RESUMEN
Brazil has been severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic with one of the largest numbers of youth impacted by school closure globally. This longitudinal online survey assessed emotional problems in children and adolescents aged 5-17 years living in Brazil during the COVID-19 pandemic. Recruitment occurred between June to November 2020 and participants were invited for follow-up assessments every 15 days until June 2021. Participants were 5795 children and adolescents living across the country with mean age of 10.7 (SD 3.63) years at recruitment; 50.5% were boys and 69% of white ethnicity. Weighted prevalence rates of anxiety, depressive and total emotional symptoms at baseline were 29.7%, 36.1% and 36%, respectively. Longitudinal analysis included 3221 (55.6%) participants and revealed fluctuations in anxiety and depressive symptoms during one year follow-up, associated with periods of social mobility and mortality. Emotional problems significantly increased in July and September 2020 and decreased from December 2020 to February 2021 and then significantly increased in May 2021 relative to June 2020. Older age, feeling lonely, previous diagnosis of mental or neurodevelopmental disorder, previous exposure to traumatic events or psychological aggression, parental psychopathology, and sleeping less than 8/h a day were associated with increased rates of anxiety and depressive symptoms at baseline and over time. Food insecurity and less social contact with family and peers were associated with baseline anxiety and depressive symptoms, and lowest socio-economic strata, chronic disease requiring treatment and family members physically ill due to COVID-19 were associated with increasing rates over time. The pandemic severely affected youth, particularly those from vulnerable populations and in moments of increased mortality and decreased social mobility. Results underscore the need for allocation of resources to services and the continuous monitoring of mental health problems among children and adolescents.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Electronic clinical decision support tools (eCDS) are increasingly available to assist General Practitioners (GP) with the diagnosis and management of a range of health conditions. It is unclear whether the use of eCDS tools has an impact on GP workload. This scoping review aimed to identify the available evidence on the use of eCDS tools by health professionals in general practice in relation to their impact on workload and workflow. METHODS: A scoping review was carried out using the Arksey and O'Malley methodological framework. The search strategy was developed iteratively, with three main aspects: general practice/primary care contexts, risk assessment/decision support tools, and workload-related factors. Three databases were searched in 2019, and updated in 2021, covering articles published since 2009: Medline (Ovid), HMIC (Ovid) and Web of Science (TR). Double screening was completed by two reviewers, and data extracted from included articles were analysed. RESULTS: The search resulted in 5,594 references, leading to 95 full articles, referring to 87 studies, after screening. Of these, 36 studies were based in the USA, 21 in the UK and 11 in Australia. A further 18 originated from Canada or Europe, with the remaining studies conducted in New Zealand, South Africa and Malaysia. Studies examined the use of eCDS tools and reported some findings related to their impact on workload, including on consultation duration. Most studies were qualitative and exploratory in nature, reporting health professionals' subjective perceptions of consultation duration as opposed to objectively-measured time spent using tools or consultation durations. Other workload-related findings included impacts on cognitive workload, "workflow" and dialogue with patients, and clinicians' experience of "alert fatigue". CONCLUSIONS: The published literature on the impact of eCDS tools in general practice showed that limited efforts have focused on investigating the impact of such tools on workload and workflow. To gain an understanding of this area, further research, including quantitative measurement of consultation durations, would be useful to inform the future design and implementation of eCDS tools.