The COVID Psychosocial Impacts Scale: A Reliable and Valid Tool to Examine the Psychosocial Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

This paper reports on the development and validation of the COVID Psychosocial Impacts Scale (CPIS), a self-report measure that comprehensively examines both positive and negative psychosocial impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic. This is the first part of the program of work in which the CPIS was administered and compared with a measure of psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale, K-10) and wellbeing (World Health Organization Well-Being Index, WHO-5). The data were obtained online in 2020 and 2022 at two distinct time points to capture different exposures to the pandemic in the New Zealand population to a non-representative sample of 663 and 687 adults, respectively. Two hundred seventy-one participants took part in both surveys. Findings indicate a unidimensional structure within CPIS subscales and inter-relatedness among CPIS stress-related subscales. The scatter plots and correlation matrix indicate CPIS having a positive moderate correlation with K10 and a negative moderate correlation with WHO-5, indicative of construct validity. The paper outlines contextual factors surrounding CPIS development and makes suggestions for future iterations of CPIS. Further work will examine its psychometric properties across cultures.

Examining the psychosocial impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic: an international cross-sectional study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic exposed people to significant and prolonged stress. The psychosocial impacts of the pandemic have been well recognised and reported in high-income countries (HICs) but it is important to understand the unique challenges posed by COVID-19 in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where limited international comparisons have been undertaken. This protocol was therefore devised to study the psychosocial impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic in seven LMICs using scales that had been designed for or translated for this purpose. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This cross-sectional study uses an online survey to administer a novel COVID Psychosocial Impacts Scale (CPIS) alongside established measures of psychological distress, post-traumatic stress, well-being and post-traumatic growth in the appropriate language. Participants will include adults aged 18 years and above, recruited from Indonesia, Iraq, Iran, Malaysia, Pakistan, Somalia and Turkey, with a pragmatic target sample size of 500 in each country.Data will be analysed descriptively on sociodemographic and study variables. In addition, CPIS will be analysed psychometrically (for reliability and validity) to assess the suitability of use in a given context. Finally, within-subjects and between-subjects analyses will be carried out using multi-level mixed-effect models to examine associations between key sociodemographic and study variables. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was granted by the Human Ethics Committee, University of Otago, New Zealand (Ref. No. 21/102). In addition, international collaborators obtained local authorisation or ethical approval in their respective host universities before data collection commenced.Participants will give informed consent before taking part. Data will be collected and stored securely on the University of Otago, New Zealand Qualtrics platform using an auto-generated non-identifiable letter-number string. Data will be available on reasonable request. Findings will be disseminated by publications in scientific journals and/or conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05052333.

Feasibility study of brief Group Transdiagnostic Cognitive Behavioural Treatment delivered via Zoom for anxiety and depression in primary care

Transdiagnostic Cognitive Behavioural Treatment (TCBT) (targeting depression and a range of anxiety disorders) is an effective treatment that targets the common factors and processes underlying anxiety and depressive symptoms.68 Previous trials evaluating TCBT have been internet-based or face-to-face in individual or group form.9 Treatment lengths have typically been 10-18 sessions,912 although a large TCBT study evaluated brief (seven session) group TCBT for emotional disorders in primary care.13 This study reported sustained improvements for anxiety, depression, somatisation and reliable recovery for those receiving TCBT compared to treatment with general practitioners (GPs), but the treatment intervention was longer than is typically provided in the New Zealand context and the study did not include an active therapy control. Exclusion criteria Patients not eligible included those for whom alcohol and drugs were identified as the main clinical issue, those for whom a referral to specialty services was required to manage moderate-severe illness or high levels of risk and those with significant cognitive problems or language barriers that meant psychological interventions and completion of rating scales was not possible unless in modified form. Group content included the following: socialisation to the group, goal setting and motivation, introduction to the TCBT model, understanding the function of emotion, emotion-driven behaviours and the role of avoidance, behavioural activation, learning to observe emotions and thoughts (mindfulness exercises), thinking biases and thought restructuring, behavioural experiments, awareness of and tolerating physiological sensations (including interoceptive exposures) and relapse prevention. Reliable recovery was measured by scoring above clinical cut-off for PHQ-9 (>10) and GAD-7 (>8) at baseline assessment, scoring below clinical cut-off for PHQ-9 and GAD-7 at the follow-up time point and showing reliable improvement over treatment (pre-post change in PHQ-9>5.2 and GAD-7>3.53).19 The PHQ-9 is a reliable, valid self-administered measure of depression20 and the GAD-7 is a valid and efficient self-report measure for the assessment of generalised anxiety disorder.21 Secondary outcome measures were: 1.

Social Rhythm Disruption is Associated with Greater Depressive Symptoms in People with Mood Disorders: Findings from a Multinational Online Survey During COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: Societal restrictions imposed to prevent transmission of COVID-19 may challenge circadian-driven lifestyle behaviours, particularly amongst those vulnerable to mood disorders. The overarching aim of the present study was to investigate the hypothesis that, in the routine-disrupted environment of the COVID-19, amongst a sample of people living with mood disorders, greater social rhythm disruption would be associated with more severe mood symptoms. METHODS: We conducted a two-wave, multinational survey of 997 participants (MAge=39.75±13.39,Female=81.6%) who self-reported a mood disorder diagnosis (i.e., major depressive disorder or bipolar disorder). Respondents completed questionnaires assessing demographics, social rhythmicity (The Brief Social Rhythm Scale), depression symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), sleep quality and diurnal preference (The Sleep, Circadian Rhythms and Mood questionnaire) and stressful life events during the COVID-19 pandemic (The Social Readjustment Rating Scale). RESULTS: The majority of participants indicated COVID-19-related social disruption had affected the regularity of their daily routines to at least some extent (n = 788, 79.1%). As hypothesised, lower social rhythmicity was associated with greater depressive symptoms when tested cross-sectionally (standardised ß = -.25, t = -7.94, P = 0.000) and when tested using a 2-level hierarchical linear model across two time points (b = -0.14, t = -3.46, df = 264, P ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These results are consistent with the social zeitgeber hypothesis proposing that mood disorders are sensitive to life events that disrupt social rhythms.

Recruitment and retention of participants in longitudinal studies after a natural disaster.

Climate change and population growth will increase vulnerability to natural and human-made disasters or pandemics. Longitudinal research studies may be adversely impacted by a lack of access to study resources, inability to travel around the urban environment, reluctance of sample members to attend appointments, sample members moving residence and potentially also the destruction of research facilities. One of the key advantages of longitudinal research is the ability to assess associations between exposures and outcomes by limiting the influence of sample selection bias. However, ensuring the validity and reliability of findings in longitudinal research requires the recruitment and retention of respondents who are willing and able to be repeatedly assessed over an extended period of time. This study examined recruitment and retention strategies of 11 longitudinal cohort studies operating during the Christchurch, New Zealand earthquake sequence which began in September 2010, including staff perceptions of the major impediments to study operations during/after the earthquakes and respondents' barriers to participation. Successful strategies to assist recruitment and retention after a natural disaster are discussed. With the current COVID-19 pandemic, longitudinal studies are potentially encountering some of the issues highlighted in this paper including: closure of facilities, restricted movement of research staff and sample members, and reluctance of sample members to attend appointments. It is possible that suggestions in this paper may be implemented so that longitudinal studies can protect the operation of their research programmes.

Virtual Reality for Supporting the Treatment of Depression and Anxiety: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Mental health conditions pose a major challenge to health care providers and society at large. The World Health Organization predicts that by 2030, mental health conditions will be the leading cause of disease burden worldwide. The current need for mental health care is overwhelming. In New Zealand, 1 in 6 adults has been diagnosed with common mental disorders, such as depression and anxiety disorders, according to a national survey. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) has been shown to effectively help patients overcome a wide variety of mental health conditions. Virtual reality exposure therapy (VRET) might be one of the most exciting technologies emerging in the clinical setting for the treatment of anxiety and depression. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate the virtual reality (VR) technologies currently being used to help support the treatment of depression and anxiety. We also aim to investigate whether and how CBT is included as part of VRET and look at the VR technologies and interventions that have been used in recent studies on depression and anxiety. METHODS: We performed a scoping review. To identify significant studies, we decided to use already aggregated sources from the Google Scholar database. Overall, the goal of our search strategy was to limit the number of initial results related to VR in mental health to only a relevant minimum. RESULTS: Using our defined keywords, Google Scholar identified >17,300 articles. After applying all the inclusion and exclusion criteria, we identified a total of 369 articles for further processing. After manual evaluation, 34 articles were shortlisted; of the 34 articles, 9 (26%) reported the use of CBT with VR. All of the articles were published between 2017 and 2021. Out of the 9 studies, CBT was conducted within a VR environment in 5 (56%) studies, whereas in the remaining 4 (44%) studies, CBT was used as an addition to VRET. All 9 studies reported the use of CBT either in vivo or in a virtual environment to be effective in supporting the treatment of anxiety or depression. CONCLUSIONS: Most studies demonstrated the use of VR to be effective for supporting the treatment of anxiety or depression in a range of settings and recommended its potential as a tool for use in a clinical environment. Even though standalone headsets are much easier to work with and more suitable for home use, the shift from tethered VR headsets to standalone headsets in the mental health environment was not observed. All studies that looked at the use of CBT either in vivo or in a virtual environment found it to be effective in supporting the treatment of anxiety or depression.

Adrift in time: the subjective experience of circadian challenge during COVID-19 amongst people with mood disorders.

Social distancing/lockdown policies during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic may alter social rhythms of people through imposition of restrictions on normal daily activities. This may in turn challenge circadian function, particularly in people with mood disorders. Although objective data describing the relationship between circadian disturbances and mood disorders exist, data regarding the subjective experience of circadian challenge is sparse, and its association with mood symptoms is unclear. The present qualitative study was one component of a mixed-methods multi-national project, which took advantage of widespread disruption to daily routines due to Government COVID-related lockdowns during 2020. The Behavior Emotion and Timing during COVID-19 (BEATCOVID) survey study included three open questions generating qualitative data on participants' subjective experience of social disruption due to social distancing/lockdown policies, two of which asked about the barriers and opportunities for stabilizing routines. Responses were coded and analyzed using Thematic Analysis. A total of N = 997 participants responded to at least one of the free-text questions. Four themes were identified: 1) loss of daily timed activities, 2) role of social interaction, 3) altered time perception and 4) disruption to motivation and associated psychological effects. Themes were organized into a provisional heuristic map, generating hypotheses for future research centered on the new concept of 'psychological drift.'

Learning from previous disasters: Potential pitfalls of epidemiological psychosocial research in the COVID-19 environment.

It is critical to understand the psychosocial impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on populations around the world. In this article, we highlight the key challenges associated with epidemiological psychosocial research in a disaster context and reflect on lessons learned from firsthand experience over the last decade in Christchurch, New Zealand, following the 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquakes and 2019 Mosque attacks. We make recommendations for study design to improve the quality of research evaluating the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, the inclusion of positive outcome measures and the need to evaluate a range of cultural contexts. We hope that highlighting these areas will improve research and result in a better understanding of the psychosocial impacts of the pandemic.