A pilot study of the peer support group for people with Post-Acute Sequelae of COVID-19

Effects of disaster-related traumatic events on worry about radiation and COVID-19: A decade after the Fukushima nuclear power plant accident.

Community residents exposed to nuclear power plant (NPP) accidents have long-term worry about the effects of radiation. After the 2011 Fukushima NPP accident, those who experienced traumatic events during the Great East Japan Earthquake (GEJE) tended to have greater worry about radiation. Along with the prolonged worry about radiation, there may also be cognitive changes caused by the traumatic events. We hypothesized that if there were cognitive changes underlying the prolonged worry about radiation, those who experienced the traumatic events would tend to have greater worry about other issues unrelated to radiation. We examined the effects of the traumatic events during the GEJE on community residents' worry about radiation and COVID-19 a decade after the Fukushima NPP accident. Using the data of a longitudinal questionnaire survey following a random sample of 4900 community residents outside the evacuation zone in Fukushima, this study analyzed 774 responses (15.8%). The traumatic events consisted of (1) injury, (2) injury or death of a family member, and (3) the loss of a house or other property. We developed a mediation model drawing paths from the traumatic events to worry about radiation and COVID-19, including posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) as a mediator, using structural equation modeling. The traumatic events directly affected worry about radiation. Although it did not directly affect worry about COVID-19, it did so indirectly through worry about radiation and PTSS. Traumatic events can increase trauma-related worry independently of PTSS and increase trauma-unrelated worry indirectly through trauma-related worry and PTSS.

Association between Poverty and Refraining from Seeking Medical Care during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Japan: A Prospective Cohort Study.

This limited study examined how low household income affected avoidant behaviors to seek medical care during the pandemic. We investigated an association between household income below the relative poverty line and refraining from seeking medical care (RSMC) in a longitudinal study during the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted an analysis of a population-based internet cohort in Japan. Individuals aged 20 to 79 years old living in Japan participated in the internet surveys between 2020 and 2021. The primary outcome was the RSMC of regular visits and new symptoms in 2021. A total of 19,672 individuals were included in the analysis. Household income below the relative poverty line in 2020 was significantly associated with refraining from seeking regular medical visits for men and women (for men, odds ratio: 1.28; confidence interval: 1.19, 1.83; for women, odds ratio: 1.42; confidence interval: 1.14, 1.82) in 2021, after accounting for RSMC in 2020. Relative poverty in 2020 was also associated with the RSMC of new symptoms among men (for males, odds ratio: 1.32; confidence interval: 1.05, 1.66) in 2021 after adjusting for covariates. The study suggested the need to alleviate the financial burden of vulnerable people seeking medical care and advocate for making necessary medical visits, even in a pandemic.

Association of preexisting psychiatric disorders with post-COVID-19 prevalence: a cross-sectional study.

Evidence demonstrating the association of preexisting psychiatric disorders with post-COVID-19 is limited. We aim to investigate the association using larger sample sizes and more extended postinfection periods than previous studies. A total of 6015 (response rate = 77.5%) COVID-19 survivors were surveyed using a self-administered questionnaire from July to September 2021. Poisson regression analysis with robust error variance was performed to estimate post-COVID-19 prevalence ratios (PRs) with or without preexisting psychiatric disorders. Participants with preexisting psychiatric disorders numbered 1067 (17.7%), and with post-COVID-19 were 2149 (35.7%). Post-COVID-19 PR with preexisting psychiatric disorders was 1.09 (95% CI 1.02-1.18, p = 0.013). The interaction between preexisting psychiatric disorders and postinfection periods was significant (p for interaction < 0.001). The subgroup analysis showed that those with preexisting psychiatric disorders might be at greater prolonged risk of post-COVID-19 than those without the disorders. These findings suggested that preexisting psychiatric disorders were associated with an increased post-COVID-19 risk, and post-COVID-19 with preexisting psychiatric disorders might prolong even if time passes.

Relationship between attitudes toward COVID-19 infection, depression and anxiety: a cross-sectional survey in Japan.

BACKGROUND: Although negative attitudes are known to develop with experiences of COVID-19 infection, it remains unclear whether such attitudes contribute to depression and anxiety as sequelae of COVID-19. We aimed to investigate the relationships between attitude towards COVID-19 infection and post-COVID-19 depression and anxiety. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of COVID-19 recovered patients was conducted from July to September 2021 in Japan. Outcome variables, depression and anxiety were assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7); scores of 10 and above were identified as having symptoms of depression and anxiety, respectively. Exposure variables were whether participants were experiencing the following attitude strongly: threat to life due to COVID-19 infection, helplessness regarding COVID-19 infection, blaming a third party who did not restrain from going outside, blaming themselves for their COVID-19 infection, worry about spreading the infection to others, and self-stigma (Self-Stigma Scale-Short). Modified Poisson regression analyses were performed to analyze the findings. RESULTS: A total of 6016 responses were included in the analyses. The proportion of depression was 19.88%, and anxiety was 11.47%. The threat of life due to COVID-19 infection, helplessness regarding COVID-19 infection, blaming oneself for their COVID-19 infection, and self-stigma were significantly associated with depression and anxiety after adjusting covariates. Blaming the third party who did not restrain from going outside was associated with anxiety. There was no association between the worry about spreading infection to others and depression or anxiety. CONCLUSION: Negative attitudes, including self-stigma with the experience of COVID-19 infection, were related to depression and anxiety. Further studies confirming whether countermeasures for preventing or decreasing the negative attitude towards COVID-19 infection mitigate these symptoms are needed.

Differences in the Course of Depression and Anxiety after COVID-19 Infection between Recovered Patients with and without a Psychiatric History: A Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to examine the course of depression and anxiety in COVID-19 survivors with a psychiatric history compared with those without a psychiatric history. METHODS: A web-based cross-sectional survey for COVID-19 survivors was conducted from July to September 2021. A total of 6016 COVID-19 survivors, the accuracy of whose responses was determined to be assured, were included in analyses. Exposures included psychiatric history and time since COVID-19 infection, and the main outcomes and measures included severity of depression and anxiety, as assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), respectively. RESULTS: Mean severity of PHQ-9 and GAD-7 were significantly higher in participants with a psychiatric history than in those without a psychiatric history. Two-way analysis of covariance for PHQ-9 showed a significant main effect of the presence of psychiatric history and a significant interaction effect of psychiatric history × time since infection. Two-way analysis of covariance for the GAD-7 score revealed a significant main effect of the presence of psychiatric history and time since COVID-19 infection and the interaction effect of these factors. CONCLUSIONS: The course of depression and anxiety was more severe in COVID-19 survivors with a psychiatric history than in those without a psychiatric history.

Longitudinal change in depressive symptoms among healthcare professionals with and without COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy from October 2020 to June 2021 in Japan.

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.

The effect of social restrictions, loss of social support, and loss of maternal autonomy on postpartum depression in 1 to 12-months postpartum women during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: This study focused on postpartum women, who are one of the most vulnerable populations during the COVID-19 pandemic, aiming to reveal mental health consequences of social restrictions, loss of social support, and loss of autonomy. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study for postpartum women in October 2020 in Japan (N = 600). The Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale (EPDS) was used to measure postpartum depression. The prevalence ratios were estimated by log-binomial regression models, adjusting for age, education, household income, residential area, parity, the timing of delivery, and a prior history of depression. RESULTS: The prevalence of postpartum depression was 28.7% (EPDS ≥9, which is frequently used in Japan), 18.6% (≥11), and 13.1% (≥13). Social restrictions, including cancellation of home visits by healthcare professionals and cancellation of infant checkups or vaccinations, loss of support during pregnancy or after delivery, including loss of opportunities to consult with healthcare professionals or friends and cancellation of parents or other family members' visits to support, and loss of autonomy about delivery or breastfeeding, were associated with postnatal depression. CONCLUSIONS: At least 13% of women who delivered and raised babies during the COVID-19 pandemic had postpartum depressive symptoms. COVID-19 related social restrictions and loss of social support from healthcare professionals, families, and friends were significantly associated with postpartum depression. In addition, loss of maternal autonomy in delivery and breastfeeding was associated with postpartum depression. The results indicate that both formal and informal support should not be limited to preventing postpartum depression during a pandemic.

The Effect of the Imacoco Care Psychoeducation Website on Improving Psychological Distress Among Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The prolonged COVID-19 pandemic has affected mental health among workers. Psychoeducational intervention via a website could be effective for primary prevention of mental illness among workers in the current COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this randomized controlled trial is to examine the effect of a newly developed online psychoeducational website named Imacoco Care on reducing psychological distress and fear about COVID-19 infection among workers. METHODS: Participants in the study were recruited from registered members of a web survey company in Japan. Participants who fulfilled the eligibility criteria were randomly allocated to the intervention or control group. Participants in the intervention group were invited to access the Imacoco Care program within a month after the baseline survey. The Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6) and the Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S) scores were obtained at baseline and at 1- and 3-month follow-ups. RESULTS: A total of 1200 workers were randomly allocated to the intervention and control groups (n=600 [50%] per group). The Imacoco Care intervention group showed a significant favorable effect on K6 scores (P=.03) with a small effect size (ES; Cohen d=-0.14) and an adverse effect on FCV-19S scores (P=.01) with a small ES (Cohen d=0.16) at 3-month follow-up. In the per protocol analysis (including only participants who had read the Imacoco Care content at least 1 time), the Imacoco Care intervention group also showed a significant favorable effect on reducing K6 scores (P=.03), while an adverse effect on FCV-19S scores was not significant (P=.06) in the intervention group at 3-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: A web-based psychoeducation approach may be effective for improving psychological distress among workers; however, it may be important not only to distribute information but also to encourage active engagement with the content of the program to prevent adverse effects of psychoeducational intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR) UMIN000042556; https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000048548.

Temporary employment and suicidal ideation in COVID-19 pandemic in Japan: A cross-sectional nationwide survey.

OBJECTIVES: Association between employment contract (temporary vs. permanent) and suicidal ideation (persistent suicidal ideation [i.e., with onset before COVID-19] or newly developed under COVID-19 pandemic) was examined using a nationally representative cross-sectional study in Japan. METHODS: An Internet survey was conducted from August to September 2020. The participants' inclusion criteria for this study were as follows: (i) 20-65 years old, (ii) employees (excluding self-employed, students, retired, housewives, and unemployed). The associations of suicidal ideation with the employees' factors were analyzed using the multinomial logistic regression model, adjusting for covariates (sex, age, marital status, education, company size, industries, and a history of psychiatric disease). RESULTS: Of total 12 249 participants, 72.4% were permanent and 27.6% were temporary employees. The prevalence was 8.5% for persistent suicidal ideation and 3.2% for newly developed suicidal ideation in the COVID-19 pandemic. Temporary employment was significantly associated with persistent suicidal ideation (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.36 [95% confidence interval, CI: 1.16-1.59]; P < .001), but not associated with newly developed suicidal ideation (aOR = 1.10 [0.85-1.42]; P = .457) after adjusting the covariates. Sensitivity analysis showed temporary employment was significantly associated with persistent suicidal ideation only in women. Newly developed suicidal ideation was significantly higher among participants of a young age, employees in drinking/eating/hotel business industry, and those having a history of psychiatric disease than among the counterparts. CONCLUSIONS: Working on a temporary employment contract was associated with persistent suicidal ideation under conditions of COVID-19 outbreaks in Japan. However, the result showed no significant difference in newly developed suicidal ideation. Further longitudinal study will be needed to examine the risk of being employed on an unstable occupational contract in the prolonged pandemic.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of healthcare workers: study protocol for the COVID-19 HEalth caRe wOrkErS (HEROES) study.

BACKGROUND: Preliminary country-specific reports suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic has a negative impact on the mental health of the healthcare workforce. In this paper, we summarize the protocol of the COVID-19 HEalth caRe wOrkErS (HEROES) study, an ongoing, global initiative, aimed to describe and track longitudinal trajectories of mental health symptoms and disorders among health care workers at different phases of the pandemic across a wide range of countries in Latin America, Europe, Africa, Middle-East, and Asia. METHODS: Participants from various settings, including primary care clinics, hospitals, nursing homes, and mental health facilities, are being enrolled. In 26 countries, we are using a similar study design with harmonized measures to capture data on COVID-19 related exposures and variables of interest during two years of follow-up. Exposures include potential stressors related to working in healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as sociodemographic and clinical factors. Primary outcomes of interest include mental health variables such as psychological distress, depressive symptoms, and posttraumatic stress disorders. Other domains of interest include potentially mediating or moderating influences such as workplace conditions, trust in the government, and the country's income level. RESULTS: As of August 2021, ~ 34,000 health workers have been recruited. A general characterization of the recruited samples by sociodemographic and workplace variables is presented. Most participating countries have identified several health facilities where they can identify denominators and attain acceptable response rates. Of the 26 countries, 22 are collecting data and 2 plan to start shortly. CONCLUSIONS: This is one of the most extensive global studies on the mental health of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, including a variety of countries with diverse economic realities and different levels of severity of pandemic and management. Moreover, unlike most previous studies, we included workers (clinical and non-clinical staff) in a wide range of settings.

Longitudinal Change of Psychological Distress among Healthcare Professionals with and without Psychological First Aid Training Experience during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

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.

Mental Health Difficulties and Countermeasures during the Coronavirus Disease Pandemic in Japan: A Nationwide Questionnaire Survey of Mental Health and Psychiatric Institutions.

The number of people with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has been increasing worldwide. Anxiety about potential infection, fear of severe illness, death, economic problems, and loneliness and isolation brought on by social distancing are increasingly being experienced by people. Therefore, it is imperative to address and improve such mental health-related problems during COVID-19. We aimed to investigate the current mental health care and psychological intervention statuses related to COVID-19 in Japan. In a questionnaire survey, 55 of 69 (80%) mental health and welfare centers and 194 of 931 (21%) psychiatric institutions across Japan responded. COVID-19 patients, their family members, and the general public often consulted the mental health and welfare institutions through telephone. The questionnaire included various information of mental health difficulties related to COVID-19 such as the numbers and contents of the consultations, and the type of the interventions. The contents of consultation included psychological symptoms (anxiety, depression, insomnia, and alcohol problems) and psychosocial problems (interpersonal problems, prejudice, and discrimination). Overall, 9% of mental health and welfare centers provided psychological first aid as psychological intervention and 28% of consultations involved cases requiring urgent care. In Japan, consultations about COVID-19-related mental health problems occurred mainly in mental health and welfare centers. There is urgent need to establish a system that enables mental health triage and brief psychological interventions that are feasible in the centers.

The Japanese Medical Science Federation COVID-19 Expert Opinion English Version.

In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic has had unprecedented impacts on various aspects of the world. Each academic society has published a guide and/or guidelines on how to cope with COVID-19 separately. As the one and only nationwide association of academic societies that represent medical science in Japan, JMSF has decided to publish the expert opinion to help patients and care providers find specifically what they want. This expert opinion is a summary of recommendations by many academic societies and will be updated when necessary. Patients that each academic society targets differ even though they suffer from the same COVID-19, and recommendations can be different in a context-dependent manner. Readers are supposed to be flexible and adjustable when they use this expert opinion.

Care difficulties and burden during COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns among caregivers of people with schizophrenia: A cross-sectional study.

AIMS: The purpose of this study was to retrospectively investigate care difficulties experienced by caregivers of people with schizophrenia during COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns in Japan (April 7-May 25, 2020) and examine associations between these care difficulties during lockdowns and daily caregiver burden. METHODS: Data were collected from 132 participants of the LINE Schizophrenia Family Association using an online survey. RESULTS: Caregivers were mostly concerned about who would care for people with schizophrenia if caregivers become infected with COVID-19. A significant association was found between higher daily caregiver burden and more difficult care experiences during COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns (B = 0.58, 95% confidence interval, 0.40-0.75, P < .01, adjusted R-squared = .34). CONCLUSIONS: Further studies and supports for caregivers of people with schizophrenia are needed.