Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
J Infect Public Health ; 15(5): 599-608, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1796483

ABSTRACT

AIMS: Post-viral mental health problems (MHP) in COVID-19 patients and survivors were anticipated already during early stages of this pandemic. We aimed to synthesize the prevalence of the anxiety, depression, post-traumatic and general distress domain associated with virus epidemics since 2002. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, PsycINFO, and Embase from 2002 to April 14, 2021 for peer-reviewed studies reporting prevalence of MHP in adults with laboratory-confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-1, H1N1, MERS-CoV, H7N9, Ebolavirus, or SARS-CoV-2 infection. We included studies that assessed post-viral MHP with validated and frequently used scales. A three-level random-effects meta-analysis for dependent effect sizes was conducted to account for multiple outcome reporting. We pooled MHP across all domains and separately by severity (above mild or moderate-to-severe) and by acute (one month), ongoing (one to three months), and post-illness stages (longer than three months). A meta-regression was conducted to test for moderating effects, particularly for exploring estimate differences between SARS-Cov-2 and previous pandemics and epidemics. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020194535. RESULTS: We identified 59 studies including between 14 and 1002 participants and providing 187 prevalence estimates. MHP, in general, decreased from acute to post-illness from 46.3% to 38.8% and for mild and moderate-to-severe from 22.3% to 18.8%, respectively. We found no evidence of moderating effects except for non-random sampling and H1N1 showing higher prevalence. There was a non-significant trend towards lower MHP for SARS-CoV-2 compared to previous epidemics. CONCLUSIONS: MHP prevalence estimates decreased over time but were still on a substantial level at post-illness. Post-viral mental health problems caused by SARS-CoV-2 could have been expected much earlier, given the previous post-viral sequelae.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype , Influenza A Virus, H7N9 Subtype , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Mental Health , Pandemics , Prevalence , SARS-CoV-2
2.
Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci ; 30: e27, 2021 Mar 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1142402

ABSTRACT

AIMS: The SARS-Cov-2 pandemic and the lockdown response are assumed to have increased mental health problems in general populations compared to pre-pandemic times. The aim of this paper is to review studies on the course of mental health problems during and after the first lockdown phase. METHODS: We conducted a rapid review of multi-wave studies in general populations with time points during and after the first lockdown phase. Repeated cross-sectional and longitudinal studies that utilised validated instruments were included. The main outcome was whether indicators of mental health problems have changed during and after the first lockdown phase. The study was registered with PROSPERO No. CRD42020218640. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies with 56 indicators were included in the qualitative review. Studies that reported data from pre-pandemic assessments through lockdown indicated an increase in mental health problems. During lockdown, no uniform trend could be identified. After lockdown, mental health problems decreased slightly. CONCLUSIONS: As mental health care utilisation indicators and data on suicides do not suggest an increase in demand during the first lockdown phase, we regard the increase in mental health problems as general distress that is to be expected during a global health crisis. Several methodological, pandemic-related, response-related and health policy-related factors need to be considered when trying to gain a broader perspective on the impact of the first wave of the pandemic and the first phase of lockdown on general populations' mental health.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Mental Health/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans
3.
Front Public Health ; 8: 560389, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-952903

ABSTRACT

Background: The swift spread of SARS-CoV-2 provides a challenge worldwide. As a consequence of restrictive public health measures like isolation, quarantine, and community containment, the provision of mental health services is a major challenge. Evidence from past virus epidemics and the current SARS-CoV-2 outbreak indicate high prevalence rates of mental health problems (MHP) as short- and long-term consequences. However, a broader picture of MHP among different populations is still lacking. Methods: We conducted a rapid review on MHP prevalence rates published since 2000, during and after epidemics, including the general public, health care workers, and survivors. Any quantitative articles reporting on MHP rates were included. Out of 2,855 articles screened, a total of 74 were included in this review. Results: Most original studies on MHP were conducted in China in the context of SARS-CoV-1, and reported on anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress symptoms/disorder, general psychiatric morbidity, and psychological symptoms. The MHP rates across studies, populations, and epidemics vary substantially. While some studies show high and persistent rates of MHP in populations directly affected by isolation, quarantine, threat of infection, infection, or life-threatening symptoms (e.g., health care workers), other studies report minor effects. Furthermore, even less affected populations (e.g., distant to epidemic epicenter, no contact history with suspected or confirmed cases) can show high rates of MHP. Discussion: MHP vary largely across countries and risk-groups in reviewed studies. The results call attention to potentially high MHP during epidemics. Individuals affected directly by an epidemic might be at a higher risk of short or even long-term mental health impairments. This study delivers insights stemming from a wide range of psychiatric instruments and questionnaires. The results call for the use of validated and standardized instruments, reference norms, and pre-post measurements to better understand the magnitude of the MHP during and after the epidemics. Nevertheless, emerging MHP should be considered during epidemics including the provision of access to mental health care to mitigate potential mental impairments.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Epidemics , China , Health Personnel , Humans , Mental Health , Prevalence , SARS-CoV-2 , Survivors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL