines the study protocol for a trial that tests the efficacy of a brief group-based psychological intervention (Coping with COVID; CWC), relative to Supportive Counselling, to reduce distress associated with COVID-19 in a young adult population in Bangalore, India. METHODS: A single-blind, parallel, randomized controlled trial will be carried out via video conferencing in a small group format. Following informed consent, adults that screen positive for levels of psychological distress (Kessler 10 (K-10 score ≥ 20) and have access to a videoconferencing platform will be randomised to an adapted version of CWC (n = 90) or Supportive Counselling (SC) (n = 90). The primary outcome will be reduction in psychological distress including anxiety and depression at 2-months post treatment. Secondary outcomes include worry, positive wellbeing, and stress in relation to COVID-19. DISCUSSION: This treatment trial will assess whether CWC will result in reduced distress relative to Supportive Counselling in a young adult population in Bangalore, India. This study will yield important insights into the role of nonspecific factors versus the intervention's components in impacting COVID-19 related distress. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was prospectively registered on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12621001064897). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been obtained from the participating institution, CHRIST University in Bangalore. Results of the trial will be submitted for publication in peer reviewed journals and findings presented at scientific conferences and to key service providers and policy makers.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Psychological Distress , Young Adult , Humans , Pandemics , Single-Blind Method , Universities , Psychosocial Intervention , India , Australia , Students , Treatment Outcome , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
8.
SSM Popul Health ; 20: 101285, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2120105

ABSTRACT

•Symptoms of anxiety/depression were found in 28.8% of the participants at least once.•Unemployment and financial difficulties were associated with anxiety/depression.•Targeted mental health support could lessen mental health impact.

9.
Int J Public Health ; 67: 1604553, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2089970

ABSTRACT

Objective: To characterize the evolution of healthcare workers' mental health status over the 1-year period following the initial COVID-19 pandemic outbreak and to examine baseline characteristics associated with resolution or persistence of mental health problems over time. Methods: We conducted an 8-month follow-up cohort study. Eligible participants were healthcare workers working in Spain. Baseline data were collected during the initial pandemic outbreak. Survey-based self-reported measures included COVID-19-related exposures, sociodemographic characteristics, and three mental health outcomes (psychological distress, depression symptoms, and posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms). We examined three longitudinal trajectories in mental health outcomes between baseline and follow-up assessments (namely asymptomatic/stable, recovering, and persistently symptomatic/worsening). Results: We recruited 1,807 participants. Between baseline and follow-up assessments, the proportion of respondents screening positive for psychological distress and probable depression decreased, respectively, from 74% to 56% and from 28% to 21%. Two-thirds remained asymptomatic/stable in terms of depression symptoms and 56% remained symptomatic or worsened over time in terms of psychological distress. Conclusion: Poor mental health outcomes among healthcare workers persisted over time. Occupational programs and mental health strategies should be put in place.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Anxiety/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Depression/epidemiology , Follow-Up Studies , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Pandemics , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
10.
Digit Health ; 8: 20552076221129084, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2064702

ABSTRACT

Background and aims: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has challenged health services worldwide, with a worsening of healthcare workers' mental health within initial pandemic hotspots. In early 2022, the Omicron variant is spreading rapidly around the world. This study explores the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a stepped-care programme of scalable, internet-based psychological interventions for distressed health workers on self-reported anxiety and depression symptoms. Methods: We present the study protocol for a multicentre (two sites), parallel-group (1:1 allocation ratio), analyst-blinded, superiority, randomised controlled trial. Healthcare workers with psychological distress will be allocated either to care as usual only or to care as usual plus a stepped-care programme that includes two scalable psychological interventions developed by the World Health Organization: A guided self-help stress management guide (Doing What Matters in Times of Stress) and a five-session cognitive behavioural intervention (Problem Management Plus). All participants will receive a single-session emotional support intervention, namely psychological first aid. We will include 212 participants. An intention-to-treat analysis using linear mixed models will be conducted to explore the programme's effect on anxiety and depression symptoms, as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire - Anxiety and Depression Scale summary score at 21 weeks from baseline. Secondary outcomes include post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms, resilience, quality of life, cost impact and cost-effectiveness. Conclusions: This study is the first randomised trial that combines two World Health Organization psychological interventions tailored for health workers into one stepped-care programme. Results will inform occupational and mental health prevention, treatment, and recovery strategies. Registration details: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04980326.

11.
BMC Psychiatry ; 22(1): 633, 2022 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2053881

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUNDS: Individuals with chronic medical conditions are considered highly exposed to COVID-19 pandemic stress, but emerging evidence is demonstrating that resilience is common even among them. We aimed at identifying sustained resilient outcomes and their predictors in chronically ill people during the first year of the pandemic. METHODS: This international 4-wave 1-year longitudinal online survey included items on socio-demographic characteristics, economic and living situation, lifestyle and habits, pandemic-related issues, and history of mental disorders. Adherence to and approval of imposed restrictions, trust in governments and in scientific community during the pandemic were also investigated. The following tools were administered: the Patient Health Questionnaire, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale, the PTSD Checklist DSM-5, the Oslo Social Support Scale, the Padua Inventory, and the Portrait Values Questionnaire. RESULTS: One thousand fifty-two individuals reporting a chronic condition out of 8011 total participants from 13 countries were included in the study, and 965 had data available for the final model. The estimated probability of being "sustained-resilient" was 34%. Older male individuals, participants employed before and during the pandemic or with perceived social support were more likely to belong to the sustained-resilience group. Loneliness, a previous mental disorder, high hedonism, fear of COVID-19 contamination, concern for the health of loved ones, and non-approving pandemic restrictions were predictors of not-resilient outcomes in our sample. CONCLUSIONS: We found similarities and differences from established predictors of resilience and identified some new ones specific to pandemics. Further investigation is warranted and could inform the design of resilience-building interventions in people with chronic diseases.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Anxiety , Chronic Disease , Depression , Humans , Loneliness , Male , Prospective Studies
12.
Frontiers in public health ; 10, 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1989809

ABSTRACT

Background Healthcare workers (HCWs) from COVID-19 hotspots worldwide have reported poor mental health outcomes since the pandemic's beginning. The virulence of the initial COVID-19 surge in Spain and the urgency for rapid evidence constrained early studies in their capacity to inform mental health programs accurately. Here, we used a qualitative research design to describe relevant mental health problems among frontline HCWs and explore their association with determinants and consequences and their implications for the design and implementation of mental health programs. Materials and methods Following the Programme Design, Implementation, Monitoring, and Evaluation (DIME) protocol, we used a two-step qualitative research design to interview frontline HCWs, mental health experts, administrators, and service planners in Spain. We used Free List (FL) interviews to identify problems experienced by frontline HCWs and Key informant (KI) interviews to describe them and explore their determinants and consequences, as well as the strategies considered useful to overcome these problems. We used a thematic analysis approach to analyze the interview outputs and framed our results into a five-level social-ecological model (intrapersonal, interpersonal, organizational, community, and public health). Results We recruited 75 FL and 22 KI interviewees, roughly balanced in age and gender. We detected 56 themes during the FL interviews and explored the following themes in the KI interviews: fear of infection, psychological distress, stress, moral distress, and interpersonal conflicts among coworkers. We found that interviewees reported perceived causes and consequences across problems at all levels (intrapersonal to public health). Although several mental health strategies were implemented (especially at an intrapersonal and interpersonal level), most mental health needs remained unmet, especially at the organizational, community, and public policy levels. Conclusions In keeping with available quantitative evidence, our findings show that mental health problems are still relevant for frontline HCWs 1 year after the COVID-19 pandemic and that many reported causes of these problems are modifiable. Based on this, we offer specific recommendations to design and implement mental health strategies and recommend using transdiagnostic, low-intensity, scalable psychological interventions contextually adapted and tailored for HCWs.

13.
Diagnostics ; 12(5):1225, 2022.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1871603

ABSTRACT

There has been particular interest in the deployment of digital pathology (DP) and artificial intelligence (AI) in the diagnosis of prostate cancer, but little is known about the views of the public on their use. Prostate Cancer UK supporters were invited to an online survey which included quantitative and qualitative questions exploring views on the use of DP and AI in histopathological assessment. A total of 1276 responses to the survey were analysed (response rate 12.5%). Most respondents were supportive of DP (87%, 1113/1276) and of testing AI in clinical practice as a diagnostic adjunct (83%, 1058/1276). Respondents saw DP as potentially increasing workflow efficiency, facilitating research, education/training and fostering clinical discussions between clinician and patient. Some respondents raised concerns regarding data security, reliability and the need for human oversight. Among those who were unsure about AI, information was requested regarding its performance and others wanted to defer the decision to use it to an expert. Although most are in favour of its use, some are unsure, and their concerns could be addressed with more information or better communication. A small minority (<1%) are not in favour of the testing of the use of AI in histopathology for reasons which are not easily addressed.

14.
European Journal of Psychotraumatology ; 13(1), 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1755813

ABSTRACT

Background The Beirut Port Blast on August 4, 2020 is the largest (non-nuclear) explosion on record. St George Hospital University Medical Center (SGHUMC), a leading academic medical centre in Lebanon, adjacent to the Port, sustained a massive loss in lives and infrastructure. Objective The current study uses the baseline data of an ongoing longitudinal study to explore the prevalence, severity, and predictors of probable Acute Stress Disorder (ASD) among health workers at SGHUMC following the blast. Methods In the context of COVID-19 tests administered 9–15 days after the blast, SGHUMC staff were asked to complete a questionnaire that included socio-demographic details, the Beirut Port Exposure Inventory, and the Acute Stress Disorder Scale (ASDS). Results A total of 570 health workers participated in the study. The prevalence of probable DSM-5 ASD [95%CI] was 38.34% [31.41;45.32]. Many specific exposures were related, on a bivariate level, to ASD be it as a probable DSM-5 diagnosis or its severity as measured by the ASDS. A classification and regression tree (CART) analysis identified the highest risk predictors of probable DSM-5 ASD diagnosis to be: being a female, seeing dead or mutilated bodies, death of a close one, and being scared at the time of the explosion. Nurses carried the highest risks of all health workers with a probable DSM-5 ASD prevalence of 51.28%, (OR = 3.72 [95% CI: 2.22;6.25]). Being scared at the time of the blast was the most single predictor of probable ASD. Conclusion Both the prevalence and severity of probable DSM-5 ASD in this sample are higher than most reported in the literature, which may be explained by the severity of the trauma and the ongoing stress in the context of the pandemic. Fear at the time of the explosion was independently the most predictive parameter of probable ASD.

15.
Psychiatry ; 84(4): 351-357, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1642091
16.
European Journal of Psychotraumatology ; 12(1), 2021.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1564423

ABSTRACT

Background Refugees may be especially vulnerable to the adverse effects of COVID-19. Therefore it is critical that refugee communities are supported to access COVID-19 vaccines and for public health responses to address vaccine hesitancy. Objective To investigate the key demographic factors, barriers and attitudes associated with vaccine hesitancy in a community sample of refugees. Method Participants in the Refugee Adjustment Study, a cohort of refugees living in Australia, were invited to complete a survey about their COVID-19 vaccine intentions, barriers to access and attitudes relating to the vaccine. Results Of the 516 participants, 88% were unvaccinated and 28.1% were classed as vaccine hesitant. Key predictors of vaccine hesitancy were younger age, information and trust barriers, lower logistical barriers, and attitudes relating to low control and risk posed by COVID-19. Conclusions Findings suggest that public health strategies need to address trust, control and risk perception attitudes to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake in resettled refugee communities. HIGHLIGHTS Low trust in health authorities, concerns about a lack of control, and the perception of COVID-19 as low-risk emerged as the salient barriers and attitudes associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in a trauma-exposed refugee sample.

17.
Psychother Psychosom ; 91(1): 63-72, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1556865

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Anxiety and depression have increased markedly during the COVID-19 pandemic. There is a lack of evidence-based strategies to address these mental health needs during the pandemic. OBJECTIVE: We aim to conduct a proof-of-concept trial of the efficacy of a brief group-based psychological intervention delivered via videoconferencing for adults in Australia distressed by the pandemic. METHODS: In this single-blind, parallel, randomised controlled trial, adults who screened positive for COVID-related psychological distress across Australia were randomly allocated to either a 6-session group-based program based on behavioural principles (n = 120) or enhanced usual care (EUC, n = 120). Primary outcome was total score on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression (HADS) anxiety and depression subscales assessed at baseline, 1 week posttreatment, 2 months (primary outcome time point), and 6 months after treatment, as well as secondary outcome measures of worry, sleep impairment, anhedonia, mood, and COVID-19-related stress. RESULTS: Between May 20, 2020, and October 20, 2020, 240 patients were enrolled into the trial. Relative to EUC, at 2 months participants receiving intervention showed greater reduction on anxiety (mean difference, 1.4 [95% CI, 0.3 to 2.6], p = 0.01; effect size, 0.4 [95% CI, 0.1 to 0.7]) and depression (mean difference, 1.6 [95% CI, 0.4 to 2.8], p = 0.009; effect size, 0.4 [95% CI, 0.2 to 0.7]) scales. These effects were maintained at 6 months. There were also greater reductions of worry, anhedonia, COVID-19-related fears, and contamination fears. CONCLUSIONS: This trial provides initial evidence that brief group-based behavioural intervention delivered via videoconferencing results in moderate reductions in common psychological problems arising during the COVID-19 pandemic. This program may offer a viable and scalable means to mitigate the rising mental health problems during the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Depression/therapy , Humans , Mental Health , Pandemics , Psychosocial Intervention , SARS-CoV-2 , Single-Blind Method , Treatment Outcome , Videoconferencing
18.
PLoS One ; 16(12): e0260726, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1546966

ABSTRACT

Mental health disorders represent an enormous cost to society, are related to economic outcomes, and have increased markedly since the COVID-19 outbreak. Economic activity contracted dramatically on a global scale in 2020, representing the worst crisis since the Great Depression. This study used the COVID Impact Survey to provide insights on the interactions of mental illness and economic uncertainty during COVID-19. We used a probability-based panel survey, COVID Impact Survey, conducted in the U.S. over three waves in the period April-June 2020. The survey covered individual information on employment, economic and financial uncertainty, mental and physical health, as well as other demographic information. The prevalence of moderate mental distress was measured using a Psychological Distress Scale, a 5-item scale that is scored on a 4-point scale (total range: 0-15). The mental distress effect of employment, economic, and financial uncertainty, was assessed in a logit regression analysis conditioning for demographic and health information. It is found that employment, health coverage, social security, and food provision uncertainty are additional stressors for mental health. These economic factors work in addition to demographic effects, where groups who display increased risk for psychological distress include: women, Hispanics, and those in poor physical health. A decrease in employment and increases in economic uncertainty are associated with a doubling of common mental disorders. The population-representative survey evidence presented strongly suggests that economic policies which support employment (e.g., job keeping, job search support, stimulus spending) provide not only economic security but also constitute a major health intervention. Moving forward, the economic uncertainty effect ought to be reflected in community level intervention and prevention efforts, which should include strengthening economic support to reduce financial and economic strain.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Economic Recession , Mental Disorders/etiology , Adolescent , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Employment/economics , Employment/psychology , Female , Humans , Male , Mental Disorders/economics , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Psychological Distress , Sex Factors , Socioeconomic Factors , Surveys and Questionnaires , Uncertainty , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
19.
Eur J Psychotraumatol ; 12(1): 1997173, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1537454

ABSTRACT

Background: Refugees may be especially vulnerable to the adverse effects of COVID-19. Therefore it is critical that refugee communities are supported to access COVID-19 vaccines and for public health responses to address vaccine hesitancy. Objective: To investigate the key demographic factors, barriers and attitudes associated with vaccine hesitancy in a community sample of refugees. Method: Participants in the Refugee Adjustment Study, a cohort of refugees living in Australia, were invited to complete a survey about their COVID-19 vaccine intentions, barriers to access and attitudes relating to the vaccine. Results: Of the 516 participants, 88% were unvaccinated and 28.1% were classed as vaccine hesitant. Key predictors of vaccine hesitancy were younger age, information and trust barriers, lower logistical barriers, and attitudes relating to low control and risk posed by COVID-19. Conclusions: Findings suggest that public health strategies need to address trust, control and risk perception attitudes to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake in resettled refugee communities.


Antecedentes: Los refugiados pueden ser especialmente vulnerables a los efectos adversos del COVID-19. Por lo tanto, es fundamental que las comunidades de refugiados reciban apoyo para acceder a las vacunas COVID-19 y para que las respuestas de salud pública aborden la indecisión ante las vacunas.Objetivo: Investigar los factores demográficos clave, las barreras y las actitudes asociadas con la indecisión ante las vacunas en una muestra comunitaria de refugiados.Método: Se invitó a los participantes en el Estudio de Adaptación de Refugiados, una cohorte de refugiados que viven en Australia, a completar una encuesta sobre sus intenciones de vacunarse contra el COVID-19, barreras de acceso y actitudes relacionadas con la vacuna.Resultados: De los 516 participantes, el 88% no estaban vacunados y el 28,1% se clasificaron como reacios a vacunarse. Los predictores clave de la vacilación a la vacuna fueron menor edad, las barreras en información y confianza, menores barreras logísticas y las actitudes relacionadas con bajo control y el riesgo que plantea el COVID-19.Conclusiones: Los hallazgos sugieren que las estrategias de salud pública deben abordar las actitudes de confianza, control y percepción del riesgo para aumentar la aceptación de la vacuna COVID-19 en las comunidades de refugiados reasentados.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , Refugees/psychology , Vaccination Hesitancy/psychology , Adult , Australia , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cohort Studies , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Intention , Male , Refugees/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , Trust , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Hesitancy/statistics & numerical data
20.
Eur J Psychotraumatol ; 12(1): 1991651, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1510838

ABSTRACT

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in increased anxiety and depression around the world. Refugees may be particularly vulnerable to the mental health effects of the pandemic because of their higher rates of mental health disorders, trauma histories, and daily stressors. Objectives: This study used data from a controlled trial of a brief behavioural intervention for psychological distress in Syrian refugees living in Azraq Camp in Jordan to examine the psychological effects of the pandemic on refugee mental health. Method: A total of 410 participants were randomized to either the intervention or control arms of the trial and were assessed at baseline and 3-month follow-up. Half the sample (199; 48.5%) completed their 3-month follow-up assessment after the pandemic restrictions began in Jordan and 211 (51.5%) completed the assessment prior to the pandemic. Refugees were independently assessed for symptoms of PTSD, anxiety, and depression at baseline and follow-up, and pandemic-related worries were assessed at follow-up for those who completed their assessment during the pandemic. Results: The most commonly reported worries were economic difficulties (82.4%), shortage of essential supplies (71.3%), and infecting others (59.7%) or themselves (51.9%). Refugees who were assessed during the pandemic had less severe PTSD symptoms than those assessed prior to the pandemic. Significant predictors of pandemic-related worries were lower levels of depression prior to the pandemic and greater anxiety during the pandemic. Conclusion: These findings highlight the specific needs of refugees during the pandemic and suggest that pre-existing mental health issues may not necessarily be the key risk factors for who will experience major mental health issues or worries during the pandemic.


Antecedentes: La ansiedad y la depresión alrededor del mundo se han incrementado como consecuencia de la pandemia por la COVID-19. Los refugiados pueden ser particularmente vulnerables a los efectos de la pandemia sobre la salud mental a sus tasas más altas de trastornos de salud mental, de antecedentes de trauma y de estresores diarios.Objetivos: Este estudio empleó los datos del ensayo controlado de una intervención conductual breve para la angustia psicológica en refugiados sirios que vivían en el campo Azraq en Jordania. Se buscó evaluar los efectos psicológicos de la pandemia sobre la salud mental de los refugiados.Método: Un total de 410 participantes fueron asignados aleatoriamente, bien al grupo de intervención o bien al grupo de control del ensayo, y fueron evaluados al inicio y a los 3 meses de seguimiento. La mitad de la muestra (199; 48,5%) completó la evaluación a los 3 meses de seguimiento después de que comenzaran las restricciones de la pandemia en Jordania, mientras que 211 (51,5%) completaron esta evaluación antes de la pandemia. Los refugiados fueron evaluados de forma independiente para detectar síntomas del TEPT, de la ansiedad y de la depresión al inicio y en el seguimiento. Las preocupaciones relacionadas a la pandemia se evaluaron durante el seguimiento en aquellos que completaron su evaluación durante la pandemia.Resultados: Las preocupaciones más comúnmente reportadas fueron las dificultades económicas (82,4%), la escasez de suministros esenciales (71,3%) y la infección de otros (59,7%) o de ellos mismos (51,9%). Los refugiados que fueron evaluados durante la pandemia tenían síntomas de TEPT menos severos que aquellos que fueron evaluados antes de la pandemia. Los predictores significativos de las preocupaciones relacionados con la pandemia fueron niveles más bajos de depresión antes de la pandemia y mayor ansiedad durante la pandemia.Conclusiones: Estos hallazgos destacan las necesidades especificas de los refugiados durante la pandemia y sugieren que los problemas de salud mental preexistentes no necesariamente pueden ser los factores de riesgo clave para aquellos que experimentarán los principales problemas de salud mental o preocupaciones durante la pandemia.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mental Health , Psychotherapy, Group , Refugees , Adult , Anxiety/epidemiology , Depression/epidemiology , Humans , Jordan/epidemiology , Psychological Distress , Refugees/psychology , Refugees/statistics & numerical data , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic , Syria/ethnology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL