Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Int J Disaster Risk Reduct ; 81: 103250, 2022 Oct 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1996226

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection prevention measures have led to a variety of mental health issues. Although several self-care methods have been recommended for those quarantined, evidence regarding how best to support quarantined people experiencing a mental health crisis is limited. In February 2020, the Diamond Princess cruise ship was quarantined in Yokohama port, Japan following a passenger testing positive for COVID-19. We were sent to address the mental health issues as the Disaster Psychiatric Assistance Team (DPAT). In the present study, we examined the acute mental health needs of the passengers and crew collected by the DPAT using the standard Emergency Medical Team daily reporting system. We assessed 206 cases (99 men and 107 women) with generic health issues and 127 cases (39 men and 88 women) with mental health issues. Mental health issues including disaster stress-related symptoms were as frequent as physical health events associated with COVID-19. The most significant mental health issue was anxiety, as an acute psychological reaction to the quarantine situation. Women and crews most frequently needed mental health support. Mental health improved in most clients after brief counseling. Although several passengers experienced suicidal ideation, there were no cases of actual suicide attempts during the quarantine period. This case has been regarded as a well-known public health event at the beginning of the COVID-19 era. In addition to physical health support, disaster mental health support was essential to save lives. Our findings may facilitate responses to future quarantines, accidents, and mental health crises.

2.
Ind Health ; 60(4): 387-394, 2022 07 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1968964

ABSTRACT

This study aimed to compare the longitudinal change in depressive symptoms among healthcare professionals in Japan who are willing to receive novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccination and those who are unwilling to receive COVID-19 vaccination. The baseline survey was conducted in October 2020 (Survey time 1: T1); respondents in T1 were invited to participate in May 2021 (Survey time 2: T2). Depressive symptoms were assessed by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). Group comparisons of the estimated mean of PHQ-9 score at T1 and T2 were estimated by the analysis of covariance. In T1, 597 participants (response rate: 4.4%) completed all questions. In T2, 211 participants (follow up rate: 35.3%) completed all questions. The group and time interaction effect was significant (F(1, 207)=3.9, p=0.049); depressive symptoms were worse among healthcare professionals who were unwilling to receive vaccination than among those who were willing to receive vaccination. This study showed that depressive symptoms were worse among healthcare professionals who were unwilling to receive COVID-19 vaccination than those who are willing to receive COVID-19 vaccination. This suggests that it is important to take care of healthcare professionals who are unwilling to receive vaccination to prevent mental health deterioration.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Depression/epidemiology , Humans , Japan/epidemiology , Vaccination , Vaccination Hesitancy
3.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(23)2021 11 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1542529

ABSTRACT

This study aimed to compare longitudinal change of the psychological distress of a group with psychological first aid (PFA) experience and a group without PFA experience among physicians and other healthcare professionals from before the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic to during the pandemic. The baseline survey was conducted in January 2020 (T1). The respondents in T1 were invited to participate in March (T2) and November 2020 (T3). Psychological distress was assessed by the Kessler 6 Scale. Participants were divided into two categories: a group with and a group without PFA experience. Participants were further divided between physicians and healthcare professionals other than physicians, because physicians are more likely to experience morally injurious events. A mixed-model repeated-measures ANOVA was conducted as an indicator of the group differences. In T1, 398 healthcare professionals participated. The longitudinal analysis of healthcare professionals other than physicians showed that psychological distress was significantly greater in the group without PFA experience than in the group with PFA experience (T1 vs. T3). This study showed psychological distress among healthcare professionals other than physicians was significantly greater in the group without PFA experience than in the group with PFA experience during the COVID-19 pandemic, but the results were not consistent among physicians.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Psychological Distress , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Pandemics , Psychological First Aid , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL