Assessment of depression, anxiety and stress in COVID-19 infected individuals and their families

Quality of Life and Emotional Problems of COVID-19 Patients after Discharge: A One-Month Longitudinal Study

AIM

The first coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in Taiwan occurred in May 2021 and many individuals were infected. All COVID-19 patients were quarantined in designated facilities until they fully recovered to prevent the spread of the disease. Prolonged quarantine could adversely affect these patients. In this study, we focused on investigating changes in the quality of life and mental health of individuals discharged from hospital after recovering from COVID-19.

METHODS

This study employed a longitudinal design and surveyed individuals discharged from a teaching hospital in northern Taiwan in 2021 within one week of their discharge and again after one month. An online questionnaire comprising the participants' background, respiratory function (COPD Assessment Test), quality of life (WHOQoL-BREF), and emotional problems (DASS-21) was administered to the participants.

RESULTS

A total of 56 participants actively took part in both surveys. We observed that participants with abnormal respiratory function had a lower physical and psychological quality of life, especially those with severe symptoms requiring endotracheal intubation during the treatment period of COVID-19. Additionally, approximately 30% of participants experienced anxiety problems throughout this study period. Finally, patients with COVID-19 symptoms exhibited a lower quality of life and higher levels of severe emotional problems.

CONCLUSIONS

According to our findings, it is necessary to monitor and provide appropriate interventions for individuals who have recovered from COVID-19, especially those who experienced severe symptoms that required endotracheal intubation during COVID-19 treatment. These interventions, such as symptom management and psychological support, can help improve their quality of life and reduce emotional problems. Therefore, after the participants are discharged, hospitals should regularly track the patients' status and provide appropriate support or referrals to help these individuals. Otherwise, future research could include more participants and follow up with them for longer to investigate the longitudinal impact of COVID-19.

Evaluating the effect of online psychoeducational support group on perceived stress in family caregivers of COVID-19 survivors

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to determine the effect of an online psychoeducational support group on the perceived stress of caregivers of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) survivors.

METHODS

This randomized clinical trial included 70 caregivers of COVID-19 survivors discharged from Imam Reza Hospital in Mashhad, Iran in 2021. The intervention group received a psychoeducational support training program for stress management through six online group sessions (each 35-45 minutes) in a week. An expert psychiatric nurse provided this program on WhatsApp immediately after the patient's discharge from the hospital. The participants completed the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-14) before starting the intervention and 1 week after that. Data analysis was conducted by descriptive and inferential statistics, including Chi-square, Fisher's exact test, independent, and paired t-test.

RESULTS

Both groups were homogeneous in terms of demographic variables of survivors and caregivers. In terms of the PSS, there was no significant difference between the two groups before the intervention (p=0.28). The pre- and post-intervention scores of PSS in the intervention group were 39.57 ± 5.89 and 35.48 ± 5.68, respectively, indicating a significant decrease (p<0.001). Also, the pre- and post-intervention differences between the intervention and control groups were -4.08 ± 3.52 and -0.11 ± 2.66, respectively, indicating a greater decrease in the total PSS of the intervention group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The family caregivers of COVID-19 survivors suffered from psychological distress during their patient care. It is recommended to perform online psychoeducational support group interventions for these individuals based on psychological and educational support program.

Analysis of COVID-19-related psychiatric disorders: clinical manifestations and therapeutic considerations

During the COVID-19 pandemic, neuropsychiatric disorders have been diagnosed both in the acute phase, and in the aftermath of this disease. Inpatients, as well as outpatients recently diagnosed with mild, moderate or severe forms of Coronavirus infection have reported neuropsychiatric manifestations with variable duration, symptoms that could be directly or indirectly related to the viral pathogenic agent. Patients who are recovering from the acute phase of COVID-19 also may exhibit various psychopathological manifestations, during the so-called “post-COVID-19 syndrome” or “long COVID-19 syndrome”. Explanations regarding the onset of this type of clinical manifestations and the SARS-CoV-2 infection are extremely diverse, ranging from biological factors (e.g., direct central nervous system viral activity, cerebral hypo-oxygenation, high level of inflammatory response) to psycho-social stressors (e.g., isolation, fear of death, anxiety related to possible somatic complications or sequelae). Objectives: The primary objective of this article was to analyze psychiatric manifestations in patients with acute COVID-19 disease and in patients during post-COVID-19 phase. The secondary objective was to propose a conceptual framework for the evaluation and treatment of these patients. Methods: Patients included in this analysis were screened positive for COVID-19 infection in the last 6 months before their first psychiatric examination. These patients were further evaluated to detect any personal history of psychiatric disorders, somatic comorbidities, or significant concomitant pharmacological treatments. Specific scales for the measurement of symptoms severity and functional impairment were administered in all patients. Results: Five patients were included in this analysis, one during the acute phase of COVID-19 infection, and four patients were evaluated after the complete remission of this disease. Hyperactive delirium, mild neurocognitive disorder, major depressive episode, panic disorder with agoraphobia, or acute psychotic disorder were the main diagnoses in these patients. All patients received adequate treatment and they were monitored using psychological scales until symptoms remission or stabilisation. Conclusions: Psychosocial stressors, neurobiological changes, systemic inflammatory reaction, and individual vulnerability factors may contribute to a diathesis-stress model for psychiatric disorders onset within the acute phase or after the remission of acute manifestations in COVID-19-diagnosed patients

Application of Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemics-6 Items (SAVE-6) to Public Workers for Measuring Their Anxiety Response During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Objective: This study aimed to compare the adaptability of the adapted version of Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemics-9 (SAVE-9) for public workers and the SAVE-6 scale and to validate them among public workers who are on the frontline of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Methods: A total of 300 public workers responded to the anonymous online survey during April 1-12, 2021. Principal component analysis was conducted with varimax rotation to explore the factor structure of this scale. Confirmatory factor analysis was also used to explore construct validity. Spearman correlation analysis of the scale with the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) and the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) was performed to explore the convergent validity. The cut-off score in accordance with the mild degree of generalized anxiety symptoms (GAD-7 score of 5) was defined using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Findings: The single-structure model of each scale (the adapted version of SAVE-9 and SAVE-6) was adopted based on the results of the parallel analysis. Because SAVE-6 showed good construct validity, but the adapted version of SAVE-9 did not, we adopted to apply the SAVE-6 scale to assess the anxiety response of public workers in response to the viral epidemic. SAVE-6 showed good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.817; McDonald's Omega = 0.818) and good convergent validity with GAD-7 (rho = 0.417, p < 0.001) and PHQ-9 (rho = 0.317, p < 0.001) scale scores. The appropriate cut-off score for SAVE-6 was determined to be ≥ 16. Conclusion: The SAVE-6 scale, as compared to the public workers' version of SAVE-9, is a reliable and valid rating scale to assess the work-related stress and anxiety of public workers due to the viral epidemic.