The impact of healthcare setting on post-COVID mood disorders: a single-centre perspective from Southern Italy Respiratory Intensive Care Unit.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Post-COVID syndrome includes several clinical identities, with both physical and mental alterations lasting several months from the acute phase of COVID-19 disease. However, to date, data concerning the relationship between healthcare settings during COVID-19 disease and post-COVID mood disorders are lacking. METHODS: We performed a prospective study enrolling 440 patients with post-COVID syndrome. Each patient underwent a complete clinical evaluation, along with blood and functional tests. Patients were divided according to the healthcare setting needed during COVID-19 disease. RESULTS: Patients admitted to RICU were more prone to develop mental alterations, even when compared to ICU-admitted patients. Other risk factors for mood disorders included female gender and some post-COVID symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare needs during COVID-19 can explain the higher incidence of mood disorders in post-COVID syndrome. RICU arises as an important but underexplored risk factor for post-COVID psychic sequelae.

Estimated Global Proportions of Individuals With Persistent Fatigue, Cognitive, and Respiratory Symptom Clusters Following Symptomatic COVID-19 in 2020 and 2021.

Importance: Some individuals experience persistent symptoms after initial symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (often referred to as Long COVID). Objective: To estimate the proportion of males and females with COVID-19, younger or older than 20 years of age, who had Long COVID symptoms in 2020 and 2021 and their Long COVID symptom duration. Design, Setting, and Participants: Bayesian meta-regression and pooling of 54 studies and 2 medical record databases with data for 1.2 million individuals (from 22 countries) who had symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Of the 54 studies, 44 were published and 10 were collaborating cohorts (conducted in Austria, the Faroe Islands, Germany, Iran, Italy, the Netherlands, Russia, Sweden, Switzerland, and the US). The participant data were derived from the 44 published studies (10 501 hospitalized individuals and 42 891 nonhospitalized individuals), the 10 collaborating cohort studies (10 526 and 1906), and the 2 US electronic medical record databases (250 928 and 846 046). Data collection spanned March 2020 to January 2022. Exposures: Symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of individuals with at least 1 of the 3 self-reported Long COVID symptom clusters (persistent fatigue with bodily pain or mood swings; cognitive problems; or ongoing respiratory problems) 3 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection in 2020 and 2021, estimated separately for hospitalized and nonhospitalized individuals aged 20 years or older by sex and for both sexes of nonhospitalized individuals younger than 20 years of age. Results: A total of 1.2 million individuals who had symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection were included (mean age, 4-66 years; males, 26%-88%). In the modeled estimates, 6.2% (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 2.4%-13.3%) of individuals who had symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection experienced at least 1 of the 3 Long COVID symptom clusters in 2020 and 2021, including 3.2% (95% UI, 0.6%-10.0%) for persistent fatigue with bodily pain or mood swings, 3.7% (95% UI, 0.9%-9.6%) for ongoing respiratory problems, and 2.2% (95% UI, 0.3%-7.6%) for cognitive problems after adjusting for health status before COVID-19, comprising an estimated 51.0% (95% UI, 16.9%-92.4%), 60.4% (95% UI, 18.9%-89.1%), and 35.4% (95% UI, 9.4%-75.1%), respectively, of Long COVID cases. The Long COVID symptom clusters were more common in women aged 20 years or older (10.6% [95% UI, 4.3%-22.2%]) 3 months after symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection than in men aged 20 years or older (5.4% [95% UI, 2.2%-11.7%]). Both sexes younger than 20 years of age were estimated to be affected in 2.8% (95% UI, 0.9%-7.0%) of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections. The estimated mean Long COVID symptom cluster duration was 9.0 months (95% UI, 7.0-12.0 months) among hospitalized individuals and 4.0 months (95% UI, 3.6-4.6 months) among nonhospitalized individuals. Among individuals with Long COVID symptoms 3 months after symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, an estimated 15.1% (95% UI, 10.3%-21.1%) continued to experience symptoms at 12 months. Conclusions and Relevance: This study presents modeled estimates of the proportion of individuals with at least 1 of 3 self-reported Long COVID symptom clusters (persistent fatigue with bodily pain or mood swings; cognitive problems; or ongoing respiratory problems) 3 months after symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The Place of Care under Constraint for Mood Disorders in the Context of the Collapse of the Supply of Psychiatric Care during the COVID-19 Crisis.

BACKGROUND: In March 2020, the Belgian population was exposed to a confinement situation that it had never experienced before associated with the collapse in access to psychiatric care. Initially, only emergencies and constrained care continued to operate. In these specific circumstances, where both the overall population and the psychiatric population, was exposed to unique stress factors, what was the role of forced psychiatric internments in the treatment of mood disorders? SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We have measured the number of detentions for observation with and without suicide attempt over the two years prior to the pandemic in order to obtain theoretical reference values. We have compared these values with the measures over the 12 months following the start of the confinement period, which constitute the Crisis values. The continuation of measures, with an equal number of observation measures, constituted the Post-Crisis values. For these same cases, we compared in suicide attempt cases, whether the criteria for Severe Major Depressive Disorder were met or not. Lastly we compared the number of observation measures that were lifted, or not, within ten days of patient care. RESULTS: There was no significant increase in Detentions for Observation following a suicide attempt during the Crisis period. However a significant increase was observed during the Post-Crisis period. As regards cases of attempted suicide during the Crisis period, the number of patients suffering from Major Depressive Disorders reduced significantly in terms of statistics. This confirms our impression of a change in population. The Post-Crisis values dropped to the Theoric values. The number of Observation measures lifted increased quite significantly during the Crisis period, while there was a return to values in terms of statistics similar to the Theoric values during the Post-Crisis period. CONCLUSIONS: Although the population, both the healthy population and those suffering from a psychiatric condition, was subject to stress that it had never before experienced coinciding with a collapse of healthcare provision, there was no increase in patients meeting the criteria to benefit from constrained care during the Crisis period. On the other hand, there was a significant change in statistical terms in the population of patients who attempted suicide. We have seen a collapse in the number of patients suffering from depressive disorders and an equivalent increase in the number of patients with personality disorders or adjustment disorders. The number of Observation measures lifted during the Crisis period also grew quite significantly. Constrained care was available to help manage reactive suicide attempts. All other things being equal, they indirectly showed a reduction in Major Depressive Disorders requiring constrained care in the population.

Increase in prevalence of current mental disorders in the context of COVID-19: analysis of repeated nationwide cross-sectional surveys.

AIMS: The United Nations warned of COVID-19-related mental health crisis; however, it is unknown whether there is an increase in the prevalence of mental disorders as existing studies lack a reliable baseline analysis or they did not use a diagnostic measure. We aimed to analyse trends in the prevalence of mental disorders prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We analysed data from repeated cross-sectional surveys on a representative sample of non-institutionalised Czech adults (18+ years) from both November 2017 (n = 3306; 54% females) and May 2020 (n = 3021; 52% females). We used Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) as the main screening instrument. We calculated descriptive statistics and compared the prevalence of current mood and anxiety disorders, suicide risk and alcohol-related disorders at baseline and right after the first peak of COVID-19 when related lockdown was still in place in CZ. In addition, using logistic regression, we assessed the association between COVID-19-related worries and the presence of mental disorders. RESULTS: The prevalence of those experiencing symptoms of at least one current mental disorder rose from a baseline of 20.02 (95% CI = 18.64; 21.39) in 2017 to 29.63 (95% CI = 27.9; 31.37) in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic. The prevalence of both major depressive disorder (3.96, 95% CI = 3.28; 4.62 v. 11.77, 95% CI = 10.56; 12.99); and suicide risk (3.88, 95% CI = 3.21; 4.52 v. 11.88, 95% CI = 10.64; 13.07) tripled and current anxiety disorders almost doubled (7.79, 95% CI = 6.87; 8.7 v. 12.84, 95% CI = 11.6; 14.05). The prevalence of alcohol use disorders in 2020 was approximately the same as in 2017 (10.84, 95% CI = 9.78; 11.89 v. 9.88, 95% CI = 8.74; 10.98); however, there was a significant increase in weekly binge drinking behaviours (4.07% v. 6.39%). Strong worries about both, health or economic consequences of COVID-19, were associated with an increased odds of having a mental disorder (1.63, 95% CI = 1.4; 1.89 and 1.42, 95% CI = 1.23; 1.63 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence matching concerns that COVID-19-related mental health problems pose a major threat to populations, particularly considering the barriers in service provision posed during lockdown. This finding emphasises an urgent need to scale up mental health promotion and prevention globally.

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.

Three-Month Follow-up Study of Mental Health Outcomes After a National COVID-19 Lockdown: Comparing Patients With Mood or Anxiety Disorders Living in an Area With a Higher Versus Lower Infection Incidence.

Objective: The COVID-19 pandemic and the related containment measures can represent a traumatic experience, particularly for populations living in high incidence areas and individuals with mental disorders. The aim of this study was to prospectively examine posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety, and depressive symptoms since the end of the first COVID-19 pandemic wave and Italy's national lockdown in subjects with mood or anxiety disorders living in 2 regions with increasing pandemic incidence.Methods: 102 subjects with a DSM-5 anxiety or mood disorder were enrolled from June to July 2020 and assessed at baseline (T0) and after 3 months (T1) with the Impact of Event Scale-Revised, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-Item, and Work and Social Adjustment Scale. At T1, subjects were also assessed by means of the Trauma and Loss Spectrum Self-Report for PTSD.Results: At T0, subjects from the high COVID-19 incidence area showed higher levels of traumatic symptoms than those from the low COVID-19 incidence area (P < .001), with a decrease at T1 with respect to T0 (P = .001). Full or partial DSM-5 PTSD related to the COVID-19 pandemic emerged in 23 subjects (53.5%) from the high COVID-19 incidence area and in 9 (18.0%) from the low COVID-19 incidence area (P < .001).Conclusions: Subjects with mood or anxiety disorders presented relevant rates of PTSD, depressive, and anxiety symptoms in the aftermath of the lockdown, and in most cases these persisted after 3 months. The level of exposure to the pandemic emerged as a major risk factor for PTSD development. Further long-term studies are needed to follow up the course of traumatic burden.

Symptom changes in patients with pre-existing psychiatric disorders in the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic: Vulnerability of female patients and patients with mood disorders.

How patients with pre-existing psychiatric disorders are responding to the COVID-19 pandemic remains unclear, and no comprehensive studies have yet been performed. To elucidate (1) which psychiatric disorders were exacerbated during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic and (2) the contributing factors, we prospectively assessed psychiatric symptoms of 1592 psychiatric outpatients in a single-center study using the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) before the state of emergency was declared in Japan and during two months under the state of emergency (study period: April 8 to June 7, 2020). We conducted a chi-squared test for the relationship between psychiatric diagnostic category (ICD-10) and exacerbation. To control for confounders, we conducted a logistic regression analysis using sex, age, diagnostic category, and pre-pandemic GAF score as independent variables. Exacerbation rates of patients with mood disorders (F3) and neurotic disorders (F4) were 4.32% and 5.37%, respectively, and were significantly higher than those for patients with organic disorders (F0) and schizophrenic disorders (F2) (X2 (9, N = 1592) = 27.8, p < .01). Logistic regression analysis revealed that patients with F3 and female patients were significantly more affected than patients with other disorders or male patients, respectively (odds ratio (95% confidence interval) = 2.4 (1.2-4.6), p < .01 for F3; 3.1 (1.5-6.6), p < .01 for females). These findings suggest a need for careful management of patients with mood disorders and female psychiatric patients during a pandemic.

Can changes in social contact (frequency and mode) mitigate low mood before and during the COVID-19 pandemic? The I-CONECT project.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global outbreak allowed a natural experiment to observe how older adults changed social patterns and how it affected their emotional well-being. We studied the frequency and modes of social contact and their effects on older adults' mood before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Phone-based surveys were administered weekly before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. SETTING: Participants were recruited from Portland, Oregon, and Detroit, Michigan. PARTICIPANTS: Older adults ≥75 years old (n = 155, age = 81.0 ± 4.5, 72.3% women) were included in a randomized controlled trial, the Internet-Based Conversational Engagement Clinical Trial (I-CONECT). MEASUREMENTS: Low mood was self-reported as feeling downhearted or blue for three or more days in the past week. Social contact was self-reported by the amount of time spent in interactions, with whom (family, friends, others), and via which modes (in-person, phone/video call, text/email/letter). RESULTS: A total of 5525 weeks of data were derived from 155 participants. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, average social interaction time spent in-person, on phone/video call, and via text/email/letter was 406, 141, and 68 min/week, respectively. During the COVID-19 pandemic, time spent in-person was reduced by 135 min/week, while time spent via phone/video call and writing increased by 33 and 26 mins/week, respectively. In-person family contact was associated with less low mood regardless of the pandemic (odds ratio = 0.92, p < 0.05). There was a COVID-19 × text/email/letter with friends interaction (odds ratio = 0.77, p = 0.03), suggesting that during the COVID-19 pandemic, an increase of 1 h of writing with friends per week was associated with a 23% decrease in the likelihood of experiencing low mood. CONCLUSION: The lost in-person time relating to COVID-19 restrictions tended to be partially compensated for with increased calls and writing time, although overall social interaction time decreased. During the COVID-19 pandemic, at least two types of social interactions (writing to friends and in-person family time) showed promise for mitigating low mood for older adults with limited social resources.

Acute mental health service use following onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario, Canada: a trend analysis.

BACKGROUND: The extent to which heightened distress during the COVID-19 pandemic translated to increases in severe mental health outcomes is unknown. We examined trends in psychiatric presentations to acute care settings in the first 12 months after onset of the pandemic. METHODS: This was a trends analysis of administrative population data in Ontario, Canada. We examined rates of hospitalizations and emergency department visits for mental health diagnoses overall and stratified by sex, age and diagnostic grouping (e.g., mood disorders, anxiety disorders, psychotic disorders), as well as visits for intentional self-injury for people aged 10 to 105 years, from January 2019 to March 2021. We used Joinpoint regression to identify significant inflection points after the onset of the pandemic in March 2020. RESULTS: Among the 12 968 100 people included in our analysis, rates of mental health-related hospitalizations and emergency department visits declined immediately after the onset of the pandemic (peak overall decline of 30% [hospitalizations] and 37% [emergency department visits] compared to April 2019) and returned to near prepandemic levels by March 2021. Compared to April 2019, visits for intentional self-injury declined by 33% and remained below prepandemic levels until March 2021. We observed the largest declines in service use among adolescents aged 14 to 17 years (55% decline in hospitalizations, 58% decline in emergency department visits) and 10 to 13 years (56% decline in self-injury), and for those with substance-related disorders (33% decline in emergency department visits) and anxiety disorders (61% decline in hospitalizations). INTERPRETATION: Contrary to expectations, the abrupt decline in acute mental health service use immediately after the onset of the pandemic and the return to near prepandemic levels that we observed suggest that changes and stressors in the first 12 months of the pandemic did not translate to increased service use. Continued surveillance of acute mental health service use is warranted.

Mood Reactive Disorders among COVID-19 Inpatients: Experience from a Monocentric Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate the presence and severity of depressive symptoms among coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) inpatients and any possible changes after their discharge. SUBJECT AND METHODS: We collected data of patients admitted to the Infectious Disease Unit in Sassari, Italy, for COVID-19, from March 8 to May 8, 2020. The Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) was performed 1 week after admission (T0) and 1 week after discharge (T1). The cutoff point chosen to define the clinical significance of depressive symptoms was 20 (at least moderate). RESULTS: Forty-eight subjects were included. Mean age was 64.3 ± 17.6 years, and 32 (66.7%) were male. Most frequent comorbidities were cardiovascular diseases (19; 39.6%) and hypertension (17; 35.4%). When performing BDI-II at T0, 21 (43.7%) patients reported depressive symptoms at T0, according to the chosen cutoff point (BDI-II = 20). Eight (16.7%) patients had minimal symptoms. Mild mood disturbance and moderate and severe depressive symptoms were found in 24 (50%), 14 (29.2%), and 2 (4.2%) patients, respectively, at T0. The comparison of the BDI-II questionnaire at T0 with T1 showed a significant improvement in the total score (p < 0.0001), as well as in 4 out of the 5 selected questions of interest (p < 0.05). Univariate analysis showed that kidney failure and the death of a roommate were significantly associated with severity of mood disorders. CONCLUSION: Mood disturbances and depressive symptoms commonly occur among COVID-19 inpatients. Our results show that COVID-19 inpatients might be at higher risk for developing depressive reactive disorders and could benefit from an early psychological evaluation and strategies improving sleep quality.

Association Between Mood Disorders and Risk of COVID-19 Infection, Hospitalization, and Death: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: Preexisting noncommunicable diseases (eg, diabetes) increase the risk of COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and death. Mood disorders are associated with impaired immune function and social determinants that increase the risk of COVID-19. Determining whether preexisting mood disorders represent a risk of COVID-19 would inform public health priorities. Objective: To assess whether preexisting mood disorders are associated with a higher risk of COVID-19 susceptibility, hospitalization, severe complications, and death. Data Sources: Systematic searches were conducted for studies reporting data on COVID-19 outcomes in populations with and without mood disorders on PubMed/MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, PsycInfo, Embase, Web of Science, Google/Google Scholar, LitCovid, and select reference lists. The search timeline was from database inception to February 1, 2021. Study Selection: Primary research articles that reported quantitative COVID-19 outcome data in persons with mood disorders vs persons without mood disorders of any age, sex, and nationality were selected. Of 1950 articles identified through this search strategy, 21 studies were included in the analysis. Data Extraction and Synthesis: The modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess methodological quality and risk of bias of component studies. Reported adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were pooled with unadjusted ORs calculated from summary data to generate 4 random-effects summary ORs, each corresponding to a primary outcome. Main Outcomes and Measures: The 4 a priori primary outcomes were COVID-19 susceptibility, COVID-19 hospitalization, COVID-19 severe events, and COVID-19 death. The hypothesis was formulated before study search. Outcome measures between individuals with and without mood disorders were compared. Results: This review included 21 studies that involved more than 91 million individuals. Significantly higher odds of COVID-19 hospitalization (OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.12-1.53; P = .001; n = 26 554 397) and death (OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.34-1.69; P < .001; n = 25 808 660) were found in persons with preexisting mood disorders compared with those without mood disorders. There was no association between mood disorders and COVID-19 susceptibility (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.73-2.19; n = 65 514 469) or severe events (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.87-1.03; n = 83 240). Visual inspection of the composite funnel plot for asymmetry indicated the presence of publication bias; however, the Egger regression intercept test result was not statistically significant. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis examining the association between preexisting mood disorders and COVID-19 outcomes suggest that individuals with preexisting mood disorders are at higher risk of COVID-19 hospitalization and death and should be categorized as an at-risk group on the basis of a preexisting condition.

Food insecurity and its associations with bulimic-spectrum eating disorders, mood disorders, and anxiety disorders in a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults.

PURPOSE: To examine cross-sectional associations between food insecurity and 12-month eating disorders, mood disorders, and anxiety disorders among U.S. adults. METHODS: This study used data collected between 2001 and 2003 from 2914 participants in the National Comorbidity Survey-Replication, a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults (mean age = 44.9 years; 53.4% female). Twelve-month food insecurity was assessed with a modified version of the Short Form U.S. Household Food Security Scale. Twelve-month DSM-IV diagnoses of mental disorders were based on the World Health Organization Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Modified Poisson regression models were conducted, adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, and income-to-poverty ratio. RESULTS: Food insecurity was experienced by 11.1% of participants. Food insecurity was associated with greater prevalence of bulimic-spectrum eating disorders (prevalence ratio [PR] = 3.81; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.26-6.42), mood disorders (PR = 2.53; 95% CI 1.96-3.29), and anxiety disorders (PR = 1.69; 95% CI 1.39-2.07). CONCLUSION: Results indicate that food insecurity is associated with a range of internalizing mental disorders, though these findings should be confirmed with contemporary data to reflect DSM-5 diagnostic updates and the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Findings from this study emphasize the need to expand food insecurity interventions and improve access to mental health services for food-insecure populations.

Impact of Confinement in Patients under Long-Term Noninvasive Ventilation during the First Wave of the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: A Remarkable Resilience.

BACKGROUND: During the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Switzerland, confinement was imposed to limit transmission and protect vulnerable persons. These measures may have had a negative impact on perceived quality of care and symptoms in patients with chronic disorders. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether patients under long-term home noninvasive ventilation (LTHNIV) for chronic respiratory failure (CRF) were negatively affected by the 56-day confinement (March-April 2020). METHODS: A questionnaire-based survey exploring mood disturbances (HAD), symptom scores related to NIV (S3-NIV), and perception of health-care providers during confinement was sent to all patients under LTHNIV followed up by our center. Symptom scores and data obtained by ventilator software were compared between confinement and the 56 days prior to confinement. RESULTS: Of a total of 100 eligible patients, 66 were included (median age: 66 years [IQR: 53-74]): 35 (53%) with restrictive lung disorders, 20 (30%) with OHS or SRBD, and 11 (17%) with COPD or overlap syndrome. Prevalence of anxiety (n = 7; 11%) and depressive (n = 2; 3%) disorders was remarkably low. Symptom scores were slightly higher during confinement although this difference was not clinically relevant. Technical data regarding ventilation, including compliance, did not change. Patients complained of isolation and lack of social contact. They felt supported by their relatives and caregivers but complained of the lack of regular contact and information by health-care professionals. CONCLUSIONS: Patients under LTHNIV for CRF showed a remarkable resilience during the SARS-CoV-2 confinement period. Comments provided may be helpful for managing similar future health-care crises.

Severe mental illness is associated with increased mortality and severe course of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: Psychiatric disorders have been associated with unfavourable outcome following respiratory infections. Whether this also applies to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been scarcely investigated. METHODS: Using the Danish administrative databases, we identified all patients with a positive real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction test for COVID-19 in Denmark up to and including 2 January 2021. Multivariable cox regression was used to calculate 30-day absolute risk and average risk ratio (ARR) for the composite end point of death from any cause and severe COVID-19 associated with psychiatric disorders, defined using both hospital diagnoses and redemption of psychotropic drugs. RESULTS: We included 144,321 patients with COVID-19. Compared with patients without psychiatric disorders, the standardized ARR of the composite outcome was significantly increased for patients with severe mental illness including schizophrenia spectrum disorders 2.43 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.79-3.07), bipolar disorder 2.11 (95% CI, 1.25-2.97), unipolar depression 1.70 (95% CI, 1.38-2.02), and for patients who redeemed psychotropic drugs 1.70 (95% CI, 1.48-1.92). No association was found for patients with other psychiatric disorders 1.13 (95% CI, 0.86-1.38). Similar results were seen with the outcomes of death or severe COVID-19. Among the different psychiatric subgroups, patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders had the highest 30-day absolute risk for the composite outcome 3.1% (95% CI, 2.3-3.9%), death 1.2% (95% CI, 0.4-2.0%) and severe COVID-19 2.7% (95% CI, 1.9-3.6%). CONCLUSION: Schizophrenia spectrum disorders, bipolar disorder, unipolar depression and psychotropic drug redemption are associated with unfavourable outcomes in patients with COVID-19.

Mental Health and Physical Activity among Children and Adolescents during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is causing disruptions in the global social system. Japanese children and adolescents have had their schools closed, government-mandated activity restrictions imposed, and interactions outside the home reduced. These restrictions can have a considerable psychological impact on children and adolescents. This review aims to describe the impacts of COVID-19 pandemic on physical activity and psychological status of this population. The review was conducted by searching PubMed for information on the impact of COVID-19-related activity restrictions on children and adolescents. The search identified 11 articles, three of which contained data on anxiety and psychological problems due to physical inactivity. Next, a PubMed search was conducted about physical activity and psychological status in children and adolescents under psychological stress. The search identified 368 articles, 28 of which were included in the review. For children, data that revealed a correlation between physical activity and psychological health and sedentary time leading to mood disorders were included. For adolescents, there were nine studies that reported a correlation between physical activity and psychological health and four studies that reported no correlation between physical activity and psychological health. Of the studies that reported a correlation, seven reported that physical activity improves psychological health. The impact of psychologically stressful situations such as COVID-19 on children and adolescents has been experienced worldwide. Physical activity has been correlated with psychological health, and it may improve psychological status; physical activity should be recommended to better support the psychological health of children and adolescents under the influence of COVID-19.

[Impact of the lockdown on children and families: a survey of family pediatricians within a community.] / Impatto del lockdown sui bambini e sulle famiglie: un'indagine dei pediatri di famiglia all'interno di una comunità.

OBJECTIVES: The recent lockdown, resulting from the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, has had a strong social and psychological impact on the most fragile individuals and family structures. In the present work we investigated the experience of families without specific elements of social or health vulnerability during the quarantine period that occurred in the spring of 2020. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between May and July 2020, 22 primary care pediatricians belonging to AUSL Romagna administered to a number of families a questionnaire to detect changes that occurred, during the lockdown, in family environment, school attendance and personal attitudes. RESULTS: A total of 721 questionnaires were collected, analyzing the associations between variables relating to home environment, daily rhythms, school and warning signs in relation to the age of children. As a result of the lockdown, family habits changed in 31% of cases, with a greater presence of the reference figure in 68% of these. Three out of four families reported they had sufficient domestic spaces, and nine out of ten had access to an outdoor, private or condominium space. Daily rhythms were preserved in 56.7% of cases; mood disorders appeared in 30% of adolescent children, followed by sleep, appetite and psychosomatic disorders. One in three children has made progress in terms of evolution and behavior, and one in 5 children has seen their relationships improve. The overall resilience of families during the lockdown period was considered good in 66.3%, sufficient in 31.3% and not satisfactory in only 2.4% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that, in the interviewed families, the simultaneous presence of adults and children at home has generally intensified. Families refer, on the whole, a positive and resilient behavior in the lockdown period, even if initial emotional problems are reported in one out of three children-adolescents. The ability to maintain a family organized structure seems to be partially compromised. Forced cohabitation leads to competition for the same resources of time and space and affects the entire family unit. The school institution emerges as a protective factor for children, young people and also for the well-being of families themselves.

Peripandemic psychiatric emergencies: impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients according to diagnostic subgroup.

On March 11th, 2020, the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic. Governments took drastic measures in an effort to reduce transmission rates and virus-associated morbidity. This study aims to present the immediate effects of the pandemic on patients presenting in the psychiatric emergency department (PED) of Hannover Medical School. Patients presenting during the same timeframe in 2019 served as a control group. A decrease in PED visits was observed during the COVID-19 pandemic with an increase in repeat visits within 1 month (30.2 vs. 20.4%, pBA = 0.001). Fewer patients with affective disorders utilized the PED (15.2 vs. 22.2%, pBA = 0.010). Suicidal ideation was stated more frequently among patients suffering from substance use disorders (47.4 vs. 26.8%, pBA = 0.004), while patients with schizophrenia more commonly had persecutory delusions (68.7 vs. 43.5%, pBA = 0.023) and visual hallucinations (18.6 vs. 3.3%, pBA = 0.011). Presentation rate of patients with neurotic, stress-related, and somatoform disorders increased. These patients were more likely to be male (48.6 vs. 28.9%, pBA = 0.060) and without previous psychiatric treatment (55.7 vs. 36.8%, pBA = 0.089). Patients with personality/behavioral disorders were more often inhabitants of psychiatric residencies (43.5 vs. 10.8%, pBA = 0.008). 20.1% of patients stated an association between psychological well-being and COVID-19. Most often patients suffered from the consequences pertaining to social measures or changes within the medical care system. By understanding how patients react to such a crisis situation, we can consider how to improve care for patients in the future and which measures need to be taken to protect these particularly vulnerable patients.

Association of Psychiatric Disorders With Mortality Among Patients With COVID-19.

Importance: To date, the association of psychiatric diagnoses with mortality in patients infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has not been evaluated. Objective: To assess whether a diagnosis of a schizophrenia spectrum disorder, mood disorder, or anxiety disorder is associated with mortality in patients with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study assessed 7348 consecutive adult patients for 45 days following laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 between March 3 and May 31, 2020, in a large academic medical system in New York. The final date of follow-up was July 15, 2020. Patients without available medical records before testing were excluded. Exposures: Patients were categorized based on the following International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnoses before their testing date: (1) schizophrenia spectrum disorders, (2) mood disorders, and (3) anxiety disorders. Patients with these diagnoses were compared with a reference group without psychiatric disorders. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mortality, defined as death or discharge to hospice within 45 days following a positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) test result. Results: Of the 26 540 patients tested, 7348 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (mean [SD] age, 54 [18.6] years; 3891 [53.0%] women). Of eligible patients with positive test results, 75 patients (1.0%) had a history of a schizophrenia spectrum illness, 564 (7.7%) had a history of a mood disorder, and 360 (4.9%) had a history of an anxiety disorder. After adjusting for demographic and medical risk factors, a premorbid diagnosis of a schizophrenia spectrum disorder was significantly associated with mortality (odds ratio [OR], 2.67; 95% CI, 1.48-4.80). Diagnoses of mood disorders (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.87-1.49) and anxiety disorders (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.65-1.41) were not associated with mortality after adjustment. In comparison with other risk factors, a diagnosis of schizophrenia ranked behind only age in strength of an association with mortality. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of adults with SARS-CoV-2-positive test results in a large New York medical system, adults with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder diagnosis were associated with an increased risk for mortality, but those with mood and anxiety disorders were not associated with a risk of mortality. These results suggest that schizophrenia spectrum disorders may be a risk factor for mortality in patients with COVID-19.

Clinical management of individuals with Intellectual Disability: The outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic as experienced in a clinical and research center Research in Developmental Disabilities.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Oasi Research Institute of Troina (Italy) became an important hotbed for infection; in fact, 109 patients with different levels of Intellectual Disability (ID) tested positive for COVID-19. The procedures and interventions put in place at the Oasi Research Institute due to the COVID-19 pandemic are exhaustively reported in this paper. The description of the clinical procedures as well as remote/in person psychological support services provided to people with ID and their families are here divided into three different sections: Phase I (or Acute phase), Phase II (or Activity planning), and Phase III (or Activity consolidation). In each section, the main psycho-pathological characteristics of patients, the reactions of family members and the multidisciplinary interventions put in place are also described.