How does COVID stress vary across the anxiety-related disorders? Assessing factorial invariance and changes in COVID Stress Scale scores during the pandemic.

BACKGROUND: No studies have examined whether levels of COVID stress vary across anxiety-related disorders. Likewise, no studies have assessed structural invariance of the COVID Stress Scales (CSS) across clinical diagnoses. We sought to address these issues in the present study. Given the dynamic nature of pandemics, we also assessed whether COVID stress changed from the first to third wave in those with clinical diagnoses and those with no mental health conditions. METHOD: Data were collected during COVID-19 from two independent samples of adults assessed about a year apart (early-mid in 2020, N = 6854; and early-mid 2021, N = 5812) recruited from Canada and the United States through an online survey. Participants provided demographic information, indicated the presence of current (i.e., past-year) anxiety-related or mood disorder, and completed the CSS. RESULTS: The five CSS were reliable (internally consistent), and the five-factor structure was stable across samples. Scores tended to be highest in people with anxiety-related or mood disorders, particularly panic disorder. As expected, scores fluctuated over time, being higher during the early phases of the pandemic when threat was greatest and lower during the later phases, when vaccines were deployed and the COVID-19 threat was reduced. CONCLUSION: The findings add to the growing number of studies supporting the psychometric properties of the CSS. The results encourage further investigations into the utility of the scales, such as their ability to detect treatment-related changes in COVID-19-related distress. The scales also show promise for studies of future pandemics or outbreaks because the CSS can be modified, with minor wording changes, to assess distress associated with all kinds of disease outbreaks.

The Serbian COVID-19 Stress Scale and vaccine acceptance: is there a place for COVID-19-related distress in explaining attitudes towards vaccination?

OBJECTIVES: Previous research has shown that the COVID-19 Stress Scale (CSS), a measure assessing various dimensions of distress related to the COVID-19 pandemic, is associated with self-protective behaviours; however, it remains unknown whether this distress can be used to predict attitudes towards vaccination. The purpose of this study was to validate the Serbian CSS (Serbian-CSS) and to explore its predictive power over and above certain sociodemographic characteristics, individual difference variables (attitudes and personality) and general distress in relation to COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. STUDY DESIGN: An online cross-sectional study was conducted that targeted users of different social network groups at the beginning of the public COVID-19 vaccination programme in Serbia. METHODS: A large, online study sample (N = 3129) provided self-reported data on COVID-19-related distress, health and sociodemographic indicators, individual difference variables and attitudes towards vaccination. RESULTS: The Serbian-CSS is a valid and reliable instrument that assesses six dimensions of COVID-19 distress. The strongest predictors of vaccine acceptance were attitudes towards immigrants (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31, 0.41), followed by education (AOR = 1.51, 95% CI 1.27, 1.88) and prepandemic mental health issues (AOR = 1.61, 95% CI 1.30, 2.01). CONCLUSIONS: The level of distress measured by the CSS had a non-substantial contribution to vaccine acceptance, which is probably because of the mild level of distress that was observed at the time of assessment. Public health messaging that relies on the distribution of information is not sufficient to address strongly held beliefs against vaccination. The study provides a benchmark for future cross-cultural research regarding negative affective states associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Persian COVID stress scales (Persian-CSS) and COVID-19-related stress reactions in patients with obsessive-compulsive and anxiety disorders.

The COVID Stress Scales (CSS) were designed to assess stress related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Emerging evidence indicates that people with anxiety disorders (ADs) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) may be more negatively impacted by COVID-19 than those with mood disorders or healthy individuals. Accordingly, this study sought to validate the Persian CSS (Persian-CSS) and to compare COVID-19-related stress reactions among patients with specific ADs and OCD. Patients with OCD (n = 300) and ADs (n = 310) completed the Persian-CSS and other scales developed to assess anxiety-related traits and COVID-19-related distress. The Persian-CSS replicated a five-factor structure similar to the original CSS in OCD and ADs. The total CSS and its scales had good reliability and validity. Patients with generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder, and OCD had higher COVID-19 stress reactions than patients with social anxiety disorder and specific phobia. Patients with panic disorder had higher danger and contamination fears and xenophobia than patients with OCD. The study suggests that the Persian-CSS is a valid scale to be used in patients with OCD and ADs, each of whom differs in their specific patterns of COVID-19-related stress reactions.

Online and Recovery-Oriented Support Groups Facilitated by Peer Support Workers in Times of COVID-19: Protocol for a Feasibility Pre-Post Study.

BACKGROUND: In times of pandemics, social distancing, isolation, and quarantine have precipitated depression, anxiety, and substance misuse. Scientific literature suggests that patients living with mental health problems or illnesses (MHPIs) who interact with peer support workers (PSWs) experience not only the empathy and connectedness that comes from similar life experiences but also feel hope in the possibility of recovery. So far, it is the effect of mental health teams or programs with PSWs that has been evaluated. OBJECTIVE: This paper presents the protocol for a web-based intervention facilitated by PSWs. The five principal research questions are whether this intervention will have an impact in terms of (Q1) personal-civic recovery and (Q2) clinical recovery, (Q3) how these recovery potentials can be impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, (Q4) how the lived experience of persons in recovery can be mobilized to cope with such a situation, and (Q5) how sex and gender considerations can be taken into account for the pairing of PSWs with service users beyond considerations based solely on psychiatric diagnoses or specific MHPIs. This will help us assess the impact of PSWs in this setting. METHODS: PSWs will lead a typical informal peer support group within the larger context of online peer support groups, focusing on personal-civic recovery. They will be scripted with a fixed, predetermined duration (a series of 10 weekly 90-minute online workshops). There will be 2 experimental subgroups-patients diagnosed with (1) psychotic disorders (n=10) and (2) anxiety or mood disorders (n=10)-compared to a control group (n=10). Random assignment to the intervention and control arms will be conducted using a 2:1 ratio. Several instruments will be used to assess clinical recovery (eg, the Recovery Assessment Scale, the Citizenship Measure questionnaire). The COVID-19 Stress Scales will be used to assess effects in terms of clinical recovery and stress- or anxiety-related responses to COVID-19. Changes will be compared between groups from baseline to endpoint in the intervention and control groups using the Student paired sample t test. RESULTS: This pilot study was funded in March 2020. The protocol was approved on June 16, 2020, by the Research Ethics Committees of the Montreal Mental Health University Institute. Recruitment took place during the months of July and August, and results are expected in December 2020. CONCLUSIONS: Study results will provide reliable evidence on the effectiveness of a web-based intervention provided by PSWs. The investigators, alongside key decision makers and patient partners, will ensure knowledge translation throughout, and our massive open online course (MOOC), The Fundamentals of Recovery, will be updated with the evidence and new knowledge generated by this feasibility study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04445324; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04445324. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/22500.

Prevalence of Stress in Healthcare Professionals during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Northeast Mexico: A Remote, Fast Survey Evaluation, Using an Adapted COVID-19 Stress Scales.

The world is currently subjected to the worst health crisis documented in modern history: an epidemic led by the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). At the epicenter of this crisis, healthcare professionals continue working to safeguard our well-being. To the regular high levels of stress, COVID-19 adds even more so to healthcare professionals in particular, depending on their area, specialty, and type of work. Here we investigated what are the tendencies or areas most affected. Through an adaptation of the original COVID-stress scales, we developed a remote, fast test designed for healthcare professionals in the northeastern part of Mexico, an important part of the country with economic and cultural ties to the United States. Our results showed four key correlations as highly dependent: work area-xenophobia (p < 0.045), work with COVID patients-traumatic stress (p < 0.001), total number of COVID patients per day-traumatic stress (p < 0.027), and total number of COVID patients-compulsive checking and reassurance. Overall, we concluded that normal levels of stress have increased (mild-moderate). Additionally, we determine that the fear of being an asymptomatic patient (potential to spread without knowing) continues being a concern.