Pain paths among post-COVID-19 condition subjects: A prospective cross-sectional study with in-person evaluation.

BACKGROUND: New-onset chronic pain has been acknowledged as part of the post-COVID-19 condition. However, available fine-grained data about its clinical phenotype, trajectories and main associated characteristics remain scarce. We described the distinct temporal evolutions of post-COVID-19 pain and their epidemiological and phenotypical features. METHODS: A prospective cross-sectional study enrolled post-COVID-19 condition patients (i.e. who had persisting COVID-19-related symptoms over 30 days since their first positive laboratory test), whose COVID-19 diagnosis had been supported by RT-PCR of oral/nasopharyngeal swab or serology. They underwent in-person evaluations with a structured interview, pain and quality-of-life-related questionnaires and thorough physical examination. Chronic pain (CP) and probable neuropathic pain (NP) were defined according to IASP criteria. RESULTS: The present study included 226 individuals, 177 (78.3%) of whom presented over 3 months since their first COVID-19 symptom. New-onset pain occurred in 170 (75.2%) participants and was chronic in 116 (68.2%). A chronic course was associated with COVID-19-related hospitalization, new-onset fatigue, lower cognitive performance, motor and thermal sensory deficits, mood and sleep impairments and overall lower quality-of-life levels. Probable NP occurred in only 7.6% new-onset pain patients, and was associated with pain chronification, new-onset fatigue, motor and thermal sensory deficits, mechanical allodynia and lower rates of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Previous CP was reported by 86 (38.1%) individuals and had aggravated after the infection in 66 (76.7%) of them, which was associated with orthostatic hypotension. CONCLUSIONS: Post-COVID pain phenomena follow different paths, which are associated with specific clinical and epidemiological features, and possibly distinct underlying mechanisms, prognostic and therapeutic implications. SIGNIFICANCE: COVID-19-related pain usually follows a chronic course and is non-neuropathic. Its possible courses and phenotypes are associated with distinct clinical and epidemiological features. This suggests differing underlying mechanisms, which may have significant prognostic and therapeutic implications.

Association between chemosensory impairment with neuropsychiatric morbidity in post-acute COVID-19 syndrome: results from a multidisciplinary cohort study.

Preliminary methodologically limited studies suggested that taste and smell known as chemosensory impairments and neuropsychiatric symptoms are associated in post-COVID-19. The objective of this study is to evaluate whether chemosensory dysfunction and neuropsychiatric impairments in a well-characterized post-COVID-19 sample. This is a cohort study assessing adult patients hospitalized due to moderate or severe forms of COVID-19 between March and August 2020. Baseline information includes several clinical and hospitalization data. Further evaluations were made using several different reliable instruments designed to assess taste and smell functions, parosmia, and neuropsychiatric disorders (using standardized psychiatric and cognitive measures). Out of 1800 eligible individuals, 701 volunteers were assessed on this study. After multivariate analysis, patients reporting parosmia had a worse perception of memory performance (p < 0.001). Moderate/severe hypogeusia was significantly associated with a worse performance on the word list memory task (p = 0.012); Concomitant moderate/severe olfactory and gustatory loss during the acute phase of COVID-19 was also significantly associated with episodic memory impairment (p = 0.006). We found a positive association between reported chemosensory (taste and olfaction) abnormalities and cognition dysfunction in post-COVID-19 patients. These findings may help us identify potential mechanisms linking these two neurobiological functions, and also support the speculation on a possible route through which SARS-CoV-2 may reach the central nervous system.

Working from home, work-time control and mental health: Results from the Brazilian longitudinal study of adult health (ELSA-Brasil).

This cross-sectional study investigated the association between work-time control (WTC), independently and in combination with hours worked (HW), and four mental health outcomes among 2,318 participants of the Longitudinal Study of Adult Health (ELSA-Brasil) who worked from home during the COVID-19 pandemic. WTC was assessed by the WTC Scale, and mental health outcomes included depression, anxiety, stress (measured by the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale, DASS-21), and self-rated mental health. Logistic regression models were used to determine odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Among women, long HW were associated with stress (OR = 1.56; 95% CI = 1.11-2.20) and poor self-rated mental health (OR = 1.64; 95% CI = 1.13-2.38), whereas they were protective against anxiety among men (OR = 0.59; 95% CI = 0.37-0.93). In both sexes, weak WTC was associated with all mental health outcomes. Among women, the long HW/weak WTC combination was associated with all mental health outcomes, and short HW/weak WTC was associated with anxiety and stress. Among men, long HW/strong WTC was protective against depression and stress, while short HW/strong WTC and short HW/weak WTC was associated with all mental health outcomes. In both sexes, weak WTC, independently and in combination with HW, was associated with all mental health outcomes. WTC can improve working conditions, protect against mental distress, and fosterwork-life balance for those who work from home.

Trajectories of common mental disorders symptoms before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: findings from the ELSA-Brasil COVID-19 Mental Health Cohort.

AIM: Evidence indicates most people were resilient to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health. However, evidence also suggests the pandemic effect on mental health may be heterogeneous. Therefore, we aimed to identify groups of trajectories of common mental disorders' (CMD) symptoms assessed before (2017-19) and during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2021), and to investigate predictors of trajectories. METHODS: We assessed 2,705 participants of the ELSA-Brasil COVID-19 Mental Health Cohort study who reported Clinical Interview Scheduled-Revised (CIS-R) data in 2017-19 and Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21 (DASS-21) data in May-July 2020, July-September 2020, October-December 2020, and April-June 2021. We used an equi-percentile approach to link the CIS-R total score in 2017-19 with the DASS-21 total score. Group-based trajectory modeling was used to identify CMD trajectories and adjusted multinomial logistic regression was used to investigate predictors of trajectories. RESULTS: Six groups of CMD symptoms trajectories were identified: low symptoms (17.6%), low-decreasing symptoms (13.7%), low-increasing symptoms (23.9%), moderate-decreasing symptoms (16.8%), low-increasing symptoms (23.3%), severe-decreasing symptoms (4.7%). The severe-decreasing trajectory was characterized by age < 60 years, female sex, low family income, sedentary behavior, previous mental disorders, and the experience of adverse events in life. LIMITATIONS: Pre-pandemic characteristics were associated with lack of response to assessments. Our occupational cohort sample is not representative. CONCLUSION: More than half of the sample presented low levels of CMD symptoms. Predictors of trajectories could be used to detect individuals at-risk for presenting CMD symptoms in the context of global adverse events.

Association of Everyday Discrimination With Depressive Symptoms and Suicidal Ideation During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the All of Us Research Program.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has coincided with an increase in depressive symptoms as well as a growing awareness of health inequities and structural racism in the United States. Objective: To examine the association of mental health with everyday discrimination during the pandemic in a large and diverse cohort of the All of Us Research Program. Design, Setting, and Participants: Using repeated assessments in the early months of the pandemic, mixed-effects models were fitted to assess the associations of discrimination with depressive symptoms and suicidal ideation, and inverse probability weights were applied to account for nonrandom probabilities of completing the voluntary survey. Main Outcomes and Measures: The exposure and outcome measures were ascertained using the Everyday Discrimination Scale and the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), respectively. Scores for PHQ-9 that were greater than or equal to 10 were classified as moderate to severe depressive symptoms, and any positive response to the ninth item of the PHQ-9 scale was considered as presenting suicidal ideation. Results: A total of 62 651 individuals (mean [SD] age, 59.3 [15.9] years; female sex at birth, 41 084 [65.6%]) completed at least 1 assessment between May and July 2020. An association with significantly increased likelihood of moderate to severe depressive symptoms and suicidal ideation was observed as the levels of discrimination increased. There was a dose-response association, with 17.68-fold (95% CI, 13.49-23.17; P < .001) and 10.76-fold (95% CI, 7.82-14.80; P < .001) increases in the odds of moderate to severe depressive symptoms and suicidal ideation, respectively, on experiencing discrimination more than once a week. In addition, the association with depressive symptoms was greater when the main reason for discrimination was race, ancestry, or national origins among Hispanic or Latino participants at all 3 time points and among non-Hispanic Asian participants in May and June 2020. Furthermore, high levels of discrimination were as strongly associated with moderate to severe depressive symptoms as was history of prepandemic mood disorder diagnosis. Conclusions and Relevance: In this large and diverse sample, increased levels of discrimination were associated with higher odds of experiencing moderate to severe depressive symptoms. This association was particularly evident when the main reason for discrimination was race, ancestry, or national origins among Hispanic or Latino participants and, early in the pandemic, among non-Hispanic Asian participants.

Dimensions of emotional distress among Brazilian workers in a COVID-19 reference hospital: A factor analytical study.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is an unprecedented challenge for public health and has caused the loss of millions of lives worldwide. Hospital workers play a key role in averting the collapse of the health system, but the mental health of many has deteriorated during the pandemic. Few studies have been devoted to identifying the needs of workers on frontline duty. AIM: To investigate dimensions of common emotional symptoms and associated predictors among Brazilian workers in a COVID-19 reference hospital. METHODS: This is an observational study of the mental health of professionals in a COVID-19 hospital in the city of São Paulo. We invited all hospital employees to respond to an online survey between July and August 2020, during the first peak of the pandemic. Data of 1000 participants who completed the survey were analyzed (83.9% were women and 34.3% were aged 30 to 40). Hospital workers self-reported the presence of symptoms of depression, anxiety, trauma-related stress, and burnout through the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, the Impact of Event Scale-Revised and the Mini-Z Burnout Assessment respectively. Responses were assembled and subjected to exploratory factor analysis to reveal workers' core emotional distress. Multiple linear regression models were subsequently carried out to estimate the likelihood of dimensions of distress using questions on personal motivation, threatening events, and institutional support. RESULTS: Around one in three participants in our sample scored above the threshold of depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, and burnout. The factor analysis revealed a three-factor structure that explained 58% of the total data variance. Core distressing emotional domains were avoidance and re-experience, depression-anxiety, and sleep changes. Regression analysis revealed that institutional support was a significant protective factor for each of these dimensions (ß range = -0.41 to -0.20, P < 0.001). However, participants' personal motivation to work in healthcare service was not associated with these emotional domains. Moreover, the likelihood of presenting the avoidance and re-experience dimension was associated with having a family member or close friend be hospitalized or die due to COVID-19 and having faced an ethical conflict. CONCLUSION: Distressing emotional domains among hospital workers were avoidance and re-experience, depression and anxiety, and sleep changes. Improving working conditions through institutional support could protect hospital workers' mental health during devastating public health crises.

Post-COVID-19 psychiatric and cognitive morbidity: Preliminary findings from a Brazilian cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: The present study aims to investigate the occurrence of psychiatric and cognitive impairments in a cohort of survivors of moderate or severe forms of COVID-19. METHOD: 425 adults were assessed 6 to 9 months after hospital discharge with a structured psychiatric interview, psychometric tests and a cognitive battery. A large, multidisciplinary, set of clinical data depicting the acute phase of the disease, along with relevant psychosocial variables, were used to predict psychiatric and cognitive outcomes using the 'Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator' (LASSO) method. RESULTS: Diagnoses of 'depression', 'generalized anxiety disorder' and 'post-traumatic stress disorder' were established respectively in 8%, 15.5% and 13.6% of the sample. After pandemic onset (i.e., within the previous year), the prevalence of 'depression' and 'generalized anxiety disorder' were 2.56% and 8.14%, respectively. Memory decline was subjectively reported by 51.1% of the patients. Psychiatric or cognitive outcomes were not associated with any clinical variables related to the severity of acute-phase disease, nor by disease-related psychosocial stressors. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to access rates of psychiatric and cognitive morbidity in the long-term outcome after moderate or severe forms of COVID-19 using standardized measures. As a key finding, there was no significant association between clinical severity in the acute-phase of SARS-CoV-2 infection and the neuropsychiatric impairment 6 to 9 months thereafter.