Common Mental Disorders and Economic Uncertainty: Evidence from the COVID-19 Pandemic in the U.S.

Mental health disorders represent an enormous cost to society, are related to economic outcomes, and have increased markedly since the COVID-19 outbreak. Economic activity contracted dramatically on a global scale in 2020, representing the worst crisis since the Great Depression. This study used the COVID Impact Survey to provide insights on the interactions of mental illness and economic uncertainty during COVID-19. We used a probability-based panel survey, COVID Impact Survey, conducted in the U.S. over three waves in the period April-June 2020. The survey covered individual information on employment, economic and financial uncertainty, mental and physical health, as well as other demographic information. The prevalence of moderate mental distress was measured using a Psychological Distress Scale, a 5-item scale that is scored on a 4-point scale (total range: 0-15). The mental distress effect of employment, economic, and financial uncertainty, was assessed in a logit regression analysis conditioning for demographic and health information. It is found that employment, health coverage, social security, and food provision uncertainty are additional stressors for mental health. These economic factors work in addition to demographic effects, where groups who display increased risk for psychological distress include: women, Hispanics, and those in poor physical health. A decrease in employment and increases in economic uncertainty are associated with a doubling of common mental disorders. The population-representative survey evidence presented strongly suggests that economic policies which support employment (e.g., job keeping, job search support, stimulus spending) provide not only economic security but also constitute a major health intervention. Moving forward, the economic uncertainty effect ought to be reflected in community level intervention and prevention efforts, which should include strengthening economic support to reduce financial and economic strain.

Neuroscience20 (BRAIN20, SPINE20, and MENTAL20) Health Initiative: A Global Consortium Addressing the Human and Economic Burden of Brain, Spine, and Mental Disorders Through Neurotech Innovations and Policies.

Neurological disorders significantly impact the world's economy due to their often chronic and life-threatening nature afflicting individuals which, in turn, creates a global disease burden. The Group of Twenty (G20) member nations, which represent the largest economies globally, should come together to formulate a plan on how to overcome this burden. The Neuroscience-20 (N20) initiative of the Society for Brain Mapping and Therapeutics (SBMT) is at the vanguard of this global collaboration to comprehensively raise awareness about brain, spine, and mental disorders worldwide. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive review of the various brain initiatives worldwide and highlight the need for cooperation and recommend ways to bring down costs associated with the discovery and treatment of neurological disorders. Our systematic search revealed that the cost of neurological and psychiatric disorders to the world economy by 2030 is roughly $16T. The cost to the economy of the United States is $1.5T annually and growing given the impact of COVID-19. We also discovered there is a shortfall of effective collaboration between nations and a lack of resources in developing countries. Current statistical analyses on the cost of neurological disorders to the world economy strongly suggest that there is a great need for investment in neurotechnology and innovation or fast-tracking therapeutics and diagnostics to curb these costs. During the current COVID-19 pandemic, SBMT, through this paper, intends to showcase the importance of worldwide collaborations to reduce the population's economic and health burden, specifically regarding neurological/brain, spine, and mental disorders.

Mental Health and COVID-19: Challenges and Multimodal Clinical Solutions.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to an exponential rise in mental health issues. Studies have shown that, in times of increased unemployment rates and economic downturn, rates of mental health issues, suicide, substance use, and domestic violence tend to increase. Barriers to care, including stigma and decreased access to providers, contribute to morbidity and mortality. Telehealth services are being utilized to help increase access to care, and economic stimulus packages have been created to help with the financial burden that is often associated with increased mental health stressors. Efforts to prevent burnout and other policy recommendations can help decrease mental health issues in first responders and health care professionals, who are at an increased risk for these problems. Increasing the ability to provide wellness screenings to the general population, to educate the public about preventive measures and practices, and to provide mental health and substance use treatment, such as medication management and therapy services, are among top priorities to further reduce the socioeconomic impact of COVID-19 on mental illness.

COVID-19 impacts on drinking and mental health in emerging adults: Longitudinal changes and moderation by economic disruption and sex.

BACKGROUND: There are significant concerns that the COVID-19 pandemic may have negative effects on substance use and mental health, but most studies to date are cross-sectional. In a sample of emerging adults, over a two-week period during the pandemic, the current study examined: (1) changes in drinking-related outcomes, depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder and (2) differences in changes by sex and income loss. The intra-pandemic measures were compared to pre-pandemic measures. METHODS: Participants were 473 emerging adults (Mage  = 23.84; 41.7% male) in an existing longitudinal study on alcohol misuse who were assessed from June 17 to July 1, 2020, during acute public health restrictions in Ontario, Canada. These intra-pandemic data were matched to participant pre-pandemic reports, collected an average of 5 months earlier. Assessments included validated measures of drinking, alcohol-related consequences, and mental health indicators. RESULTS: Longitudinal analyses revealed significant decreases in heavy drinking and adverse alcohol consequences, with no moderation by sex or income loss, but with substantial heterogeneity in changes. Significant increases in continuous measures of depression and anxiety were present, both of which were moderated by sex. Females reported significantly larger increases in depression and anxiety. Income loss >50% was significantly associated with increases in depression. CONCLUSIONS: During the initial phase of the pandemic, reductions in heavy drinking and alcohol consequences were present in this sample of emerging adults, perhaps due to restrictions on socializing. In contrast, there was an increase in internalizing symptoms , especially in females, highlighting disparities in the mental health impacts of the pandemic.

Integrating youth mental health into cash transfer programmes in response to the COVID-19 crisis in low-income and middle-income countries.

Social protection measures can play an important part in securing livelihoods and in mitigating short-term and long-term economic, social, and mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, cash transfer programmes are currently being adapted or expanded in various low-income and middle-income countries to support individuals and families during the pandemic. We argue that the current crisis offers an opportunity for these programmes to focus on susceptible young people (aged 15-24 years), including those with mental health conditions. Young people living in poverty and with mental health problems are at particular risk of experiencing adverse health, wellbeing, and employment outcomes with long-term consequences. They are also at risk of developing mental health conditions during this pandemic. To support this population, cash transfer programmes should not only address urgent needs around food security and survival but expand their focus to address longer-term mental health impacts of pandemics and economic crises. Such an approach could help support young people's future life chances and break the vicious cycle between mental illness and poverty that spirals many young people into both socioeconomic and mental health disadvantage.

Anticipated mental health consequences of COVID-19 in a nationally-representative sample: Context, coverage, and economic consequences.

The COVID-19 pandemic will have long-term consequences due to social and economic disruption. This study aimed to understand the contextual, media, and economic factors associated with anticipated mental health consequences from the COVID-19 pandemic among Americans. A nationally representative survey of 1001 respondents was conducted in April 2020. Chi-square tests and logistic regressions examined anticipated emotional or psychological effects on respondents or members of their households should social distancing measures continue. Specific analyses focused on: 1) COVID-19 experience - knowing someone or being infected; living in a state with a high death rate; or state social distancing policies; 2) media exposure - source of coronavirus information and time spent on coronavirus news; and 3) economics - current economic effects; and anticipated long-term financial effects. 41% of respondents anticipated mental health consequences. Living in a state with a greater COVID-19 death rate (OR 1.73; 95% CI 1.10, 2.72) and anticipating long-term financial difficulties (OR 2.98; 95% CI 1.93, 4.60) were both associated with greater likelihood of anticipated mental health consequences. Those whose primary news source was television, as opposed to print or online, were almost 50% less likely to anticipate mental health challenges (OR 0.52 CI 0.33, 0.81), while those who reported spending two or more hours daily on COVID-19 news were 90% more likely (OR 1.90; 95% CI 1.27, 2.85). Aspects of community health, media consumption, and economic impacts influence anticipated poor mental health from the COVID-19 pandemic, suggesting each domain is relevant to interventions to address the consequences.

Psychiatry's Past Can Be Psychiatry's Future.

In the last half of the 20th century, psychiatry lost many of the conditions needed for unhindered practice. I compiled from searches of the literature the 20th century changes in the arenas of psychiatric practice and the sources of these changes. I determined how these changes are shaping 21st century health and well-being. The neglect of the severely mentally ill, first in Bedlams and now on Boulevards, reflects a wide loss of resources. Psychiatry's patients have lost a past of community-based mental health services, interdisciplinary care teams, preventive consultation with social agencies, and, with reimbursements targeted for 15-minute visits, time adequate with the physician to individualize diagnosis and treatment. With the Covid-19 and other epidemics, economic inequalities, an economic crisis, unrest over police violence, and racism, psychiatry can find in its past the resources to engage 21st century psychiatric and other problems.

Assessing concerns for the economic consequence of the COVID-19 response and mental health problems associated with economic vulnerability and negative economic shock in Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom.

Many different countries have been under lockdown or extreme social distancing measures to control the spread of COVID-19. The potentially far-reaching side effects of these measures have not yet been fully understood. In this study we analyse the results of a multi-country survey conducted in Italy (N = 3,504), Spain (N = 3,524) and the United Kingdom (N = 3,523), with two separate analyses. In the first analysis, we examine the elicitation of citizens' concerns over the downplaying of the economic consequences of the lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic. We control for Social Desirability Bias through a list experiment included in the survey. In the second analysis, we examine the data from the same survey to predict the level of stress, anxiety and depression associated with being economically vulnerable and having been affected by a negative economic shock. To accomplish this, we have used a prediction algorithm based on machine learning techniques. To quantify the size of this affected population, we compare its magnitude with the number of people affected by COVID-19 using measures of susceptibility, vulnerability and behavioural change collected in the same questionnaire. We find that the concern for the economy and for "the way out" of the lockdown is diffuse and there is evidence of minor underreporting. Additionally, we estimate that around 42.8% of the populations in the three countries are at high risk of stress, anxiety, and depression, based on their level of economic vulnerability and their exposure to a negative economic shock.

Employment and economic outcomes of persons with mental illness and disability: The impact of the Great Recession in the United States.

Objective: To examine variation in employment and economic outcomes before, during, and after the great recession by disability and mental health status. Methods: Using a sample of adults in the 1999 to 2016 National Health Interview Survey (N = 419,336), we examined changes in labor force and economic outcomes by mental health and physical disability status. We employed difference-in-differences analyses to determine whether the changes in these outcomes during and after the recession for each comparison group (those with moderate mental illness, serious psychiatric disability, or physical disability) were significantly different from the changes for persons with neither a mental illness nor a disability. Findings: While the recession impacted all groups, those with mental illnesses or physical disabilities were hardest hit. Persons with disabilities were disadvantaged on all outcomes at each period, but persons with mental illnesses were the most disadvantaged. Unemployment, poverty, and use of food stamps increased for all groups, but the increase was greatest for persons with mental health problems who also saw a more substantial decline in wage income. Conclusions and Implications for Practice: The effects of the recession persist well after the recovery period. Practitioners should be aware that although most persons with mental illnesses want to work, they face significant barriers to employment. Following economic shocks such as those brought on by the current coronavirus pandemic, interventions should focus on people who are the most vulnerable, especially those with mental health problems. Renewed focus on employment for people with mental disorders is important. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Whither economic evaluation in the case of COVID-19: What can the field of mental health economics contribute within the Australian context?

COVID-19 has resulted in broad impacts on the economy and aspects of daily life including our collective mental health and well-being. The Australian health care system already faces limitations in its ability to treat people with mental health diagnoses. Australia has responded to the COVID-19 outbreak by, among other initiatives, providing reimbursement for telehealth services. However, it is unclear if these measures will be enough to manage the psychological distress, depression, anxiety and post-traumatic distress shown to accompany infectious disease outbreaks and economic shocks. Decision making has focused on the physical health ramifications of COVID-19, the avoidance of over-burdening the health care system and saving lives. We propose an alternative framework for decision making that combines life years saved with impacts on quality of life. A framework that simultaneously includes mental health and broader economic impacts into a single decision-making process would facilitate transparent and accountable decision making that can improve the overall welfare of Australian society as we continue to address the considerable challenges that the COVID-19 pandemic is creating.

How to Mitigate the Mental Health Care Consequences of the COVID-19 Financial Crisis.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to record unemployment claims and a weakened U.S. economy. This column reviews results of past research to examine how a recession might affect behavioral health and the treatment of mental and substance use disorders and suggests potential policy solutions. Despite increases in suicide and substance use, losses in employment-related health insurance could dampen treatment seeking. Federal, state, and local officials should be vigilant regarding suicide prevention. Individuals who lose employee insurance coverage should be protected through insurance marketplaces and Medicaid outreach and enrollment. Public and private coverage of telehealth, which has already been expanded, should continue beyond the pandemic. Federal support for community behavioral health organizations should continue to offset state and local budget cuts and ensure provision of needed treatment. The capacity of social services should be expanded as well as systems that facilitate client connection to social services.