COVID-19 government measures and their impact on mental health: a cross-sectional study of older primary care patients in Germany.

Background: With the outbreak of COVID-19, government measures including social distancing and restrictions of social contacts were imposed to slow the spread of the virus. Since older adults are at increased risk of severe disease, they were particularly affected by these restrictions. These may negatively affect mental health by loneliness and social isolation, which constitute risk factors for depressiveness. We aimed to analyse the impact of perceived restriction due to government measures on depressive symptoms and investigated stress as mediator in an at-risk-population in Germany. Methods: Data were collected in April 2020 from the population of the AgeWell.de-study, including individuals with a Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Aging, and Incidence of Dementia (CAIDE) score ≥9, using the depression subscale of the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI-18) and the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4). Feeling restricted due to COVID-19 government measures was surveyed with a standardized questionnaire. Stepwise multivariate regressions using zero-inflated negative binomial models were applied to analyse depressive symptoms, followed by a general structural equation model to assess stress as mediator. Analysis were controlled for sociodemographic factors as well as social support. Results: We analysed data from 810 older adults (mean age = 69.9, SD = 5). Feeling restricted due to COVID-19 government measures was linked to increased depressiveness (b = 0.19; p < 0.001). The association was no longer significant when adding stress and covariates (b = 0.04; p = 0.43), while stress was linked to increased depressive symptoms (b = 0.22; p < 0.001). A final model confirms the assumption that the feeling of restriction is mediated by stress (total effect: b = 0.26; p < 0.001). Conclusion: We found evidence that feeling restricted due to COVID-19 government measures is associated with higher levels of depressive symptoms in older adults at increased risk for dementia. The association is mediated by perceived stress. Furthermore, social support was significantly associated with less depressive symptoms. Thus, it is of high relevance to consider possible adverse effects of government measures related to COVID-19 on mental health of older people.

[Assessment of Direct (COVID-19-Related) and Collateral, Psychosocial Pandemic Consequences for Vulnerable Groups by the Example of Serious Mental Illness]. / Erfassung direkter (COVID-19-bezogener) und kollateraler, psychosozialer Folgen für vulnerable Gruppen am Beispiel schwerer psychischer Erkrankungen.

The indirect pandemic consequences could by far exceed the direct effects of SARS-CoV-2 in terms of costs, morbidity, and mortality. This essay includes a proposed method (matrix) to visualize virus-related and psychosocial risks for different populations side by side in a systematic and concise manner. COVID-19-related and psychosocial vulnerability, stressors, direct and indirect consequences are derived on a theoretical and empirical basis. An exemplary quantification of the matrix for the vulnerable group of people with severe mental illness revealed a very high risk for severe COVID-19 consequences, as well as a pronounced risk for psychosocial collateral effects. The proposed approach could be further discussed for a risk-graded pandemic management, crisis recovery, and future preparedness to adequately address psychosocial collateral effects and better identify and protect vulnerable groups in this regard.

Increase in Mental Disorders During the COVID-19 Pandemic-The Role of Occupational and Financial Strains.

BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have reported an increase in mental disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic, but the exact reasons for this development are not well understood. In this study we investigate whether pandemic-related occupational and financial changes (e.g., reduced working hours, working from home, financial losses) were associated with increased symptoms of depression and anxiety compared with the situation before the pandemic. METHODS: We analyzed data from the German National Cohort (NAKO) Study. Between May and November 2020, 161 849 study participants answered questions on their mental state and social circumstances. Their responses were compared with data from the baseline survey before the pandemic (2014-2019). Linear fixed-effects models were used to determine whether individual changes in the severity of symptoms of depression (PHQ-9) or anxiety (GAD-7) were associated with occupational/ financial changes (controlling for various covariates). RESULTS: The prevalence of moderate or severe symptoms of depression and anxiety increased by 2.4% and 1.5%, respectively, during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with the preceding years. The mean severity of the symptoms rose slightly. A pronounced increase in symptoms was observed among those who became unemployed during the pandemic (+ 1.16 points on the depression scale, 95% confidence interval [0.91; 1.41], range 0-27). Increases were also seen for reduced working hours with no short-time allowance, increased working hours, working from home, insecurity regarding employment, and financial strain. The deterioration in mental health was largely statistically explained by the occupational and financial changes investigated in the model. CONCLUSION: Depressive symptoms and anxiety disorders increased slightly in the study population during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Occupational and financial difficulties were an essential contributory factor. These strains should be taken into account both in the care of individual patients and in the planning of targeted prevention measures.

Increase in depression and anxiety disorder diagnoses during the COVID-19 pandemic in children and adolescents followed in pediatric practices in Germany.

The coronavirus pandemic and related restrictions impacted the daily lives of children and youth, partly due to the closure of schools and the absence of outdoor activities. The aim of this study was to investigate, quantify, and critically discuss the effect of the pandemic and related restrictions on consultations pertaining to depression and anxiety disorders in children and adolescents. This retrospective cross-sectional study was based on medical record data from the Disease Analyzer database (IQVIA) and included all children and adolescents aged 2-17 years with at least one visit to one of 168 German pediatric practices between April 2019 and December 2019 (n = 454,741) or between April 2020 and December 2020 (n = 417,979). The number of children and adolescents with depression and anxiety disorder diagnoses per practice and the prevalence of these diagnoses were compared for April 2020-December 2020 versus April 2019-December 2019. The number of children and adolescents with depression and anxiety diagnoses per practice increased in April 2020-December 2020 compared to the same period in 2019 (anxiety: + 9%, depression: + 12%). The increase was much greater in girls than in boys (anxiety: + 13% vs. + 5%; depression + 19% vs. + 1%). The prevalence of anxiety disorder increased from 0.31 to 0.59% (p < 0.001), and that of depression from 0.23 to 0.47% (p < 0.001). The biggest increases were observed for girls (anxiety from 0.35 to 0.72% (+ 106%, p < 0.001), depression from 0.28 to 0.72% (+ 132%, p < 0.001). This study shows an increase in the number of pediatric diagnoses of depression and anxiety disorders in the pandemic year 2020 compared to the previous year.

The relationship between weight history and psychological health-Differences related to gender and weight loss patterns.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence and burden of obesity continues to grow worldwide. Psychological comorbidities may not only influence quality of life, but may also hinder successful weight loss. The causality between excess weight and mental health issues is still not fully understood. The aim of the study was to investigate whetherweight history parameters, (ie.age of onset) are related to psychological comorbidities. METHOD: The data were derived from a representative telephone survey in Germany, collecting information on weight loss patterns and mental health outcomes among individuals with BMI>30kg/m2. Overall, 787 participants were examined in terms of depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire, PHQ-9) and anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire, GAD7). In addition, participants were asked about different aspects of their weight history (ie. weight loss patterns and trajectories) over the lifespan. The relationship between weight history and mental health was analyzed using multivariate statistics. RESULTS: According to regression analyses, having had more weight loss attempts, a greater weight loss being desired and being a "weight maintainer" was associated with more symptoms of depression (p < 0.001), whereas a greater desired weight loss and being categorized as a "weight maintainer" was associated with more anxiety (p < 0.001). Moroever, the prevalence of depressive symptoms was significantly higher in male individuals who desire to lose more weight or had more weight loss attempts in the past. CONCLUSION: Gender-specific differences were observed in terms of weight history parameters, as well as mental health outcomes. Especially for men, weight loss patterns seem to be related to depressive symptoms. Concerning the overall results, it becomes clear that screening for weight history at the beginning of a multidisciplinary weight loss program in the context of gender-specific psychological comorbidities is important. The question remains why some aspects of weight history seem to be more important than others.

The impact of BMI on psychological health in oldest old individuals-Are there differences between women and men?

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the association of mental health issues associated with BMI and gender in the oldest old population (secondary data analyses). METHOD: The data were taken from the second follow-up of a long-term study investigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on health in oldest old individuals (range: 77-96 years). The response rate was 80.0%. Apart from sociodemographic characteristics (age, gender, weight and height); anxiety, depression, somatic complaints and social support were assessed in this survey. RESULTS: Analyses revealed gender-specific differences, indicating that male participants with excess weight show more complaints compared to their counterparts without excess weight. According to regression results, BMI was associated with somatization, but not depression or anxiety. CONCLUSION: High BMI contributed to more somatic complaints and men may be affected differently by BMI regarding their mental well-being. Longitudinal results are needed in order to confirm these findings and develop suitable interventions based on individual needs of the oldest old.

Depression and Anxiety in Old Age during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Comparative Study of Individuals at Cardiovascular Risk and the General Population.

Our study aims to examine the associations of sociodemographic factors, social support, resilience, and perceptions of the COVID-19 pandemic with late-life depression and anxiety symptoms in a cardiovascular risk group and a matched sample from the German general population during the beginning of the pandemic and draw a comparison regarding psychosocial characteristics. Data of n = 1236 participants (aged 64-81 years) were analyzed, with n = 618 participants showing a cardiovascular risk profile, and n = 618 participants from the general population. The cardiovascular risk sample had slightly higher levels of depressive symptoms and felt more threatened by the virus due to pre-existing conditions. In the cardiovascular risk group, social support was associated with less depressive and anxiety symptoms. In the general population, high social support was associated with less depressive symptoms. Experiencing high levels of worries due to COVID-19 was associated with more anxiety in the general population. Resilience was associated with less depressive and anxiety symptoms in both groups. Compared to the general population, the cardiovascular risk group showed slightly higher levels of depressive symptomatology even at the beginning of the pandemic and may be supported by addressing perceived social support and resilience in prevention programs targeting mental health.

Coping with stress during the COVID-19 pandemic in the oldest-old population.

The aim of the study is to investigate psychosocial factors that are associated with positive and negative coping with stress, as well as with worries about and perceived threat by COVID-19 to enable us to provide adequate support for oldest-old individuals. A paper-pencil-based survey assessed COVID-19 worries and perceived threat, depression, anxiety, somatization, social support, loneliness, resilience, positive and negative coping in a sample of n = 197 oldest-old individuals (78-100 years). Linear multivariate and binary logistic regression analyses were conducted. Individuals with high levels of resilience were more likely to feel self-efficient when coping with stress. High levels of depression, anxiety and loneliness were associated with feeling more helpless when coping with stress. However, oldest-old individuals who felt lonely also experienced situations where they felt competent in stress coping. Being male and experiencing high levels of social support was more likely associated with high levels of worries due to COVID-19. Increased age and higher levels of depression were associated with lower levels of perceived personal threat, whereas higher somatization scores were more likely associated with higher perceived personal threat. Findings suggest that mental health factors may shape the way oldest-old individuals cope with pandemic-related stress. Resilience might be an important factor to take into account when targeting an improvement in positive coping with stress. Oldest-old individuals who have higher levels of depression, anxiety and feel lonely may be supported by adapting their coping skill repertoire to reduce the feeling of helplessness when coping with stress.

Neuropsychiatric phenotype of post COVID-19 syndrome in non-hospitalized patients

The post COVID-19 syndrome (PCS) is an emerging phenomenon worldwide with enormous socioeconomic impact. While many patients describe neuropsychiatric deficits, the symptoms are yet to be assessed and defined systematically. In this prospective cohort study, we report on the results of a neuropsychiatric consultation implemented in May 2021. A cohort of 105 consecutive patients with merely mild acute course of disease was identified by its high symptom load 6 months post infection using a standardized neurocognitive and psychiatric-psychosomatic assessment. In this cohort, we found a strong correlation between higher scores in questionnaires for fatigue (MFI-20), somatization (PHQ15) and depression (PHQ9) and worse functional outcome as measured by the post COVID functional scale (PCFS). In contrast, neurocognitive scales correlated with age, but not with PCFS. Standard laboratory and cardiopulmonary biomarkers did not differ between the group of patients with predominant neuropsychiatric symptoms and a control group of neuropsychiatrically unaffected PCS patients. Our study delineates a phenotype of PCS dominated by symptoms of fatigue, somatisation and depression. The strong association of psychiatric and psychosomatic symptoms with the PCFS warrants a systematic evaluation of psychosocial side effects of the pandemic itself and psychiatric comorbidities on the long-term outcome of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Covid-19 pandemic: Anxiety experience of resident and hospital psychiatrists

Background: To date, no studies have examined the pandemic-related stress experience of inpatient versus outpatient psychiatrists. Therefore, the aim is to investigate the extent of Covid-19 exposure, anxiety, stress experience, and coping abilities among psychiatrists in private practice compared to physicians in psychiatric and psychosomatic hospitals. Methods: E-mail-based questionnaires with 13 items were used to assess anxiety and stress experience. A total of 105 practicing psychiatrists, and 73 physicians and psychologists from four clinics (including the Clinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy) were surveyed between early April and mid-May 2020. Results: Compared to hospital psychiatrists, psychiatrists in private practice more often felt severely restricted (52.4 vs. 32.9 % p = 0.010), at risk of infection (35.2 vs. 13.7 %, p < 0.001) and financially threatened (24.7 vs. 6.9 %, p = 0.002). The proportion of well-informed practicing psychiatrists was lower (47.6 vs. 63.0 %, p = 0.043) and the proportion with lack of protective equipment was higher (27.6 vs. 4.1 %, p < 0.001). At the same COVID-19 exposure level (8.6 vs. 8.2 %), office-based psychiatrists were more likely to report high anxiety, although not significantly, compared to hospital psychiatrists (18.1 vs. 9.6 %, p = 0.114). Risk factors for experiencing anxiety in both groups were feeling restricted (OR = 5.52, p = 0.025) and experienced risk of infection (OR = 5.74, p = 0.005). Exposure level, clinic or practice affiliation, age, gender, and other dimensions of threat experience and coping behavior had no influence. Discussion: Psychiatrists in private practice felt more stressed and threatened by the COVID-19 pandemic compared with hospital-based colleagues. The experience of anxiety was dependent on feeling constrained and at risk of exposure, but not on exposure, protective equipment. Objective indicators seem to play less of an important role in the expression of anxiety than subjective experience. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (German) Hintergrund: Bisher gibt es keine Studien, die das Pandemie bedingte Belastungserleben von stationar im Vergleich zu ambulant tatigen Psychiatern untersucht hat. Es soll deshalb das Ausmas der Covid-19-Exposition, die Angst, das Belastungserleben und die Bewaltigungsmoglichkeiten bei niedergelassenen Psychiatern im Vergleich zu Arzten in psychiatrischen und psychosomatischen Kliniken untersucht werden. Methode: Zur Erfassung von Angst- und Belastungserleben wurden E-Mail-gestutzte Fragebogen mit 13 Items genutzt. Insgesamt wurden 105 niedergelassene Psychiater, und 73 Arzte und Psychologen aus vier Klinikern (inkl. Klinik fur Psychosomatische Medizin und Psychotherapie) zwischen Anfang April bis Mitte Mai 2020 befragt. Ergebnis: In ihrem Belastungserleben fuhlten sich niedergelassene im Vergleich zu Krankenhauspsychiatern haufiger stark eingeschrankt (52,4 vs. 32,9 % p = 0,010), infektionsgefahrdet (35,2 vs. 13,7 %, p < 0,001) und finanziell bedroht (24,7 vs. 6,9 %, p = 0,002). Der Anteil gut Informierter niedergelassener Psychiater war geringer (47,6 vs. 63,0 %, p = 0,043) und der Anteil mit fehlender Schutzausrustung hoher (27,6 vs. 4,1 %, p < 0,001). Bei gleichem COVID-19 Expositionsniveau (8,6 vs. 8,2 %) berichteten niedergelassene Psychiater im Vergleich zu Krankenhaus-Psychiatern haufiger, wenn auch nicht signifikant, grose Angst (18,1 vs. 9,6 %, p = 0,114). Risikofaktoren fur ein Angsterleben waren in beiden Gruppen das Gefuhl der Einschrankung (OR = 5,52, p = 0,025) und die erlebte Infektionsgefahr (OR = 5,74, p = 0,005). Keinen Einfluss hatten das Expositionsniveau, die Klinik- bzw. Praxiszugehorigkeit, das Alter, das Geschlecht und andere Dimensionen des Bedrohungserlebens und des Bewaltigungsverhaltens. Diskussion: Niedergelassene Psychiater fuhlten sich im Vergleich zu den Kollegen im Krankenhaus durch die COVID-19 Pandemie mehr belastet und bedroht. Das Erleben von Angst war abhangig vom Gefuhl der Einschrankung und der Expositionsgefahr, nicht jedoch von der Exposition, der Ausstattung mit Schutzmitteln. Fur die Auspragung der Angst scheinen weniger objektive Indikatoren als das subjektive Erleben eine wichtige Rolle zu spielen. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

What Builds Resilience? Sociodemographic and Social Correlates in the Population-Based LIFE-Adult-Study.

Resilience is closely related to mental health and well-being. Identifying risk groups with lower resilience and the variables associated with resilience informs preventive approaches. Previous research on resilience patterns in the general population is heterogeneous, and comprehensive large-scale studies are needed. The aim of our study is to examine sociodemographic and social correlates of resilience in a large population-based sample. We examined 4795 participants from the LIFE-Adult-Study. Assessments included resilience (RS-11), social support (ESSI), and social network (LSNS), as well as the sociodemographic variables age, gender, marital status, education, and occupation. The association of resilience with sociodemographic and social correlates was examined using linear regression analyses. Higher resilience was associated with female gender, married marital status, high education, and full-time occupation. Social support and social network were positively associated with resilience. Our results implicate that resilience is related to various sociodemographic variables. Social variables seem to be particularly important for resilience. We identified risk groups with lower resilience, which should be given special attention by public health policies, especially in times of crisis. Reducing loneliness and promoting social connectedness may be promising ways to build resilience in the general population.

Coping with stress during the COVID-19 pandemic in the oldest-old population

The aim of the study is to investigate psychosocial factors that are associated with positive and negative coping with stress, as well as with worries about and perceived threat by COVID-19 to enable us to provide adequate support for oldest-old individuals. A paper–pencil-based survey assessed COVID-19 worries and perceived threat, depression, anxiety, somatization, social support, loneliness, resilience, positive and negative coping in a sample of n = 197 oldest-old individuals (78–100 years). Linear multivariate and binary logistic regression analyses were conducted. Individuals with high levels of resilience were more likely to feel self-efficient when coping with stress. High levels of depression, anxiety and loneliness were associated with feeling more helpless when coping with stress. However, oldest-old individuals who felt lonely also experienced situations where they felt competent in stress coping. Being male and experiencing high levels of social support was more likely associated with high levels of worries due to COVID-19. Increased age and higher levels of depression were associated with lower levels of perceived personal threat, whereas higher somatization scores were more likely associated with higher perceived personal threat. Findings suggest that mental health factors may shape the way oldest-old individuals cope with pandemic-related stress. Resilience might be an important factor to take into account when targeting an improvement in positive coping with stress. Oldest-old individuals who have higher levels of depression, anxiety and feel lonely may be supported by adapting their coping skill repertoire to reduce the feeling of helplessness when coping with stress.

[Mental Disorders in German Pediatric Practices Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic]. / Psychische Störungen in deutschen pädiatrischen Praxen vor und während der COVID-19-Pandemie.

BACKGROUND: Field studies show an increased mental distress in children and adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic. This health care data based study investigates, whether this corresponds with an increased number of diagnosed mental disorders in pediatric practices during the COVID-19 pandemics. METHODS: Data are based on children aged 2-17 years who visited one of 154 pediatric practices (Disease Analyzer database/IQVIA) at least once. Descriptive analyses were conducted. RESULTS: In 2020 and 2021, significantly more mental disorders were diagnosed compared to the two previous years (chi2 p < 0.001). An increase was particularly evident in affective disorders, although absolute numbers were small with an average increase of 7 patients per practice per year. DISCUSSION: The pandemic-associated increase in mental disorders in children and adolescents is reflected in the physician-diagnosed cases in pediatric practices, but is small in terms of numbers in individual practices.

LeiP#netz 2.0: mapping COVID-19-related changes in mental health services in the German city of Leipzig.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to investigate the changes in psychosocial and psychiatric services in the German city of Leipzig during the COVID-19-pandemic. METHODS: A participatory, mixed-methods study was used involving a quantitative online survey and qualitative semi-structured interviews with professionals. Quantitative findings were reported with descriptive statistics, and thematic analysis was conducted for qualitative data. RESULTS: Fifty professionals from various mental health services participated in the survey and eleven professionals were interviewed. Quantitative findings showed that some services were closed intermittently and that there was a stiff increase in use of digital/telephonic service and a decrease in face-to-face services. Staff or funding did not change considerably during the pandemic. Psychosocial groups were suspended or reduced, while access to services became more difficult and professional training for staff was stopped. Thematic analysis of the interviews showed that professionals experienced different phases and levels of change during the pandemic, including changes on a structural level, on the users' level, and on the staff' level. Professionals particularly criticised the equivocality of COVID-19 regulations, a defective flow of information and lack of attention for mental healthcare in public policies. They also saw positive aspects, such as the capacity of users and the outpatient care system to adapt to the new situation. CONCLUSION: This study suggests directions for policy and service development, such as communicating clearly in infection-control measures, fostering outpatient care and networks between services.

Mild Cognitive Disorder in Post-COVID-19 Syndrome: A Retrospective Cohort Study of 67,000 Primary Care Post-COVID Patients.

Background: Little is known about the impact of COVID-19 on mild cognitive disorder. Objective: The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to investigate whether COVID-19 diagnosis is associated with subsequent mild cognitive disorder (MCD) compared to acute upper respiratory infections (AURI). Methods: This retrospective cohort study used data from the Disease Analyzer database (IQVIA) and included 67,046 patients with first-time symptomatic or asymptomatic COVID-19 diagnoses in 1,172 general practices in Germany between March 2020 and September 2021. Diagnoses were based on ICD-10 codes. Patients diagnosed with AURI were matched to 67,046 patients with COVID-19 using propensity scores based on sex, age, index month, and comorbidities. The index date was the diagnosis date for either COVID-19 or AURI. Associations between the COVID-19 and MCD were studied using conditional Poisson regression models. Results: The incidence of MCD was 7.6 cases per 1,000 person-years in the COVID-19 group and 5.1 cases per 1,000 person-years in the AURI group (IRR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.22-1.82). The incidence rate ratio decreased strongly with increasing age from 10.08 (95% CI = 4.00-24.42) in the age group≤50 to 1.03 (95% CI = 0.81-1.31) in the age group > 70. In addition, the association between COVID-19 and MCD was significant in women (IRR: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.34-2.16) but not in men (IRR: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.75-1.56). Conclusion: The incidence of MCD was low but significantly higher in COVID-19 than in AURI patients, especially among younger patients. If a cognitive disorder is suspected, referral to a specialist is recommended.

Multidomain interventions for risk reduction and prevention of cognitive decline and dementia: current developments.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The potential for dementia prevention is deemed substantial if modifiable risk factors were addressed. First large-scale multidomain lifestyle interventions aiming at reducing risk of cognitive decline and dementia have yielded mixed but promising evidence. RECENT FINDINGS: Despite the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on trials conduction, causing interruptions and delays, the research landscape on multidomain interventions is growing rapidly. The successful Finish Geriatric Intervention Study to Prevent Cognitive Impairment and Disability (FINGER) has led to an adaptation of the FINGER model in trials underway or being planned in over 40 countries. Recent studies identified barriers and facilitators of and adherence to multidomain interventions, showed the suitability of dementia risk scores as surrogate outcomes, and suggested mechanisms. Multidomain interventions are increasingly conducted in the Global South, and study protocols are increasingly testing expanded FINGER models, for example, with pharmacological components, in digital/remote settings and co-designed personalized interventions. SUMMARY: Though results remain mixed, the many ongoing trials will provide more conclusive evidence within the next few years and help to optimize interventions. Continued international collaboration is pivotal to scale and accelerate the development and implementation of effective multidomain interventions as part of larger public health strategies to counteract the global dementia increase.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Avoidance of Health Care, Symptom Severity, and Mental Well-Being in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease.

The COVID-19 pandemic affected regular health care for patients with chronic diseases. However, the impact of the pandemic on primary care for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) who are enrolled in a structured disease management program (DMP) in Germany is not clear. We investigated whether the pandemic affected primary care and health outcomes of DMP-CAD patients (n = 750) by using a questionnaire assessing patients' utilization of medical care, CAD symptoms, as well as health behavior and mental health since March 2020. We found that out of concern about getting infected with COVID-19, 9.1% of the patients did not consult a medical practitioner despite having CAD symptoms. Perceived own influence on infection risk was lower and anxiety was higher in these patients compared to symptomatic CAD patients who consulted a physician. Among the patients who reported chest pain lasting longer than 30 min, one third did not consult a medical practitioner subsequently. These patients were generally more worried about COVID-19. Patients with at least one worsening CAD symptom (chest pain, dyspnea, perspiration, or nausea without apparent reason) since the pandemic showed more depressive symptoms, higher anxiety scores, and were less likely to consult a doctor despite having CAD symptoms out of fear of infection. Our results provide evidence that the majority of patients received sufficient medical care during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. However, one in ten patients could be considered particularly at risk for medical undersupply and adverse health outcomes. The perceived infection risk with COVID-19 might have facilitated the decision not to consult a medical doctor.

Methodological challenges across WW-FINGERS Studies: Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on statistical design and analysis plans for multidomain RCTs

Background The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic presents challenges to the conduct of randomized clinical trials of lifestyle interventions. Method World-Wide FINGERS is an international network of clinical trials to assess the impact of multidomain lifestyle intervention on cognitive decline in at-risk adults. Individual trials are tailoring successful approaches from the Finnish Geriatric Intervention Study to Prevent Cognitive Impairment and Disability (FINGER) to local cultures and environments. The network convened forums for researchers to discuss statistical design and analysis issues they faced during the pandemic. We will provide an updated report on experiences of trials that, at various stages of conduct, altered designs and analysis plans to navigate these issues. We provide recommendations for future trials to consider as they develop and launch behavioral intervention trials. Result The pandemic led researchers to change recruitment plans, interrupt timelines for assessments and intervention delivery, and move to remote intervention and assessments protocols. The necessity of these changes add emphasis to the importance, in study design and analysis, of intention to treat approaches, flexibility, within site stratification, interim power projections, and sensitivity analyses. Conclusion Robust approaches to study design and analysis are critical to negotiate issues related to the intervention. The World Wide Network of similarly oriented clinical trials will allow us to evaluate the effectiveness of responses to the pandemic across cultures, local environments, and phases of the pandemic.

[Covid-19 Pandemic: Anxiety Experience of Resident and Hospital Psychiatrists]. / Covid-19-Pandemie: Angsterleben von niedergelassenen und Krankenhaus-Psychiatern.

BACKGROUND: To date, no studies have examined the pandemic-related stress experience of inpatient versus outpatient psychiatrists. Therefore, the aim is to investigate the extent of Covid-19 exposure, anxiety, stress experience, and coping abilities among psychiatrists in private practice compared to physicians in psychiatric and psychosomatic hospitals. METHODS: E-mail-based questionnaires with 13 items were used to assess anxiety and stress experience. A total of 105 practicing psychiatrists, and 73 physicians and psychologists from four clinics (including the Clinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy) were surveyed between early April and mid-May 2020. RESULTS: Compared to hospital psychiatrists, psychiatrists in private practice more often felt severely restricted (52.4 vs. 32.9% p=0.010), at risk of infection (35.2 vs. 13.7%, p<0.001) and financially threatened (24.7 vs. 6.9%, p=0.002). The proportion of well-informed practicing psychiatrists was lower (47.6 vs. 63.0%, p=0.043) and the proportion with lack of protective equipment was higher (27.6 vs. 4.1%, p<0.001). At the same COVID-19 exposure level (8.6 vs. 8.2%), office-based psychiatrists were more likely to report high anxiety, although not significantly, compared to hospital psychiatrists (18.1 vs. 9.6%, p=0.114). Risk factors for experiencing anxiety in both groups were feeling restricted (OR=5.52, p=0.025) and experienced risk of infection (OR=5.74, p=0.005). Exposure level, clinic or practice affiliation, age, gender, and other dimensions of threat experience and coping behavior had no influence. DISCUSSION: Psychiatrists in private practice felt more stressed and threatened by the COVID-19 pandemic compared with hospital-based colleagues. The experience of anxiety was dependent on feeling constrained and at risk of exposure, but not on exposure, protective equipment. Objective indicators seem to play less of an important role in the expression of anxiety than subjective experience.

[COVID-19 and Anxiety Amongst General Practitioners, Psychiatrists and Surgeons - A German Perspective]. / Angsterleben von Hausärzten, Psychiatern und Chirurgen zu Beginn der COVID-19-Pandemie in Deutschland.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic represents an exceptional challenge for the medical fraternity. We examined the differences in experiencing anxiety of general practitioners (GP), psychiatrists (PS) and surgeons (SU) during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. METHODS: E-mail-based survey (April-May 2020) of 608 physicians (GP n = 162, PS n = 299, SU n = 147) on anxiety experience in relation to COVID-19 and potential determinants. RESULTS: High levels of COVID-19-related anxiety were reported by 31.1 % of GP, 19.2 % of PS, and 11.6 % of SU. The frequency of contact with COVID-19 patients was highest in SU (68.5 %), followed by GP (51.0 %) and PS (8.1 %). The experience of COVID-19-related distress was overall highest among GP. SU felt best informed and rated their resilience most highly. A high level of anxiety was positively associated with the perceived risk of infection. CONCLUSION: Studies on the distress of physicians provide important information to optimize pandemic management.