Prevalence and correlates of lifestyle behavior, anxiety and depression in Chinese college freshman: A cross-sectional survey

Background: This study aims to investigate the mental health of COVID-19 patients in Saudi Arabia. Method: A cross-sectional study was carried out targeting confirmed cases of COVID-19 in Saudi Arabia. Due to travel and time constraints as well as the accessibility of patients, cases were included from East Jeddah Hospital, King Abdulaziz Hospital, and the Oncology Center in Jeddah. The data were collected using a predesigned self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire addressed COVID-19 cases, personal data, medical history, smoking, traveling abroad, and work-related conditions. Additionally, data regarding contact level with COVID-19 cases were considered. The mental health statuses of the patients were assessed using a validated Arabic version of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression (HAD) scale. The study included 261 COVID-19 patients whose ages ranged from 18 to 65 years. Results: The survey findings revealed that 13% of COVID-19 patients had a borderline level of anxiety, 26.8% were considered anxiety cases, while 60.2% were normal. The findings also revealed that 29.9% had a borderline level of depression, 18.4% were considered depression cases, while 51.7% were normal. Conclusions: This study concluded that COVID-19 patients experience anxiety and depression, and as the COVID-19 epidemic continues to spread, the results of the study are particularly useful in developing a strategy to psychologically support COVID-19 patients.

Download Full-text

841 The psychological impact of Foundation Interim Year 1 Placements on Final Year UK Medical Students Transitioning to Foundation Year One During the COVID Era

British Journal of Surgery ◽

10.1093/bjs/znab134.093 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 108 (Supplement_2) ◽

Author(s):

M Durand-Hill ◽

D I Ike ◽

A N Nijhawan ◽

A B Shah ◽

A Dawson ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Medical Students ◽

Perceived Stress ◽

Psychological Impact ◽

Depression Scale ◽

Anxiety And Depression ◽

Hospital Anxiety ◽

Cross Sectional Survey ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Stress Scale ◽

The Uk

Abstract Introduction During the COVID pandemic, the 2019-2020 cohort of final year students were invited to participate in Foundation interim Year 1 placements (FiY1). FiY1 aimed to ease transition to Foundation Year 1 doctor (FY1). We assessed the psychological impact of FiY1 on final year medical students. Method A cross-sectional survey was distributed to final year medical students in the UK between June 4th and July 4th, 2020. The survey contained the following domains: participant demographics, rationale for FiY1 participation, a checklist of the key safety principles for FiY1s, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and the Perceived Stress scale-4. Results 107 final years responded to the survey. 72.0% (n = 77) of final year students surveyed were working as FiY1s. Final year students participating in FiY1 postings had reduced rates of anxiety (29.9% vs 43.4%, P = 0.186), depression (5.2% vs 20.0%, P = 0.018) and lower perceived stress levels (5.0 vs 7.2, P < 0.001). 19.5% (15/77) FiY1s reported working beyond their competency, 27.3% (22/77) felt unsupervised, but 94.8% (73/77) of FiY1s felt the post prepared them for FY1. Conclusions Students participating in FiY1 postings felt less stressed and depressed than those not participating in the scheme and the majority felt it was preparing them for FY1.

Download Full-text

Younger people are more vulnerable to stress, anxiety and depression during COVID-19 pandemic: A global cross-sectional survey

Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry ◽

10.1016/j.pnpbp.2020.110236 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 110236

Author(s):

Prerna Varma ◽

Moira Junge ◽

Hailey Meaklim ◽

Melinda L. Jackson

Keyword(s):

Anxiety And Depression ◽

Cross Sectional Survey ◽

Cross Sectional

Download Full-text

Childhood sexual abuse and psychosis: data from a cross-sectional national psychiatric survey in England

The British Journal of Psychiatry ◽

10.1192/bjp.bp.110.083642 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 199 (1) ◽

pp. 29-37 ◽

Cited By ~ 166

Author(s):

Paul Bebbington ◽

Sarah Jonas ◽

Elizabeth Kuipers ◽

Michael King ◽

Claudia Cooper ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Sexual Abuse ◽

Childhood Sexual Abuse ◽

Psychiatric Morbidity ◽

Population Attributable Risk ◽

Population Sample ◽

Cannabis Use ◽

Anxiety And Depression ◽

Computer Assisted ◽

Cross Sectional Survey ◽

Cross Sectional

BackgroundA number of studies in a range of samples attest a link between childhood sexual abuse and psychosis.AimsTo use data from a large representative general population sample (Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey 2007) to test hypotheses that childhood sexual abuse is linked to psychosis, and that the relationship is consistent with mediation by revictimisation experiences, heavy cannabis use, anxiety and depression.MethodThe prevalence of psychosis was established operationally in a representative cross-sectional survey of the adult household population of England (n = 7353). Using computer-assisted self-interview, a history of various forms of sexual abuse was established, along with the date of first abuse.ResultsSexual abuse before the age of 16 was strongly associated with psychosis, particularly if it involved non-consensual sexual intercourse (odds ratio (OR) = 10.14, 95% CI 4.8–21.3, population attributable risk fraction 14%). There was evidence of partial mediation by anxiety and depression, but not by heavy cannabis use nor revictimisation in adulthood.ConclusionsThe association between childhood sexual abuse and psychosis was large, and may be causal. These results have important implications for the nature and aetiology of psychosis, for its treatment and for primary prevention.

Download Full-text

A Cross-Sectional Survey of the Workplace Factors Contributing to Symptoms of Anxiety and Depression Among Nurses and Physicians During the First Wave of COVID-19 Pandemic in Two US Healthcare Systems

Annals of Work Exposures and Health ◽

10.1093/annweh/wxab085 ◽

2021 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Igor Burstyn ◽

Karyn Holt

Keyword(s):

Depression Scale ◽

Participation Rate ◽

Healthcare Systems ◽

Working Environment ◽

Mitigation Measures ◽

Anxiety And Depression ◽

Cross Sectional Survey ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Psychological Burden ◽

Nurses And Physicians

Abstract Background Anxiety and depression among physicians and nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic in the USA are not well described and their modifiable causes are poorly understood. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional survey of symptoms of anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) among physicians and nurses in two US healthcare systems in June through September 2020; participation rate was 5–10%. We described features of work as well as their perceptions and associated concerns in relation to the risk of anxiety and depression, while controlling for health history via regression and path analyses. Results About a third of 684 nurses and 185 physicians surveyed showed symptoms of anxiety or depression, and the excess of symptoms of mood disorders was particularly prominent in nurses. The belief that one was infected was a dominant correlate of both anxiety and depression. This belief was more associated with history of symptoms of pneumonia than the contact with COVID-19 diagnosed patients. Factors found to be associated with reduced anxiety and depression in this working environment were having confidence in the competent use of and access to personal protective equipment, maintaining usual working hours, being surrounded by colleagues who were both sufficient in numbers and not stressed, and the support of immediate family and religious communities. Involvement in aerosol-generating procedures with infected patients was linked with lower depression in nurses but higher among physicians. Likewise, the setting of recent patient encounters affected risk of anxiety and depression differently for physicians and nurses. Conclusions Our findings may help develop mitigation measures and underscore the need to help nurses and physicians bear the psychological burden of the COVID-19 pandemic and similar events in the future.

Download Full-text

Mental Health, Potential Minority Stressors And Resilience: Evidence From A Cross-Sectional Survey Of Gay, Bisexual And Other Men Who Have Sex With Men Within The Celtic Nations

10.21203/rs.3.rs-87687/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Arlene McGarty ◽

Lisa McDaid ◽

Paul Flowers ◽

Julie Riddell ◽

John Pachankis ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Protective Effect ◽

Severe Depression ◽

Anxiety And Depression ◽

Future Research ◽

Depression And Anxiety ◽

Cross Sectional Survey ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Sex With Men ◽

Severe Anxiety

Abstract Background: Gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) are at a greater risk of mental health problems, such as anxiety and depression, than heterosexual adults. Numerous factors and stressors have been reported to impact men’s mental health, although it has been suggested that resilience could have a protective effect. The aim of this study is to explore mental health, minority stressors, and resilience among a large online cross-sectional survey of GBMSM in the Celtic nations. Methods: Data for this cross-sectional study were collected from the Social Media, GBMSM and Sexual and Holistic Health (SMMASH2) self-report online survey. Participants (n=3077) were recruited via gay sociosexual media in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, and the Republic of Ireland. Binary logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify factors that increased the odds of moderate-to-severe anxiety and depression. Potentially relevant variables (p<0.05) were carried forward in hierarchal logistic regression analyses. Results: The prevalence of moderate-to-severe anxiety and depression was 19.9% and 14.4%, respectively. Having a disability (OR = 1.73) and having financial worries sometimes/all of the time (OR = 1.93) increased the odds of having moderate-to-severe depression and anxiety, respectively. No minority stressors were associated with depression, whereas experiencing any form of relationship abuse in the last 12 months significantly increased the odds of anxiety (OR = 1.50). Resilience, namely a sense of coherence, had a protective effect and significantly reduced the odds of moderate-to-severe depression (OR = 0.85) and anxiety (OR = 0.89). Discussion: Disability and financial worries were associated with increased depression and anxiety, respectively, while resilience had a protective effect for GBMSM in the SMMASH2 study. Future research is needed to better understand the role of resilience and the challenges and stresses of everyday life and intersecting health problems. Future research is also needed that incorporates the perspectives of those most affected by mental ill-health to co-develop effective solutions that respond to their contextual surroundings.

Download Full-text

Depression and Anxiety Among Quarantined People, Community Workers, Medical Staff, and General Population in the Early Stage of COVID-19 Epidemic

Frontiers in Psychology ◽

10.3389/fpsyg.2021.638985 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 12 ◽

Author(s):

Xiaoling Li ◽

Hegao Yu ◽

Weiqiang Yang ◽

Qihua Mo ◽

Zhanggui Yang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Medical Staff ◽

General Public ◽

Early Stage ◽

Multiple Logistic Regression Analysis ◽

Depression Scale ◽

Anxiety And Depression ◽

Depression And Anxiety ◽

Cross Sectional Survey ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Self Rating

Background: We described the prevalence of anxiety and depression related to COVID-19 pandemic among different types of population and examined their potential risk factors.Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted to collect demographic characteristics, exposure histories, and many other concerns about COVID-19. The Zung's self-rating anxiety scale (SAS) and self-rating depression scale (SDS), followed by a four-step multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with mental health outcomes.Results: Out of 3,303 participants, the quarantined people (40.9%), community workstation staffs-policemen-volunteers (CPV) (36.4%) and general public (30.7%) reported higher percentages of depression than the general medical staff (18.4%). Moreover, the quarantined people (19.1%) also showed higher prevalence of anxiety than the general public (9.1%) and the general medical staff (7.8%). The quarantined people had the highest risk of anxiety and depression, whereas the self-rated health was negatively associated with the risks of anxiety and depression. Younger age group (18 to 30 years) showed higher risks of anxiety (OR = 6.22, 95% CI = 2.89–13.38, p < 0.001) and depression (OR = 3.69, 95% CI = 2.40–5.69, p < 0.001). People who had exposure history or contact from Hubei province after December 1, 2019 (OR = 1.57, 95% CI = 1.07–2.30, p < 0.001), had family or friends engaged in front-line health care work (OR = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.02–2.14, p < 0.001), had confirmed case nearby (OR = 2.44, 95% CI = 1.43–4.18, p < 0.001) were all more likely to suffer from anxiety. Moreover, the negligence (OR = 1.85, 95% CI = 1.37–2.51, p < 0.001) or overindulgence (OR = 1.45, 95% CI = 1.03–2.04, p < 0.001) toward the epidemic information was associated with a higher risk of depression and anxiety.Conclusions: Our findings show that the CPV and quarantined people were most at-risk population. We have identified that the young people, people with exposure histories and negligence or overindulgence toward epidemic information are in grave need of attention.

Download Full-text

Over-the-counter analgesics use is associated with pain and psychological distress among adolescents: a mixed effects approach in cross-sectional survey data from Norway

BMC Public Health ◽

10.1186/s12889-021-12054-3 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Rune Jonassen ◽

Eva Hilland ◽

Catherine J. Harmer ◽

Dawit S. Abebe ◽

Anne Kristine Bergem ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Psychological Distress ◽

Survey Data ◽

Population Based ◽

Mixed Effects ◽

Anxiety And Depression ◽

Cross Sectional Survey ◽

Self Medication ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Over The Counter ◽

Psychological Predictor

Abstract Background Over-the-counter analgesics (OTCA) such as Paracetamol and Ibuprofen are frequently used by adolescents, and the route of administration and access at home allows unsupervised use. Psychological distress and pain occur simultaneously and are more common among females than among males. There is a dynamic interplay between on-label pain indications and psychological distress, and frequent OTCA use or misuse can exacerbate symptoms. No studies have to date provided an overview of frequent OTCA use in a larger population-based study. The current study used survey data to explore associations between and the relative predictive value of on-label pain indication and measures of psychological distress, together with sex differences for weekly OTCA use. Methods This study included 349,528 adolescents aged 13–19. The data was collected annually between January 2014 and December 2018 as part of the Norwegian Young Data survey. Performance analysis was conducted to explore the relative roles and associations between on-label pain indication and psychological distress in weekly OTCA use. A mixed-effects logistic regression model was used to explore the unique contributions from four domains of on-label pain indication and psychological distress as measured by a combined measure of anxiety and depression (HSCL-10) and peer-bullying involvement as victims or bullies. Results Thirty percent of females and 13 % of males use OTCA weekly. Headache is the strongest on-label pain predictor of weekly OTCA use, followed by abdominal pain. Depression and anxiety are the strongest psychological predictor of weekly OTCA use, and higher symptom levels and being female increase the strength of this association. Anxiety and depression also predict weekly OTCA use after controlling for physiological pain. Conclusions Sex, pain and anxiety and depression are inter-correlated and strong predictors of frequent OTCA use. Frequent OTCA use in the context of psychological distress may be a form of self-medication that can exacerbate symptoms and decrease psychosocial function. Longitudinal studies that explore causal trajectories between frequent on-label OTCA use and psychological distress are required. OTCA use among adolescents, and particularly among females, with anxiety and depression should be administered with caution and closely monitored.

Download Full-text

The Differences of the Psychological Status of the Public Between Hubei Provinces and Other Provinces After the COVID-19 Outbreak: a Cross-sectional Study

10.21203/rs.3.rs-56124/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Na Du ◽

Yingjie Ouyang ◽

Yunge Li ◽

Manxi He ◽

Ting Geng ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Physical Health ◽

Psychological Intervention ◽

Linear Regression Analysis ◽

Educational Background ◽

Psychological Status ◽

Anxiety And Depression ◽

Cross Sectional Survey ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

The Public

Abstract Background: Assessing the psychological status of public from different areas after the COVID-19 outbreak in China and analyzing the risk factors. Methods: A cross-sectional survey via online questionnaires was conducted. Occurrence of pressure, anxiety and depression were measured with Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), Generalized Anxiety Scale (GAD-7), and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), respectively. Results: The study included 3300 participants, with 1644 from Hubei and 1656 from outside Hubei. The rates of anxiety and depression among subjects from Hubei were 59.6% and 52.3%, while the corresponding rates for those outside Hubei were 44.4% and 46.6%. The scores of PSS, GAD-7, and PHQ-9 in Hubei were significantly higher than those in other areas (t = 3.823, 5.860, 2.211; P < 0.05). Multiple linear regression analysis indicated that among the participants from Hubei, the higher the educational background, the history of psychosis, the worse their physical health, the COVID-19 infected, isolated, and their families infected with the COVID-19, their mental health was relatively poor. In the participants outside Hubei, the more unstable their marriage status, the worse their physical health, isolated, and their families infected with the COVID-19, the worse their mental health level. Conclusions: The stress, anxiety, and depression of the public in Hubei are more prominent and the factors that affect their mental health are more complex. When conducting psychological intervention on the general public, we still need to formulate special intervention plans according to the different characteristics of different groups of people to provide them with appropriate crisis intervention services.

Download Full-text

Mental health outcomes and associations during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: A cross-sectional survey of the US general population

10.1101/2020.05.26.20114140 ◽

2020 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Bella Nichole Kantor ◽

Jonathan Kantor

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

General Population ◽

Multivariable Analysis ◽

Anxiety And Depression ◽

Cross Sectional Survey ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

The Us ◽

History Of ◽

Male Sex ◽

Baseline Demographic

AbstractPandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may lead to significant mental health stresses, potentially with modifiable risk factors. To determine the presence of and magnitude of associations between baseline associations and anxiety and depression in the US general population, we performed an internet-based cross-sectional survey of an age-, sex-, and race-stratified representative sample from the US general population. Degrees of anxiety, depression, and loneliness were assessed using the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7), the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), and the 8-item UCLA Loneliness Scale, respectively. Unadjusted and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to determine associations with baseline demographic characteristics. A total of 1,005 finished surveys were returned of the 1,020 started, yielding a completion rate of 98.5% in the survey panel. The mean (SD) age of respondents was 45 (16), and 494 (48.8%) were male. Baseline demographic data were similar between those that were (n=663, 66.2%) and were not (n=339, 33.8%) under a shelter in place/ stay at home order, with the exception of sex and geographic location. Overall, 264 subjects (26.8%) met criteria for an anxiety disorder based on a GAD-7 cutoff of 10; a cutoff of 7 yielded 416 subjects (41.4%) meeting clinical criteria for anxiety. On multivariable analysis, male sex (OR 0.65, 95% CI [0.49, 0.87]) and living in a larger home (OR 0.46, 95% CI [0.24, 0.88]) were associated with a decreased odds of meeting anxiety criteria. Rural location (OR 1.39, 95% CI [1.03, 1.89]), loneliness (OR 4.92, 95% CI [3.18, 7.62]), and history of hospitalization (OR 2.04, 95% CI [1.38, 3.03]), were associated with increased odds of meeting anxiety criteria. 232 subjects (23.6%) met criteria for clinical depression. On multivariable analysis, male sex (OR 0.71, 95% CI [0.53, 0.95]), increased time outdoors (OR 0.51, 95% CI [0.29, 0.92]), and living in a larger home (OR 0.35, 95% CI [0.18, 0.69]), were associated with decreased odds of meeting depression criteria. Having lost a job (OR 1.64, 95% CI [1.05, 2.54]), loneliness (OR 10.42, 95% CI [6.26, 17.36]), and history of hospitalization (OR 2.42, 95% CI [1.62, 3.62]), were associated with an increased odds of meeting depression criteria. Income, media consumption, and religiosity were not associated with mental health outcomes. Anxiety and depression are common in the US general population in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, and are associated with potentially modifiable factors.

Download Full-text