ABSTRACT
Adverse experiences interact with individual vulnerability in the etiology of mental disorders, but due to the paucity of longitudinal studies, their precise interplay remains unclear. Here, we investigated how individual differences in threat responsiveness modulated adjustments in negative affect during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants (N = 441) underwent a fear conditioning and generalization experiment between 2013 and 2020 and were reassessed regarding anxiety and depression symptoms after the pandemic outbreak. Participants showed increased levels of negative affect following pandemic onset, which were partly modulated by laboratory measures of threat responsiveness. Decreased differentiation of threat and safety signals in participants with higher prepandemic depression and anxiety scores in the laboratory assessment were most predictive of increased symptom levels after the onset of the pandemic. However, effects were small and should be replicated in independent samples to further characterize how individual differences in threat processing interact with adverse experiences in the development of psychopathology.
ABSTRACT
Emotion-motivation models propose that behaviors, including health behaviors, should be predicted by the same variables that also predict negative affect since emotional reactions should induce a motivation to avoid threatening situations. In contrast, social cognitive models propose that safety behaviors are predicted by a different set of variables that mainly reflect cognitive and socio-structural aspects. Here, we directly tested these opposing hypotheses in young adults (N = 4134) in the context of COVID-19-related safety behaviors to prevent infections. In each participant, we collected measures of negative affect as well as cognitive and socio-structural variables during the lockdown in the first infection wave in Germany. We found a negative effect of the pandemic on emotional responses. However, this was not the main predictor for young adults' willingness to comply with COVID-19-related safety measures. Instead, individual differences in compliance were mainly predicted by cognitive and socio-structural variables. These results were confirmed in an independent data set. This study shows that individuals scoring high on negative affect during the pandemic are not necessarily more likely to comply with safety regulations. Instead, political measures should focus on cognitive interventions and the societal relevance of the health issue. These findings provide important insights into the basis of health-related concerns and feelings as well as behavioral adaptations.
ABSTRACT
Background: The study aimed to assess the mental well-being of healthcare professionals at a German department of anesthesiology and critical care with a specialized ICU for treatment of COVID-19 patients during the first two peaks of the 2020 pandemic, and identifying risk and protective factors. Methods: A single-center longitudinal, online-based survey was conducted in healthcare workers from a department of anesthesiology and critical care in Bavaria, the most affected federal state in Germany at the time of assessment. Validated scores for depression, anxiety, somatic disorders, burnout, resilience, and self-management were used and complemented by questions about perceived COVID-19-related stressors. In parallel, patient characteristics in the ICU were collected. Results: 24 and 23 critically ill COVID-19 patients were treated during both observation periods in April/May and November/December 2020, respectively. 87.5% and 78.2% of patients had moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. From March 6, 2020 onwards, the hospital had switched to a command and control-based hospital incident command system (HICS) and increased work forces. Point prevalence of depression-like symptoms (13.6% and 12.8%) and burnout (21.6% and 17.4%) in the department's healthcare professionals was high. Exposure to SARS-CoV-2 did not increase psychological burden. Consequences of the lockdown were rated as highly distressing by a majority of all ICU personnel. High self-reported trait resilience was protective against signs of depression, generalized anxiety, and burnout. Conclusions: During the pandemic, healthcare professionals have been suffering from increased psychological distress compared to reference data for both the general population and ICU personnel. General effects of the lockdown appear more relevant than actual COVID-19 patient contact. High trait resilience has a protective effect, yet vulnerable individuals may require specific support. Prevention against potential after effects of the lockdown, and in particular measures allowing to avoid another lockdown, appear warranted.