Dataset Information

Psychological distress and sleep problems when people are under interpersonal isolation during an epidemic: A nationwide multicenter cross-sectional study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND.:During the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), people are under the dual pressure of interpersonal isolation and concerns about infection. An evaluation of people's psychological status and risk factors is needed to conduct target interventions. METHODS.:This was a nationwide, multicenter, cross-sectional study using quota and snowball sampling methods during the COVID-19 epidemic in China. Participants' characteristics and experiences were obtained by an online questionnaire and telephone review. Psychological distress and sleep problems were measured by the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, and the Insomnia Severity Index. RESULTS.:A total of 23,500 participants were recruited, and 19,372 valid questionnaires were received from 11 centers. Overall, 11.0-13.3% of the participants had anxiety, depression, or insomnia symptoms, and 1.9-2.7% had severe symptoms. The prevalence of psychological and sleep problems has increased. Working as frontline medical staff (Odds Ratio OR = 3.406), living in Hubei Province (OR = 2.237), close contacts with COVID-19 (OR = 1.808), and age 35-49 years (OR = 1.310) were risk factors for anxiety symptoms; no outside activity for 2 weeks (OR = 2.167) and age 35-49 years (OR = 1.198) were risk factors for depression symptoms; and living in Hubei Province (OR = 2.376), no outside activity for 2 weeks (OR = 1.927), and age 35-49 years (OR = 1.262) were risk factors for insomnia symptoms. Only 1.9% of participants received counseling during the epidemic. CONCLUSIONS.:Psychological and sleep problems increased during interpersonal isolation due to COVID-19. Current psychological interventions are far from sufficient.

SUBMITTER: Wang S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7503168 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Psychological distress and sleep problems when people are under interpersonal isolation during an epidemic: A nationwide multicenter cross-sectional study.

Wang Shu S Zhang Yuan Y Ding Wei W Meng Yao Y Hu Huiting H Liu Zhenhua Z Zeng Xianwei X Wang Minzhong M

European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists 20200828 1

<h4>Background.</h4>During the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), people are under the dual pressure of interpersonal isolation and concerns about infection. An evaluation of people's psychological status and risk factors is needed to conduct target interventions.<h4>Methods.</h4>This was a nationwide, multicenter, cross-sectional study using quota and snowball sampling methods during the COVID-19 epidemic in China. Participants' characteristics and experiences were obtained by an ...[more]

PMID: 32854786

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe emerging novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become one of the leading cause of deaths worldwide in 2020. The present systematic review and meta-analysis estimated the magnitude of sleep problems during the COVID-19 pandemic and its relationship with psychological distress.MethodsFive academic databases (Scopus, PubMed Central, ProQuest, ISI Web of Knowledge, and Embase) were searched. Observational studies including case-control studies and cross-sectional studies were included if relevant data relationships were reported (i.e., sleep assessed utilizing the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index or Insomnia Severity Index). All the studies were English, peer-reviewed papers published between December 2019 and February 2021. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020181644.Findings168 cross-sectional, four case-control, and five longitudinal design papers comprising 345,270 participants from 39 countries were identified. The corrected pooled estimated prevalence of sleep problems were 31% among healthcare professionals, 18% among the general population, and 57% among COVID-19 patients (all p-values < 0.05). Sleep problems were associated with depression among healthcare professionals, the general population, and COVID-19 patients, with Fisher's Z scores of -0.28, -0.30, and -0.36, respectively. Sleep problems were positively (and moderately) associated with anxiety among healthcare professionals, the general population, and COVID-19 patients, with Fisher's z scores of 0.55, 0.48, and 0.49, respectively.InterpretationSleep problems appear to have been common during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, sleep problems were found to be associated with higher levels of psychological distress. With the use of effective programs treating sleep problems, psychological distress may be reduced. Vice versa, the use of effective programs treating psychological distress, sleep problems may be reduced.FundingThe present study received no funding.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) is a psychological intervention with established efficacy in the prevention and treatment of depressive disorders. Previous systematic reviews have not evaluated the effectiveness of IPT on symptoms of stress, anxiety, depression, quality of life, relationship satisfaction/quality, social supports, and an improved psychological sense of wellbeing. There is limited information regarding moderating and mediating factors that impact the effectiveness of IPT such as the timing of the intervention or the mode of delivery of IPT intervention. The overall objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of IPT interventions to treat perinatal (from pregnancy up to 12 months postpartum) psychological distress. METHODS:MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (OVID), CINAHL with Full Text (Ebsco), Social Work Abstracts (Ebsco), SocINDEX with Full Text (Ebsco), Academic Search Complete (Ebsco), Family & Society Studies Worldwide (Ebsco), Family Studies Abstracts (Ebsco), and Scopus databases were searched from inception until 31 January 2019. Two researchers independently screened articles for eligibility. Of the 685 screened articles, 43 met the inclusion criteria. The search was re-run on 11 May 2020. An additional 204 articles were screened and two met the inclusion criteria, resulting in a total of 45 studies included in this review. There were 25 Randomized Controlled Trials, 10 Quasi-experimental studies, eight Open Trials, and two Single Case Studies. All included studies were critically appraised for quality. RESULTS:In most studies (n = 24, 53%), the IPT intervention was delivered individually; in 17 (38%) studies IPT was delivered in a group setting and two (4%) studies delivered the intervention as a combination of group and individual IPT. Most interventions were initiated during pregnancy (n = 27, 60%), with the remaining 18 (40%) studies initiating interventions during the postpartum period. LIMITATIONS:This review included only English-language articles and peer-reviewed literature. It excluded government reports, dissertations, conference papers, and reviews. This limited the access to grassroots or community-based recruitment and retention strategies that may have been used to target smaller or marginalized groups of perinatal women. CONCLUSIONS:IPT is an effective intervention for the prevention and treatment of psychological distress in women during their pregnancy and postpartum period. As a treatment intervention, IPT is effective in significantly reducing symptoms of depression and anxiety as well as improving social support, relationship quality/satisfaction, and adjustment. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO CRD42019114292.

Project description:ImportanceInfection with SARS-CoV-2 is associated with fatigue and sleep problems long after the acute phase of COVID-19. In addition, there are concerns of SARS-CoV-2 infection causing psychiatric illness; however, evidence of a direct effect is inconclusive.ObjectiveTo assess risk of risk of incident or repeat psychiatric illness, fatigue, or sleep problems following SARS-CoV-2 infection and to analyze changes according to demographic subgroups.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study assembled matched cohorts using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum, a UK primary care registry of 11 923 499 individuals aged 16 years or older. Patients were followed-up for up to 10 months, from February 1 to December 9, 2020. Individuals with less than 2 years of historical data or less than 1 week follow-up were excluded. Individuals with positive results on a SARS-CoV-2 test without prior mental illness or with anxiety or depression, psychosis, fatigue, or sleep problems were matched with up to 4 controls based on sex, general practice, and year of birth. Controls were individuals who had negative SARS-CoV-2 test results. Data were analyzed from January to July 2021.ExposureSARS-CoV-2 infection, determined via polymerase chain reaction testing.Main outcomes and measuresCox proportional hazard models estimated the association between a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result and subsequent psychiatric morbidity (depression, anxiety, psychosis, or self-harm), sleep problems, fatigue, or psychotropic prescribing. Models adjusted for comorbidities, ethnicity, smoking, and body mass index.ResultsOf 11 923 105 eligible individuals (6 011 020 [50.4%] women and 5 912 085 [49.6%] men; median [IQR] age, 44 [30-61] years), 232 780 individuals (2.0%) had positive result on a SARS-CoV-2 test. After applying selection criteria, 86 922 individuals were in the matched cohort without prior mental illness, 19 020 individuals had prior anxiety or depression, 1036 individuals had psychosis, 4152 individuals had fatigue, and 4539 individuals had sleep problems. After adjusting for observed confounders, there was an association between positive SARS-CoV-2 test results and psychiatric morbidity (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.83; 95% CI, 1.66-2.02), fatigue (aHR, 5.98; 95% CI, 5.33-6.71), and sleep problems (aHR, 3.16; 95% CI, 2.64-3.78). However, there was a similar risk of incident psychiatric morbidity for those with a negative SARS-CoV-2 test results (aHR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.65-1.77) and a larger increase associated with influenza (aHR, 2.98; 95% CI, 1.55-5.75).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of individuals registered at an English primary care practice during the pandemic, there was consistent evidence that SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with increased risk of fatigue and sleep problems. However, the results from the negative control analysis suggest that unobserved confounding may be responsible for at least some of the positive association between COVID-19 and psychiatric morbidity.

Project description:COVID-19 has created a general state of worry and distress, especially among vulnerable groups such as those with psychiatric diagnoses. Worldwide, psychiatric care provision has drastically suffered during the pandemic, with many patients unable to access proper care, which may have implications for increased mental health consequences in patients with psychiatric disorders (e.g., relapse and suicide). This cross-sectional study used structural equation modeling to investigate COVID-19-related trauma and distress among Arab psychiatric population during COVID-19 quarantine. Patients with pre-existing psychiatric disorders (N = 168) completed an online survey that comprised the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale 21 (DASS-21), the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), and a questionnaire on COVID-19-related attitudes/perceptions, sources of information, used protective measures, and socio-demographic information. Respondents commonly reported feeling down-hearted/blue, trouble concentrating, along with symptoms of avoidance and rumination related to the pandemic. Patients with depression and sleep disorders expressed higher COVID-19-related trauma than patients with other disorders. Perceived physical health mediated the effect of co-morbid chronic physical disorders on COVID-19 trauma, psychological distress, perceived vulnerability to COVID-19, and perceived likelihood of recovery in case of contracting COVID-19. Perceived physical health and perceived vulnerability to COVID-19 were strong direct predictors of COVID-19-related trauma and psychological distress. Staying at home negatively predicted COVID-19 trauma and exerted an indirect negative effect on psychological distress via COVID-19 trauma. COVID-19 trauma, age, and marital status directly predicted psychological distress, with COVID-19 trauma being the strongest predictor. Educational level, income, having family members working in the medical field, keeping up to date with the news on deaths/infected cases or the development of COVID-19 drugs or vaccines, satisfaction with available information on COVID-19, and using different protective measures were not associated with significant differences in COVID-19 trauma and psychological distress scores. Immuno-psychiatric interventions should be designed to target COVID-19-trauma and distress among younger single patients with perceived poor physical health, especially those diagnosed with depression and sleep disorders.

Dataset Information

Psychological distress and sleep problems when people are under interpersonal isolation during an epidemic: A nationwide multicenter cross-sectional study.

Publications

Psychological distress and sleep problems when people are under interpersonal isolation during an epidemic: A nationwide multicenter cross-sectional study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets