ABSTRACT
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic is a health emergency resulting in multiple stressors that may be related to posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Objective: This study examined relationships between risk and protective factors, pandemic-related stressors, and PTSD during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Data from the European Society of Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS) ADJUST Study were used. N = 4,607 trauma-exposed participants aged 18 years and above were recruited from the general populations of eleven countries (Austria, Croatia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, and Sweden) from June to November 2020. We assessed sociodemographic (e.g. gender), pandemic-related (e.g. news consumption), and health-related (e.g. general health condition) risk and protective factors, pandemic-related stressors (e.g. fear of infection), and probable PTSD (PC-PTSD-5). The relationships between these variables were examined using logistic regression on multiple imputed data sets. Results: The prevalence of probable PTSD was 17.7%. Factors associated with an increased risk for PTSD were younger age, female gender, more than 3 h of daily pandemic-related news consumption (vs. no consumption), a satisfactory, poor, or very poor health condition (vs. a very good condition), a current or previous diagnosis of a mental disorder, and trauma exposure during the COVID-19 pandemic. Factors associated with a reduced risk for PTSD included a medium and high income (vs. very low income), face-to-face contact less than once a week or 3-7 times a week (vs. no contact), and digital social contact less than once a week or 1-7 days a week (vs. no contact). Pandemic-related stressors associated with an increased risk for PTSD included governmental crisis management and communication, restricted resources, restricted social contact, and difficult housing conditions. Conclusion: We identified risk and protective factors as well as stressors that may help identify trauma-exposed individuals at risk for PTSD, enabling more efficient and rapid access to care. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Spanish) Antecedentes: La pandemia COVID-19 es una emergencia sanitaria que genera multiples estresores que pueden estar relacionados con el trastorno de estres postraumatico (TEPT). Objetivo: Este estudio examino las relaciones entre los factores de riesgo y protectores, estresores relacionados con la pandemia y TEPT durante la pandemia de COVID-19. Metodos: Se utilizaron los datos del estudio ADJUST de la Sociedad Europea de Estudios de Estres Traumatico (ESTSS por sus siglas en ingles). N = 4.607 participantes mayores de 18 anos expuestos a trauma fueron reclutados de la poblacion general de once paises (Austria, Croacia, Georgia, Alemania, Grecia, Italia, Lituania, Paises Bajos, Polonia, Portugal y Suecia) desde junio a noviembre 2020. Evaluamos factores de riesgo y protectores sociodemograficos (p.ej. genero), relacionados con la pandemia (p.ej. consumo de noticias) y relacionados con la salud (p.ej. estado de salud general), estresores relacionados con la pandemia (p.ej. temor a la infeccion) y TEPT probable (PC-PTSD-5 por sus siglas en ingles). Las relaciones entre estas variables se examinaron mediante regresion logistica en multiples conjuntos de datos imputados. Resultados: La prevalencia de TEPT probable fue del 17.7%. Los factores asociados con un mayor riesgo de TEPT fueron edad mas joven, sexo femenino, mas de 3 horas de consumo diario de noticias relacionadas con la pandemia (frente a ningun consumo), un estado de salud satisfactorio, malo o muy malo (frente a un estado muy bueno), un diagnostico de trastorno mental actual o previo y exposicion a un trauma durante la pandemia de COVID-19. Los factores asociados con un riesgo reducido de TEPT incluyeron ingresos medios y altos (frente a ingresos muy bajos), contacto cara a cara menos de una vez a la semana o de 3 a 7 veces por semana (frente a ningun contacto) y contacto social digital menos de una vez a la semana o de 1 a 7 dias a la semana (frente a ningun contacto). Los estresores relacionados con la pandemia asociados con un mayor riesgo de TEPT incluyeron la gestion y comunicacion de crisis gubernamental, recursos restringidos, contacto social restringido y condiciones de vivienda dificiles. Conclusiones: Identificamos factores de riesgo y protectores, asi como estresores que pueden ayudar a identificar a las personas expuestas a traumas en riesgo de TEPT, lo que permite un acceso mas eficiente y rapido a la atencion. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
ABSTRACT
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic is a health emergency resulting in multiple stressors that may be related to posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Objective: This study examined relationships between risk and protective factors, pandemic-related stressors, and PTSD during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Data from the European Society of Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS) ADJUST Study were used. N = 4,607 trauma-exposed participants aged 18 years and above were recruited from the general populations of eleven countries (Austria, Croatia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, and Sweden) from June to November 2020. We assessed sociodemographic (e.g. gender), pandemic-related (e.g. news consumption), and health-related (e.g. general health condition) risk and protective factors, pandemic-related stressors (e.g. fear of infection), and probable PTSD (PC-PTSD-5). The relationships between these variables were examined using logistic regression on multiple imputed data sets. Results: The prevalence of probable PTSD was 17.7%. Factors associated with an increased risk for PTSD were younger age, female gender, more than 3 h of daily pandemic-related news consumption (vs. no consumption), a satisfactory, poor, or very poor health condition (vs. a very good condition), a current or previous diagnosis of a mental disorder, and trauma exposure during the COVID-19 pandemic. Factors associated with a reduced risk for PTSD included a medium and high income (vs. very low income), face-to-face contact less than once a week or 3–7 times a week (vs. no contact), and digital social contact less than once a week or 1–7 days a week (vs. no contact). Pandemic-related stressors associated with an increased risk for PTSD included governmental crisis management and communication, restricted resources, restricted social contact, and difficult housing conditions. Conclusion: We identified risk and protective factors as well as stressors that may help identify trauma-exposed individuals at risk for PTSD, enabling more efficient and rapid access to care. HIGHLIGHTS N = 4,607 trauma-exposed adult participants were recruited from the general population during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. The prevalence for probable posttraumatic stress disorder was 17.7%. We identified risk factors (e.g. poor health condition) and protective factors (e.g. social contact) associated with posttraumatic stress disorder.
ABSTRACT
This study assessed the validity and reliability of the Pandemic Coping Scale (PCS), a new brief measure of coping with pandemic-related stressors. Methods: The PCS was administered to N = 2316 German participants during the COVID-19 pandemic. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis was applied among random splits of the sample. Global goodness of fit (χ 2, RMSEA, SRMR, CFI, TLI), local goodness of fit (factor loadings, communalities, factor reliability, discriminant validity) and additional test quality criteria (internal consistency, item discrimination and difficulty) were evaluated for a four-factor model vs. a four-factor model combined with a second-order general factor. Convergent and divergent validity were examined by Pearson correlations of the PCS subscales with the Brief-COPE subscales; criterion validity was evaluated by correlations with wellbeing (WHO-5), depressive (PHQ-9) and anxiety symptoms (GAD-2). Results: Exploratory factor analysis suggested a four-factor solution ('Healthy Lifestyle', 'Joyful Activities', 'Daily Structure', 'Prevention Adherence'). Confirmatory factor analysis showed a sufficient global fit for both specified models which did not differ in their fit to the data. Local goodness of fit indices showed moderate to large factor loadings and good factor reliabilities except for the subscale 'Prevention Adherence'. Internal consistencies were good for the PCS total scale (α = .83), the 'Healthy Lifestyle' (α = .79) and the 'Daily Structure' (α = .86) subscales, acceptable for 'Joyful Activities' (α = .60), and low for 'Prevention Adherence' (α = .52). The four subscales evidenced convergent and divergent validity with the Brief-COPE subscales. The subscales 'Healthy lifestyle', 'Joyful activities' and 'Daily structure' showed criterion validity with wellbeing, depressive and anxiety symptoms. Conclusions: The PCS is a reliable and valid measure to assess pandemic-specific coping behavior in the domains of 'Healthy Lifestyle', 'Joyful Activities', and 'Daily Structure'. The PCS subscale 'Prevention Adherence' might be improved by adding items with varying item difficulties.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) are liberally prescribed in patients with liver cirrhosis. Observational studies link PPI therapy in cirrhotic patients with an increased risk for infectious complications, hepatic encephalopathy and an increased risk for hospitalization and mortality. However, patients with liver cirrhosis are also considered to be at risk for peptic ulcer bleeding. The STOPPIT trial evaluates if discontinuation of a pre-existing PPI treatment delays a composite endpoint of re-hospitalization and/or death in patients (recently) hospitalized with liver cirrhosis compared to patients on continued PPI medication. METHODS: The STOPPIT-trial is a prospective, multicentre, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial. In total, 476 patients with complicated liver cirrhosis who already receive long-term PPI therapy without evidence-based indication are 1:1 randomized to receive either esomeprazole 20 mg (control group) or placebo (intervention group) for 360 days. Patients with an indication for PPI therapy (such as a recent diagnosis of peptic ulcers, severe reflux esophagitis, severe hemorrhagic gastritis, recent endoscopic therapy for oesophageal varices) are excluded. The primary composite endpoint is the time-to re-hospitalization and/or death. Secondary endpoints include rates of re-hospitalization, mortality, occurrence of infections, hepatic decompensation and acute-on-chronic liver failure. The safety endpoint is defined as manifestation of an evidence-based indication for PPI re-therapy. The impact of PPI continuation or discontinuation on the intestinal microbiota will be studied. The recruitment will take place at 18 study sites throughout Germany. Recruitment has started in April 2021. DISCUSSION: The STOPPIT trial is the first clinical trial to study the effects of PPI withdrawal on relevant outcome variables in patients with complicated liver cirrhosis. If the hypothesis that PPI withdrawal improves clinical outcomes of cirrhosis patients is confirmed, this would argue for a strong restriction of the currently liberal prescription practice of PPIs in this population. If, on the other hand, the trial demonstrates an increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding events in patients after PPI withdrawal, this could create a rationale for a more liberal, prophylactic PPI treatment in patients with liver cirrhosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EU clinical trials register EudraCT 2019-005008-16 (registered December 27, 2019). CLINICALTRIALS: gov NCT04448028 (registered June 25, 2020). German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00021290 (registered March 10, 2021).
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Proton Pump Inhibitors , Humans , Liver Cirrhosis/complications , Liver Cirrhosis/diagnosis , Liver Cirrhosis/drug therapy , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Prospective Studies , Proton Pump Inhibitors/adverse effects , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
Background The COVID-19 pandemic exposes individuals to multiple stressors, such as quarantine, physical distancing, job loss, risk of infection, and loss of loved ones. Such a complex array of stressors potentially lead to symptoms of adjustment disorder. Objective This cross-sectional exploratory study examined relationships between risk and protective factors, stressors, and symptoms of adjustment disorder during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods Data from the first wave of the European Society of Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS) longitudinal ADJUST Study were used. N = 15,563 participants aged 18 years and above were recruited in eleven countries (Austria, Croatia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, and Sweden) from June to November 2020. Associations between risk and protective factors (e.g. gender, diagnosis of a mental health disorder), stressors (e.g. fear of infection, restricted face-to-face contact), and symptoms of adjustment disorder (ADNM-8) were examined using multivariate linear regression. Results The prevalence of self-reported probable adjustment disorder was 18.2%. Risk factors associated with higher levels of symptoms of adjustment disorder were female gender, older age, being at risk for severe COVID-19 illness, poorer general health status, current or previous trauma exposure, a current or previous mental health disorder, and longer exposure to COVID-19 news. Protective factors related to lower levels of symptoms of adjustment disorder were higher income, being retired, and having more face-to-face contact with loved ones or friends. Pandemic-related stressors associated with higher levels of symptoms of adjustment disorder included fear of infection, governmental crisis management, restricted social contact, work-related problems, restricted activity, and difficult housing conditions. Conclusions We identified stressors, risk, and protective factors that may help identify individuals at higher risk for adjustment disorder. HIGHLIGHTS We examined symptoms of adjustment disorder in 15,563 adults during the COVID-19 pandemic. The prevalence of probable adjustment disorder was 18.2%. We identified stressors, risk, and protective factors that may help identify individuals at higher risk for adjustment disorder.
ABSTRACT
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic exposes individuals to multiple stressors, such as quarantine, physical distancing, job loss, risk of infection, and loss of loved ones. Such a complex array of stressors potentially lead to symptoms of adjustment disorder. Objective: This cross-sectional exploratory study examined relationships between risk and protective factors, stressors, and symptoms of adjustment disorder during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Data from the first wave of the European Society of Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS) longitudinal ADJUST Study were used. N = 15,563 participants aged 18 years and above were recruited in eleven countries (Austria, Croatia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, and Sweden) from June to November 2020. Associations between risk and protective factors (e.g. gender, diagnosis of a mental health disorder), stressors (e.g. fear of infection, restricted face-to-face contact), and symptoms of adjustment disorder (ADNM-8) were examined using multivariate linear regression. Results: The prevalence of self-reported probable adjustment disorder was 18.2%. Risk factors associated with higher levels of symptoms of adjustment disorder were female gender, older age, being at risk for severe COVID-19 illness, poorer general health status, current or previous trauma exposure, a current or previous mental health disorder, and longer exposure to COVID-19 news. Protective factors related to lower levels of symptoms of adjustment disorder were higher income, being retired, and having more face-to-face contact with loved ones or friends. Pandemic-related stressors associated with higher levels of symptoms of adjustment disorder included fear of infection, governmental crisis management, restricted social contact, work-related problems, restricted activity, and difficult housing conditions. Conclusions: We identified stressors, risk, and protective factors that may help identify individuals at higher risk for adjustment disorder.
Antecedentes: La pandemia de COVID-19 expone a las personas a múltiples factores estresantes, como la cuarentena, el distanciamiento físico, la pérdida del trabajo, el riesgo de infección, y la pérdida de seres queridos. Esta compleja serie de factores estresantes puede potencialmente conducir a síntomas del trastorno de adaptación.Objetivo: Este estudio exploratorio transversal examinó las relaciones entre los factores de riesgo y de protección, los factores estresantes, y los síntomas del trastorno de adaptación durante el primer año de la pandemia de COVID-19.Métodos: Se utilizaron datos de la primera ola del estudio longitudinal ADJUST de la Sociedad Europea de Estudios de Estrés Traumático (ESTSS en su sigla en inglés). N = 15.563 participantes de 18 años o más fueron reclutados en once países (Austria, Croacia, Georgia, Alemania, Grecia, Italia, Lituania, Países Bajos, Polonia, Portugal, y Suecia) de junio a noviembre de 2020. Se examinaron mediante regresión lineal multivariante las asociaciones entre los factores de riesgo y de protección (p. ej., género, diagnóstico de un trastorno de salud mental), factores estresantes (p. ej., miedo a la infección, contacto restringido cara a cara), y síntomas del trastorno de adaptación (ADNM-8 en su sigla en inglés).Resultados: La prevalencia del trastorno de adaptación probable autoinformado fue del 18,2%. Los factores de riesgo asociados con niveles más altos de síntomas del trastorno de adaptación fueron género femenino, edad avanzada, riesgo de enfermedad grave por COVID-19, peor estado de salud general, exposición a un trauma actual o anterior, un trastorno de salud mental actual o anterior, y una exposición más prolongada a las noticias de COVID-19. Los factores de protección relacionados con niveles más bajos de síntomas del trastorno de adaptación fueron mayores ingresos, estar jubilado, y tener más contacto cara a cara con sus seres queridos o amigos. Los factores estresantes relacionados con la pandemia que se asociaron con niveles más altos de síntomas del trastorno de adaptación incluyeron miedo a la infección, manejo gubernamental de crisis, contacto social restringido, problemas relacionados con el trabajo, actividad restringida, y condiciones de vivienda difíciles.Conclusiones: Identificamos factores estresantes, de riesgo, y protectores que pueden ayudar a identificar a las personas con mayor riesgo de trastorno de adaptación.
Subject(s)
Adjustment Disorders/psychology , COVID-19/psychology , Psychological Trauma/psychology , Adjustment Disorders/epidemiology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Europe/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Protective Factors , Psychological Trauma/epidemiology , Quarantine/psychology , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic has caused strains on health systems worldwide disrupting routine hospital services for all non-COVID patients. Within this retrospective study, we analyzed inpatient hospital admissions across 18 German university hospitals during the 2020 lockdown period compared to 2018. Patients admitted to hospital between January 1 and May 31, 2020 and the corresponding periods in 2018 and 2019 were included in this study. Data derived from electronic health records were collected and analyzed using the data integration center infrastructure implemented in the university hospitals that are part of the four consortia funded by the German Medical Informatics Initiative. Admissions were grouped and counted by ICD 10 chapters and specific reasons for treatment at each site. Pooled aggregated data were centrally analyzed with descriptive statistics to compare absolute and relative differences between time periods of different years. The results illustrate how care process adoptions depended on the COVID-19 epidemiological situation and the criticality of the disease. Overall inpatient hospital admissions decreased by 35% in weeks 1 to 4 and by 30.3% in weeks 5 to 8 after the lockdown announcement compared to 2018. Even hospital admissions for critical care conditions such as malignant cancer treatments were reduced. We also noted a high reduction of emergency admissions such as myocardial infarction (38.7%), whereas the reduction in stroke admissions was smaller (19.6%). In contrast, we observed a considerable reduction in admissions for non-critical clinical situations, such as hysterectomies for benign tumors (78.8%) and hip replacements due to arthrosis (82.4%). In summary, our study shows that the university hospital admission rates in Germany were substantially reduced following the national COVID-19 lockdown. These included critical care or emergency conditions in which deferral is expected to impair clinical outcomes. Future studies are needed to delineate how appropriate medical care of critically ill patients can be maintained during a pandemic.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, University/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Patient Admission/statistics & numerical data , Quarantine/statistics & numerical data , Emergency Service, Hospital/trends , Forecasting , Germany/epidemiology , Hospitalization/trends , Hospitals, University/trends , Humans , Patient Admission/trends , Quarantine/trends , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
In an effort to contain the spread of COVID-19, Germany has gradually implemented mobility restrictions culminating in a partial lockdown and contact restrictions on 22 March. The easing of the restrictions began 1 month later, on 20 April. Analysis of the consequences of these measures for mobility and infection incidence is of public health interest. A dynamic cohort of about 2,000 individuals in Germany aged 16-89 years provided individual information on demographic variables, and their continuous geolocation via a smartphone app. Using interrupted time series analysis, we investigated mobility by age, sex, and previous mobility habits from 13 January until 17 May 2020, measured as median daily distance traveled before and after restrictions were introduced. Furthermore, we have investigated the association of mobility with the number of new cases and the reproduction number. Median daily distance traveled decreased substantially in total and homogeneously across all subgroups considered. The decrease was strongest in the last week of March followed by a slight increase. Relative reduction of mobility developed parallel with number of new cases and the daily estimated reproduction number in the weeks after contact restrictions were implemented. The increase in mobility from mid-April onwards, however, did not result in increased case numbers but in further decrease. Other behavioral changes, e.g., wearing masks, individual distancing, or general awareness of the COVID-19 hazards may have contributed to the observed further reduction in case numbers and constant reproduction numbers below one until mid-July.