scholarly journals The impact of SARS-CoV-2 transmission fear and COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of patients with primary immunodeficiency disorders, severe asthma, and other high-risk groups (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatih Çölkesen ◽  
Oguzhan Kilincel ◽  
Mehmet Sozen ◽  
Eray Yıldız ◽  
Sengul Beyaz ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND The adverse effects of COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of high-risk group patients for morbidity and mortality and its impact on public health in the long term have not been clearly determined. OBJECTIVE To determine the level of COVID-19 related transmission fear and anxiety in healthcare workers and patients with primary immunodeficiency disorder (PID), severe asthma, and the ones with other comorbidities. METHODS The healthcare workers and patients with PID, severe asthma (all patients receiving biological agent treatment), malignancy, cardiovascular disease, hypertension (90% of patients receiving ACEI or ARB therapy), diabetes mellitus (42 % of patients receiving DPP-4 inhibitor therapy) were included in the study. A total of 560 participants, 80 individuals in each group, were provided. The hospital anxiety and depression scale ( HADS ) and Fear of illness and virus evaluation (FIVE ) scales were applied to the groups with face to face interview methods. RESULTS The mean age was 49.30 years and 306 (55 %) were female. The FIVE Scale and HADS-A scale scores of health care workers were significantly higher than other groups' scores (p = 0.001 and 0.006). The second-highest scores belonged to patients with PID. There was no significant difference between the groups for the HADS-D score (p=0.07). The lowest score in all scales was observed in patients with hypertension. CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrated that in the pandemic process, patients with primary immunodeficiency, asthma patients, and other comorbid patients, especially healthcare workers, should be referred to the centers for the detection and treatment of mental health conditions.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatih Çölkesen ◽  
Oğuzhan Kılınçel ◽  
Mehmet Sözen ◽  
Eray Yıldız ◽  
Şengül Beyaz ◽  
...  

AbstractBackgroundThe adverse effects of COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of high-risk group patients for morbidity and mortality and its impact on public health in the long term have not been clearly determined.ObjectiveTo determine the level of COVID-19 related transmission fear and anxiety in healthcare workers and patients with primary immunodeficiency disorder (PID), severe asthma, and the ones with other comorbidities.MethodsThe healthcare workers and patients with PID, severe asthma (all patients receiving biological agent treatment), malignancy, cardiovascular disease, hypertension (90% of patients receiving ACEI or ARB therapy), diabetes mellitus (42 % of patients receiving DPP-4 inhibitor therapy) were included in the study. A total of 560 participants, 80 individuals in each group, were provided. The hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS) and Fear of illness and virus evaluation (FIVE) scales were applied to the groups with face to face interview methods.ResultsThe mean age was 49.30 ± 13.74 years and 306 (55 %) were female. The FIVE Scale and HADS-A scale scores of health care workers were significantly higher than other groups scores (p = 0.001 and 0.006). The second-highest scores belonged to patients with PID. There was no significant difference between the groups for the HADS-D score (p=0.07). The lowest score in all scales was observed in patients with hypertension.ConclusionsThis study demonstrated that in the pandemic process, patients with primary immunodeficiency, asthma patients, and other comorbid patients, especially healthcare workers, should be referred to the centers for the detection and treatment of mental health conditions.


2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 84-91
Author(s):  
Fatih Çölkesen ◽  
Oğuzhan Kılınçel ◽  
Mehmet Sözen ◽  
Eray Yıldız ◽  
Şengül Beyaz ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT Objective: The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health in the long term is unclear. We evaluated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)–related transmission fear and mental-health disorders in populations at high risk for COVID-19. Materials and Methods: Healthcare workers and patients with primary immunodeficiency disorders (PIDs), severe asthma, malignancy, cardiovascular disease, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus were included in the study. The hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS) and Fear of Illness and Virus Evaluation (FIVE) scales were applied during face-to-face interviews. Results: There was a total of 560 participants, 80 per group; 306 (55%) were female. The FIVE and HADS-A scale scores of health care workers were significantly higher than the other groups (p = 0.001 and 0.006). The second-highest scores were in patients with PID. There was no significant difference between the groups in HADS-D scores (p = 0.07). There was a significant positive correlation between FIVE scale scores and anxiety (r = 0.828; p < 0.001) and depression (r = 0.660; p < 0.001). The FIVE scale had significant discriminatory power for anxiety (AUC = 0.870, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.836–0.904; p < 0.0001) and depression (area under the curve = 0.760, 95% CI = 0.717–0.803; p < 0.0001). Conclusion: During the COVID-19 pandemic, mental-health disorders may develop in patients with comorbidities, especially healthcare workers. They should be referred to mental-health centers. Keywords: Asthma, COVID-19, fear of virus transmission, mental health, primary immunodeficiency


Author(s):  
Biao Chen ◽  
Qing-xian Li ◽  
Heng Zhang ◽  
Jia-yong Zhu ◽  
Yu-hang Wu ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose: To assess the psychological effects of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on medical staff and the general public.Methods: During the outbreak of COVID-19, an internet-based questionnaire included The Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS), Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10), and Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) was used to assess the impact of the epidemic situation on the mental health of medical staff and general population in Wuhan and its surrounding areas.Results: The results suggest that the outbreak of COVID-19 has affected individuals significantly, the degree of which is related to age, sex, occupation and mental illness. There was a significant difference in PSS-10 and IES-R scores between the medical staff and the general population. The medical staff showed higher PSS-10 scores (16.813 ± 4.87) and IES-R scores (22.40 ± 12.12) compared to members of the general population PSS-10 (14.80 ± 5.60) and IES-R scores (17.89 ± 13.08). However, there was no statistically significant difference between the SDS scores of medical staff (44.52 ± 12.36) and the general public (43.08 ± 11.42). In terms of the need for psychological assistance, 50.97% of interviewees responded that they needed psychological counseling, of which medical staff accounted for 65.87% and non-medical staff accounted for 45.10%.Conclusion: During the ongoing COVID-19 outbreak, great attention should be paid to the mental health of the population, especially medical staff, and measures such as psychological intervention should be actively carried out for reducing the psychosocial effects.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michela Di Trani ◽  
Rachele Mariani ◽  
Rosa Ferri ◽  
Daniela De Berardinis ◽  
Maria G. Frigo

The COVID-19 outbreak has placed extraordinary demands upon healthcare systems worldwide. Italy's hospitals have been among the most severely overwhelmed, and as a result, Italian healthcare workers' (HCWs) well-being has been at risk. The aim of this study is to explore the relationships between dimensions of burnout and various psychological features among Italian healthcare workers (HCWs) during the COVID-19 emergency. A group of 267 HCWs from a hospital in the Lazio Region completed self-administered questionnaires online through Google Forms, including the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), Resilience Scale, and Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale Short Form (IU). Cluster analysis highlighted two opposite burnout risk profiles: low burnout and high-risk burnout. The high-risk group had lower resilience and greater difficulties in tolerating the uncertainty than the low-burnout group. A set of general linear models confirmed that both IU subscales, prospective and inhibition, moderated the relationship between resilience and burnout (specifically in the depersonalization dimension). In conclusion, the results showed that individual levels of resilience and one's ability to tolerate uncertainty have been significant factors in determining the impact of the COVID-19 emergency on HCWs. The use of emotional strategies that allow individuals to stay in a critical situation without the need to control it appears to protect against burnout in these circumstances.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Youji Takubo ◽  
Naohisa Tsujino ◽  
Yuri Aikawa ◽  
Kazuyo Fukiya ◽  
Momoko Iwai ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has recently become the most important issue in the world. Very few reports in Japan have examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on peripartum mental health. We examined the status of postpartum mental health before and during COVID-19 pandemic from a consecutive database in a metropolitan area of Japan. Methods The subjects were women who had completed a maternity health check-up at a core regional hospital in Yokohama during the period from April 1, 2017, to December 31, 2020. We collected the subjects’ scores for the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) and the Mother-to-Infant Bonding Scale (MIBS) at 1 month postpartum. The subjects were divided into four groups (three Before COVID-19 groups and a During COVID-19 group). MANOVA and post-hoc tests were used to determine mental health changes in the postpartum period among the four groups. Results The Before and During COVID-19 groups contained 2844 and 1095 mothers, respectively. There were no significant difference in the total scores of the EPDS and MIBS among the four groups. However, the EPDS items related to anxiety factors were significantly higher and the EPDS items related to anhedonia and depression factors (excluding thoughts of self-harm) were significantly lower in the During COVID-19 group. Conclusion The EPDS scores changed in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic. Anxiety, which represent hypervigilance, was significantly higher and anhedonia and depression were significantly lower in the During COVID-19 group. Our results may reflect COVID-19-related health concerns and a lack of social support caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.


Author(s):  
Ignacio Ricci-Cabello ◽  
Jose F. Meneses-Echavez ◽  
Maria Jesús Serrano-Ripoll ◽  
David Fraile-Navarro ◽  
Maria Antònia Fiol de Roque ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTObjectivesTo examine the impact of providing healthcare during or after health emergencies caused by viral epidemic outbreaks on healthcare workers′(HCWs) mental health, and to assess the available evidence base regarding interventions to reduce such impact.DesignSystematic rapid review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO, searched up to 23 March 2020.MethodWe selected observational and experimental studies examining the impact on mental health of epidemic outbreaks on HCWs. One reviewer screened titles and abstracts, and two reviewers independently reviewed full texts. We extracted study characteristics, symptoms, prevalence of mental health problems, risk factors, mental health interventions, and its impact. We assessed risk of bias for each individual study and used GRADE to ascertain the certainty of the evidence. We conducted a narrative and tabulated synthesis of the results. We pooled data using random-effects meta-analyses to estimate the prevalence of specific mental health problems.ResultsWe included 61 studies (56 examining impact on mental health and five about interventions to reduce such impact). Most were conducted in Asia (59%), in the hospital setting (79%), and examined the impact of the SARS epidemic (69%). The pooled prevalence was higher for anxiety (45%, 95% CI 21 to 69%; 6 studies, 3,373 participants), followed by depression (38%, 95% CI 15 to 60%; 7 studies, 3,636 participants), acute stress disorder (31%, 95% CI 0 to 82%, 3 studies, 2,587 participants), burnout (29%, 95% CI 25 to 32%; 3 studies; 1,168 participants), and post-traumatic stress disorder (19%, 95% CI 11 to 26%, 10 studies, 3,121 participants). Based on 37 studies, we identified factors associated with the likelihood of developing those problems, including sociodemographic (younger age and female gender), social (lack of social support, social rejection or isolation, stigmatization), and occupational (working in a high risk environment (frontline staff), specific occupational roles (e.g., nurse), and lower levels of specialised training, preparedness and job experience) factors. Five studies reported interventions for frontline HCW, two of which were educational and aimed to prevent mental health problems by increasing HCWs′ resilience. These interventions increased confidence in support and training, pandemic self-efficacy, and interpersonal problems solving (very low certainty). One multifaceted intervention implemented training and organisational changes) targeted at hospital nurses during the SARS epidemic, reporting improvements in anxiety, depression, and sleep quality (very low certainty). The two remaining interventions, which were multifaceted and based on psychotherapy provision, did not assess their impact.ConclusionThe prevalence of anxiety, depression, acute and post-traumatic stress disorder, and burnout, was high both during and after the outbreaks. These problems not only have a long-lasting effect on the mental health of HCWs, but also hinder the urgent response to the current COVID-19 pandemic, by jeopardising attention and decision-making. Governments and healthcare authorities should take urgent actions to protect the mental health of HCWs. In light of the limited evidence regarding the impact of interventions to tackle mental health problems in HCWs, the risk factors identified in this study, more so when they are modifiable, represent important targets for future interventions.SUMARY BOX1:What is already known on this topic?Previous studies showed that healthcare workers involved providing frontline care during viral epidemic outbreaks are at high risk of developing mental health problems.Given the current COVID-19 pandemic, there is an urgent need to synthesize the evidence regarding the impact of viral epidemic outbreaks on mental health of healthcare workers.2:What does this study add?This timely systematic rapid review offers for the first time pooled estimations of the prevalence of the most common mental health problems experienced by HCWs during and after viral epidemic outbreaks, namely anxiety (45%), depression (38%), and acute stress disorder (31%), among others.Our study also identifies a broad number of factors associated with these conditions, including sociodemographic factors such as younger age and female gender, social factors such as lack of social support, social rejection or isolation, stigmatization, and occupational factors such as working in a high risk environment, specific occupational roles, and having lower levels of specialised training, preparedness and job experience.Our study shows that, although educational and multifaceted interventions might mitigate the development of mental health problems, the certainty on the evidence is very low - therefore indicating that further high quality research is urgently needed to inform evidence-based policies for viral pandemics.


Author(s):  
Tina Vilovic ◽  
Josko Bozic ◽  
Marino Vilovic ◽  
Doris Rusic ◽  
Sanja Zuzic Furlan ◽  
...  

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, family physicians (FPs) are the backbone of the healthcare system with considerable impact on the general population, and their well-being is of great importance. The aim of this investigation was to assess FPs mental health, as well as knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAPs) regarding the pandemic, and opinions on non-communicable disease (NCD) health care provided to patients. A cross-sectional study was carried out with a sample of 613 FPs. Anxiety and depression levels were estimated with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, subjective perceived stress with the Perceived Stress Scale, while trauma-related symptoms were assessed using the Impact on Event Scale-COVID19. KAPs toward the pandemic and opinions regarding NCD patients were evaluated with questionnaires accordingly. Results have shown that age (β = −0.02, p = 0.013) and personal risk of COVID‑19 (β = 1.05, p < 0.001) were significant independent correlates of the knowledge score. A total of 87.7% FPs expressed moderate/high perceived stress, 45.2% moderate/severe trauma-related symptoms, 60.4% borderline/abnormal anxiety levels, and 52.4% borderline/abnormal depression levels. Knowledge score was an independent predictor of perceived stress (β = −0.33, p = 0.023) and anxiety (β = −0.31, p = 0.006) levels. Limited accessibility to healthcare services and decreased number of newly-diagnosed NCD cases were mostly agreed on. The pandemic puts a considerable strain on FPs mental health, as well as on public health measures, due to the decreased overall quality of NCD patient health care. Educational programs may bridge the gaps between FPs’ knowledge. Thus lowering anxiety and improving patient care.


Author(s):  
Johannes Korth ◽  
Benjamin Wilde ◽  
Sebastian Dolff ◽  
Jasmin Frisch ◽  
Michael Jahn ◽  
...  

SARS-CoV-2 is a worldwide challenge for the medical sector. Healthcare workers (HCW) are a cohort vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection due to frequent and close contact with COVID-19 patients. However, they are also well trained and equipped with protective gear. The SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody status was assessed at three different time points in 450 HCW of the University Hospital Essen in Germany. HCW were stratified according to contact frequencies with COVID-19 patients in (I) a high-risk group with daily contacts with known COVID-19 patients (n = 338), (II) an intermediate-risk group with daily contacts with non-COVID-19 patients (n = 78), and (III) a low-risk group without patient contacts (n = 34). The overall seroprevalence increased from 2.2% in March–May to 4.0% in June–July to 5.1% in October–December. The SARS-CoV-2 IgG detection rate was not significantly different between the high-risk group (1.8%; 3.8%; 5.5%), the intermediate-risk group (5.1%; 6.3%; 6.1%), and the low-risk group (0%, 0%, 0%). The overall SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence remained low in HCW in western Germany one year after the outbreak of COVID-19 in Germany, and hygiene standards seemed to be effective in preventing patient-to-staff virus transmission.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document