Protective and Non-Protective Factors of Mental Health Distress in the United States during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review.

Background and objectives: Health care organizations continue to respond to the COVID-19 global pandemic and an ongoing array of related mental health concerns. These pandemic-related challenges continue to be experienced by both the U.S. population and those abroad. Materials and methods: This systematic review queried three research databases to identify applicable studies related to protective and non-protective factors of mental health distress experienced during the pandemic within the United States. Results: Three primary factors were identified as protective factors, potentially helping to moderate the incidence of mental distress during the pandemic: demographics, personal support/self-care resources, and income/financial concerns. Researchers also identified these same three constructs of non-protective factors of mental health distress, as well as two additional variables: health/social status and general knowledge/government mistrust. Conclusions: This systematic review has identified protective and non-protective factors of mental health distress experienced in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic (to date) that can further assist medical providers in the U.S. and beyond as the pandemic and related mental health concerns continue at a global level.

Influences of reopening businesses and social venues: COVID-19 incidence rate in East Texas county.

As the on-going severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic, we aimed to understand whether economic reopening (EROP) significantly influenced coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) incidence. COVID-19 data from Texas Health and Human Services between March and August 2020 were analysed. COVID-19 incidence rate (cases per 100 000 population) was compared to statewide for selected urban and rural counties. We used joinpoint regression analysis to identify changes in trends of COVID-19 incidence and interrupted time-series analyses for potential impact of state EROP orders on COVID-19 incidence. We found that the incidence rate increased to 145.1% (95% CI 8.4-454.5%) through 4th April, decreased by 15.5% (95% CI -24.4 -5.9%) between 5th April and 30th May, increased by 93.1% (95% CI 60.9-131.8%) between 31st May and 11th July and decreased by 13.2% (95% CI -22.2 -3.2%) after 12 July 2020. The study demonstrates the EROP policies significantly impacted trends in COVID-19 incidence rates and accounted for increases of 129.9 and 164.6 cases per 100 000 populations for the 24- or 17-week model, respectively, along with other county and state reopening ordinances. The incidence rate decreased sharply after 12th July considering the emphasis on a facemask or covering requirement in business and social settings.

An update on emergency contraception.

Emergency contraception decreases the risk of unintended pregnancy after unprotected sexual intercourse or after suspected failure of routine contraception (e.g., a condom breaking). Oral methods include combined contraceptive pills (i.e., Yuzpe method), single- or split-dose levonorgestrel, and ulipristal. The Yuzpe method and levonorgestrel are U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved for use 72 hours postcoitus, whereas the newest method, ulipristal, is approved for up to 120 hours postcoitus. The copper intrauterine device may be used as emergency contraception up to seven days after unprotected intercourse. It is nonhormonal and has the added benefit of long-term contraception. Advanced provision of emergency contraception may be useful for all patients, and for persons using ulipristal because it is available only by prescription. Physicians should counsel patients on the use and effectiveness of emergency contraception, the methods available, and the benefits of routine and consistent contraception use.