scholarly journals Post-viral mental health sequelae: Systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence proportions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simeon Joel Zuercher ◽  
Celine Banzer ◽  
Christine Adamus ◽  
Anja I Lehmann ◽  
Dirk Richter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Moderating Effects ◽  
General Distress ◽  
Multiple Outcome ◽  
Post Traumatic ◽  
Anxiety Depression ◽  
Illness Phase

Background: 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 anxiety, depression, post-traumatic and general distress of major virus epidemics since 2002. Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, PsycINFO, and Embase from 2002 until 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 MHP with well-validated and frequently used scales. A three-level random-effects meta-analysis for dependent sizes was conducted to account for multiple outcome reporting. We pooled MHP jointly and separately for mild or moderate-to-severe severity by acute (one month), ongoing (one to three month), and post-illness phase (longer than three months). A meta-regression was conducted to test for moderating effects. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020194535. Findings: We identified 59 studies providing a total of 187 effect sizes. Range for sample size (n=14-n=1002), females (22-79%), and mean age (32-72 years). MHP prevalence was higher for mild (35.5-46.3%) compared to moderate-to-severe MPH (17.3-22.3). 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 proportions. Interpretation: MHP decreased over time but were still on a substantial level at post-illness. This highlights a need for rapid access to mental health care and rehabilitation planning in affected individuals.

scholarly journals Assessing anxiety, depression and insomnia symptoms among Ebola survivors in Africa: A meta-analysis

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. e0246515
Author(s):  
Jeremiah W. Acharibasam ◽  
Batholomew Chireh ◽  
Hayelom G. Menegesha
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Traumatic Stress ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Virus Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Post Traumatic Stress ◽  
Frontline Workers ◽  
Post Traumatic ◽  
Anxiety Depression ◽  
Insomnia Symptoms

Background During health disaster events such as the current devastating havoc being inflicted on countries globally by the SARS-CoV-19 pandemic, mental health problems among survivors and frontline workers are likely concerns. However, during such health disaster events, stakeholders tend to give more precedence to the socio-economic and biomedical health consequences at the expense of mental health. Meanwhile, studies show that regardless of the kind of disaster/antecedent, all traumatic events trigger similar post-traumatic stress symptoms among survivors, families, and frontline workers. Thus, our study investigated the prevalence of anxiety, depression and insomnia symptoms among survivors of the 2014–2016 Ebola virus disease that plagued the West African sub-region. Methods We systematically retrieved peer-reviewed articles published between 1970 and 2019 from seven electronic databases, including Google Scholar, MEDLINE, PsychInfo, PubMed, Scopus, Springer Link, Web of Science on Ebola and post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms. A comprehensive hand search complemented this literature search. Of the 87 articles retrieved, only 13 met the inclusion criteria for this meta-analysis. Results After heterogeneity, influence, and publication bias analysis, our meta-analysis pooled proportion effects estimates showed a moderate to a high prevalence of anxiety (14%; 99% CI: 0.05–0.30), depression (15%; 99% CI: 0.11–0.21), and insomnia (22%; 99% CI: 0.13–0.36). Effect estimates ranging from (0.13; 99% CI: 0.05, 0.28) through to (0.11; 99% CI: 0.05–0.22), (0.15; 99% CI: 0.09–0.25) through to (0.13; 99% CI: 0.08–0.21) and (0.23; 99% CI: 0.11–0.41) to (0.23; 99% CI: 0.11–0.41) were respectively reported for anxiety, depression and insomnia symptoms. These findings suggest a significant amount of EVD survivors are struggling with anxiety, depression and insomnia symptoms. Conclusion Our study provided the first-ever meta-analysis evidence of anxiety, depression, and insomnia symptoms among EVD survivors, and suggest that the predominant biomedical health response to regional and global health disasters should be complemented with trauma-related mental health services.

scholarly journals Burden of predominant psychological reactions among the healthcare workers and general during COVID-19 pandemic phase: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bhaskar Thakur ◽  
Mona Pathak
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Global Mental Health ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Random Effect ◽  
Anxiety And Depression ◽  
Psychological Reactions ◽  
Frontline Healthcare Workers ◽  
Anxiety Depression

ABSTRACTAimPresent systematic review and meta-analysis examined the burden of psychological reactions predominantly anxiety, depression, stress and insomnia during novel COVID-19 pandemic phase among the frontline healthcare, non-frontline healthcare and general.MethodologyPubMed, EMBASE and SCOPUS were searched for studies between Jan 1, 2020 to May 25, 2020. Brief protocol of the systematic review was registered with the PROSPERO database, (CRD42020186229).Any study that reported the burden of at least one of psychological reactions including anxiety or depression or stress or insomnia was eligible. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistic and results were synthesized using random effect meta-analysis.ResultsOut of 52eligible studies, 43 reported anxiety, 43 reported depression, 20 reported stress and 11 reported insomnia. Overall prevalence for anxiety, depression, stress and insomnia were 26.6%, 26.2%,26.2% and 34.4% respectively. Anxiety and depression were found highest among the COVID-19 patients (43.3% and 51.75 respectively). Apart from COVID-19 patients, prevalence of anxiety, depression, stress and insomnia were found highest among the frontline healthcare (27.2%, 32.1%,55.6% and 34.4% respectively) as compared to general healthcare workers (26.9%, 15.7%, 7.0% and 34.0% respectively) and general population (25.9%, 25.9%,25.4% and 29.4% respectively).ConclusionAnxiety and depression were found highest among the COVID-19 patients. Apart from COVID-19 patients, the anxiety, depression, stress and insomnia were more prevalent among frontline healthcare workers compared to general. Such increased prevalence is prompting towards the global mental health emergency. Therefore a call of urgent attention and pan-region effective mental-health intervention are required to mitigate these psychological reactions.

scholarly journals Bibliotherapy as a Non-pharmaceutical Intervention to Enhance Mental Health in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review and Bioethical Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniela Monroy-Fraustro ◽  
Isaac Maldonado-Castellanos ◽  
Mónica Aboites-Molina ◽  
Susana Rodríguez ◽  
Perla Sueiras ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Quality Criteria ◽  
Health Problems ◽  
Clinical Settings ◽  
Road Map ◽  
Road Maps

Background: A non-pharmaceutical treatment offered as psychological support is bibliotherapy, which can be described as the process of reading, reflecting, and discussing literature to further a cognitive shift. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic demands a response to prevent a peak in the prevalence of mental health problems and to avoid the collapse of mental health services, which are scarce and inaccessible due to the pandemic. Thus, this study aimed to review articles on the effectiveness of bibliotherapy on different mental health problems.Methods: A systematic review was conducted to examine relevant studies that assess the effectiveness of bibliotherapy in different clinical settings as a treatment capable of enhancing a sense of purpose and its surrounding values. To achieve this, a systematic review, including a bioethical meta-analysis, was performed. A variant of the PICO (Participants, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome) model was used for the search strategy, and the systematic review was conducted in three databases: PubMed, Bireme, and OVID. Inclusion criteria were relevant studies that included the keywords, excluding documents with irrelevant topics, studies on subjects 15 years or younger, and in languages besides Spanish or English. Starting with 707 studies, after three rounds of different quality criteria, 13 articles were selected for analysis, including a hermeneutic analysis, which was followed by a fourth and final recovery round assessing bibliotherapy articles concerning healthcare workers.Results: Our findings showed that through bibliotherapy, patients developed several capacities, including the re-signification of their own activities through a new outlook of their moral horizon. There are no research road maps serving as guides to conduct research on the use of bibliotherapy to enhance mental health. Additionally, values such as autonomy and justice were closely linked with positive results in bibliotherapy. This implies that bibliotherapy has the potential to have a positive impact in different settings.Conclusions: Our contribution is to offer a road map that presents state-of-the-art bibliotherapy research, which will assist institutions and healthcare professionals to plan clinical and specific interventions with positive outcomes.

scholarly journals Time Perspective as A Common Transdiagnostic Factor of Mental Problems: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocol

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yi Yang ◽  
Siu Ching Wong ◽  
Ingrid Obsuth ◽  
Aja Murray
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Quality Assessment ◽  
Time Perspective ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mental Health Issue ◽  
Health Issues ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Mental Health Issues

Abstract BackgroundResearch into the transdiagnostic processes underlying multiple mental health problems is promising for making clinical practice and interventions more effective and resource-efficient. In this protocol, we describe a systematic review and meta-analysis that will explore time perspective, defined as an individual’s relative investment of attention on past, present, and future, as a possible transdiagnostic factor that may contribute to issues across wide-ranging domains of mental health. MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted to quantify the associations between mental health issue and specific dimensions of time perspective (past, present, future), respectively. The review will include quantitatively measured associations between time perspective and psychological problems published in a peer-reviewed journal from 1st January 1990 up until 1st March 2021, in the English language. Electronic searches will be conducted in Google Scholar, PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science, and EMBASE and supplemented by expert consultation and inspection of the reference lists of included papers. Screening, quality assessment and data extraction will be conducted by two reviewers independently, and potential conflicts will be resolved through discussion with a third reviewer. Random-effects meta-analysis will be conducted using the metafor package in R statistical software, and quality assessment will employ The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Form for Cohort Studies and for Case-Control Studies. The Quality In Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) will be used to evaluate risk of bias. A narrative synthesis will additionally be used to summarize and interpret the results. DiscussionThe present review will provide the first systematic synthesis exploring the associations between time perspective defined as a multidimensional construct and a broad range of mental health issues. This will help evaluate the extent to which time perspective can be considered a key transdiagnostic factor in mental health and thus a key intervention target for the prevention and treatment of multiple mental health issues simultaneously. With a clearer view of the relations between time perspective and various mental health issues based on a robust synthesis, more focused, effective, and efficient interventions may be delivered. Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42021228869

scholarly journals Mental health in relation to changes in sleep, exercise, alcohol and diet during the COVID-19 pandemic: examination of four UK cohort studies

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aase Villadsen ◽  
Praveetha Patalay ◽  
David Bann
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Health Behaviours ◽  
Poor Mental Health ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Depression Symptoms ◽  
Adverse Health ◽  
Anxiety Depression

AbstractBackgroundResponses to the COVID-19 pandemic have included lockdowns and social distancing with considerable disruptions to people’s lives. These changes may have particularly impacted on those with mental health problems, leading to a worsening of inequalities in the behaviours which influence health.MethodsWe used data from four national longitudinal British cohort studies (N=10,666). Respondents reported mental health (psychological distress and anxiety/depression symptoms) and health behaviours (alcohol, diet, physical activity, and sleep) before and during the pandemic. Associations between pre-pandemic mental ill-health and pandemic mental ill-health and health behaviours were examined using logistic regression; pooled effects were estimated using meta-analysis.ResultsWorse mental health was related to adverse health behaviours; effect sizes were largest for sleep, exercise and diet, and weaker for alcohol. The associations between poor mental health and adverse health behaviours were larger during the May lockdown than pre-pandemic. In September, when restrictions had eased, inequalities had largely reverted to pre-pandemic levels. A notable exception was for sleep, where differences by mental health status remained high. Risk differences for adverse sleep for those with the highest level of prior mental ill-health compared to those with the lowest, were 21.2% (95% CI: 16.2, 26.2) before lockdown, 25.5% (20.0, 30.3) in May, and 28.2% (21.2, 35.2) in September.ConclusionsTaken together, our findings suggest that mental health is an increasingly important factor in health behaviour inequality in the COVID era. The promotion of mental health may thus be an important component of improving post-COVID population health.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document