Can we predict who will be more anxious and depressed in the COVID-19 ward?

Clinical usefulness of the serum levels of neuroinflammatory and lung fibrosis biomarkers in the assessment of cognitive dysfunction in post-COVID19 patients

A growing body of evidence indicates there is an increasing incidence of cognitive dysfunction in patients after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. However, still lack diagnostic tools, which allow us to predict prognosis in such cases and improve the stratification of the disease. This study aims to evaluate the usefulness of the biomarkers that could allow to predict the severity and progression of COVID-19 in patients with post-COVID syndrome and cognitive problems. Data regarding clinical history, pre-existing conditions, chest CT scan, and therapy (remdesivir, steroids) were acquired. A total of 44 patients with hospitalized COVID-19, and healthy controls were enrolled in the investigation, and serum blood was obtained. After 6 months of observations, patients with COVID-19 were divided into two groups: first - without post-COVID syndrome and memory complaints, and second - with post-COVID and cognitive problems. Measurements of YKL-40 and MR-pro-ADM were taken in the serum with enzyme immunoassay kits at the time of admission (visit 1) and 6 months after discharge from the hospital (visit 2). Significantly higher concentrations of YKL-40 were found in patients with COVID-19 as compared to healthy individuals (p = 0.016). Moreover, YKL-40 ratio allowed to differentiate patients with and without post-COVID syndrome (median: 0.94 vs. 1.55, p = 0.004). Additionally, COVID-19 patients with dyspnea presented significantly elevated levels of MR-pro-ADM as compared to the group of COVID-19 survivors without dyspnea (p = 0.015). In the group of patients without post-COVID syndrome, the concentrations of YKL-40 and MR-pro-ADM decreased after treatment as compared to levels before therapy (77 vs. 36 ng/ml and 607 vs. 456 pmol/L). However, in patients with post-COVID syndrome and cognitive problems, the levels of both markers did not alter 6 months after hospital discharge in comparison to basal levels. Furthermore, after dexamethasone treatment the YKL-40 concentrations declined significantly (p = 0.003) in patients with COVID-19. This study demonstrated the predictive usefulness of YKL-40 as an indicator of successful treatment in patients with COVID-19 infection allowing risk stratification of hospitalized patients. It seems that indicators of neuroinflammation might have the potential to track development of cognitive complaints, however, it requires further investigations.

Women's mental health and COVID-19: increased vulnerability and inequalities

Introduction

The impact of COVID-19 on mental health has become a relevant object of research. Studies have demonstrated that women have experienced greater mental health challenges, highlighting the importance of public health systems to address women's specific needs.

Methods

This literature review explores the effects of the coronavirus pandemic on psychological distress among women, aiming to provide a comprehensive understanding of the subject and to explore how these research findings can guide public mental health care responses in crisis settings. A total of 131 studies were analyzed and four dimensions were discussed: study characteristics, factors impacting women's mental health in the pandemic setting, particularities of pregnancy and the postpartum period, and proposed interventions. Most studies exclusively addressed populations of adult women, predominantly during pregnancy and the postpartum period.

Results

Anxiety, depression, and stress were the most common outcomes. Lower education and income, preexisting mental health problems, and living alone or with children were risk factors for higher levels of anxiety and depression.

Discussion

A comprehensive care approach supported by public health policies and focused on intersectional factors, including race, socioeconomic status, and access to resources, is necessary to improve women's mental health care response in future crises.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Management of Mental Health Services for Hospitalized Patients in Sibiu County-Central Region, Romania

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic brought a burden and represented a challenge for the Romanian medical system. This study explored the consequences that COVID epidemiological measures had on the quality of the mental health care provided to hospitalized patients in a regional psychiatric hospital in Romania.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Both patient-level and hospital-level indicators were considered for this comparative retrospective study. On the one hand, we extracted patient-level indicators, such as sociodemographics, diagnosis, admission, and discharge dates for 7026 hospitalized patients (3701 women, average age = 55.14) from hospital records. On the other hand, for the hospital-level indicators, we included indicators referring to the aggregated concept of mental health services, such as case mix index, length of stay, bed occupancy rate and patients' degree of satisfaction. Data extracted covered a period of two years (1 March 2019-28 February 2021) before and during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

We found that, compared to the pre-pandemic period, the pandemic period was marked by a drastic decrease in hospitalized patient admissions, coupled with an increase in emergency-based admissions. Other management indicators, such as the case mix index, the number of cases contracted/performed, and the degree of patient satisfaction, decreased. In contrast, the average length of stay and bed occupancy rate increased.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic, especially in the first year, raised multiple difficult issues for the management of psychiatric hospitals. It imposed an application of strict measures designed to face these new and unprecedented challenges. Our findings offer a detailed snapshot of the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in terms of its impact on mental health services and suggest some future directions. Implications for hospital management are discussed.

Psychosocial changes during COVID-19 lockdown on nursing home residents, their relatives and clinical staff: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Previous works have observed an increase of depression and other psychological disorders on nursing home residents as a consequence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) lockdown; however, there are few studies that have performed a comprehensive evaluation of all people involved in nursing homes environment. The objective of the work was to analyse the impact of lockdown on psychosocial factors of nursing home residents, relatives and clinical staff and how these variables have influenced residents' survival.

METHODS

A prospective study was designed. Evaluations were performed at three different times: a) at the beginning of Spanish confinement, in March 2020; b) just before the second wave of the pandemic, with relaxation of security measures but in lockdown, and c) in January-February 2021, at the end of the second wave, when visits were already allowed. The study was conducted on three different nursing homes. Three hundred and one residents, 119 clinical staff and 51 relatives took part in the study. Anxiety and depression were evaluated in all participants. A scale on the meaning of suffering was also performed. In addition, burnout status was also determined in the clinical staff.

RESULTS

All participants showed lower depression during lockdown, while at the beginning and at the end of the confinement, these values were significantly increased. In residents, these changes were dependent of cognitive status (p = 0.012). Anxiety was significantly higher in residents. The evolution of anxiety was similar than with depression, with lower values during confinement, although clinical staff showed higher anxiety levels at the beginning. The feeling of suffering was significantly lower in the clinical staff than in resident and relative groups. Residents' survival was dependent of cognitive status (p = 0.018) and voluntary confinement (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

During the first COVID-19 lockdown, psychological wellbeing of residents cared in nursing homes, their relatives and staff did not seem to be seriously affected. Previous mental health in relatives and staff together with a resilient approach to the adversity might partly be protecting factors. The lack of consequences on residents' anxiety, depression and perception of social support may reflect the special attention and care they received. Finally, as in the current study only data of the first two COVID-19 waves were analysed, its findings might be partly generalized to all the pandemic.

Prevalence and Predictors of Anxiety among Stable Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients in Malaysia

The COVID-19 pandemic has created anxiety among hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 patients. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the prevalence of anxiety and its associated factors among stable inpatient COVID-19 patients in Malaysia. Method: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a web-based online survey involving 401 patients from Malaysia’s leading COVID-19 hospitals from 15th April until 30th June 2020, who were chosen using quota sampling. The General Anxiety Disorders 7 items (GAD-7) scale, the Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced Inventory (Brief-COPE) and a socio-demographic profile questionnaire were used. Descriptive analysis and multiple logistic regression were performed using SPSS v23 to determine the prevalence of anxiety and its associated factors. Result: The results showed that the prevalence of anxiety was 7.0%. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that female gender (p < 0.05), a fear of infection (p < 0.05), a lack of information (p < 0.05), a maladaptive coping mechanism of behavioral disengagement (p < 0.001) and self-blame (p < 0.001) were significantly associated with anxiety. Meanwhile, adaptive coping mechanisms via instrumental support (p < 0.001) were a significant protective predictor of anxiety. Conclusions: COVID-19 infection has had a significant influence on the mental health of patients. Findings in our study provide baseline data on the prevalence of anxiety among stabilized COVID-19 inpatients in Malaysia. Despite the relatively low prevalence, the data have the potential to improve the present mental health monitoring system and the deployment of suitable treatments in dealing with similar circumstances.

Agreement for diagnosis of depression and anxiety between self-assessment with e-questionnaire and psychiatric telephone interview among post-COVID-19 patients

BACKGROUND

Psychological disorders, such as depression and anxiety, are common among individuals who have experienced coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); however, diagnosis may be challenging and subjected to invalidity. This study aimed to examine agreement between online self-assessment and psychiatric telephone interview among COVID-19 survivors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This cross-sectional descriptive study was carried out from March to June 2021 in Afzalipour Hospital, Kerman, Iran. The inpatients confirmed with COVID-19 were contacted within the first week after discharge and were asked to fill the Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale (HADS) and socio-demography questionnaire. They were later interviewed using Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A). Agreement between the data extracted from self-report and telephone interview was analyzed using Cohen's kappa coefficient, sensitivity, and specificity.

RESULTS

Out of 200 post-COVID patients, 60 participants completed all assessments. Prevalence of depression was observed to be 88% via telephone interview and 45% via self-assessment. Moreover, 83% of the participants were diagnosed with anxiety according to the telephone interview, in comparison to 31% diagnosed with anxiety using self-report questionnaire. The agreement between online self-assessment and telephone interview for depression and anxiety was not significant (κ = 0.08 and κ = 0.1, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The discordance between online self-report and clinician's assessment via phone contact interview indicates that using self-report evaluations is not sufficient as the single assessment tool for mental health monitoring and reflects the need to employ multiple assessments for diagnosis of psychiatric problems in pandemics.

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on depression and anxiety symptoms: Findings from the United Arab Emirates Healthy Future (UAEHFS) cohort study

BACKGROUND

Significant concerns about mental health were raised during the COVID-19 pandemic. We investigated the prevalence of depression and anxiety symptoms among the participants of the United Arab Emirates Healthy Future Study (UAEHFS); a national cohort study. We further explored the change in the prevalence of depression symptoms among those with comparable pre-pandemic data.

METHODS

A sample of UAEHFS participants were invited to complete a COVID-19 online questionnaire during the first wave of the pandemic. Depression and anxiety symptoms were assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire Depression Scale (PHQ-8) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 Scale (GAD-7) respectively. Unpaired analyses were done to examine the effect of COVID-19 on depression and anxiety symptoms during the pandemic. Paired analysis was conducted to examine the change in depression symptoms.

RESULTS

During the pandemic, we reported a prevalence of 32.8% (95% CI: 27.0, 39.1) for depression and 26.4% (95% CI: 21.0, 32.6) for anxiety symptoms. Younger people reported higher levels of depression (40.4%) and anxiety (34.5%) symptoms. Females reported higher levels of depression (36.5%) and anxiety (32.7%) symptoms. In paired analysis, the prevalence of depression symptoms during the pandemic was 34% (95% CI: 26.5, 42.4) compared to 29.9% (95% CI: 22.7, 38.1) before the pandemic. No statistically significant difference was observed, p-value = 0.440. Adjusted multivariate logistic regression models for PHQ-8 and GAD-7 during the pandemic showed that participants, who were experiencing flu-like symptoms, had higher odds of reporting depression symptoms compared to those without symptoms. Additionally, age was significantly negatively associated with anxiety symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, we found that depression and anxiety symptoms were more prevalent among young people and females. However, we did not find a significant change in the prevalence of depression symptoms among those with comparable pre-pandemic data. Identifying vulnerable groups and understanding trajectories through longitudinal studies would help with planning for effective mental health interventions for the current and future pandemics.

Anxiety and coping strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study of staff and students from a tertiary education center in Malaysia

Aim

We examined the anxiety levels and coping strategies among staff and students of a tertiary educational institution during the COVID-19 pandemic and determined the association between anxiety level and coping strategies.

Method

Through an online survey, we used Coronavirus Anxiety Scale (CAS) to measure the level of anxiety associated with the COVID-19 crisis and Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE) to assess the coping responses adopted to handle stressful life events. Coping strategies were classified as adaptive and maladaptive, for which the aggregate sores were calculated. Multiple linear regression was used to determine the predictors of anxiety adjusted for potentially confounding variables. Results from 434 participants were available for analysis.

Results

The mean score (SD) of the CAS was 1.1 (1.8). The mean scores of adaptive and maladaptive coping strategies were 35.69 and 19.28, respectively. Multiple linear regression revealed that maladaptive coping [Adjusted B coefficient = 4.106, p-value < 0.001] and presence of comorbidities [Adjusted B coefficient = 1.376, p-value = 0.025] significantly predicted anxiety.

Conclusion

Maladaptive coping and presence of comorbidities were the predictors of coronavirus anxiety. The apparent lack of anxiety in relation to COVID-19 and movement restriction is reflective of the reported high level of satisfaction with the support and services provided during the COVID-19 outbreak in Malaysia. Adaptive coping strategies were adopted more frequently than maladaptive. Nevertheless, public education on positive coping strategies and anxiety management may be still be relevant to provide mental health support to address the needs of the general population.

Psychological Distress among Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients in Denmark during the First 12 Months of the Pandemic

This study aimed to investigate psychological distress among patients hospitalized with a COVID-19 diagnosis in Denmark during the first 12 months of the pandemic and to assess changes in psychological distress in the three months following discharge. A single-center prospective observational survey study among patients hospitalized with a COVID-19 diagnosis between May 2020 and May 2021 was conducted. Participants completed a survey at three time points: at admission, and 1 and 3 months after discharge. Psychological distress was assessed by validated scales measuring symptoms related to depression, anxiety, stress, insomnia, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). In total, 95 patients were included. At admission, the proportion of patients with symptoms of depression was 43%, symptoms of anxiety 32%, moderate/high level of stress 39%, insomnia 52%, and probable/positive PTSD 19%. The burden of symptoms related to depression and anxiety decreased significantly over time, while there was no significant change over time in stress, insomnia, or PTSD. Suboptimal levels of physical and mental HRQoL were detected at admission but improved over time. Patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 during the first year of the pandemic experienced considerable levels of psychological distress at admission, with some improvements within 3 months after discharge.

Acute and chronic neuropsychiatric symptoms in novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients: A qualitative review

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) on March 11th, 2020. It has had unprecedented adverse effects on healthcare systems, economies, and societies globally. SARS-CoV-2 is not only a threat to physical health but has also been shown to have a severe impact on neuropsychiatric health. Many studies and case reports across countries have demonstrated insomnia, depressed mood, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and cognitive change in COVID-19 patients during the acute phase of the infection, as well as in apparently recovered COVID-19 patients. The goal of this narrative review is to synthesize and summarize the emerging literature detailing the neuropsychiatric manifestations of COVID-19 with special emphasis on the long-term implications of COVID-19.

Predictors of long-term anxiety and depression in discharged COVID-19 patients: A follow-up study

BACKGROUND

Patients who were hospitalized for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) faced an extremely stressful experience that challenged their mental health and the long-term effects are not definitely known yet.

AIM

To identify both the course of mental symptoms (anxiety and depressive symptoms) and the related risk factors of recovered patients at the 20-22 mo follow-up.

METHODS

One hundred and seventy-two patients were enrolled. The patients were evaluated with a telepsychiatry interview and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Sociodemographic and clinical features were analyzed by regression analysis.

RESULTS

The mean HADS-Anxiety (HADS-A) score was 9.08 ± 4.90, and the mean HADS-Depression (HADS-D) score was 8.55 ± 4.39. The mean HADS-A (P = 0.484) and HADS-D (P = 0.011) scores were increased compared to scores during hospitalization. Being over 50 years old, having lower financial status, and being vaccinated were associated with symptoms of depression (adjusted R 2 = 0.168) while being over 50 years old, female sex, being vaccinated, and dyspnea were associated with higher anxiety (adjusted R 2 = 0.245).

CONCLUSION

To prevent the deterioration of mental health, psychiatrists should play an active role in identifying emerging mental problems as soon as possible, more vulnerable groups should be characterized, and psychological support should be sustained after discharge.

Prevalence of and risk factors for depression, anxiety, and stress in non-hospitalized asymptomatic and mild COVID-19 patients in East Java province, Indonesia

Background

Despite abundant data on mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic, 3 important knowledge gaps continue to exist, i.e., 1) studies from low-/middle income countries (LMICs); 2) studies in the later period of the COVID-19 pandemic; and 3) studies on non-hospitalized asymptomatic and mild COVID-19 patients. To address the knowledge gaps, we assessed the prevalence of and the risk factors for mental health symptoms among non-hospitalized asymptomatic and mild COVID-19 patients in one LMIC (Indonesia) during the later period of the pandemic.

Methods

This cross-sectional study was conducted in September 2020 in East Java province, Indonesia. Study population consisted of non-hospitalized asymptomatic and mild COVID-19 patients who were diagnosed based on reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction results from nasopharyngeal swab. Mental health symptoms were evaluated using the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21.

Results

From 778 non-hospitalized asymptomatic and mild COVID-19 patients, 608 patients were included in the analysis. Patients’ median age was 35 years old and 61.2% were male. Of these, 22 (3.6%) reported symptoms of depression, 87 (14.3%) reported symptoms of anxiety, and 48 (7.9%) reported symptoms of stress. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that females were more likely to report symptoms of stress (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.98, p-value = 0.028); healthcare workers were more likely to report symptoms of depression and anxiety (aOR = 5.57, p-value = 0.002 and aOR = 2.92, p-value = 0.014, respectively); and those with a recent history of self-quarantine were more likely to report symptoms of depression and stress (aOR 5.18, p = 0.004 and aOR = 1.86, p = 0.047, respectively).

Conclusion

The reported prevalence of mental health symptoms, especially depression, was relatively low among non-hospitalized asymptomatic and mild COVID-19 patients during the later period of the COVID-19 pandemic in East Java province, Indonesia. In addition, several risk factors have been identified.

Post-viral mental health sequelae in infected persons associated with COVID-19 and previous epidemics and pandemics: Systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence estimates

AIMS

Post-viral mental health problems (MHP) in COVID-19 patients and survivors were anticipated already during early stages of this pandemic. We aimed to synthesize the prevalence of the anxiety, depression, post-traumatic and general distress domain associated with virus epidemics since 2002.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, PsycINFO, and Embase from 2002 to April 14, 2021 for peer-reviewed studies reporting prevalence of MHP in adults with laboratory-confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-1, H1N1, MERS-CoV, H7N9, Ebolavirus, or SARS-CoV-2 infection. We included studies that assessed post-viral MHP with validated and frequently used scales. A three-level random-effects meta-analysis for dependent effect sizes was conducted to account for multiple outcome reporting. We pooled MHP across all domains and separately by severity (above mild or moderate-to-severe) and by acute (one month), ongoing (one to three months), and post-illness stages (longer than three months). A meta-regression was conducted to test for moderating effects, particularly for exploring estimate differences between SARS-Cov-2 and previous pandemics and epidemics. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020194535.

RESULTS

We identified 59 studies including between 14 and 1002 participants and providing 187 prevalence estimates. MHP, in general, decreased from acute to post-illness from 46.3% to 38.8% and for mild and moderate-to-severe from 22.3% to 18.8%, respectively. We found no evidence of moderating effects except for non-random sampling and H1N1 showing higher prevalence. There was a non-significant trend towards lower MHP for SARS-CoV-2 compared to previous epidemics.

CONCLUSIONS

MHP prevalence estimates decreased over time but were still on a substantial level at post-illness. Post-viral mental health problems caused by SARS-CoV-2 could have been expected much earlier, given the previous post-viral sequelae.

Machine learning techniques for predicting depression and anxiety in pregnant and postpartum women during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional regional study

Background: Maternal depression and anxiety are significant public health concerns that play an important role in the health and well-being of mothers and children. The COVID-19 pandemic, the consequential lockdowns and related safety restrictions worldwide negatively affected the mental health of pregnant and postpartum women. Methods: This regional study aimed to develop a machine learning (ML) model for the prediction of maternal depression and anxiety. The study used a dataset collected from five Arab countries during the COVID-19 pandemic between July to December 2020. The population sample included 3569 women (1939 pregnant and 1630 postpartum) from five countries (Jordan, Palestine, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain). The performance of seven machine learning algorithms was assessed for the prediction of depression and anxiety symptoms. Results: The Gradient Boosting (GB) and Random Forest (RF) models outperformed other studied ML algorithms with accuracy values of 83.3% and 83.2% for depression, respectively, and values of 82.9% and 81.3% for anxiety, respectively. The Mathew’s Correlation Coefficient was evaluated for the ML models; the Naïve Bayes (NB) and GB models presented the highest performance measures (0.63 and 0.59) for depression and (0.74 and 0.73) for anxiety, respectively. The features’ importance ranking was evaluated, the results showed that stress during pregnancy, family support, financial issues, income, and social support were the most significant values in predicting anxiety and depression. Conclusion: Overall, the study evidenced the power of ML models in predicting maternal depression and anxiety and proved to be an efficient tool for identifying and predicting the associated risk factors that influence maternal mental health. The deployment of machine learning models for screening and early detection of depression and anxiety among pregnant and postpartum women might facilitate the development of health prevention and intervention programs that will enhance maternal and child health in low- and middle-income countries.

Mental health outcomes of adults hospitalized for COVID-19: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patients hospitalized for COVID-19 may be at high risk of mental health (MH) disorders. This systematic review assesses MH outcomes among adults during and after hospitalization for COVID-19 and ascertains MH care utilization and resource needs.

METHODS

We searched multiple medical literature databases for studies published December 2019 to March 2021. Studies of ≥ 200 participants were synthesized. One reviewer completed article selection, data abstraction and assessed study quality and strength of evidence, with verification by a second.

RESULTS

Fifty articles met preliminary inclusion criteria; 19 articles that included ≥ 200 participants were synthesized. Evidence from these primarily fair-quality studies suggests many patients experience symptoms of depression (9-66%), anxiety (30-39%), and insomnia (24-40%) during and 3 months after hospitalization for COVID-19. However, patients infrequently receive a new MH disorder diagnosis 6 months after hospitalization (5% are diagnosed with a new mood disorder, 7% anxiety disorder, and 3% insomnia). Some hospitalized patients - including women and those with more severe COVID-19 - may be at higher risk of poor MH outcomes. Data on MH care utilization and resource needs are currently limited.

LIMITATIONS

Most included studies were small, did not report the proportion of participants with preexisting MH disorders, and did not use comparison groups.

CONCLUSIONS

While many patients experience MH symptoms after hospitalization for COVID-19, most do not go on to develop a new MH disorder. Future studies should report whether participants have preexisting MH disorders and compare patients hospitalized for COVID-19 to patients hospitalized for other causes.

Hospitalization for COVID-19 is associated with a higher risk of subsequent hospitalization for psychiatric disorders: A French nationwide longitudinal study comparing hospitalizations for COVID-19 and for other reasons

Introduction

Although COVID-19 has been associated with psychiatric symptoms in patients, no study to date has examined the risk of hospitalization for psychiatric disorders after hospitalization for this disease.

Objective

We aimed to compare the proportions of hospitalizations for psychiatric disorders in the 12 months following either hospitalization for COVID-19 or hospitalization for another reason in the adult general population in France during the first wave of the current pandemic.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective longitudinal nationwide study based on the national French administrative healthcare database.

Results

Among the 2,894,088 adults hospitalized, 96,313 (3.32%) were admitted for COVID-19. The proportion of patients subsequently hospitalized for a psychiatric disorder was higher for COVID-19 patients (11.09 vs. 9.24%, OR = 1.20 95%CI 1.18–1.23). Multivariable analyses provided similar results for a psychiatric disorder of any type and for psychotic and anxiety disorders (respectively, aOR = 1.06 95%CI 1.04–1.09, aOR = 1.09 95%CI 1.02–1.17, and aOR = 1.11 95%CI 1.08–1.14). Initial hospitalization for COVID-19 in intensive care units and psychiatric history were associated with a greater risk of subsequent hospitalization for any psychiatric disorder than initial hospitalization for another reason.

Discussion

Compared with hospitalizations for other reasons, hospitalizations for COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic in France were associated with a higher risk of hospitalization for a psychiatric disorder during the 12 months following initial discharge. This finding should encourage clinicians to increase the monitoring and assessment of psychiatric symptoms after hospital discharge for COVID-19, and to propose post-hospital care, especially for those treated in intensive care.

The prevalence of anxiety in general hospital inpatients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the prevalence of anxiety in general hospital inpatients by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of all relevant published studies.

METHOD

We searched Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase and Ovid PsycINFO from inception to December 2020. We included studies of the prevalence of anxiety symptoms of clinically significant severity (using cut-off scores on rating scales) and of the prevalence of anxiety disorders (using diagnostic interviews) in general hospital inpatients. Two independent reviewers assessed articles and extracted data. The review is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42020189722.

RESULTS

We included 32 studies. Pooled prevalence estimates in random-effects meta-analyses were: anxiety symptoms 28% (95% CI 19% to 38%, 95% prediction interval 5% to 72%), any anxiety disorder 8% (95% CI 5% to 12%, 95% prediction interval 2% to 33%), panic disorder 3% (95% CI 2% to 4%, 95% prediction interval 1% to 8%), generalized anxiety disorder 5% (95% CI 3% to 8%, 95% prediction interval 1% to 23%). There was high heterogeneity in prevalence, little of which was explained in exploratory analyses of a limited number of potential determinants.

CONCLUSION

Anxiety symptoms of clinically significant severity affect more than one in four inpatients and anxiety disorders affect nearly one in ten.

Assessment of anxiety and depression among hospitalized COVID-19 patients in Thailand during the first wave of the pandemic: a cross-sectional study

Anxiety and depression in hospitalized COVID-19 patients in Thailand during the first wave of the pandemic were investigated. Thai version of Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) was chosen as an instrument for evaluation. Thirty-two voluntary participants completed the questionnaire. Three (9.4%) respondents had abnormal anxiety sub-scale scores while no respondents had abnormal depression sub-scale scores. There was no statistical demographic difference between the anxiety and non-anxiety groups.

Dursun S. A Multi-Dimensional Psychiatric Perspective on the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) arose in Wuhan, China in December 2019 and spread worldwide rapidly, and was declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization as of March 2020. As the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has spread worldwide, its impact is increasingly being recognized among vulnerable groups and also by the public in general. Recent findings indicate that patients with mental health disorders are among the groups most vulnerable to psychological stress and social hardships related to the current pandemic. Studies also indicate an increased risk of infection by SARS-CoV-2 in subjects with psychiatric disorders. Patients affected by SARS-CoV-2 may present to the psychiatrist with delirium, psychotic symptoms, depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, and insomnia. Some patients will develop persistent somatic symptoms such as fatigue after the acute infection. In this article, we summarize the preliminary findings related to the effects of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on patients with mental health disorders, as well as recent research on psychiatric presentations in patients affected by SARS-CoV-2.

How patients with COVID-19 managed the disease at home during the first wave in Spain: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

Most patients with mild COVID-19 had to stay at home trying to implement an optimal quarantine. The aim of this study was to describe the COVID-19 cases during the first wave of the pandemic in Spain, how they managed the disease at home, focusing on differences by age, as well as differences in knowledge, attitudes and preventive practices, compared with the uninfected population.

DESIGN

An online survey was used to conduct a cross-sectional study of individuals who were 14 years or older living in Spain during the COVID-19 lockdown. The main variable was a COVID-19 case. Logistic regression models for COVID-19 cases were obtained using a backward stepwise procedure to assess the association between social variables, disease knowledge, attitudes, prevention practices and emotional impact.

RESULTS

3398 people completed the survey. Participants' mean age was 49.6 (SD=14.3). COVID-19 was significantly more prevalent among married people (5.3%) and those currently doing an on-site work (8.7%). Most of the COVID-19 cases stayed at home (84.0%) during the episode. There were significant age-based differences with regard to self-isolation conditions at home during the disease. COVID-19 cases showed better attitudes, practices and knowledge about disease symptoms and transmission than the uninfected population. COVID-19 cases also felt more depressed (adjusted OR: 3.46, 95% CI 1.45 to 8.26) and had better preventive behaviour than the uninfected population, such as always wearing a mask outside the home (adjusted OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.30).

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 cases found it difficult to comply with recommended home self-isolation conditions, with differences by age group. COVID-19 had an important impact on care dependency in non-hospitalised patients, who were mostly dependent on their families for care. It is necessary to reinforce social and health services and to be ready to meet the care needs of populations during the different waves or in future epidemics.

Prevalence and factors associated with psychological burden in COVID-19 patients and their relatives: A prospective observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Due to the dramatic measures accompanying isolation and the general uncertainty and fear associated with COVID-19, patients and relatives may be at high risk for adverse psychological outcomes. Until now there has been limited research focusing on the prevalence of psychological distress and associated factors in COVID-19 patients and their relatives. The objective of our study was to assess psychological distress in COVID-19 patients and their relatives 30 days after hospital discharge.

METHODS

In this prospective observational cohort study at two Swiss tertiary-care hospitals we included consecutive adult patients hospitalized between March and June 2020 for a proven COVID-19 and their relatives. Psychological distress was defined as symptoms of anxiety and/or depression measured with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), i.e., a score of ≥8 on the depression and/or anxiety subscale. We further evaluated symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), defined as a score of ≥1.5 on the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R).

RESULTS

Among 126 included patients, 24 (19.1%) had psychological distress and 10 (8.7%) had symptoms of PTSD 30 days after hospital discharge. In multivariate logistic regression analyses three factors were independently associated with psychological distress in patients: resilience (OR 0.82; 95%CI 0.71 to 0.94; p = 0.005), high levels of perceived stress (OR 1.21; 95%CI 1.06 to 1.38; p = 0.006) and low frequency of contact with relatives (OR 7.67; 95%CI 1.42 to 41.58; p = 0.018). The model showed good discrimination, with an area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.92. Among 153 relatives, 35 (22.9%) showed symptoms of psychological distress, and 3 (2%) of PTSD. For relatives, resilience was negatively associated (OR 0.85; 95%CI 0.75 to 0.96; p = 0.007), whereas perceived overall burden caused by COVID-19 was positively associated with psychological distress (OR 1.72; 95%CI 1.31 to 2.25; p<0.001). The overall model also had good discrimination, with an AUC of 0.87.

CONCLUSION

A relevant number of COVID-19 patients as well as their relatives exhibited psychological distress 30 days after hospital discharge. These results might aid in development of strategies to prevent psychological distress in COVID-19 patients and their relatives.

SARS-CoV-2 Positive and Isolated at Home: Stress and Coping Depending on Psychological Burden

Objective: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has led to pronounced health changes, especially for those infected and psychologically burdened. This cross-sectional study examined the stress experience and coping strategies during home isolation of SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals and analyzed differences regarding psychological burden. Methods: SARS-CoV-2 infected respondents were recruited by telephone and completed an online survey during their home isolation. This questionnaire assessed sociodemographic aspects, somatic factors, psychological burden (depressive symptoms, anxiety, and somatic symptom disorder), perceived stress and coping behavior during the home isolation. Results: Out of 838 SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals during the study period, 648 were contacted and 224 home-isolated respondents were included in the study. Disgrace, social restrictions, job fear, health concerns, and infectiousness could be explored as stressors during the home isolation. Fifty-four percent experienced psychological burden. SARS-CoV-2 infected and home-isolated individuals with psychological burden perceived significant stressors more strongly (p < 0.001, r = 0.5) and coped significantly less (p < 0.001, r = 0.3) with their infection and home isolation compared to SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals without psychological burden. Conclusion: SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals with psychological burden experienced higher stressors and were unable to cope adaptively with home isolation. Therefore, a general and standardized screening procedure for psychological burden should be established. SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals with psychological burden should receive targeted support with professional help in the areas of stress experience and coping skills during their home isolation and beyond to avoid long-term consequences.