Public Mental Health Crisis during COVID-19 Pandemic, China.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Dong L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7323564 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST1055 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic increased multiple risk factors for mental health. Evidence-based, intersectoral public mental health responses are therefore critical. The primary aim of this study was to collate public mental health responses from across Europe.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey in March 2021. Participants were public and mental health professionals from across Europe. We developed an online instrument exploring five domains: changes in mental health supports during the pandemic; mental health support for vulnerable groups; multi-sectoral and service-user involvement; published mental health response plans; and perceived quality of overall country response.ResultsFifty-two individuals from 20 European nations responded. Reported changes in mental health supports included an increase in online mental health supports (n = 18); but no change in long-term mental health funding (n = 13); and a decrease in access to early interventions (n = 9). Responses indicated mental health support for vulnerable groups was limited, as was multi-sectoral and service-user involvement. Few national mental health response plans existed (n = 9) and 48% of respondents felt their countries mental health response had been 'poor' or 'very poor'.ConclusionsOur results give insights into the changes in mental health support at a country level across Europe during the COVID-19 pandemic. They indicate countries were not prepared to respond and people with existing vulnerabilities were often neglected in response planning. To be prepared for future pandemics and environmental disasters Public Mental Health preparedness plans are highly needed. These must be developed cross-departmentally, and through the meaningful inclusion of vulnerable groups.
| S-EPMC9897993 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8108487 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study demonstrates that religion protected mental health but constrained support for crisis response during the crucial early days of the COVID-19 pandemic. Data from a national probability-based sample of the U.S. population show that highly religious individuals and evangelicals suffered less distress in March 2020. They were also less likely to see the coronavirus outbreak as a crisis and less likely to support public health restrictions to limit the spread of the virus. The conservative politicization of religion in the United States can help explain why religious Americans (and evangelicals in particular) experienced less distress and were less likely to back public health efforts to contain the virus. We conclude that religion can be a source of comfort and strength in times of crisis, but-at least in the case of the COVID-19 pandemic-it can also undercut efforts to end the root causes of suffering.
| S-EPMC8250760 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionAs a multidimensional stressor, the COVID-19 pandemic posed a significant threat to mental health, with studies showing younger age groups to be particularly vulnerable. Thus, this study aimed to monitor mental health, potential risk/protective factors, and pandemic-related variables among young university students during the pandemic.MethodsStudents of the University of Greifswald (M age = 23.0 years, 73.9% female) participated in five cross-sectional online surveys in December 2020 (N = 1,127), March 2021 (N = 760), June/July 2021 (N = 531), December 2021 (N = 1,226), and December 2022 (N = 814). Sociodemographic data, depression and anxiety severity, loneliness, quality of life, coping strategies, resilience, self-esteem, and emotion regulation were measured. First, results from December 2020 were compared to pre-pandemic normative data. Second, the time course during the pandemic was analyzed. Third, linear models were calculated to examine the influence of risk and protective factures on depression and anxiety severity.ResultsHigher levels of depression, anxiety, and loneliness, as well as lower levels of self-esteem, physical and mental health, social relationships and well-being were found in December 2020 compared to pre-pandemic. Levels of depression and anxiety severity peaked in December 2022. Female sex, loneliness, and previous mental treatment showed associations with higher depression and anxiety severity, while higher self-esteem, resilience and use of reappraisal strategies appeared to act as protective factors.DiscussionThe study indicates the pandemic's detrimental impact on students' mental health and quality of life. Identified risk and protective factors provide guidance for tailored prevention and treatment, as well as the design of measures for future pandemics and other crisis.
| S-EPMC10864646 | biostudies-literature
Project description:With an emergence of research investigating the educational impacts of the
| S-EPMC9666408 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on breastfeeding women and to identify predictors of maternal mental health and coping.MethodsMothers aged ≥ 18 years with a breast-fed infant ≤ 18 months of age during the COVID-19 pandemic in Beijing, China, completed a questionnaire. Descriptive analysis of lockdown consequences was performed and predictors of these outcomes were examined using stepwise linear regression.ResultsOf 2233 participants, 29.9%, 20.0% and 34.7% felt down, lonely, and worried, respectively, during the lockdown; however, 85.3% felt able to cope. Poorer maternal mental health was predicted by maternal (younger age, higher education) and infant (older age, lower gestation) characteristics, and social circumstances (husband unemployed or working from home, receiving advice from family, having enough space for the baby, living close to a park or green space). Conversely, better maternal mental health was predicted by higher income, employment requiring higher qualifications, more personal space at home, shopping or walking > once/week and lack of impact of COVID-19 on job or income. Mothers with higher education, more bedrooms, fair division of household chores and attending an online mother and baby group > once/week reported better coping.ConclusionThe findings highlight maternal characteristics and circumstances that predict poorer mental health and reduced coping which could be used to target interventions in any future public health emergencies requiring social restrictions.
| S-EPMC8231088 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has exposed humans to the highest physical and mental risks. Thus, it is becoming a priority to probe the mental health problems experienced during the pandemic in different populations. We performed a meta-analysis to clarify the prevalence of postpandemic mental health problems. Seventy-one published papers (n = 146,139) from China, the United States, Japan, India, and Turkey were eligible to be included in the data pool. These papers reported results for Chinese, Japanese, Italian, American, Turkish, Indian, Spanish, Greek, and Singaporean populations. The results demonstrated a total prevalence of anxiety symptoms of 32.60% (95% confidence interval (CI): 29.10-36.30) during the COVID-19 pandemic. For depression, a prevalence of 27.60% (95% CI: 24.00-31.60) was found. Further, insomnia was found to have a prevalence of 30.30% (95% CI: 24.60-36.60). Of the total study population, 16.70% (95% CI: 8.90-29.20) experienced post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic. Subgroup analysis revealed the highest prevalence of anxiety (63.90%) and depression (55.40%) in confirmed and suspected patients compared with other cohorts. Notably, the prevalence of each symptom in other countries was higher than that in China. Finally, the prevalence of each mental problem differed depending on the measurement tools used. In conclusion, this study revealed the prevalence of mental problems during the COVID-19 pandemic by using a fairly large-scale sample and further clarified that the heterogeneous results for these mental health problems may be due to the nonstandardized use of psychometric tools.
| S-EPMC8266633 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction: This study compares rates of depression, suicidal ideation, and burnout among resident/fellow and attending physicians in orthopaedic surgery to other specialties during height/end of the first wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic at our institution. Main outcomes and measures included suicidal ideation, Patient Health Questionnaire for Depression (PHQ-9) scores for depression, and 2 single-item measures for emotional exhaustion and depersonalization. This study provides valuable information regarding orthopaedic surgeon mental health during world crises. Methods: This is a cross-sectional survey-based study of resident, fellow, and attending physicians from 26 specialties during and after the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic at our institution from April 24, 2020 to May 15, 2020. The survey contained 22 items. This includes consent, demographics and general data, 2 single-item questions of emotional exhaustion and depersonalization, and the PHQ-9. Subjects were eligible if they were a resident/fellow or attending physician at our institution. Results: The response rate for the study was 16.31%. Across all specialties rates were 6.2% depression, 19.6% burnout, and 6.6% suicidal ideation. The results for orthopaedic surgeons are as follows: 0% tentative diagnosis of depression, 3.8% suicidal ideation, and 4% burnout. Anesthesiology had the highest rate of depression (14.3%). Internal medicine and other non-surgical specialties had the highest rate of suicidal ideation (10.2%). Orthopaedic surgeons were significantly more likely to achieve work-life balance and experience less burnout than anesthesiologists and pediatricians. Discussion: Depression, suicidal ideation, and burnout continue to affect physicians across all specialties. These issues are amplified in light of crisis. Job satisfaction and rigorous training may be protective factors that allow orthopaedic surgeons to adapt to novel clinical settings under stress when compared to anesthesiologists and pediatricians. Resilience training and stress management strategies should continue to be investigated to better prepare physicians for world crises.
| S-EPMC8361516 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundResilience is a process that allows recovery from or adaptation to adversities. The aim of this study was to evaluate state resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic in psychiatric patients (PP), unaffected relatives (UR) and community controls (CC).MethodsThis study is part of the Barcelona ResIlience Survey for Mental Health COVID-19 (BRIS-MHC) project. Logistic regression models were performed to identify mental health outcomes associated with bad state resilience and predictors of good state resilience. The association between state resilience and specific affective temperaments as well as their influence on the association between depressive symptoms and state resilience were verified.ResultsThe study recruited 898 participants that took part in the survey. The presence of depressive symptoms was a predictor of bad state resilience in PP (β=0.110, OR=1.117, p=0.028). No specific mental health outcome was associated with bad state resilience in UR and CC. Predictors of good state resilience in PP were having pursued hobbies/conducted home tasks (β=1.261, OR=3.528, p=0.044) and level of organization in the family (β=0.986, OR=2.682, p=0.008). Having a controlling family was inversely associated with good state resilience in CC (β=-1.004, OR=0.367, p=0.012). The association between bad state resilience and depressive symptoms was partially mediated by affective temperaments.LimitationsParticipants self-reported their psychiatric diagnoses, their relatives' diagnoses or the absence of a psychiatric disorder, as well as their psychiatric symptoms.ConclusionsEnhancing resilience and coping strategies in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic might have important implications in terms of mental health outcomes.
| S-EPMC7845537 | biostudies-literature