Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 144
Filter
1.
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
2.
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
3.
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
4.
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
5.
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
6.
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 , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Object Attachment , Pregnancy , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Rural Population , Social Determinants of Health , Turkey/epidemiology
7.
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
9.
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
10.
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
11.
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
12.
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
13.
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
14.
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
15.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(5)2022 02 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1736907

ABSTRACT

Depression is ranked as the second-leading cause for years lived with disability worldwide. Objective monitoring with a standardized scale for depressive symptoms can improve treatment outcomes. This study evaluates the construct and concurrent validity of the Malay Self-Report Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS-SR16) among Malaysian clinical and community samples. This cross-sectional study was based on 277 participants, i.e., patients with current major depressive episode (MDE), n = 104, and participants without current MDE, n = 173. Participants answered the Malay QIDS-SR16 and were administered the validated Malay Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) for DSM-IV-TR. Factor analysis was used to determine construct validity, alpha statistic for internal consistency, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis for concurrent validity with MINI to determine the optimal threshold to identify MDE. Data analysis provided evidence for the unidimensionality of the Malay QIDS-SR16 with good internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.88). Based on ROC analysis, the questionnaire demonstrated good validity with a robust area under the curve of 0.916 (p < 0.000, 95% CI 0.884-0.948). A cut-off score of nine provided the best balance between sensitivity (88.5%) and specificity (83.2%). The Malay QIDS-SR16 is a reliable and valid instrument for identifying MDE in unipolar or bipolar depression.


Subject(s)
Depressive Disorder, Major , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depressive Disorder, Major/diagnosis , Humans , Malaysia , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Psychometrics , Reproducibility of Results , Self Report
16.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ; 22(1): 191, 2022 Mar 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1736354

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 social restrictions have increased the risk for depression compared to the previous period in Italian women with Low-Risk Pregnancy (LRP). lLess is known about the impact of COVID-19 restrictions on High-Risk Pregnancy (HRP). This study aimed: 1) to explore levels of depression in women who become pregnant before and during COVID-19 pandemic, distinguishing between LRP and HRP; 2) to analyze the impact of COVID-19 restrictions on pregnancy experience in LRP and HRP. METHODS: A before-during COVID-19 pandemic cross-sectional study was carried out on 155 pregnant women (Mean age = 34.18), between 23 and 32 weeks of gestation. 77 women were recruited before COVID-19 pandemic (51.9% LRP; 48.1% HRP) and 78 women were recruited during COVID-19 pandemic (51.3% LRP; 48.7% HRP). HRP group was enrolled during hospitalization for high-risk pregnancy. Participants filled out Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. Moreover, only COVID-19 group answered an open-ended question about the impact of restriction on pregnancy experience. RESULTS: HRP women reported higher levels of depressive symptoms than LRP. No difference emerged for COVID (before/during) but an interaction effect between COVID-19 and obstetric condition was found. The qualitative results showed the impact of restrictions on emotions and concerns. CONCLUSION: Respect to the previous period, LRP women during COVID-19 presented an increased risk for depressive symptoms than HRP. The HRP women during COVID-19 seemed to use hospitalization as a resource to find a social support network with other pregnant women and to be reassured on the clinical ongoing of pregnancy.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Depression/psychology , Pregnancy, High-Risk/psychology , Pregnant Women/psychology , Adult , Cross-Sectional Studies , Emotions , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Italy , Middle Aged , Pregnancy/psychology , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Quality of Health Care , Quarantine/psychology , SARS-CoV-2
17.
BMC Nephrol ; 23(1): 80, 2022 02 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1700434

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused significant psychological distress globally. Our study assessed the prevalence of psychological distress and associated factors during COVID-19 pandemic among kidney transplant recipients and kidney donors. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of 497 participants (325 recipients and 172 donors) was conducted from 1st May to 30th June 2020 in Singapore. The survey questionnaire assessed knowledge levels of COVID-19, socio-demographic data, health status, psychosocial impact of COVID-19, and precautionary behaviors during the pandemic. Psychological distress was defined as having anxiety, depression, or stress measured by the validated Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale-21. Linear regression analyses were used to assess factors associated with higher psychological distress. RESULTS: The prevalence of psychological distress was 14.3% (95% confidence interval: 11.5-17.6%) in the overall population; it was 12.8% (9.79-16.6%) in recipients and 13.4% (9.08-19.6%) in donors with no significant difference (P = 0.67). Younger age (21-49 vs. ≥50 years), unmarried status, non-Singapore citizen, worse health conditions, and worrying about physical and mental health were associated with higher psychological distress. Malays (versus Chinese), taking precautionary measures (hand sanitization), and receiving enough information about COVID-19 were associated with lower psychological distress. No interactions were observed between recipients and donors. CONCLUSIONS: At least one in ten recipients and donors suffer from psychological distress during COVID-19 pandemic. Focused health education to younger adults, unmarried individuals, non-Singapore citizens, and those with poor health status could potentially prevent psychological distress in recipients and donors.


Subject(s)
Anxiety/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , Depression/epidemiology , Psychological Distress , Tissue Donors/psychology , Transplant Recipients/psychology , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Anxiety/ethnology , COVID-19/prevention & control , China/ethnology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/ethnology , Female , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice/ethnology , Health Status , Humans , Kidney Transplantation , Malaysia/ethnology , Male , Marital Status , Middle Aged , Prevalence , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , SARS-CoV-2 , Singapore/epidemiology , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult
18.
PLoS One ; 17(2): e0263888, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1690705

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID Stress Scales (CSS) assess health- and contamination-related distress in the face of a medical outbreak like the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Though the CSS is translated into 21 languages, it has not been validated in a Swedish national sample. AIM: Our general objective is to provide a translation, replication, and validation of the CSS and test its convergent- and discriminant validity in relation to anxiety, health anxiety, depression, and stress in the general Swedish population. We also present latent psychometric properties by modelling based on item response theory. METHODS: Participants consisted of 3044 Swedish adults (> 18 years) from a pre-stratified (gender, age, and education) sample from The Swedish Citizen Panel. Mental health status was assessed by validated instruments, including the CSS, PHQ-4, SHAI-14, and PSS-10. RESULTS: Results indicate that our Swedish translation of CSS has good psychometric properties and consists of 5 correlated factors. DISCUSSION: The CSS is useful either as a unidimensional or multidimensional construct using the CSS scales to measure key facets of pandemic-related stress. CONCLUSIONS: The findings support the cross-cultural validity of the CSS and its potential utility in understanding many of the emotional challenges posed by the current and future pandemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Stress, Psychological/psychology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Discriminant Analysis , Factor Analysis, Statistical , Female , Humans , Least-Squares Analysis , Male , Middle Aged , Regression Analysis , Socioeconomic Factors , Sweden , Young Adult
19.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(3)2022 01 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1686743

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Postpartum depression is commonly experienced by mothers worldwide and is associated with anxiety disorders, parenting stress, and other forms of distress, which may lead to a complex illness condition. Several studies have investigated the risk factors for this disorder, including biological and socio-demographic variables, medical and obstetric factors, and psychological and relational dimensions. The present study aimed to describe the psychological status of mothers up to 12 months postpartum, and to investigate the predictors of depressive symptoms at 12 months postpartum, considering obstetric factors along with psychological and relational variables. METHODS: A sample of 137 women completed a questionnaire composed of a sheet on anamnestic and obstetric information and the following scales: Wijma Delivery Experience Questionnaire; State-Trait Anxiety Inventory; Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale; Parenting Stress Index (Short Form); Dyadic Adjustment Scale; and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. Data were collected at four assessment times: 2-3 days, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months postpartum. RESULTS: Findings showed that the highest percentage of women with clinically significant symptoms of anxiety (state and trait) and depression was found at 12 months postpartum, which indicated that this was the most critical time. The quality of childbirth experience and trait anxiety at three months postpartum emerged as significant predictors of postpartum depression at 12 months. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the importance of providing stable programs (such as educational programs) to mothers in the first year postpartum. Furthermore, because the quality of the childbirth experience is one of the most important predictors of PPD at 12 months postpartum, effort should be made by healthcare professionals to guarantee a positive experience to all women to reduce possible negative long-term consequences of this experience.


Subject(s)
Depression, Postpartum , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/psychology , Depression/psychology , Depression, Postpartum/diagnosis , Female , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Mothers/psychology , Parturition/psychology , Postpartum Period/psychology , Pregnancy , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Risk Factors , Surveys and Questionnaires
20.
Eur J Psychotraumatol ; 13(1): 2022279, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1684419

ABSTRACT

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has imposed fundamental challenges on nearly every area of life. Objective: The purpose of the current study was to expand on the literature on the impact of the pandemic on college students by a) examining domains of impact of the pandemic on psychiatric and alcohol outcomes and b) controlling for pre-pandemic outcomes. Method: Participants included 897 college students (78.6% female) from a larger longitudinal study on college student mental health. Structural equation models were fit to examine how COVID-19 impact (exposure, worry, food/housing insecurity, change in social media use, change in substance use) were associated with PTSD, anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, and alcohol phenotypes. Models were fit to adjust for pre-pandemic symptoms. Results: No effects of COVID-19 exposure remained after adjusting for earlier outcomes. COVID-19 worry predicted PTSD, depression, and anxiety, even after adjusting for earlier levels of outcomes (ß's: .091-.180, p's < .05). Housing/food concerns predicted PTSD, anxiety, and depression symptoms as well as suicidal ideation (ß's: .085-.551, p's < .05) after adjusting for earlier levels of symptoms. Change in media use predicted alcohol consumption (ß's: ± .116-.197, p's < .05). Change in substance use affected all outcomes except suicidality (ß's: .112-.591, p's < .05). Conclusions: Domains of COVID-19 impact had differential effects on mental health and substance outcomes in college students during the first wave of the coronavirus pandemic. Future studies should examine the trajectory of these factors on college student mental health across waves of the pandemic.


Antecedentes: La pandemia de COVID-19 ha impuesto desafíos fundamentales en prácticamente todas las áreas de la vida.Objetivo: El propósito del presente estudio fue ampliar la literatura sobre el impacto de la pandemia en estudiantes universitarios, a) examinando dominios de impacto de la pandemia sobre resultados psiquiátricos y de alcohol, y b) controlando por resultados pre-pandemia.Método: Los participantes incluyeron 897 estudiantes universitarios (78,6% mujeres) de un estudio longitudinal más grande sobre salud mental de estudiantes universitarios. Se ajustaron modelos de ecuaciones estructurales para examinar cómo se asociaba el impacto del COVID-19 (exposición, preocupación, inseguridad de alimentos/habitación, cambio en el uso de medios sociales, cambio en uso de sustancias) con los fenotipos TEPT, ansiedad, depresión, ideación suicida y alcohol. Los modelos se ajustaron por síntomas pre-pandémicos.Resultados: No permanecieron efectos de la exposición al COVID-19 luego de ajustar por resultados previos. La preocupación por el COVID-19 predijo TEPT, depresión y ansiedad incluso luego de ajustar por niveles previos de resultados (ß's: .091­.180, p's < .05). Los problemas de habitación/alimentación predijeron síntomas de TEPT, ansiedad y depresión así como también ideación suicida (ß's: .085­.551, p's < .05) después de ajustar por niveles sintomáticos previos. El cambio en el uso de medios predijo el consumo de alcohol (ß's: ±.116­.197, p's < .05). El cambio en el uso de sustancias afectó a todos los resultados excepto suicidalidad (ß's: .112­.591, p's < .05).Conclusiones: Los dominios de impacto del COVID-19 tuvieron diferentes efectos sobre los resultados de salud mental y uso de sustancias en estudiantes universitarios durante la primera ola de la pandemia de coronavirus. Futuros estudios deberían examinar la trayectoria de esos factores en la salud mental de estudiantes universitarios a través de las olas de la pandemia.


Subject(s)
Alcohol Drinking/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , Mental Disorders/etiology , Students/psychology , Adolescent , Alcohol Drinking/psychology , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/etiology , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/etiology , Female , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/epidemiology , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/etiology , Students/statistics & numerical data , Suicidal Ideation , Universities , Virginia/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL