Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 44
Filter
1.
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
2.
Yonsei Med J ; 63(6): 499-510, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1875397

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Globally, concerns have grown regarding the long-term effects of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) infection. Therefore, we evaluated the long-term course of persistent symptoms and patient quality of life. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective cohort study was conducted at a single tertiary university hospital from August 31, 2020 to March 29, 2021 with adult patients followed at 6 and 12 months after acute COVID-19 symptom onset or diagnosis. Clinical characteristics, self-reported symptoms, EuroQol 5 dimension 5 level (EQ5D-5L) index scores, Korean version of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Korean version of the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist-5 (PCL-5-K), and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) were investigated. Symptom persistent or non-persistent groups were defined according to persistency of COVID-19 related symptoms or signs after acute COVID-19 infection, respectively. RESULTS: Of all 235 patients, 170 (64.6%) patients were eligible for analysis. The median age was 51 (interquartile range, 37-61) years old, and 102 patients were female (60.0%). After 12 months from acute COVID-19 infection, in total, 83 (48.8%) patients still suffered from COVID-19-related symptoms. The most common symptoms included amnesia (24.1%), insomnia (14.7%), fatigue (13.5%), and anxiety (12.9%). Among the five EQ5D-5L categories, the average value of anxiety or depression was the most predominant. PHQ-9 and PCL-5-K scores were statistically higher in the COVID-19-related symptom persistent group than the non-persistent group (p=0.001). However, GAD-7 scores showed no statistical differences between the two groups (p=0.051). CONCLUSION: Neuropsychiatric symptoms were the major COVID-19-related symptoms after 12 months from acute COVID-19 infection, reducing quality of life.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Quality of Life , Adult , Anxiety Disorders/diagnosis , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Quality of Life/psychology
5.
Psicothema ; 34(2): 200-208, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1835640

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The current COVID-19 pandemic is a unique stressor with potentially negative consequences for pregnant and postpartum women. We investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on perinatal depression and anxiety in Spain. METHOD: This cross-sectional study was conducted from June to December 2020. A total of 3,356 adult pregnant and postpartum women (with infants up to 6 months of age) from all Spanish regions were surveyed. The assessment included measures of Coronavirus Perinatal Experiences (COPE-IS questionnaire) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7=10) and Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS=10). RESULTS: The prevalence of perinatal anxiety and depression (above established cut-offs) was 33.3% and 47.2%, respectively; 29.2% of women screened positive for both conditions. Higher rates of perinatal depression and anxiety were associated with increased concern about threats of COVID-19, especially employment and the financial impact, along with increased overall levels of distress. Exposure to COVID-19 and its symptoms did not appear to be a relevant risk factor. More COVID-19-related predictors and a higher rate of depression were found in postpartum women. CONCLUSIONS: The current study highlights the substantial increase in symptoms of perinatal depression and anxiety, especially in postpartum women. Interventions for perinatal mental health should be a priority.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Anxiety/diagnosis , Anxiety Disorders/diagnosis , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Pandemics , Pregnancy , Spain/epidemiology
6.
Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM ; 4(3): 100605, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1783137

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic presents unique social, economic, and psychological challenges for individuals globally. Thus, women who are pregnant face unprecedented mental health challenges. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the impact of the pandemic on perinatal depression and anxiety in a longitudinal pregnancy cohort. We hypothesized increased depression and anxiety scores in women during pregnancy and after birth in the pandemic at all time points. STUDY DESIGN: Participants were enrolled in the Ontario Birth Study, a pregnancy cohort embedded in clinical care at Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Canada. Perinatal depression and anxiety were assessed using the 2-Item Patient Health Questionnaire and 2-Item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire in early pregnancy, whereas the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale and 2-Item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire were used in late pregnancy and after birth. Logistic regression models were created to examine the association of the pandemic with clinically elevated mental health scores in the prepandemic group vs pandemic group while adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: A total of 1159 survey responses from 649 participants between March 1, 2019, and February 28, 2021, were used to conduct this study. Participants were assessed in early pregnancy (n=416), in late pregnancy (n=373), and after birth (n=370). Responses received on or before February 29, 2020, were considered the "prepandemic" responses, whereas responses after the aforementioned date were considered the "pandemic" responses. Mean rank scores of depression and anxiety were significantly higher in the pandemic group (P=.02 and P=.003, respectively) in the postpartum period. There was no significant association between pandemic time and antenatal scores. However, postnatally, mothers were 2.6 times more likely to score ≥13 on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale during the pandemic than before the pandemic (95% confidence interval, 1.2-5.7; P=.02). Adjustment for ethnicity and income strengthened this association as the odds ratio increased to 3.3 (95% confidence interval, 1.4-8.0; P=.007). CONCLUSION: Pandemic-associated increases in depression and anxiety scores were confined to the postpartum period, highlighting a need for increased screening and interventions for perinatal mood and anxiety disorders postnatally as this pandemic continues.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Anxiety/diagnosis , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/etiology , Anxiety Disorders/diagnosis , Anxiety Disorders/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Depression/diagnosis , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/etiology , Female , Humans , Ontario/epidemiology , Pandemics , Parturition , Pregnancy
7.
J Anxiety Disord ; 87: 102554, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1778263

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: No studies have examined whether levels of COVID stress vary across anxiety-related disorders. Likewise, no studies have assessed structural invariance of the COVID Stress Scales (CSS) across clinical diagnoses. We sought to address these issues in the present study. Given the dynamic nature of pandemics, we also assessed whether COVID stress changed from the first to third wave in those with clinical diagnoses and those with no mental health conditions. METHOD: Data were collected during COVID-19 from two independent samples of adults assessed about a year apart (early-mid in 2020, N = 6854; and early-mid 2021, N = 5812) recruited from Canada and the United States through an online survey. Participants provided demographic information, indicated the presence of current (i.e., past-year) anxiety-related or mood disorder, and completed the CSS. RESULTS: The five CSS were reliable (internally consistent), and the five-factor structure was stable across samples. Scores tended to be highest in people with anxiety-related or mood disorders, particularly panic disorder. As expected, scores fluctuated over time, being higher during the early phases of the pandemic when threat was greatest and lower during the later phases, when vaccines were deployed and the COVID-19 threat was reduced. CONCLUSION: The findings add to the growing number of studies supporting the psychometric properties of the CSS. The results encourage further investigations into the utility of the scales, such as their ability to detect treatment-related changes in COVID-19-related distress. The scales also show promise for studies of future pandemics or outbreaks because the CSS can be modified, with minor wording changes, to assess distress associated with all kinds of disease outbreaks.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Adult , Anxiety/diagnosis , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety Disorders/diagnosis , Anxiety Disorders/epidemiology , Depression , Humans , Psychometrics , Stress, Psychological/psychology , United States
8.
Ideggyogy Sz ; 75(3-04): 111-116, 2022 Mar 31.
Article in Hungarian | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1771938

ABSTRACT

Background and purpose: Vaccination refusal is a serious obstacle to minimizing the spread of COVID-19. Nevertheless, the rejection of vaccine can be considered the result of a negative attitude towards medical treatment, and according to our previously published data, it can be influenced by the underlying affective state. Increased incidence of affective disorders and anxiety could be observed globally during the pandemic, which may have a significant impact on vaccination acceptance. The aim of our pilot study was to determine the association between clinical improvement of affective and neurocognitive symptoms and change of drug attitude and health control beliefs in a sample of psychiatric patients. Methods: A data set of 85 patients with psychiatric disorder has been analysed with the use of Patient's Health Belief Questionnaire on Psychiatric Treatment (PHBQPT) with 5 subscales (Negative Aspect of Medication - NA; Positive Aspect of Medication - PA; Doctor health locus of control- Doctor HLOC; Internal HLOC; Psychological Reactance - PR); Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS-Anx; HADS-Dep) and neurocognitive tests, such as the Stroop test and the Trail Making Tests. All the tests were performed before and after a 14 days treatment. Paired t-tests and generalized linear models were performed to assess the associations between the variables. Results: The baseline scores of NA and HADS-Anx correlated significantly (p=0.001) and after two weeks of treatment NA decreased (p=0.001), while Doctor HLOC and Internal HLOC increased (p=0.001 and p=0.006). The patients performance of the neurocognitive tests improved (all p<0.05). The reduction of HADS-Anx (p=0.002) and HADS-Dep (p=0.006) scores showed significant associations with the decrease of NA. Increase of the PA score was associated with reduction of HADS-Dep (p=0.028). Improvement of neurocognitive functions had no effect on PHBQPT scores. Conclusion: Important conclusions can be drawn regarding the rejection of the COVID-19 vaccine based on the associations found between the intensity of affective and anxiety symptoms and the attitude towards treatment. Our findings suggest that affective symptoms have a negative influence on the attitude towards treatment and that the improvement of these symptoms can facilitate the acceptance of the therapy, regardless of diagnosis. The modest effect of the improvement of neurocognitive functioning on the attitude towards drugs and the significant role of affective-emotional factors suggest that the accep-tance of vaccination probably cannot be facilitated solely with the aid of educational programs. Considering the increasing incidence of affective disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic, the screening of affective and anxiety symptoms and treatment of these disorders could be an important step towards the acceptance of the vaccine. Although psychiatry is not considered as a frontline care unit of the COVID cases, more attention is needed to pay on the availability of mental health services because refuse of vaccine can develop due to affective disorders too.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Anxiety Disorders/diagnosis , Anxiety Disorders/epidemiology , Anxiety Disorders/psychology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Humans , Pandemics , Pilot Projects
10.
Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J ; 22(1): 82-90, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1737468

ABSTRACT

Objectives: This study aimed to assess the anxiety and depression symptoms in healthcare professionals in Pakistan as a result of the coronavirus pandemic. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted from May to June 2020 and included six different hospitals in Pakistan. An English-language demographics questionnaire, a validated COVID-19 fear scale, depression scale PHQ-9 and anxiety scale GAD-7 were sent to doctors, nurses and paramedical staff via WhatsApp. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, Chi-square test and Student's t-test. Results: A total of 400 participants were included in this study (response rate: 80.0%); 263 (65.8%) were doctors and 137 (34.3%) were nurses and paramedical staff. Of the participants, 57.0% were less than 40 years old and 18.3% were aged above 50. Most of the participants (n = 262; 65.5 %) experienced moderate levels of fear and 16.5% (n = 66) experienced a high level of fear. Moreover, 19.5% feared death and 56.5% reported social media to be responsible for increasing their fears. On the depression PHQ-9 and anxiety GAD-7 scales, 21.8% (n = 87) reported moderate to severe depression and anxiety symptoms. A significant relationship was demonstrated between the depression level and age, education and profession (P <0.001 each). Similarly, anxiety and depression scores were strongly related to the availability of personal protective equipment (P <0.001). Conclusion: It was found that 21.8% of healthcare professionals are suffering from moderate to severe depression symptoms, 15.5% had moderate to severe anxiety, whereas 65.5% had moderate symptoms of fear. The predictors are age, education level and co-morbidities. These moderate to high levels of fear and anxiety and depression raise concerns about the psychological well-being of healthcare staff and should be addressed through different programmes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Physicians , Adult , Aged , Anxiety Disorders/diagnosis , Anxiety Disorders/psychology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Pakistan/epidemiology
11.
J Psychosom Res ; 155: 110725, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1693209

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare data on mood and anxiety disorders of pregnant women before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The study sample included 253 women evaluated on their first postpartum day during the COVID-19 pandemic. Mood and anxiety disorders were determined by the Structured Clinical Interview for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV). Data from sample was compared with data from previous study that was completed and published prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: The prevalence rate of mood and anxiety disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic was 7.1% and 13.0%, respectively. The most common specific disorder was generalized anxiety disorder (7.1%). Compared to period before the COVID-19 pandemic, the prevalence of mood and anxiety disorders in the current sample was not significantly different. CONCLUSION: Results of this study suggest that pregnant women may have not be under higher risk for mood and anxiety disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to before the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety Disorders/diagnosis , Anxiety Disorders/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Depression/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Mood Disorders/epidemiology , Pregnancy , Pregnant Women , Prevalence
12.
Rehabil Psychol ; 67(2): 179-188, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1655479

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: Emerging research has highlighted sources of magnified stress and trauma for people with disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic, as compared to others in the general population. However, little research has examined the mental health impact of the pandemic on people with disabilities in relation to disability-related stigma, social isolation, and demographic characteristics. The present study therefore sought to identify predictors of depression and anxiety symptoms among U.S. adults with disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESEARCH METHOD/DESIGN: Data were collected online between October and December 2020. U.S. adults with disabilities (n = 441) completed self-report measures of depression, anxiety, psychosocial processes, and a range of demographic and disability characteristics. RESULTS: In our sample, 61.0% and 50.0% of participants met criteria for a probable diagnosis of major depressive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder, respectively. Participants also experienced significantly higher levels of disability-related stigma and social isolation compared to prepandemic norms. Hierarchical regression analyses identified higher social isolation, presence of chronic pain, younger age, higher disability-related stigma, and higher worries about contracting COVID-19 as significant predictors of both depression and anxiety symptoms. CONCLUSION/IMPLICATIONS: This study highlights important demographic and psychosocial predictors of mental health risks for people with disabilities in the context of COVID-19. Findings further underscore the need to attend to those at elevated risk within the disability community as rehabilitation professionals, disability organizations, and policy makers work to support people with disabilities in postpandemic recovery and create a more equitable response to ongoing and future public health crises. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Depressive Disorder, Major , Disabled Persons , Adult , Anxiety/diagnosis , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety Disorders/diagnosis , Anxiety Disorders/epidemiology , Depression/diagnosis , Depression/epidemiology , Depressive Disorder, Major/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
13.
Telemed J E Health ; 26(12): 1461-1465, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1639432

ABSTRACT

Objective: During the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, telemedicine has been brought to the forefront of attention. This report aimed to assess psychiatric comorbidities in COVID-19 patients by utilizing telepsychiatry. Methods: COVID-19 patients admitted in Fasa University Hospital and nonhospitalized outpatients of Fasa city were interviewed by a psychiatrist through video chat for a 1-month period (March-April, 2020). Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder Assessment (GAD-7), and Perceived Stress Scale-14 (PSS 14) questionnaires were administered for all patients. Each patient's mental status was recorded, and if any psychiatric problem was diagnosed, supportive psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy, and follow-up visits based on the patient's condition were started. Result: From a total of 82 COVID-19 patients who entered the study, 32 (39.03%) and 50 (60.97%) subjects were inpatients and outpatients, respectively. Moreover, 32 (39.03%) subjects were male and 50 (60.97%) were female. Insomnia seen in 24 (29.3%) patients and adjustment disorder in 13 (15.9%) patients were the most common psychiatric disorders among a total of 33 (40.2%) patients suffering from mental illness. Female and hospitalized patients presented significantly more frequent comorbidities than males and outpatients. Conclusions: Psychiatric disorders were significantly more common in patients with hospital admission than those without and more frequent in female versus male subjects. There were no significant differences between male and female subjects with and without admission according to the PHQ-9, GAD-7, and PSS-14 scores. It was concluded that telepsychiatry in the early stages of mental problems during a catastrophic event like the coronavirus pandemic, can be an efficient instrument for the screening of psychosomatic comorbidities, so that pharmacological treatment (considering possible drug interactions with COVID-19 medications) and psychotherapeutic intervention can be optimized by psychiatrists.


Subject(s)
Anxiety Disorders/diagnosis , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/psychology , Inpatients/statistics & numerical data , Outpatients/statistics & numerical data , Telemedicine/methods , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Iran/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Sex Factors , Video Recording/statistics & numerical data
14.
Arch Sex Behav ; 51(1): 355-364, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1630254

ABSTRACT

We examined depression and anxiety prior to and during COVID-19 restrictions in Australian gay and bisexual men (GBM). In an online cohort, a COVID-19-focused survey was conducted in April 2020. During 2019 and in April 2020, 664 GBM completed the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9, measuring depression) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder Assessment (GAD-7, measuring anxiety). Increased depression and anxiety were defined as a ≥ 5 point increase on the respective scales. Mean PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores increased between 2019 and 2020 (PHQ-9: from 5.11 in 2019 to 6.55 in 2020; GAD-7: from 3.80 in 2019 to 4.95 in 2020). The proportion of participants with moderate-severe depression (PHQ-9 ≥ 10) increased from 18.8% (n = 125) to 25.5% (n = 169), while the proportion of participants with moderate-severe anxiety (GAD-7 ≥ 10) increased from 12.7% (n = 84) to 17.3% (n = 115). Almost one-quarter of participants (n = 158, 23.8%) had increased depression; in these men, mean PHQ-9 increased from 2.49 in 2019 to 11.65 in 2020 (p < 0.001). One-in-five (20.6%) participants (n = 137) had increased anxiety; among these men, mean GAD-7 increased from 2.05 in 2019 to 10.22 in 2020 (p < 0.001). Increases were associated with concerns about job security, reduction in social and sexual connections and opportunities, and being personally concerned about COVID-19 itself. COVID-19 appeared to have a sudden and pronounced impact on depression and anxiety in Australian GBM, with a significant minority showing sharp increases. Ongoing monitoring is required to determine longer-term impacts and GBM need access to appropriate and sensitive supports both during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Sexual and Gender Minorities , Anxiety/diagnosis , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety Disorders/diagnosis , Anxiety Disorders/epidemiology , Australia/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Depression/diagnosis , Depression/epidemiology , Humans , Male , Pandemics , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
15.
J Psychiatr Res ; 147: 79-84, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1611884

ABSTRACT

Little is known about the effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on mental health compared with other respiratory infections. Thus, the aim of this retrospective cohort study was to investigate whether COVID-19 diagnosis is associated with a significant increase in the incidence of depression and anxiety disorder in patients followed in general practices in Germany compared with acute upper respiratory infection diagnosis. This study included all patients diagnosed with symptomatic or asymptomatic COVID-19 for the first time in 1198 general practices in Germany between March 2020 and May 2021. Patients diagnosed with acute upper respiratory infection were matched to those with COVID-19 using propensity scores based on sex, age, index month, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. The index date corresponded to the date on which either COVID-19 or acute upper respiratory infection was diagnosed. Differences in the incidence of depression and anxiety disorder between the COVID-19 and the acute upper respiratory infection group were studied using conditional Poisson regression models. This study included 56,350 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and 56,350 patients diagnosed with acute upper respiratory infection (52.3% women; mean [SD] age 43.6 [19.2] years). The incidence of depression (IRR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.95-1.10) and anxiety disorder (IRR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.83-1.07) was not significantly higher in the COVID-19 group than in the upper respiratory infection group. Compared with acute upper respiratory infection diagnosis, COVID-19 diagnosis was not associated with a significant increase in the incidence of depression and anxiety disorder in patients treated in general practices in Germany.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety Disorders/diagnosis , Anxiety Disorders/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Depression/diagnosis , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/etiology , Female , Germany/epidemiology , Humans , Incidence , Male , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
16.
PLoS One ; 16(12): e0261590, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1598523

ABSTRACT

This study investigated the reliability and factorial validity of General Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) in the context of university students in Bangladesh. The research aimed to assess whether the original one-dimensional model or a model containing both somatic and cognitive-emotional factors is appropriate. A repeated cross-sectional survey design based on convenience sampling was used to collect data from 677 university students. The factor structure of the GAD-7 was assessed by exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and its convergent validity was determined by investigating its correlations with Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety-Depression Scale (PHQ-ADS). Results showed excellent reliability of GAD-7 as measured by Cronbach's α. CFA suggested that a modified one-factor model is appropriate for the sample. This model provided high values of comparative fit index (CFI), goodness of fit index (GFI), and Tucker Lewis Index (TLI), low value of standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) and a non-significant root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA). Correlation between GAD-7 and PHQ-9 was 0.751 and 0.934 between GAD-7 and PHQ-ADS. Overall, the study provided support for modified unidimensional structure for GAD-7 and showed high internal consistency along with good convergent validity.


Subject(s)
Anxiety Disorders/diagnosis , Anxiety Disorders/psychology , Patient Health Questionnaire , Psychometrics/methods , Adolescent , Adult , Bangladesh , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depressive Disorder/diagnosis , Depressive Disorder/psychology , Female , Humans , Male , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder/diagnosis , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder/psychology , Reproducibility of Results , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/diagnosis , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/psychology , Students/psychology , Universities , Young Adult
17.
18.
Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci ; 25(22): 7127-7134, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1552079

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The anxiety of life that comes with the pandemic process increases the health anxiety and the level of perceived stress. However, there are uncertainties about which individuals are more sensitive. This study aims to investigate the effects of alexithymic characteristics on health anxiety and perceived stress. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The authors invited the participants to study via social media and e-mail. The data of 793 individuals, aged 18-65, collected over the internet (Google Forms) between November and December 2020 were statistically evaluated. Evaluations were made with the sociodemographic data form, the General Health Questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12), the Health Anxiety Scale (HAS), the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20), and the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS). RESULTS: In mediation analyzes between TAS subscales and HAS, Difficulty in Identifying Feelings (DIF) most strongly predicted HAS (B=0.469, p<0.001) and indirectly affected HAS only through GHQ (CS: 0.08, B=0.108, SE:0.021, CI: 0.070, 0.153). However, both PSS (CS: 0.0128, B=0.084, SE:0.027, CI: 0.032, 0.139) and GHQ (CS: 0.02, B=0.139, SE:0.028, CI: 0.090, 0.198) played a mediating role between Difficulty Describing Feelings (DDF) and HAS. CONCLUSIONS: The present study suggests that individuals with alexithymic features are more sensitive to stress during periods of health-related increased stress, such as pandemics, and that individuals with alexithymic features should be given priority in psychotherapeutic interventions.


Subject(s)
Affective Symptoms/psychology , Anxiety Disorders/psychology , COVID-19/psychology , Adult , Affective Symptoms/diagnosis , Affective Symptoms/therapy , Anxiety Disorders/diagnosis , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Internet/instrumentation , Male , Middle Aged , Psychotherapy/methods , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Surveys and Questionnaires , Turkey/epidemiology
20.
Pediatr Ann ; 50(11): e446-e448, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1512790

ABSTRACT

Anxiety is incredibly common and even normal as a waxing and waning dominant emotion for children. However, attention to disruptive symptoms that prevent daily functioning or prevent a child from thriving is within the purview of the general pediatric medical home. We review diagnosis, current tools readily accessible to every pediatrician, and treatment approaches, with special sensitivity to pandemic-related barriers and outcomes related to pediatric anxiety disorders. More than ever, the general pediatrician should be prepared to co-manage anxiety disorders with an interprofessional mental health team. [Pediatr Ann. 2021;50(11):e446-e448.].


Subject(s)
Anxiety Disorders/diagnosis , Anxiety Disorders/therapy , Anxiety/psychology , COVID-19/psychology , Anxiety Disorders/psychology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Emotions , Humans , Pandemics
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL