Effects of Pre-Existing Mental Conditions on Fatigue and Psychological Symptoms Post-COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Patients who are post-COVID-19 will require more treatment soon. Therefore, it is important to understand the root cause of their psychological and somatic conditions. Previous studies showed contradictory results on the influence of pre-existing mental conditions. The present study examines the influence of these pre-existing conditions and their pre-treatment on the severity of post-COVID-19 symptoms. METHODS: This analysis employs questionnaire data from a large study sample in Germany. Overall, 801 participants were included. All participants rated their health status on a scale from 0 to 100. Fatigue, depression, and anxiety were measured using the FAS, PHQ-9, and GAD-7 scales. RESULTS: All pre-pandemic values showed no significant differences between the groups. The current health status was rated similarly by the recovered patients (µ = 80.5 ± 17.0) and the control group (µ = 81.2 ± 18.0) but significantly worse by acutely infected (µ = 59.0 ± 21.5) and post-COVID-19 patients (µ = 54.2 ± 21.1). Fatigue, depression, and anxiety were similar for recovered patients and the control group. By contrast, there were significant differences between the control and the post-COVID-19 groups concerning fatigue (45.9% vs. 93.1%), depression (19.3% vs. 53.8%), and anxiety (19.3% vs. 22.3%). CONCLUSION: Fatigue and psychological conditions of post-COVID-19 patients are not associated with pre-existing conditions.

Healthcare Workers' Perceptions and Medically Approved COVID-19 Infection Risk: Understanding the Mental Health Dimension of the Pandemic. A German Hospital Case Study.

Introduction: This study analyses how healthcare workers (HCWs) perceived risks, protection and preventive measures during the COVID-19 pandemic in relation to medically approved risks and organizational measures. The aim is to explore "blind spots" of pandemic protection and make mental health needs of HCWs visible. Methods: We have chosen an "optimal-case" scenario of a high-income country with a well-resourced hospital sector and low HCW infection rate at the organizational level to explore governance gaps in HCW protection. A German multi-method hospital study at Hannover Medical School served as empirical case; document analysis, expert information and survey data (n = 1,163) were collected as part of a clinical study into SARS-CoV-2 serology testing during the second wave of the pandemic (November 2020-February 2021). Selected survey items included perceptions of risks, protection and preventive measures. Descriptive statistical analysis and regression were undertaken for gender, profession and COVID-19 patient care. Results: The results reveal a low risk of 1% medically approved infections among participants, but a much higher mean personal risk estimate of 15%. The majority (68.4%) expressed "some" to "very strong" fear of acquiring infection at the workplace. Individual protective behavior and compliance with protective workplace measures were estimated as very high. Yet only about half of the respondents felt strongly protected by the employer; 12% even perceived "no" or "little" protection. Gender and contact with COVID-19 patients had no significant effect on the estimations of infection risks and protective workplace behavior, but nursing was correlated with higher levels of personal risk estimations and fear of infection. Conclusions: A strong mismatch between low medically approved risk and personal risk perceptions of HCWs brings stressors and threats into view, that may be preventable through better information, training/education and risk communication and through investment in mental health and inclusion in pandemic preparedness plans.