Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 64
Filter
1.
Psychol Med ; 51(11): 1952-1954, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1882703

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Due to the drastic surge of COVID-19 patients, many countries are considering or already graduating health professional students early to aid professional resources. We aimed to assess outbreak-related psychological distress and symptoms of acute stress reaction (ASR) in health professional students and to characterize individuals with potential need for interventions. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study of 1442 health professional students at Sichuan University, China. At baseline (October 2019), participants were assessed for childhood adversity, stressful life events, internet addiction, and family functioning. Using multivariable logistic regression, we examined associations of the above exposures with subsequent psychological distress and ASR in response to the outbreak. RESULTS: Three hundred and eighty-four (26.63%) participants demonstrated clinically significant psychological distress, while 160 (11.10%) met the criterion for a probable ASR. Individuals who scored high on both childhood adversity and stressful life event experiences during the past year were at increased risks of both distress (ORs 2.00-2.66) and probable ASR (ORs 2.23-3.10), respectively. Moreover, internet addiction was associated with elevated risks of distress (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.60-2.64) and probable ASR (OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.50-3.10). By contrast, good family functioning was associated with decreased risks of distress (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.33-0.55) and probable ASR (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.33-0.69). All associations were independent of baseline psychological distress. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that COVID-19 related psychological distress and high symptoms burden of ASR are common among health professional students. Extended family and professional support should be considered for vulnerable individuals during these unprecedented times.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Psychological Distress , Stress Disorders, Traumatic, Acute/epidemiology , Students, Health Occupations/psychology , Adverse Childhood Experiences/psychology , Adverse Childhood Experiences/statistics & numerical data , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/psychology , China/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/psychology , Family Relations/psychology , Humans , Internet Addiction Disorder/epidemiology , Internet Addiction Disorder/psychology , Logistic Models , Multivariate Analysis , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Stress Disorders, Traumatic, Acute/psychology , Stress, Psychological/epidemiology , Stress, Psychological/psychology
3.
Ann Am Thorac Soc ; 18(10): 1685-1692, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1448592

ABSTRACT

Rationale: Restriction or prohibition of family visiting intensive care units (ICUs) during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic poses substantial barriers to communication and family- and patient-centered care. Objectives: To understand how communication among families, patients, and the ICU team was enabled during the pandemic. The secondary objectives were to understand strategies used to facilitate virtual visiting and associated benefits and barriers. Methods: A multicenter, cross-sectional, and self-administered electronic survey was sent (June 2020) to all 217 UK hospitals with at least one ICU. Results: The survey response rate was 54%; 117 of 217 hospitals (182 ICUs) responded. All hospitals imposed visiting restrictions, with visits not permitted under any circumstance in 16% of hospitals (28 ICUs); 63% (112 ICUs) of hospitals permitted family presence at the end of life. The responsibility for communicating with families shifted with decreased bedside nurse involvement. A dedicated ICU family-liaison team was established in 50% (106 ICUs) of hospitals. All but three hospitals instituted virtual visiting, although there was substantial heterogeneity in the videoconferencing platform used. Unconscious or sedated ICU patients were deemed ineligible for virtual visits in 23% of ICUs. Patients at the end of life were deemed ineligible for virtual visits in 7% of ICUs. Commonly reported benefits of virtual visiting were reducing patient psychological distress (78%), improving staff morale (68%), and reorientation of patients with delirium (47%). Common barriers to virtual visiting were related to insufficient staff time, rapid implementation of videoconferencing technology, and challenges associated with family members' ability to use videoconferencing technology or access a device. Conclusions: Virtual visiting and dedicated communication teams were common COVID-19 pandemic innovations addressing the restrictions to family ICU visiting, and they resulted in valuable benefits in terms of patient recovery and staff morale. Enhancing access and developing a more consistent approach to family virtual ICU visits could improve the quality of care, both during and outside of pandemic conditions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Communication , Critical Care , Cross-Sectional Studies , Family , Humans , Intensive Care Units , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom
4.
Health Promot Chronic Dis Prev Can ; 41(5): 141-152, 2021 05 12.
Article in English, French | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1310337

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a disproportionate impact on vulnerable populations, including individuals with chronic pain. We examined associations between geographical variations in COVID-19 infection rates, stress and pain severity, and investigated factors associated with changes in pain status and psychological distress among individuals living with chronic pain during the pandemic. METHODS: This investigation is part of a larger initiative, the Chronic Pain & COVID-19 Pan-Canadian Study, which adopted a cross-sectional observational design. A total of 3159 individuals living with chronic pain completed a quantitative survey between 16 April and 31 May 2020. RESULTS: Two-thirds (68.1%) of participants were between 40 and 69 years old, and 83.5% were women. Two-thirds (68.9%) of individuals reported worsened pain since pandemic onset. Higher levels of perceived pandemic-related risks (adjusted odds ratio: 1.27; 95% confidence interval: 1.03-1.56) and stress (1.21; 1.05-1.41), changes in pharmacological (3.17; 2.49-4.05) and physical/psychological (2.04; 1.62-2.58) pain treatments and being employed at the beginning of the pandemic (1.42; 1.09-1.86) were associated with increased likelihood of reporting worsened pain. Job loss (34.9% of individuals were employed pre-pandemic) was associated with lower likelihood (0.67; 0.48-0.94) of reporting worsened pain. Almost half (43.2%) of individuals reported moderate/severe levels of psychological distress. Negative emotions toward the pandemic (2.14; 1.78-2.57) and overall stress (1.43; 1.36-1.50) were associated with moderate/severe psychological distress. CONCLUSIONS: Study results identified psychosocial factors to consider in addition to biomedical factors in monitoring patients' status and facilitating treatment access for chronic pain patients during a pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , Chronic Pain/psychology , Psychological Distress , Stress, Psychological/epidemiology , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/prevention & control , Canada , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Self Concept , Socioeconomic Factors
5.
J Family Med Prim Care ; 10(4): 1503-1507, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1244281

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the global population significantly and has resulted in physiological, psychological, social, and behavioral changes among the individuals. The prominent mental health effects of COVID-19 on the general and clinical populations have been well recognized. The family physicians and primary care practitioners from various disciplines are likely to encounter patients who are experiencing psychological distress manifested in the form of anxiety, depression, stress, insomnia, increased substance use, or other symptoms. This narrative review is aimed to present a bird's eye view of the psychological impact of COVID-19 on the general population and the various tools that are used to evaluate them. Besides, we intend to suggest a set of tools/questionnaires that can be used by the family physicians and primary care practitioners for generating data on the psychological impact of this pandemic.

6.
J Headache Pain ; 22(1): 41, 2021 May 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1238702

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) bring about a range of psychological distress and symptom deterioration to headache patients especially to some migraineurs. Compared to migraineurs or normal control, medication overuse headache (MOH) patients are more likely to experience a worse psychological distress and poorer outcome in non-COVID-19 time. However, in COVID-19 pandemic, whether MOH patients would have greater physical and mental symptom deterioration or worse relief of headache symptoms and medications overuse remained unclear. We aim to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on MOH patients to guide for a better management in this study. METHODS: We enrolled MOH patients who were diagnosed and treated at headache clinic of West China Hospital. Information of the pre-pandemic 3 months period and COVID-19 pandemic period was collected. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were performed to identify independent factors associated with changes in headache symptoms and drug withdrawal. RESULTS: Seventy-eight MOH patients were enrolled into the study ultimately. In comparison to pre-pandemic period, fewer MOH patients reported decreased headache days, intensity and days with acute medications per month during the pandemic. Available access to regular prophylactic medications was significantly associated with a reduction of at least 50% in headache days and decrease in headache intensity per month with respective odds ratios of 39.19 (95% CI 3.75-409.15, P = 0.002) and 10.13 (95% CI 2.33-44.12, P = 0.002). Following abrupt withdrawal and high educational level were both significant factors in decreasing headache intensity. Male sex was significantly associated with decrease in days with acute medication per month during the pandemic (odds ratios 4.78, 95%CI 1.44-15.87, P = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings reflect that MOH patients experienced a worse relief of headache symptoms and drug withdrawal during the pandemic. Available access to regular prophylactic medications was the significant independent factor for improvement of headache symptoms. Male sex was significantly associated with decreased days with acute medications per month.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Headache Disorders, Secondary , Pharmaceutical Preparations , Analgesics/adverse effects , China/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Headache , Headache Disorders, Secondary/epidemiology , Humans , Male , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
7.
J Psychosom Res ; 147: 110526, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1233506

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 causes psychological distress for patients and their relatives at short term. However, little research addressed the longer-term psychological outcomes in this population. Therefore, we aimed to prospectively assess clinically relevant psychological distress in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and their relatives 90 days after hospital discharge. METHODS: This exploratory, prospective, observational cohort study included consecutive adult patients hospitalized in two Swiss tertiary-care hospitals between March and June 2020 for confirmed COVID-19 and their relatives. The primary outcome was psychological distress defined as clinically relevant symptoms of anxiety and/or depression measured with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) 90 days after discharge. RESULTS: Clinically relevant psychological distress 90 days after hospital discharge was present in 23/108 patients (21.3%) and 22/120 relatives (18.3%). For patients, risk and protective factors associated with clinically relevant psychological distress included sociodemographic, illness-related, psychosocial, and hospital-related factors. A model including these factors showed good discrimination, with an area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.84. For relatives, relevant risk factors were illness-related, psychosocial, and hospital-related factors. Resilience was negatively associated with anxiety and depression in both patients and relatives and regarding PTSD in relatives only. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 is linked to clinically relevant psychological distress in a subgroup of patients and their relatives 90 days after hospitalization. If confirmed in an independent and larger patient cohort, knowledge about these potential risk and protective factors might help to develop preventive strategies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Hospitalization , Adult , COVID-19/therapy , Cohort Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Stress, Psychological/psychology
8.
Int J Clin Pract ; 75(8): e14319, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1223493

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The impact of lockdown measures can be widespread, affecting both clinical and psychosocial aspects of health. This study aims to assess changes in health services access, self-care, behavioural, and psychological impact of COVID-19 and partial lockdown amongst diabetes patients in Singapore. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey amongst people with diabetes with the Diabetes Health Profile-18 (DHP-18). Hierarchical regression analyses were performed for each DHP-18 subscale (Psychological Distress, Disinhibited Eating and Barriers to Activity) as dependent variables in separate models. RESULTS: Among 301 respondents, 45.2% were women, 67.1% of Chinese ethnicity, 24.2% were aged 40 to 49 years, 68.4% have Type 2 diabetes and 42.2% on oral medications alone. During the pandemic and the lockdown, nearly all respondents were able to receive care safely from the clinics they attend (94%) and obtain their medications and diabetes equipment and supplies (97%) when needed. Respondents reported less frequent engagement in physical activity (38%), checking of blood pressure (29%) and blood glucose (22%). Previous diagnosis of mental health conditions (ß = 9.33, P = .043), Type 1 diabetes (ß = 12.92, P = .023), number of diabetes-related comorbidities (ß = 3.16, P = .007) and Indian ethnicity (ß = 6.65, P = .034) were associated with higher psychological distress. Comorbidities were associated with higher disinhibited eating (ß = 2.49, P = .014) while ability to reach their doctor despite not going to the clinic is negatively associated with psychological distress (ß = -9.50 P = .002) and barriers to activity (ß = -7.53, P = .007). CONCLUSION: Health services access were minimally affected, but COVID-19 and lockdown had mixed impacts on self-care and management behaviours. Greater clinical care and attention should be provided to people with diabetes with multiple comorbidities and previous mental health disorders during the pandemic and lockdown.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Self-Management , Communicable Disease Control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/therapy , Female , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Singapore
9.
PLoS One ; 16(5): e0250590, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1216956

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Due to the dramatic measures accompanying isolation and the general uncertainty and fear associated with COVID-19, patients and relatives may be at high risk for adverse psychological outcomes. Until now there has been limited research focusing on the prevalence of psychological distress and associated factors in COVID-19 patients and their relatives. The objective of our study was to assess psychological distress in COVID-19 patients and their relatives 30 days after hospital discharge. METHODS: In this prospective observational cohort study at two Swiss tertiary-care hospitals we included consecutive adult patients hospitalized between March and June 2020 for a proven COVID-19 and their relatives. Psychological distress was defined as symptoms of anxiety and/or depression measured with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), i.e., a score of ≥8 on the depression and/or anxiety subscale. We further evaluated symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), defined as a score of ≥1.5 on the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R). RESULTS: Among 126 included patients, 24 (19.1%) had psychological distress and 10 (8.7%) had symptoms of PTSD 30 days after hospital discharge. In multivariate logistic regression analyses three factors were independently associated with psychological distress in patients: resilience (OR 0.82; 95%CI 0.71 to 0.94; p = 0.005), high levels of perceived stress (OR 1.21; 95%CI 1.06 to 1.38; p = 0.006) and low frequency of contact with relatives (OR 7.67; 95%CI 1.42 to 41.58; p = 0.018). The model showed good discrimination, with an area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.92. Among 153 relatives, 35 (22.9%) showed symptoms of psychological distress, and 3 (2%) of PTSD. For relatives, resilience was negatively associated (OR 0.85; 95%CI 0.75 to 0.96; p = 0.007), whereas perceived overall burden caused by COVID-19 was positively associated with psychological distress (OR 1.72; 95%CI 1.31 to 2.25; p<0.001). The overall model also had good discrimination, with an AUC of 0.87. CONCLUSION: A relevant number of COVID-19 patients as well as their relatives exhibited psychological distress 30 days after hospital discharge. These results might aid in development of strategies to prevent psychological distress in COVID-19 patients and their relatives.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Family/psychology , Psychological Distress , Adult , Aged , Area Under Curve , COVID-19/pathology , COVID-19/virology , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Discharge , Prevalence , Prospective Studies , ROC Curve , Resilience, Psychological , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Socioeconomic Factors , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/diagnosis , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/epidemiology , Stress, Psychological
10.
Neurol Sci ; 43(1): 341-348, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1216224

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The psychological impact of the COVID-19 outbreak and lockdown on frail populations with advanced Parkinson disease (APD) and their caregivers may present with peculiar features and require specific interventions. METHODS: We enrolled here 100 APD patients and 60 caregivers. Seventy-four patients were treated with device-aided therapies (DAT) and 26 with standard medical treatment (SMT). Through a telephonic interview, subjects underwent the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-A; HADS-D), and an ad hoc questionnaire to explore thoughts and emotions related to the pandemic. RESULTS: Depression was observed in 35% of APD patients and anxiety in 39%, with a significant reduction of the latter after the lockdown (p= 0.023). We found a significant correlation between the type of therapy and the HADS-A score (p= 0.004). Patients' main worries were as follows: a possible higher risk of COVID-19 infection (25%), interruption of non-pharmacological treatments (35%), interruption of outpatient clinics (38%), PD complications related to COVID-19 (47%). Patients treated with DAT manifested worries about device-related issues and risk for caregivers' infection. The 40% of caregivers showed anxiety, while the 21.7% of them showed depression. CONCLUSION: Our study reveals a higher prevalence of anxiety and the presence of peculiar worries and needs in APD patients during the pandemic alongside psychological sequelae of their caregivers. These findings are important for neurologists and healthcare services to foster strategies for the management of psychological distress in both patients and caregivers.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Parkinson Disease , Anxiety/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control , Depression/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , Parkinson Disease/epidemiology , Parkinson Disease/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
11.
Multidiscip Respir Med ; 16(1): 750, 2021 Jan 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1211976

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) has adopted the distress thermometer (DT) as one of the best-known distress-screening instruments. We have adopted a modified version of the NCCN distress thermometer. We questioned if this modified DT (m-DT) could be utilized for measuring the prevalence of psychological distress among COVID-19 patients. METHODS: The prospective study included 2 phases; modification of the original DT and its associated problem list (PL), and evaluation of this m-DT in measuring the prevalence of psychological distress among COVID-19 patients. Egyptian adult subjects with suspected or confirmed cases of COVID-19 at 2 University Hospitals were enrolled. Binary logistic regression tests were carried out to explore the association between the m-DT cut-off scores of 4 and the clinical variables. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-nine (60.4%) patients experienced significant distress (m-DT cut off score ≥4). Logistic regression showed that occupation, presence of special habits, length of quarantine time, worry, cough, shortness of breath, and fever, were independent factors associated with significant distress in COVID-19 patients. CONCLUSION: With the modified distress thermometer (m-DT), 60% of Egyptian COVID-19 patients experienced significant distress. This distress was significantly related to age, marital status, occupation, presence or absence of special habits, and length of the quarantine time. With m-DT, the current study had identified worry, being a health-care worker, shortness of breath, fever, length of quarantine time, presence of special habits, and cough as independent factors associated with significant distress in COVID-19 patients. Further studies are warranted.

12.
Front Psychiatry ; 12: 585537, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1211866

ABSTRACT

Objective: Little is known about the factors affecting the recovery of mental health in COVID-19 patients. The purpose of this study is to look into the change of psychological distress and to explore the role of negative appraisals in the improvement of psychological distress in COVID-19 patients after they recovered from the infection. Methods: We conducted a longitudinal survey on patients with COVID-19 infection in Changsha. The 9-item Patient Health scale, the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale, and a newly developed measure, the COVID-19 Impact Scale (CIS) were applied to assess patients' depression, anxiety, and negative appraisal toward COVID-19 infection during their hospitalization and 1 month post-discharge. Results: Seventy-two patients were included in the analysis. A significant decrease in anxiety and depression levels was observed after patients were discharged from hospital. Two meaningful factors of the CIS were extracted based on factor analysis, namely "health impact," and "social impact." The change of social impact explained the 12.7 and 10.5% variance in the depression and anxiety symptom improvement, respectively. Conclusions: Change in negative appraisals, especially the appraisals related to COVID-19 social impact may play a vital role in the relief of psychological distress of infected patients. Therefore, a cognitive and social care perspective might be considered when promoting the mental health recovery and readjustment to society among COVID-19 patients.

13.
Appetite ; 162: 105166, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1196670

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had far reaching consequences on the health and well-being of the general public. Evidence from previous pandemics suggest that bariatric patients may experience increased emotional distress and difficulty adhering to healthy lifestyle changes post-surgery. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine the impact of the novel COVID-19 public health crisis on bariatric patients' self-management post-surgery. METHOD: In a nested-qualitative study, semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 23 post-operative bariatric patients who had undergone Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) at a Canadian Bariatric Surgery Program between 2014 and 2020. A constant comparative approach was used to systematically analyze the data and identify the overarching themes. RESULTS: Participants (n = 23) had a mean age of (48.82 ± 10.03) years and most were female (n = 19). The median time post-surgery was 2 years (range: 6 months-7 years). Themes describing the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on patients' post-bariatric surgery self-management included: coping with COVID-19; vulnerability factors and physical isolation; resiliency factors during pandemic; and valuing access to support by virtual care. The need for patients to access post-operative bariatric care during COVID-19 differed based on gender and socioeconomic status. CONCLUSION: This study showed that the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted patients' ability to self-manage obesity and their mental health in a variety of ways. These findings suggest that patients may experience unique psychological distress and challenges requiring personalized care strategies to improve obesity self-care and overall well-being.


Subject(s)
Bariatric Surgery , COVID-19 , Health Services Accessibility , Self-Management , Adaptation, Psychological , Adult , Canada , Female , Humans , Male , Mental Health , Middle Aged , Obesity/surgery , Pandemics , Psychological Distress , Resilience, Psychological
14.
J Alzheimers Dis ; 80(4): 1705-1712, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1194580

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The social isolation imposed by COVID-19 pandemic can have a major impact on the mental health of dementia patients and their caregivers. OBJECTIVE: We aim to evaluate the neurological decline of patients with dementia and the caregivers' burden during the pandemic. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study. Caregivers of dementia patients following in the outpatient clinic were included. A structured telephone interview composed of the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire (NPI-Q), Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI), Beck Depression (BDI) and Anxiety (BAI) Inventories to address cognitive, behavioral, and functional changes associated with social distancing during the Sars-Cov-2 outbreak. Patients were divided in two groups according to caregivers' report: with perceived Altered Cognition (AC) and Stable Cognition (SC). RESULTS: A total of 58 patients (median age: 57 years [21-87], 58.6%females) and caregivers (median age: 76.5 years [55-89], 79.3%females) were included. Cognitive decline was shown by most patients (53.4%), as well as behavioral symptoms (48.3%), especially apathy/depression (24.1%), and functional decline (34.5%). The AC group (n = 31) presented increased behavioral (67.7%versus 25.9%, p = 0.002) and functional (61.3%versus 3.7%, p < 0.001) changes when compared to the SC group. In the AC group, ZBI, BDI, NPI-Q caregiver distress, and NPI-Q patient's severity of symptoms scores were worse than the SC group (p < 0.005 for all). CONCLUSION: Patients' neuropsychiatric worsening and caregiver burden were frequent during the pandemic. Worsening of cognition was associated with increased caregivers' psychological distress.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Caregivers/psychology , Dementia/psychology , Mental Disorders/psychology , Psychological Distress , Social Isolation/psychology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Caregivers/trends , Cross-Sectional Studies , Dementia/diagnosis , Dementia/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Mental Disorders/diagnosis , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Outpatient Clinics, Hospital/trends , Pandemics , Young Adult
15.
Sci Prog ; 104(2): 368504211010571, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1186460

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic may cause psychological distress, changes in numbers and distributions of patients in spine surgery patients, which all affect the strategies of spine surgery treatment. These changes may be related to the number of new COVID-19 cases per day since they are visual indicators of the changes in the epidemic and are of interest to the public. This descriptive research took the spine surgery department as an example in a Grade-A tertiary hospital in Anhui province, China. The number and distribution of patients from January 24 to April 2, 2020 was collected and compared with the past 5 years. A psychological scale was constructed to assess the psychological distress of patients and the number of new COVID-19 cases per day in Anhui, China was collected each day from January 24 to April 2, 2020. Also, this research compared these variables with the emergency response or the number of new COVID-19 cases per day. All distributions dropped dramatically during first-level emergency response and then back to normal. The psychological distress of patients was relatively higher at the beginning of the outbreak and then gradually returned to normal. The trends between the psychological distress of patients and the number of new COVID-19 cases per day were similar. The number of new COVID-19 cases per day could be used to predict psychological distress, changes in patient numbers and distributions, which was beneficial for the department of spine surgery to adjust its treatment strategy during the epidemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Stress, Psychological/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , COVID-19/virology , China/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification
16.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(15): e25512, 2021 Apr 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1180674

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is no study that has conducted a review or meta-analysis investigating a cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) intervention to patients with COVID19, with the aim of improving their psychological health. Therefore, in order to provide new evidence-based medical evidence for clinical treatment, we undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of CBT in relieving patients' psychological distress and improving quality of life during the COVID-19 epidemic. METHODS: Seven electronic databases including Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, Wanfang Data, Scopus, Science Direct, Cochrane Library will be searched in April 2021 by 2 independent reviewers. For search on PubMed, the following search terms will be used: "COVID-19, 2019 Coronavirus Disease, 2019-nCoV, cognitive behavioral therapy, CBT, cognitive behavioral treatment." In order to achieve a consistency (at least 80%) of extracted items, the data extractors will extract data from a sample of eligible studies. The outcomes include any rating scale describing stress, mood, and quality of life. Review Manager software (v 5.4; Cochrane Collaboration) will be used for the meta-analysis. Two independent reviewers will assess the risk of bias of the included studies at study level. Any disagreements will be discussed and resolved in discussion with a third reviewer. RESULTS: The results of our review will be reported strictly following the PRISMA criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The review will add to the existing literature by showing compelling evidence and improved guidance in clinic settings. OSF REGISTRATION NUMBER: 10.17605/OSF.IO/DCRPJ. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval and patient consent are not required because this study is a literature-based study. This systematic review and meta-analysis will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.


Subject(s)
Affect , COVID-19 , Cognitive Behavioral Therapy/methods , Quality of Life , Stress, Psychological , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , Humans , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Research Design , SARS-CoV-2 , Stress, Psychological/etiology , Stress, Psychological/prevention & control , Systematic Reviews as Topic
17.
BMC Public Health ; 21(1): 670, 2021 04 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1172830

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The aims of this systematic review and meta-analysis are to examine the prevalence of adverse mental health outcomes, both short-term and long-term, among SARS patients, healthcare workers and the general public of SARS-affected regions, and to examine the protective and risk factors associated with these mental health outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of the literature using databases such as Medline, Pubmed, Embase, PsycInfo, Web of Science Core Collection, CNKI, the National Central Library Online Catalog and dissertation databases to identify studies in the English or Chinese language published between January 2003 to May 2020 which reported psychological distress and mental health morbidities among SARS patients, healthcare workers, and the general public in regions with major SARS outbreaks. RESULTS: The literature search yielded 6984 titles. Screening resulted in 80 papers for the review, 35 of which were included in the meta-analysis. The prevalence of post-recovery probable or clinician-diagnosed anxiety disorder, depressive disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among SARS survivors were 19, 20 and 28%, respectively. The prevalence of these outcomes among studies conducted within and beyond 6 months post-discharge was not significantly different. Certain aspects of mental health-related quality of life measures among SARS survivors remained impaired beyond 6 months post-discharge. The prevalence of probable depressive disorder and PTSD among healthcare workers post-SARS were 12 and 11%, respectively. The general public had increased anxiety levels during SARS, but whether there was a clinically significant population-wide mental health impact remained inconclusive. Narrative synthesis revealed occupational exposure to SARS patients and perceived stigmatisation to be risk factors for adverse mental health outcomes among healthcare workers, although causality could not be determined due to the limitations of the studies. CONCLUSIONS: The chronicity of psychiatric morbidities among SARS survivors should alert us to the potential long-term mental health complications of covid-19 patients. Healthcare workers working in high-risk venues should be given adequate mental health support. Stigmatisation against patients and healthcare workers should be explored and addressed. The significant risk of bias and high degree of heterogeneity among included studies limited the certainty of the body of evidence of the review.


Subject(s)
Disease Outbreaks , Mental Disorders , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , Disease Outbreaks/history , History, 21st Century , Humans , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Protective Factors , Risk Factors , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/epidemiology , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/history , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/psychology
18.
Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat ; 17: 885-892, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1167200

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of psychological distress and associated factors among hospitalized patients during the COVID-19 pandemic at three selected hospitals in southwest Ethiopia. METHODS: An institution-based cross-sectional study design was conducted among hospitalized patients during the COVID-19 pandemic at Mizan-Tepi University Teaching Hospital, Tepi General Hospital, and Gebre Tsadik Shawo General Hospital, southwest Ethiopia from May 10 to August 10, 2020. Sample size was computed using a single-proportion formula, and systematic sampling was employed to recruit study participants. Data were collected using a structured interviewer-administered questionnaire. Psychological distress was assessed with the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale, which has been validated in Ethiopia. SPSS 21.0 was used for analysis. Descriptive statistics were calculated to characteristize the study population. Predictors of psychological distress were identified by logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Among the 337 study participants enrolled, about 41% were aged 25-34 years. The overall prevalence of psychological distress was 57.9% (95% CI 52.8%-63.5%). Being female (AOR 3.69, 95% CI 2.08-6.55), having high (AOR 5.45, 95% CI 2.35-12.66) and medium perceived life threat (AOR 3.37, 95% CI 1.75-6.48), poor (AOR 3.97, 95% CI 1.70-9.29) and moderate social support (AOR 3.17, 95% CI 1.36-7.41), and current khat use (AOR 4.16, 95% CI 1.67-10.35) were statistically associated with psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic at P value <0.05. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of psychological distress was high among hospitalized patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study findings highlight the need to develop psychological support strategies to improve mental health and psychological resilience.

19.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(5)2021 03 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1125625

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused an unequally distributed extra workload to hospital personnel and first reports have indicated that especially front-line health care personnel are psychologically challenged. A majority of the Finnish COVID-19 patients are cared for in the Helsinki University Hospital district. The psychological distress of the Helsinki University Hospital personnel has been followed via an electronic survey monthly since June 2020. We report six-month follow-up results of a prospective 18-month cohort study. Individual variation explained much more of the total variance in psychological distress (68.5%, 95% CI 65.2-71.9%) and negative changes in sleep (75.6%, 95% CI 72.2-79.2%) than the study survey wave (1.6%, CI 0.5-5.5%; and 0.3%, CI 0.1-1.2%). Regional COVID-19 incidence rates correlated with the personnel's psychological distress. In adjusted multilevel generalized linear multiple regression models, potentially traumatic COVID-19 pandemic-related events (OR 6.54, 95% CI 5.00-8.56) and front-line COVID-19 work (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.37-2.39) was associated with personnel psychological distress but age and gender was not. While vaccinations have been initiated, creating hope, continuous follow-up and psychosocial support is still needed for all hospital personnel.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Cohort Studies , Finland/epidemiology , Follow-Up Studies , Health Personnel , Humans , Personnel, Hospital , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
20.
Front Psychiatry ; 12: 591026, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1094218

ABSTRACT

Background: Recent studies report that hospital staff at the forefront of caring for COVID-19 patients experience increased psychological distress. To effectively manage the outbreak of COVID-19, China established COVID-19 designated and non-designated hospitals. To date, few studies have examined the impacts of COVID-19 on psychological health of staff working at non-designated hospitals. This study is to explore factors affecting psychological health of non-designated hospital staff in China during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Data were collected through an online questionnaire between February and March 2020. The questionnaire consists of General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-20), Social Support Rating Scale (SSRS), Simplified Coping Style Questionnaire (SCSQ), sociodemographic characteristics, employment history, health status, and contact history of COVID-19. The questionnaire was distributed through hospital WeChat groups and work colleague referrals. A total of 470 non-designated hospital staff members completed the questionnaire. Multiple Linear Regression analysis was used to interpret the associations among social support, coping styles, sociodemographic factors, job roles, and psychological status. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 21.0. Results: The non-designated hospital staff differed significantly in anxiety and depression subscores of the GHQ-20 by their job roles, levels of social support, and history of mental disorders. Staff with medical job roles, good self-reported health status, no previous mental disorders, adequate social support, and positive coping styles scored lower in GHQ-20 total score, which indicated healthier psychological status. Conclusions: The results indicate that history of mental health disorders, non-medical job roles, and inadequate social support are associated with greater psychological distress. Personalized support should be provided to those who are vulnerable and in need of social and psychological support.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL