ABSTRACT
Background: The coronavirus pandemic appears to put psychiatric patients with pre-existing symptomatology at risk of symptom increase, but evidence is scarce. While the pandemic and stringent governmental measures have accelerated the use of clinical videoconferencing (VCT), patient satisfaction with VCT is unclear. Objective: Aim of the study was to assess the wellbeing of patients in psychotrauma treatment during the coronavirus pandemic and to evaluate their use of and satisfaction with VCT. Method: This study used data from a routine outcome monitoring assessment completed by patients in treatment at a specialized psychotrauma institute and administered before the easing of governmental measures in June 2020. Wellbeing (Brief Symptom Inventory, Cantril Ladder, perceived stress level, and symptom change), VCT use and VCT satisfaction, and their association with demographic variables (gender, age, education level, and refugee status) were analysed. Results: Of the 318 respondents (response rate 64.5%), 139 (43.7%) reported a symptom increase, which was associated with a higher coronavirus-related stress level and general psychopathology as well as lower life satisfaction. There were significant effects of age and education level on wellbeing. VCT was reported to have been used by 228 (71.7%) patients. VCT satisfaction ratings were higher among women and those with lower levels of stress (r = -.20, p < .01) and general psychopathology (r = .21, p < .01). No difference in treatment satisfaction was found between patients who used VCT versus those who did not (mean difference = -.09 95% CI: -.79 to .62, p = .81). Conclusions: The coronavirus pandemic has aggravated mental health complaints according to a substantial percentage of patients in psychotrauma treatment. Although VCT was found to be acceptable, face-to-face treatment may remain necessary for specific target groups with limited access to VCT (such as refugees) and patients with high levels of general psychopathology.
Antecedentes: La pandemia por el coronavirus parece incrementar el riesgo de un aumento de síntomas a los pacientes psiquiátricos con sintomatología preexistente, pero la evidencia es escasa. Si bien la pandemia y las estrictas medidas gubernamentales han acelerado el uso de la videoconferencia clínica (VCT, por sus siglas en inglés), la satisfacción del paciente con la VCT no está clara.Objetivo: El objetivo del estudio fue el de evaluar el bienestar de los pacientes en tratamiento por psicotrauma durante la pandemia por el coronavirus; además, evaluar su uso y su satisfacción con la VCT.Método: Este estudio empleó los datos de las evaluaciones rutinarias de control clínico de un instituto especializado en psicotraumatología completadas por pacientes y realizadas antes de la flexibilización de las medidas gubernamentales en Junio del 2020. Se analizaron el bienestar (Inventario Breve de Síntomas, Escalera de Cantril, nivel de estrés percibido y cambio de síntomas), el uso de la VCT, la satisfacción con la VCT y su asociación con variables demográficas (género, edad, nivel educacional y condición de refugiado).Resultados: De los 318 encuestados (tasa de respuesta del 64,5%), 139 (43,7%) reportaron un aumento de síntomas, lo cual se asoció con niveles de estrés asociado al coronavirus más altos y con psicopatología general, así como con una menor satisfacción con la vida. Hubo efectos significativos entre la edad y el nivel educativo sobre el bienestar. 228 (71,7%) pacientes reportaron haber usado la VCT. Los índices de satisfacción con la VCT fueron más altos entre las mujeres y entre aquellos con menores niveles de estrés (r = −.20, p < .01) y de psicopatología general (r = .21, p < .01). No se encontraron diferencias entre la satisfacción con el tratamiento en pacientes que usaron la VCT en comparación con aquellos que no lo usaron (diferencia media = −.09 IC del 95%: −.79 a .62, p = .81).Conclusiones: La pandemia por el coronavirus ha agravado las quejas de salud mental en un porcentaje importante de pacientes en tratamiento por psicotrauma. A pesar que se halló que la VCT era aceptable, el tratamiento presencial puede seguir siendo necesario para grupos específicos con acceso limitado a la VCT (como los refugiados) y para los pacientes con altos niveles de psicopatología general.
ABSTRACT
In most disasters that have been studied, the underlying dangerous cause does not persist for very long. However, during the COVID-19 pandemic a progressively emerging life threat remains, exposing everyone to varying levels of risk of contracting the illness, dying, or infecting others. Distancing and avoiding company have a great impact on social life. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic has an enormous economic impact for many losing work and income, which is even affecting basic needs such as access to food and housing. In addition, loss of loved ones may compound the effects of fear and loss of resources. The aim of this paper is to distil, from a range of published literature, lessons from past disasters to assist in mitigating adverse psychosocial reactions to the COVID-19 pandemic. European, American, and Asian studies of disasters show that long-term social and psychological consequences of disasters may compromise initial solidarity. Psychosocial disruptions, practical and financial problems, and complex community and political issues may then result in a 'second disaster'. Lessons from past disasters suggest that communities and their leaders, as well as mental healthcare providers, need to pay attention to fear regarding the ongoing threat, as well as sadness and grief, and to provide hope to mitigate social disruption.
En la mayoría de los desastres que han sido estudiados, la causa subyacente que genera el peligro no persiste por mucho tiempo. Sin embargo, durante la pandemia COVID-19 una amenaza a la vida progresivamente emergente es mantenida, exponiendo a todos a variados niveles de riesgo de contraer la enfermedad, morir o infectar a otros. Distanciarse y evitar la compañía tiene un gran impacto en la vida social. Además, la pandemia COVID-19 tiene un impacto económico enorme para muchos por la pérdida de trabajos e ingreso, lo que está incluso afectando las necesidades básicas como la comida o la vivienda. En adición a esto, la pérdida de seres queridos puede agravar los efectos del miedo y la pérdida de recursos. El objetivo de este artículo es sintetizar a partir de una variedad de literatura publicada, lecciones de desastres pasados para ayudar a mitigar las reacciones psicosociales adversas a la pandemia COVID-19. Trabajos europeos, americanos y asiáticos sobre desastres muestran que las consecuencias a largo plazo tanto sociales como económicas de los desastres pueden poner en peligro la solidaridad inicial. Las disrupciones psicosociales, los problemas prácticos y financieros, y los complejos problemas comunitarios y políticos pueden resultar en un 'Segundo desastre'. Las lecciones de desastres pasados sugieren que las comunidades, sus líderes y también los proveedores de atención en salud mental necesitan prestar atención al miedo en relación a la amenaza en curso, así como a la tristeza y al duelo, y proveer esperanza para mitigar la disrupción social.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: There are now over 800,000 registered deaths due to the COVID-19 pandemic worldwide. Researchers have suggested that COVID-19 death characteristics (e.g., intensive care admission, unexpected death) and circumstances (e.g., secondary stressors, social isolation) will precipitate a worldwide increase of prolonged grief disorder (PGD) and persistent complex bereavement disorder (PCBD). Yet, no study has investigated this. Since acute grief is a strong predictor of future pathological grief, we compared grief levels among people recently bereaved due to COVID-19, natural, and unnatural causes. METHODS: People bereaved through COVID-19 (n = 49), natural causes (n = 1182), and unnatural causes (n = 210), completed self-report measures of demographic and loss-related characteristics and PGD and PCBD symptoms. RESULTS: COVID-19 bereavement yielded higher symptom levels of PGD (d = 0.42) and PCBD (d = 0.35) than natural bereavement (but not unnatural bereavement). Effects held when limiting analyses to recent losses and those who participated during the pandemic. Expectedness of the death explained this effect. LIMITATIONS: Limitations include using a convenience sample and self-report measures. CONCLUSIONS: Higher grief levels occur among people bereaved due to COVID-19 compared to people bereaved due to natural loss. We predict that pandemic-related increases in pathological grief will become a worldwide public health concern.