Impact of preschool attendance, parental stress, and parental mental health on internalizing and externalizing problems during COVID-19 lockdown measures in preschool children

Background Internalizing problems are common in young children, often persist into adulthood, and increase the likelihood for subsequent psychiatric disorders. Problematic attachment, parental mental health problems, and stress are risk factors for the development of internalizing problems. COVID-19 lockdown measures have resulted in additional parental burden and especially their impact on preschool children has rarely been investigated as of now. The current study examined the impact of sustained preschool attendance, parental stress, and parental mental health on internalizing and externalizing problems during COVID-19 lockdown measures in a sample of preschool children in Germany. Methods and findings N = 128 parents of preschool children filled out a one-time online survey about children's internalizing problems, externalizing problems, and attachment for three time points: before a nation-wide lockdown (T1), during the most difficult time of the lockdown (T2) and after the lockdown (T3). Additionally, parents answered questions about their own depressive and anxious symptomatology for the three time points and parental stress for T1 and T2. Linear-mixed effect models were computed to predict children's internalizing / externalizing behavior. Preschool children showed a significant increase in internalizing and externalizing problems over time, highest at T2 with small decreases at T3. Parental depressive and anxious symptomatology increased significantly from T1 to T2, but also remained high at T3. Parental stress levels were comparable to community samples at T1, but attained average values reported for at-risk families at T2. Linear-mixed effect models identified higher parental stress, parental anxiety, attachment problems, parental education, and less preschool attendance as significant predictors for internalizing and externalizing problems in preschoolers with more specific associations shown in separate models. A limitation is the retrospective assessment for the times T1 and T2. Conclusions Preschool children's mental health is strongly and negatively influenced by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and its lockdown measures. Sustained preschool attendance may serve as a protective factor.

Impact of preschool attendance, parental stress, and parental mental health on internalizing and externalizing problems during COVID-19 lockdown measures in preschool children.

BACKGROUND: Internalizing problems are common in young children, often persist into adulthood, and increase the likelihood for subsequent psychiatric disorders. Problematic attachment, parental mental health problems, and stress are risk factors for the development of internalizing problems. COVID-19 lockdown measures have resulted in additional parental burden and especially their impact on preschool children has rarely been investigated as of now. The current study examined the impact of sustained preschool attendance, parental stress, and parental mental health on internalizing and externalizing problems during COVID-19 lockdown measures in a sample of preschool children in Germany. METHODS AND FINDINGS: N = 128 parents of preschool children filled out a one-time online survey about children's internalizing problems, externalizing problems, and attachment for three time points: before a nation-wide lockdown (T1), during the most difficult time of the lockdown (T2) and after the lockdown (T3). Additionally, parents answered questions about their own depressive and anxious symptomatology for the three time points and parental stress for T1 and T2. Linear-mixed effect models were computed to predict children's internalizing / externalizing behavior. Preschool children showed a significant increase in internalizing and externalizing problems over time, highest at T2 with small decreases at T3. Parental depressive and anxious symptomatology increased significantly from T1 to T2, but also remained high at T3. Parental stress levels were comparable to community samples at T1, but attained average values reported for at-risk families at T2. Linear-mixed effect models identified higher parental stress, parental anxiety, attachment problems, parental education, and less preschool attendance as significant predictors for internalizing and externalizing problems in preschoolers with more specific associations shown in separate models. A limitation is the retrospective assessment for the times T1 and T2. CONCLUSIONS: Preschool children's mental health is strongly and negatively influenced by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and its lockdown measures. Sustained preschool attendance may serve as a protective factor.

Non-suicidal self-injury and emotional burden among university students during the COVID-19 pandemic: cross-sectional online survey.

Owing to restrictions of the COVID-19 pandemic, increased stress is evident in university students with a lifetime history of non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI). Therefore, we examined two groups of university students (n = 174) in an online survey, one that exhibited early NSSI in adolescence (n = 51) and another that exhibited continuous NSSI beyond the age of 18 (n = 123) (German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00023731). We compared the two groups in terms of depressive symptoms in the previous 2 weeks as well as self-perceived changes in emotional burden, urge to self-injure and NSSI frequency in the first year of the pandemic compared with the year before (pre-pandemic). Among other findings, both groups showed an increase in emotional burden and urge to self-injure.

Problems or prospects? Being a parent in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany.

Background: In the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, many restrictions hit people in ways never seen before. Mental wellbeing was affected and burden was high, especially for high-risk groups such as parents. However, to our knowledge no research has yet examined whether being a parent was not only a risk for psychological burden but also a way to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: An online survey was used to collect data from 1,121 participants from April to June 2020. In addition to demographic variables, risk factors (financial burden, problems complying with COVID-19 restrictions, and pre-treatment due to mental health problems) and protective factors (emotion regulation, humor, and crisis self-efficacy) were collected. The dataset was divided into three groups: parents whose children lived at home (n = 395), parents whose children did not (no longer) live at home (n = 165), and people who were not parents (n = 561). Results: A linear mixed effect model showed that parents had no higher burden than non-parents, and even less when children did not live at home. Expected risk factors were generally less important, and there were no differences between parents and non-parents. In contrast, parents had advantages in protective factors. Conclusion: In the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, it was shown that parents (with and without their children at home) were not necessarily at risk due to additional burden, but also had prospects of coping better with the situation than people without children.

Problems or prospects? Being a parent in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany

Background In the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, many restrictions hit people in ways never seen before. Mental wellbeing was affected and burden was high, especially for high-risk groups such as parents. However, to our knowledge no research has yet examined whether being a parent was not only a risk for psychological burden but also a way to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods An online survey was used to collect data from 1,121 participants from April to June 2020. In addition to demographic variables, risk factors (financial burden, problems complying with COVID-19 restrictions, and pre-treatment due to mental health problems) and protective factors (emotion regulation, humor, and crisis self-efficacy) were collected. The dataset was divided into three groups: parents whose children lived at home (n = 395), parents whose children did not (no longer) live at home (n = 165), and people who were not parents (n = 561). Results A linear mixed effect model showed that parents had no higher burden than non-parents, and even less when children did not live at home. Expected risk factors were generally less important, and there were no differences between parents and non-parents. In contrast, parents had advantages in protective factors. Conclusion In the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, it was shown that parents (with and without their children at home) were not necessarily at risk due to additional burden, but also had prospects of coping better with the situation than people without children.