Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 151
Filter
1.
Eur Psychiatry ; 66(1): e45, 2023 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20234522

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Symptoms of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) have been reported to increase during the COVID-19 lockdowns because of the hygiene requirements related to the pandemic. Patients with adjustment disorder (AD) may, in turn, represent a vulnerable population for identifiable stressors. In this study, we aimed at assessing potential symptoms changes in OCD patients during the lockdown in comparison with AD patients as well as versus healthy controls (HC). METHODS: During the COVID-related lockdown, we enrolled 65 patients and 29 HC. Participants were tested with four clinical rating scales (Yale-Brown obsessive-compulsive scale and Brown Assessment of Beliefs Scale for OCD patients; Beck Depression Inventory-II and State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-Y for each group) that had been also administered just before the Italian lockdown. RESULTS: Our results showed that during the lockdown: (i) the symptoms of depression and anxiety increased in all groups, but this increase was most pronounced in HC (p < 0.001); (ii) OCD symptoms severity did not increase, but the insight worsened (p = 0.028); (iii) the proportion of OCD patients showing hygiene-related symptoms increased (p = 0.031 for obsessions of contamination), whereas that of patients with checking-related symptoms decreased. CONCLUSIONS: The lockdown-induced psychological distress apparently changed the characteristics and the pattern of OCD symptoms expression but not their overall severity. This evidence confirms the heterogeneity and changing nature of OCD symptoms, strongly depending on the environmental circumstances.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder , Humans , COVID-19/prevention & control , Communicable Disease Control , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder/psychology , Anxiety , Obsessive Behavior , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales
2.
J Psychosoc Nurs Ment Health Serv ; 61(5): 11-16, 2023 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2314528

ABSTRACT

Anxiety disorders are among the most common mental health conditions affecting pediatric populations. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition, recommends objective measurement of pediatric anxiety for evaluation of symptomatology and treatment response. The objective of the current review was to summarize recommendations and resources for measuring pediatric anxiety, and to quantify and characterize use of outcome measures for generalized anxiety in pediatric psychiatry. These findings represent an essential step toward understanding how and to what extent anxiety rating scales are used in pediatric psychiatry and where quality improvement initiatives may be needed. Education, training, and further research are warranted to optimize use of measurement-based care for generalized anxiety in pediatric psychiatry settings and to determine which scales are optimal for use in this context. [Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services, 61(5), 11-16.].


Subject(s)
Mental Health Services , Psychiatry , Humans , Child , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Anxiety/diagnosis , Anxiety Disorders/psychology
3.
J Child Psychol Psychiatry ; 64(5): 834-838, 2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2292329

ABSTRACT

Development of standardized diagnostic instruments has facilitated the systematic characterization of individuals with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) in clinical and research settings. However, overemphasis on scores from specific instruments has significantly detracted from the original purpose of these tools. Rather than provide a definitive "answer," or even a confirmation of diagnosis, standardized diagnostic instruments were designed to aid clinicians in the process of gathering information about social communication, play, and repetitive and sensory behaviors relevant to diagnosis and treatment planning. Importantly, many autism diagnostic instruments are not validated for certain patient populations, including those with severe vision, hearing, motor, and/or cognitive impairments, and they cannot be administered via a translator. In addition, certain circumstances, such as the need to wear personal protective equipment (PPE), or behavioral factors (e.g., selective mutism) may interfere with standardized administration or scoring procedures, rendering scores invalid. Thus, understanding the uses and limitations of specific tools within specific clinical or research populations, as well as similarities or differences between these populations and the instrument validation samples, is paramount. Accordingly, payers and other systems must not mandate the use of specific tools in cases when their use would be inappropriate. To ensure equitable access to appropriate assessment and treatment services, it is imperative that diagnosticians be trained in best practice methods for the assessment of autism, including if, how, and when to appropriately employ standardized diagnostic instruments.


Subject(s)
Autism Spectrum Disorder , Autistic Disorder , Child Behavior Disorders , Child , Humans , Autism Spectrum Disorder/diagnosis , Autism Spectrum Disorder/psychology , Autistic Disorder/diagnosis , Communication , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales
4.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ; 22(1): 937, 2022 Dec 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2196105

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The positive predictive rate of the Japanese version of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) is lower than those of other versions. This study aimed to confirm whether the EPDS Japanese version reflects actual symptom frequency and to examine the possibility of improving the positive predictive rate. METHODS: This is a methodological study aimed at improving the positive predictive value of EPDS. The participants were 63 non-pregnant and 382 pregnant women. They answered the 10 questions of the Japanese version of the EPDS and reported the specific number of days as the frequency. The EPDS score (EPDS-S) and the frequency score (FREQ-S) were calculated for three factors of emotion: anhedonia, anxiety, and depression. RESULTS: The positive rates of the EPDS-S and FREQ-S in pregnant women were 6% and 8%, respectively, which were lower than those in non-pregnant women (17%). On comparing the EPDS-S with the FREQ-S, a significant underestimation of frequency was observed in approximately 3% of pregnant women. The FREQ-S showed better internal consistency than the EPDS-S. Among the factors of emotion, women tended to rate anhedonia lower in the EPDS-S than in the frequency scale. CONCLUSION: Pregnant women tended to report a lower frequency on the Japanese version of the EPDS than their actual symptom frequency, which was especially true for those with a desire to self-harm. The combined use of the FREQ-S and EPDS-S can prevent underestimation and help improve the detection rate of depression.


Subject(s)
Depression, Postpartum , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Anhedonia , Depression/diagnosis , Depression, Postpartum/diagnosis , Pregnant Women , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Japan , Language
5.
Neurosciences (Riyadh) ; 28(1): 27-35, 2023 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2204426

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD) symptoms in patients who have survived COVID-19. METHODS: The study used an observational cross-sectional design between July and October 2021. The target population was adult patients who had confirmed COVID-19 infection prior to joining the study, OCD symptoms were assessed using the Arabic OCD scale created by Abohendy and colleagues, which included 83 questions covering 12 different domains and was administired online. RESULTS: A total of 356 patients were included in the analysis. Approximately 9.0% and 1.7% of the patients had a history of psychiatric disease and OCD diagnosis (respectively). The total symptom score was 32.8%. The most frequently reported domains were rumination of ideas (55.5%), re-checking compulsions (37.0%), and slowness (34.0%), while the least frequently reported domains included obsessive impulses (26.3%), obsessive images (26.5%), and religious compulsions (26.8%). Unlike other domains, the purity and cleanliness compulsions scores were significantly higher than the scale reference population. A higher total symptom score was observed in psychiatric patients (p=0.004) and, to a lesser extent, in OCD patients (p=0.250). CONCLUSION: Overall, OCD symptoms, including cleanliness and fear of disease obsessions, tend to be higher in psychiatric and OCD patients, these findings are valuable for future studies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder , Adult , Humans , Prevalence , Saudi Arabia/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , COVID-19/epidemiology , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder/epidemiology , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder/diagnosis , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder/psychology , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales
6.
Psychiatry Res ; 316: 114728, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1955792

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: With the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, the various social distancing policies imposed have mandated psychiatrists to consider the option of using telepsychiatry as an alternative to face-to-face interview in Hong Kong. Limitations over sample size, methodology and information technology were found in previous studies and the reliability of symptoms assessment remained a concern. AIM: To evaluate the reliability of assessment of psychiatric symptoms by telepsychiatry comparing with face-to-face psychiatric interview. METHOD: This study recruited a sample of adult psychiatric patients in psychiatric wards in Queen Mary Hospital. Semi-structural interviews with the use of standardized psychiatric assessment scales were carried out in telepsychiatry and face-to-face interview respectively by two clinicians and the reliability of psychiatric symptoms elicited were assessed. RESULTS: 90 patients completed the assessments The inter-method reliability in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale and Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale showed good agreement when compared with face-to-face interview. CONCLUSION: Symptoms assessment by telepsychiatry is comparable to assessment conducted by face-to-face interview.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Psychiatry , Telemedicine , Adult , Humans , Pandemics , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Psychiatry/methods , Reproducibility of Results , Symptom Assessment
7.
Croat Med J ; 63(5): 412-422, 2022 Oct 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2092246

ABSTRACT

AIM: To assess whether fear of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with depression, anxiety, and psychosis and to evaluate if these variables are correlated with the interaction between spirituality and fear of COVID-19. METHODS: Between September and November 2020, this cross-sectional study enrolled 118 chronic schizophrenia patients. The interview with patients included Fear of COVID-19 Scale, Lebanese Anxiety Scale-10, Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual Well-Being-12. The results were analyzed by using linear regressions (Enter method), with anxiety, depression, total PANSS score, positive PANSS, negative PANSS, and general psychopathology PANSS subscales as dependent variables. Spirituality, fear of COVID-19, and the interaction of spirituality with fear of COVID-19 were independents variables. RESULTS: Fear of COVID-19 was positively correlated with increased total PANSS scores (Beta=0.90, P=0.030). Higher spirituality was significantly associated with lower anxiety (Beta=-0.14, P=0.009), lower depression (Beta=-0.21, P=0.001), lower total PANSS score (Beta=-0.90, P=0.004), lower negative PANSS score (Beta=-0.23, P=0.009), and lower general psychopathology PANSS score (Beta=-0.61, P=0.001). In patients with high fear of COVID-19, having low spirituality was significantly associated with higher anxiety, depression, and psychotic symptoms. CONCLUSION: This study suggests a positive correlation between fear of COVID-19 and higher psychosis among inpatients with schizophrenia. The interaction of spirituality with fear of COVID-19 was correlated with reduced anxiety, depression, and psychosis.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Psychotic Disorders , Schizophrenia , Humans , Spirituality , Depression/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Psychotic Disorders/complications , Psychotic Disorders/diagnosis , Anxiety , Fear
8.
J Psychiatr Res ; 154: 293-299, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2061587

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Among patients with mental illness, those with obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) showed a significant clinical worsening by the COVID-19 pandemic. The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on OCD have been shown to worsen symptoms severity, with serious clinical consequences. However, the persistence of COVID-19 pandemic in OCD patients has been poorly investigated. The purpose of the present study was to assess the impact of the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in a sample of OCD patients and to compare the results with those obtained during the first wave on the same OCD sample. METHODS: 116 OCD outpatients attending three OCD tertiary clinics in Northern Italy and previously included in a report on the impact of COVID-19, were followed-up in order to investigate sociodemographic and clinical features. Appropriate statistical analyses for categorical and continuous variables were conducted. RESULTS: The 43 OCD patients with a clinical worsening (OW) reported a significant development of new obsessions/compulsions and the recurrence of past OC symptoms, higher rates of psychiatric comorbidities and sleep disturbances compared to patients without symptom worsening. Moreover, an increase in avoidance behaviors, suicidal ideation, Internet checking for reassurance, and job difficulties emerged in OW patients. Also, lower rates of pharmacological stability, and higher rates of therapy adjustment were observed. In terms of sex differences, males showed higher rates of past obsessions occurrence, while females showed a rise in Internet checking behaviors. When comparing OW patients between the first and the second wave, the latter showed significantly higher rates of past obsession occurrence and lower rates of pharmacological stability. Moreover, patients with OW showed a significantly older age during the second wave. CONCLUSION: The persistence of the COVID-19 pandemic showed a globally impaired clinical picture in the analyzed OCD sample. A further worsening between the two waves timepoints emerged, mainly involving older patients with OCD. The concordance between our results and those existing in literature highlights the importance of an accurate long-term monitoring of OCD patients in light of COVID-19 pandemic persistence.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder/psychology , Pandemics , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales
9.
Psychiatr Danub ; 34(Suppl 8): 262-264, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2046183

ABSTRACT

In this study, with a psychodiagnostic survey, we wanted to evaluate the possible presence of depressive symptoms in patients diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. The sample of 106 type 2 diabetic patients consisted of three groups. Group A of 80 patients interviewed in 2017 at the Olbia clinic, group A-1 (a subgroup of A), of 41 patients with a follow-up after 5 years from the first examination in 2017 and group B of 26 new type 2 diabetic patients examined for the first time in 2022. All subject underwent an interview and and have completed the following validated questionnaires: Questionnaire for Mood Disorders (MDQ), Hamilton Psychiatric Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D), Montgomery-Asberg Scale for Depression (MADRS), Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAR -S) and Clinical Global Impression (CGI). The objective of the follow-up was to evaluate the possible emotional impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of the research is to evaluate the correlation between any depressive symptoms and diabetes.


Subject(s)
Depression , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , Depression/diagnosis , Depression/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/diagnosis , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales
10.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ; 22(1): 732, 2022 Sep 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2043118

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To compare the rate of postpartum depression (PPD) during the first COVID-19 lockdown with the rate observed prior to the pandemic, and to examine factors associated with PPD. METHODS: This was a prospective study. Women who gave birth during the first COVID-19 lockdown (spring 2020) were offered call-interviews at 10 days and 6-8 weeks postpartum to assess PPD using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS). Post-traumatic symptoms (Perinatal Post-traumatic Stress Disorder Questionnaire, PPQ), couple adjustment, and interaction and mother-to-infant bonding were also evaluated. The observed PPD rate was compared to the one reported before the pandemic. Factors associated with an increased risk of PPD were studied. The main outcome measures were comparison of the observed PPD rate (EPDS score > 12) to pre-pandemic rate. RESULTS: Of the 164 women included, 27 (16.5% [95%CI: 11.14-23.04]) presented an EPDS score > 12 either at 10 days or 6-8 weeks postpartum. This rate was similar to the one of 15% reported prior to the pandemic (p = 0.6). Combined EPDS> 12 or PPQ > 6 scores were observed in 20.7% of the mothers [95%CI: 14.8-0.28]. Maternal hypertension/preeclampsia (p = 0.007), emergency cesarean section (p = 0.03), and neonatal complications (p = 0.008) were significantly associated with an EPDS> 12 both in univariate and multivariate analysis (OR = 10 [95%CI: 1.5-68.7], OR = 4.09[95%CI: 1.2-14], OR = 4.02[95%CI: 1.4-11.6], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of major PPD in our population did not increase during the first lockdown period. However, 20.7% of the women presented with post-traumatic/depressive symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04366817.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Communicable Disease Control , Depression, Postpartum , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/psychology , Depression, Postpartum/psychology , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Interpersonal Relations , Male , Mother-Child Relations , Pregnancy , Prospective Studies , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Risk Factors
11.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ; 22(1): 227, 2022 Mar 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2038677

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Postpartum depression and maternal-infant attachment scores were examined in uninfected women during the COVID 19 pandemic in Kutahya, a rural province in Turkey's North Aegean region. METHODS: This cohort study was conducted in the Kutahya Health Sciences University Hospital obstetrics unit between April 2021 and August 2021. 178 low-risk term pregnant women who gave birth were given the surveys Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale and Mother-to-Infant Bonding Scale (MIBQ) 6 weeks after birth. The Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale was used to determine postpartum depression and the Mother-to-Infant Bonding Scale was used to determine maternal attachment. RESULTS: In this study, the postpartum depression rate was calculated as 17.4%. When depressed and non-depressed patients were compared, education level, maternal age, BMI, MIBQ score, history of previous pregnancies, route of delivery, previous operation history, economic status, employment status and pregnancy follow-up information were found to be similar (p > 0.05). The ratings on the Mother-to-Infant Bonding Scale were found to be similar in depressed and non-depressed patients (p > 0.05). The odds of maternal depression for patients who received guests at home was 3.068 (95%CI [1.149-8.191]) times the odds of patients who did not receive guests at home. CONCLUSIONS: Although a relationship has been found between accepting guests in the postpartum period and postpartum depression, it is necessary to investigate in further studies whether there is a causal relationship.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Depression, Postpartum/epidemiology , Mother-Child Relations/psychology , Adult , Cohort Studies , Female , Home Environment , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Object Attachment , Pregnancy , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Rural Population , Social Determinants of Health , Sociodemographic Factors , Turkey/epidemiology
12.
Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci ; 29: e173, 2020 Sep 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2016492

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/psychology , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Mental Health/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/psychology , Adult , Alcohol-Related Disorders/epidemiology , Alcohol-Related Disorders/etiology , Anxiety Disorders/epidemiology , Anxiety Disorders/etiology , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Czech Republic/epidemiology , Depressive Disorder, Major/epidemiology , Depressive Disorder, Major/etiology , Female , Humans , Male , Mental Disorders/etiology , Middle Aged , Mood Disorders/epidemiology , Mood Disorders/etiology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Prevalence , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , SARS-CoV-2 , Suicide/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires
13.
Gen Hosp Psychiatry ; 79: 1-6, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2007710

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study systematically examines risk for postpartum depressive symptoms based on COVID-19 positivity status during pregnancy. METHODS: This is a retrospective matched cohort study of pregnant patients admitted to labor and delivery units from March through December 2020. Patients were administered three depression screening questions followed by the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS). RESULTS: 129 patients with positive COVID-19 tests (most with mild symptoms) were matched with 516 COVID-19 negative controls. We found no significant differences in rates of positive responses to screening questions (14/129, 10.9% vs. 72/516, 14.0%; p = .35) or EPDS scores >9 (6/97, 6.2% vs. 42/410, 10.2%; p = .22). Prior history of psychiatric illness was the only significant predictor of an EPDS score > 9 (adjOR 2.57, p = .002) or a positive brief screen for postpartum depressive symptoms (adjOR 2.93, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences in the rates for postpartum depressive symptoms were observed among pregnant women with and without a positive COVID-19 test during pregnancy, suggesting that testing positive for COVID-19 during pregnancy was not associated with an increased risk for the development of depressive symptoms during the acute postpartum period. Overall rates of postpartum depression symptoms were low, perhaps owing to the higher socioeconomic status of the sample.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Depression, Postpartum , Pregnancy , Humans , Female , Pregnant Women , Depression/diagnosis , Depression/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Retrospective Studies , Tertiary Healthcare , COVID-19/epidemiology , Depression, Postpartum/diagnosis , Depression, Postpartum/epidemiology , Postpartum Period , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales
15.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(16)2022 08 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1987761

ABSTRACT

We aimed to explore the reliability and validity of viral anxiety rating scales (developed for the general population) among healthcare workers. In addition, we compared the psychometric properties of rating scales in accordance with the Generalized Anxiety Scale-7 items (GAD-7) during this COVID-19 pandemic. The viral anxiety of 330 healthcare workers was measured with Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemics-9 items (SAVE-9), SAVE-6, Coronavirus Anxiety Scale (CAS), Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S), and COVID-19 Anxiety Scale (CAS-7). Factor analyses, item response theory, and Rasch model analyses were conducted to confirm the construct validities of the scales and compare the psychometric properties of rating scales. The receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis examined the cutoff scores of rating scales in accordance with a mild degree of generalized anxiety. The SAVE-9, SAVE-6, CAS, FCV-19S, and CAS-7 scales showed good reliability of internal consistency among healthcare workers. Their construct validity and convergent validity of each scale were similarly good. Furthermore, in comparing the psychometric properties of rating scales, we observed that the CAS scale was the most discriminating and difficult among the scales. The CAS and FCV-19S provided more information and were more efficient than the SAVE-9, SAVE-6, and CAS-7 scales when they were used to measure healthcare workers' viral anxiety. Viral anxiety rating scales can be applied to healthcare workers with good reliability and validity.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Anxiety/diagnosis , Anxiety/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel , Humans , Pandemics , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Psychometrics , Reproducibility of Results
16.
Psychosom Med ; 83(4): 368-372, 2021 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1931979

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Infectious diseases can cause psychological changes in patients. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence and related risk factors for anxiety and depression in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed on patients with COVID-19 admitted to the Sino-French New City branch of Wuhan Tongji Hospital from January to February 2020. The Zung Self-Rating Anxiety and Depression Scales were used to evaluate the prevalence of anxiety and depression. Demographic, clinical, and sociological data were also collected. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent risk factors of anxiety and depression in patients with COVID-19. RESULTS: In the current study, 183 patients were enrolled (mean age = 53 ± 9 years; 41.1% women). The prevalences of anxiety and depression were 56.3% and 39.3%, respectively. Logistic regression analysis revealed that older age, female sex, being divorced or widowed, COVID-19 disease duration, renal disease, and depression were identified as independent risk factors for anxiety in patients with COVID-19. Factors that were associated with depression were female sex, being widowed, COVID-19 disease duration, and anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates a high prevalence of anxiety and depression in patients with COVID-19 at the peak of the epidemic in Wuhan, China. The identification of demographic, clinical, and social factors may help identify health care professionals to provide psychological care as part of treatment for patients with COVID-19 and other life-threatening infectious diseases.


Subject(s)
Anxiety/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , Depression/epidemiology , Anxiety/etiology , COVID-19/complications , China/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/etiology , Female , Humans , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Prevalence , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Risk Factors
17.
Psychosom Med ; 83(4): 322-327, 2021 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1931973

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the mental health and psychological responses in Wuhan, a severely affected area, and other areas of China during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted on February 10-20, 2020. A set of online questionnaires was used to measure mental health and responses. A total of 1397 participants from Wuhan (age, 36.4 ± 10.7 years; male, 36.1%) and 2794 age- and sex-matched participants from other areas of China (age, 35.9 ± 9.9 years; male, 39.0%) were recruited. RESULTS: Compared with their counterparts, participants from Wuhan had a significantly higher prevalence of any mental health problems (46.6% versus 32.2%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 1.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.65-2.17), anxiety (15.2% versus 6.2%; adjusted OR = 2.65, 95% CI = 2.14-3.29), depression (18.3% versus 9.7%; adjusted OR = 2.11, 95% CI = 1.74-2.54), suicidal ideation (10.5% versus 7.1%; adjusted OR = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.28-2.02), and insomnia (38.6% versus 27.6%; adjusted OR = 1.70, 95% CI = 1.48-1.96). Participants from Wuhan had a slightly higher rate of help-seeking behavior (7.1% versus 4.2%; adjusted OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.12-2.77) but similar rate of treatment (3.5% versus 2.7%; adjusted OR = 1.23, 95% CI = 0.68-2.24) for mental problems than did their counterparts. In addition, compared with their counterparts, participants from Wuhan gave higher proportions of responses regarding "fearful" (52% versus 36%, p < .001), "discrimination against COVID-19 cases" (64% versus 58%, p = .006), "strictly comply with preventive behaviors" (98.7% versus 96%, p = .003), and "fewer living and medical supplies" (<2 weeks: 62% versus 57%, p = .015). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 epidemic has raised enormous challenges regarding public mental health and psychological responses, especially in the highly affected Wuhan area. The present findings provide important information for developing appropriate strategies for the prevention and management of mental health problems during COVID-19 and other epidemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Mental Health , Adult , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/etiology , China/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/etiology , Epidemics , Female , Humans , Male , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Mental Disorders/etiology , Mental Health/statistics & numerical data , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Suicidal Ideation , Surveys and Questionnaires
18.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(11)2022 05 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1892858

ABSTRACT

Perinatal anxiety affects an estimated 15% of women globally and is associated with poor maternal and infant outcomes. Identifying women with anxiety is essential to prevent these adverse associations, but there are a number of challenges around measurement. We used data from England's 2020 National Maternity Survey to compare the prevalence of anxiety symptoms at six months postpartum using three different measures: the two-item Generalised Anxiety Disorders Scale (GAD-2), the anxiety subscales of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS-3A) and a direct question. The concordance between each pair of measures was calculated using two-by-two tables. Survey weights were applied to increase the representativeness of the sample and reduce the risk of non-response bias. The prevalence of postnatal anxiety among a total of 4611 women was 15.0% on the GAD-2, 28.8% on the EPDS-3A and 17.1% on the direct question. Concordance between measures ranged between 78.6% (95% CI 77.4-79.8; Kappa 0.40) and 85.2% (95% CI 84.1-86.2; Kappa 0.44). Antenatal anxiety was the strongest predictor of postnatal anxiety across all three measures. Women of Black, Asian or other minority ethnicity were less likely to report self-identified anxiety compared with women of White ethnicity (adjusted odds ratio 0.44; 95% CI 0.30-0.64). Despite some overlap, different anxiety measures identify different groups of women. Certain population characteristics such as women's ethnicity may determine which type of measure is most likely to identify women experiencing anxiety.


Subject(s)
Depression, Postpartum , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety Disorders/diagnosis , Anxiety Disorders/epidemiology , Depression, Postpartum/epidemiology , England/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales
19.
PLoS One ; 16(12): e0261874, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1817466

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of mood disorders (MD) during pregnancy is challenging and may bring negative consequences to the maternal-fetal binomial. The long waitlist for specialized psychiatric evaluation in Brazil contributes to the treatment omission. Almost 20.0% of women treated with antidepressants have a positive screening for bipolar disorder. Therefore, it has been recommended the investigation of depressive and bipolar disorder during prenatal care. Unfortunately, the screening for mood disorders is not a reality in Brazil and many childbearing women remain undiagnosed. The objective of this study is to observe the frequency of MD and the effectiveness of screening scales for routine use by health professionals during prenatal care in high-risk pregnancies. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: This cross-sectional study included 61 childbearing women in their second trimester who were interviewed using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) and the Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ). The cut-off point was EPDS ≥ 13 and MDQ ≥ 7 and the SCID-5 was the gold standard diagnosis. MD were diagnosed in 24.6% of the high-risk pregnancies. EDPS was positive in 19.7% and the frequency of major depression was 8.2%. 16.4% of the childbearing women were diagnosed with bipolar disorder, while MDQ was positive in 36.1%. 11.5% of the women had EPDS and MDQ positive. EPDS sensitivity was 80.0% and specificity 92.1%, whereas MDQ presented a sensitivity of 70.0% and specificity of 70.6%. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: There is a high prevalence of MD in high-risk pregnancies. The routine use of EPDS simultaneously to MDQ during antenatal care is effective and plays an important role in early diagnosis, counselling, and promotion of perinatal mental health.


Subject(s)
Bipolar Disorder/complications , Bipolar Disorder/diagnosis , Pregnancy Complications/diagnosis , Prenatal Diagnosis/methods , Adult , Brazil , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/complications , Depression/diagnosis , Female , Humans , Mania/complications , Mania/diagnosis , Mass Screening/methods , Predictive Value of Tests , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Trimester, Second , Prenatal Care , Prevalence , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Reproducibility of Results , Sensitivity and Specificity , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult
20.
Ups J Med Sci ; 1262021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1780484

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy at different cut-off values for the Swedish versions of the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15) and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) compared with a structured clinical psychiatric interview in older adults. METHODS: Community-dwelling participants (N = 113) aged 65 years or older completed the Swedish versions of the GDS-15 and PHQ-9 and were then interviewed using the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) to establish the presence or absence of current major depressive episodes (MDEs). Areas under the curve (AUC) were calculated for each scale, as well as the sensitivity, specificity, and Youden's index for different cut-off values. RESULTS: Seventeen participants met the criteria for MDEs. The AUC was 0.97 for the GDS-15 and 0.95 for the PHQ-9. A cut-off of ≥6 on the GDS-15 yielded a sensitivity of 94%, a specificity of 88%, and a Youden's index of 0.82. A cut-off of ≥5 on the PHQ-9 yielded a sensitivity of 100%, a specificity of 81%, and a Youden's index of 0.81. The proposed cut-off of ≥10 on the PHQ-9 produced excellent specificity of 95% but a lower sensitivity of 71%. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that the Swedish versions of the GDS-15 and PHQ-9 have comparable accuracy as screening instruments for older adults with MDEs. However, the proposed cut-off of 10 on the PHQ-9 might be too high when applied to older individuals in Sweden, and further investigations in larger samples in different healthcare settings are warranted.


Subject(s)
Depressive Disorder, Major , Patient Health Questionnaire , Aged , Depression , Depressive Disorder, Major/diagnosis , Humans , Mass Screening , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Sensitivity and Specificity , Sweden
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL