Changes in emergency psychiatric consultations in time of COVID-19: a retrospective observational study in the Verona Academic Hospital over the two pandemic years 2020-2021.

BACKGROUND: During the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic, local health authorities in most Italian regions prescribed a reduction of ordinary outpatient and community mental health care. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on access to the emergency departments (ED) for psychiatric consultation in the pandemic years 2020 and 2021 compared to 2019. METHODS: This is a retrospective study conducted by using routinely collected administrative data of the two EDs of the Verona Academic Hospital Trust (Verona, Italy). All ED psychiatry consultations registered from 01.01.2020 to 31.12.2021 were compared with those registered in the pre-pandemic year (01.01.2019 to 31.12.2019). The association between each recorded characteristic and the year considered was estimated by chi-square or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: A significant reduction was observed between 2020 and 2019 (-23.3%) and between 2021 and 2019 (-16.3%). This reduction was most evident in the lockdown period of 2020 (-40.3%) and in the phase corresponding to the second and third pandemic waves (-36.1%). In 2021, young adults and people with diagnosis of psychosis showed an increase in requests for psychiatric consultation. CONCLUSIONS: Fear of contagion may have been an important factor in the overall reduction in psychiatric consultations. However, psychiatric consultations for people with psychosis and for young adults increased. This finding underlines the need for mental health services to implement alternative outreach strategies aimed to support, in times of crisis, these vulnerable segments of the population.

Effectiveness of a Mindful Compassion Care Program in reducing burnout and psychological distress amongst frontline hospital nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have shown that nurses have been more affected by the COVID-19 pandemic than any other group of hospital workers in terms of anxiety, depression, and burnout. Several clinical studies had previously demonstrated the effectiveness of mindfulness and compassion interventions in reducing burnout and emotional distress amongst healthcare professionals. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A parallel-group randomized controlled trial will assess the feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy of a mindfulness and compassion-focused programme on frontline nurses who had been working during the COVID-19 pandemic. Seventy-two participants will be recruited from Verona University Hospital Trust (Veneto Region, north-east Italy) and will be divided equally into an intervention group and a control group. Primary outcome will be assessed using the Emotional Exhaustion subscale of the Maslach Burnout Inventory General Survey (MBI-GS). Secondary outcomes will be measured by the Cynicism and Professional Efficacy subscales of the MBI-GS, the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), the Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7), the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), the Impact of Stressful Events (IES-R), the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ), and the Forms of Self-Criticising/attacking and Self-Reassuring Scale (FSCRS). DISCUSSION: The study aims to fill a gap in the literature and present a scientifically validated intervention for those healthcare professionals most exposed to the stressful conditions of working during the COVID-19 pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; Identifier: NCT05308537.

The Sustained Psychological Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Health Care Workers One Year after the Outbreak-A Repeated Cross-Sectional Survey in a Tertiary Hospital of North-East Italy.

This study aimed to evaluate the mental health outcomes of health care workers (HCWs) of the Verona academic hospital trust (Italy) one year after the outbreak of COVID-19 and to identify predicted risk factors. A web-based survey was conducted from mid-April to mid-May 2021 on hospital workers one year after the first evaluation performed during the lock-down phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Post-traumatic stress, general anxiety, depression, and burnout were assessed by using, respectively, the impact of event scale (IES-R), the self-rating anxiety scale (SAS), the patient health questionnaire (PHQ-9) and the Maslach burnout inventory-general survey (MBI-GS). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with each of the four mental health outcomes one year after the COVID-19 outbreak. A total of 1033 HCWs participated. The percentage of HCWs scoring above the cut-off increased from 2020 to 2021 in all of the outcome domains (anxiety, 50.1% vs. 55.7, p < 0.05; depression, 26.6% vs. 40.6%, p < 0.001; burnout, 28.6% vs. 40.6%, p < 0.001; chi-square test), with the exception of post-traumatic distress. There was also an increase when stratifying by occupation and workplace, with a greater increase for depression and burnout. Multivariate analysis revealed that, one year after the COVID-19 outbreak, nurses were at the greatest risk of anxiety and depression, whereas residents were at the greatest risk of burnout (in terms of low professional efficacy). Working in intensive care units was associated with an increased risk of developing severe emotional exhaustion and a cynical attitude towards work.

Safety of Psychotropic Medications in People With COVID-19: Evidence Review and Practical Recommendations.

(Reprinted with permission from the BMC Medicine (2020) 18:215).

The psychological impact of COVID-19 among primary care physicians in the province of Verona, Italy: a cross-sectional study during the first pandemic wave.

BACKGROUND: Among healthcare professionals working with COVID-19 patients, general practitioners (GPs) are under considerable pressure and may develop adverse mental health outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To assess mental health outcomes on GPs working during the COVID-19 pandemic and to explore their associations with personal characteristics and features of GP practices. METHODS: Observational cross-sectional study conducted on a sample of GPs working in Verona province (Italy) during the first pandemic wave. Participants were invited to complete a web-based form addressing socio-demographic and work-related information, previous practice organization, practice re-organization during the COVID-19 pandemic, and a set of measures for post-traumatic stress (IES-R), anxiety (SAS), depression (PHQ-9), and burnout (MBI-GS). RESULTS: A total of 215 GPs (38.3% of the eligible population) participated. Overall, 44.7% reported COVID-19-related traumatic events; among these, 35.9% (95% CI, 26%‒46%) developed symptoms of post-traumatic distress. Furthermore, 36% (95% CI, 29%‒43%) reported symptoms of anxiety, 17.9% (95% CI, 12%‒23%) symptoms of at least moderate depression, and 25.4% (95% CI, 19%‒32%) symptoms of burnout. Multivariate regressions showed that being quarantined or admitted for COVID-19 was associated with all the mental health outcomes considered. Being female, working in rural settings, and having less professional experience were associated with higher anxiety and depression. The ability to diagnose COVID-19 increased self-perceived professional efficacy, thus contributing to burnout reduction. CONCLUSION: The high prevalence of adverse mental health outcomes among GPs during the pandemic highlights the importance of timely interventions in this population and promoting targeted preventive actions in the event of future healthcare crises.

Levels of burn-out among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic and their associated factors: a cross-sectional study in a tertiary hospital of a highly burdened area of north-east Italy.

OBJECTIVE: To determine burn-out levels and associated factors among healthcare personnel working in a tertiary hospital of a highly burdened area of north-east Italy during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Observational study conducted from 21 April to 6 May 2020 using a web-based questionnaire. SETTING: Research conducted in the Verona University Hospital (Veneto, Italy). PARTICIPANTS: Out of 2195 eligible participants, 1961 healthcare workers with the full range of professional profiles (89.3%) completed the survey. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Levels of burn-out, assessed by the Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Survey (MBI-GS). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with burn-out in each MBI-GS dimension (emotional exhaustion, EX; professional efficacy, EF; cynicism, CY). RESULTS: Overall, 38.3% displayed high EX, 46.5% low EF and 26.5% high CY. Burn-out was frequent among staff working in intensive care units (EX 57.0%; EF 47.8%; CY 40.1%), and among residents (EX 34.9%; EF 63.9%; CY 33.4%) and nurses (EX 49.2%; EF 46.9%; CY 29.7%). Being a resident increased the risk of burn-out (by nearly 2.5 times) in all the three MBI subscales and being a nurse increased the risk of burn-out in the EX dimension in comparison to physicians. Healthcare staff directly engaged with patients with COVID-19 showed more EX and CY than those working in non-COVID wards. Finally, the risk of burn-out was higher in staff showing pre-existing psychological problems, in those having experienced a COVID-related traumatic event and in those having experienced interpersonal avoidance in the workplace and personal life. CONCLUSIONS: Burn-out represents a great concern for healthcare staff working in a large tertiary hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact is more burdensome for front-line junior physicians. This study underlines the need to carefully address psychological well-being of healthcare workers to prevent the increase of burn-out in the event of a new COVID-19 healthcare emergency.

Correction to: Safety of psychotropic medications in people with COVID-19: evidence review and practical recommendations.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

Safety of psychotropic medications in people with COVID-19: evidence review and practical recommendations.

BACKGROUND: The novel coronavirus pandemic calls for a rapid adaptation of conventional medical practices to meet the evolving needs of such vulnerable patients. People with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) may frequently require treatment with psychotropic medications, but are at the same time at higher risk for safety issues because of the complex underlying medical condition and the potential interaction with medical treatments. METHODS: In order to produce evidence-based practical recommendations on the optimal management of psychotropic medications in people with COVID-19, an international, multi-disciplinary working group was established. The methodology of the WHO Rapid Advice Guidelines in the context of a public health emergency and the principles of the AGREE statement were followed. Available evidence informing on the risk of respiratory, cardiovascular, infective, hemostatic, and consciousness alterations related to the use of psychotropic medications, and drug-drug interactions between psychotropic and medical treatments used in people with COVID-19, was reviewed and discussed by the working group. RESULTS: All classes of psychotropic medications showed potentially relevant safety risks for people with COVID-19. A set of practical recommendations was drawn in order to inform frontline clinicians on the assessment of the anticipated risk of psychotropic-related unfavorable events, and the possible actions to take in order to effectively manage this risk, such as when it is appropriate to avoid, withdraw, switch, or adjust the dose of the medication. CONCLUSIONS: The present evidence-based recommendations will improve the quality of psychiatric care in people with COVID-19, allowing an appropriate management of the medical condition without worsening the psychiatric condition and vice versa.