Symptom severity and well-being of patients with mental illness during the COVID-19 pandemic: a two-wave survey.

PURPOSE OF THE ARTICLE: To examine changes in symptom severity and well-being during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic among individuals with pre-existing mental illness. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In February 2021, we conducted a follow-up questionnaire-based survey among adults with mental illness, who responded to a similar survey on mental health in June 2020. The participants completed the 18-item Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI-18), the five-item World Health Organization Well-Being Index (WHO-5), and 14 questions evaluating worsening or improvement in mental health using the pre-pandemic period as reference. The survey data were merged with sociodemographic and clinical data from the medical records of all invitees to the first survey, enabling analysis of attrition and weighting of the results. RESULTS: A total of 613 of 992 (62%) invitees participated in the follow-up wave of the survey. The weighted mean WHO-5 and BSI-18 scores were 38 and 27, respectively, and did not differ statistically significantly from the first wave. Multivariate logistic regression showed that having a vocational education (skilled worker/craftsman) was positively associated with reporting deterioration in psychological well-being (OR: 2.95, 95%CI: 1.14-7.81), while being unemployed was negatively associated with reporting deterioration in psychological well-being (OR: 0.20, 95%CI: 0.07-0.56) from the first to the second survey wave. The most common reason for self-reported deterioration in mental health was loneliness (70%). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one year into the COVID-19 pandemic, the level of symptoms remained high, whereas the level of psychological well-being remained low among patients with mental illness.

COVID-19 vaccine willingness amongst patients with mental illness compared with the general population.

Patients with mental illness are at an increased risk of COVID-19 infection, morbidity, and mortality, and prioritisation of this group for COVID-19 vaccination programmes has therefore been suggested. Vaccine uptake may, however, be compromised by vaccine hesitancy amongst patients with mental illness, posing a critical public health issue. We conducted two surveys to provide weighted estimates of vaccine willingness amongst patients with mental illness and the general population of Denmark. Vaccine willingness was high in both groups, but slightly lower amongst patients with mental illness (84.8%), compared with the general population (89.5%) (p < .001). Based on these findings, vaccine hesitancy does not appear to be a major barrier for vaccine uptake amongst patients with mental illness in Denmark, but may be so in other countries with lower general vaccine willingness. Replication of the present study in other countries is strongly warranted.

Mental health of patients with mental illness during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown: a questionnaire-based survey weighted for attrition.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with pre-existing mental illness may be particularly vulnerable to the negative impact that the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic seems to have on mental health. Accordingly, the objective of the present study was to assess whether patients with mental illness experienced deterioration in mental health during the COVID-19 lockdown of Denmark in the Spring of 2020. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, questionnaire-based survey coupled with sociodemographic and clinical data from the medical records of all invitees. The latter enabled analysis of attrition and weighting of results. The online questionnaire included the 18-item Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI-18), the five-item World Health Organization Well-Being Index (WHO-5), and 14 questions evaluating worsening or improvement in symptoms during lockdown using the pre-pandemic period as reference. RESULTS: A total of 992 randomly drawn patients with mental illness from the psychiatric services of the Central Denmark Region responded to the questionnaire (response rate = 21.6%). The weighted mean WHO-5 and BSI-18 scores were 38 and 28, respectively. A total of 52% of the respondents reported that their mental health had deteriorated during the lockdown, while 33% reported no change, and 16% reported improvement. The most commonly reported reasons for deterioration were loneliness, disruption of routines, concerns regarding the coronavirus, less contact with family/friends, boredom, and reduced access to psychiatric care. CONCLUSION: More than half of the patients reported worsening of their mental health during the pandemic lockdown. There should be an increased emphasis on ensuring both social and clinical support for individuals with mental illness during pandemics.

Changes in telepsychiatry regulations during the COVID-19 pandemic: 17 countries and regions' approaches to an evolving healthcare landscape.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of telemedicine as a way to reduce COVID-19 infections was noted and consequently deregulated. However, the degree of telemedicine regulation varies from country to country, which may alter the widespread use of telemedicine. This study aimed to clarify the telepsychiatry regulations for each collaborating country/region before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We used snowball sampling within a global network of international telepsychiatry experts. Thirty collaborators from 17 different countries/regions responded to a questionnaire on barriers to the use and implementation of telepsychiatric care, including policy factors such as regulations and reimbursement at the end of 2019 and as of May 2020. RESULTS: Thirteen of 17 regions reported a relaxation of regulations due to the pandemic; consequently, all regions surveyed stated that telepsychiatry was now possible within their public healthcare systems. In some regions, restrictions on prescription medications allowed via telepsychiatry were eased, but in 11 of the 17 regions, there were still restrictions on prescribing medications via telepsychiatry. Lower insurance reimbursement amounts for telepsychiatry consultations v. in-person consultations were reevaluated in four regions, and consequently, in 15 regions telepsychiatry services were reimbursed at the same rate (or higher) than in-person consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirm that, due to COVID-19, the majority of countries surveyed are altering telemedicine regulations that had previously restricted the spread of telemedicine. These findings provide information that could guide future policy and regulatory decisions, which facilitate greater scale and spread of telepsychiatry globally.