Suicide during COVID-19 and other major international respiratory outbreaks: A systematic review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kahil K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7764387 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Suicide during COVID-19 and other major international respiratory outbreaks: A systematic review.
Kahil Karine K Cheaito Mohamad Ali MA El Hayek Rawad R Nofal Marwa M El Halabi Sarah S Kudva Kundadak Ganesh KG Pereira-Sanchez Victor V El Hayek Samer S
Asian journal of psychiatry 20201226
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was recently declared a pandemic by the WHO. This outbreak threatens not only physical health but also has significant repercussions on mental health. In recent world history, major infectious outbreaks were associated with severe mental health sequelae, including suicide. In this study, we systematically review the literature on suicidal outcomes during major international respiratory outbreaks, including COVID-19. We reviewed descriptive and analytic article ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:We aimed to do a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies describing suicidal ideation, suicide attempts and suicide and associated risk factors during COVID-19 pandemic. We searched following electronic databases using relevant search terms: Medline, Embase, PsycInfo and CINAHL and systematically reviewed the evidence following PRISMA guidelines. The meta-analysis of prevalence of suicidal ideation was done using random effect model. The search returned 972 records, we examined 106 in full text and included 38 studies describing 120,076 participants. Nineteen studies described suicide or attempted self-harm, mostly in case reports. Out of 19 studies describing suicidal ideations, 12 provided appropriate data for meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of suicidal ideation in these studies was 12.1% (CI 9.3-15.2). Main risk factors for suicidal ideations were: low social support, high physical and mental exhaustion and poorer self-reported physical health in frontline medical workers, sleep disturbances, quarantine and exhaustion, loneliness, and mental health difficulties. We provide first meta-analytic estimate of suicidal ideation based on large sample from different countries and populations. The rate of suicidal ideations during COVID pandemic is higher than that reported in studies on general population prior to pandemic and may result in higher suicide rates in future.
| S-EPMC8495045 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere are concerns that suicidal behaviors are arising among adolescents. The COVID-19 pandemic could have worsened the picture, however, studies on this topic reported contrasting results. This work aimed to summarise findings from the worldwide emerging literature on the rates of suicidality among young people during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis were performed, searching five electronic databases for studies published from January 1, 2020 until July 27, 2022. Studies reporting rates for each of the three considered outcomes (suicide, suicidal behaviors, and suicidal ideation) among young people under 19 years old during the COVID-19 pandemic were included. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted, and the intra-study risk of bias was assessed. When pre-COVID-19 data were available, incidence rate ratio (IRR) and prevalence ratio (PR) estimates were calculated between the two periods. All the analyses were performed according to the setting explored: general population, emergency department (ED), and psychiatric services. The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022308014).FindingsForty-seven observational studies were selected for more than 65 million subjects. The results of the meta-analysis showed a pooled annual incidence rate of suicides of 4.9 cases/100,000 during 2020, accounting for a non-statistically significant increase of 10% compared to 2019 (IRR 1.10, 95% CI: 0.94-1.29). The suicidal behaviors pooled prevalence during the COVID-19 pandemic was higher in the psychiatric setting (25%; 95% CI: 17-36%) than in the general population (3%; 1-13%) and ED (1%; 0-9%). The pooled rate of suicidal ideation was 17% in the general population (11-25%), 36% in psychiatric setting (20-56%) and 2% in ED (0-12%). The heterogeneity level was over 97% for both outcomes in all settings considered. The comparison between before and during COVID-19 periods highlighted a non-statistically significant upward trend in suicidal behaviors among the general population and in ED setting. The only significant increase was found for suicidal ideation in psychiatric setting among studies conducted in 2021 (PR 1.15; 95% CI: 1.04-1.27), not observed exploring 2020 alone.InterpretationDuring the pandemic, suicide spectrum issues seemed to follow the known pattern described in previous studies, with higher rates of suicidal ideation than of suicidal behaviors and suicide events. Governments and other stakeholders should be mindful that youth may have unique risks at the outset of large disasters like the COVID-19 pandemic and proactive steps are necessary to address the needs of youth to mitigate those risks.FundingThe present study was funded by the University of Torino (CHAL_RILO_21_01).
| S-EPMC9621691 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The current COVID-19 pandemic is the most severe pandemic of the 21st century, on track to having a rising death toll. Beyond causing respiratory distress, COVID-19 may also cause mortality by way of suicide. The pathways by which emerging viral disease outbreaks (EVDOs) and suicide are related are complex and not entirely understood. We aimed to systematically review the evidence on the association between EVDOs and suicidal behaviors and/or ideation. An electronic search was conducted using five databases: Medline, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO and Scopus in April 2020. A rapid systematic review was carried out, which involved separately and independently extracting quantitative data of selected articles. The electronic search yielded 2480 articles, of which 9 met the inclusion criteria. Most of the data were collected in Hong Kong (n = 3) and the USA (n = 3). Four studies reported a slight but significant increase in deaths by suicide during EVDOs. The increase in deaths by suicide was mainly reported during the peak epidemic and in older adults. Psychosocial factors such as the fear of being infected by the virus or social isolation related to quarantine measures were the most prominent factors associated with deaths by suicide during EVDOs. Overall, we found scarce and weak evidence for an increased risk of deaths by suicide during EVDOs. Our results inform the need to orient public health policies toward suicide prevention strategies targeting the psychosocial effects of EVDOs. High-quality research on suicide risk and prevention are warranted during the current pandemic. Highlights • Few studies assessed the association between suicidal behaviors or ideation and emerging viral outbreaks.• The literature reports weak evidence for increased suicide rates during emerging viral outbreaks.• Psychosocial factors are associated with deaths by suicide during emerging viral outbreaks.• Suicide prevention strategies are needed during emerging viral outbreaks.
| S-EPMC7531915 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMajor organ complications have been reported in patients hospitalised for COVID-19; most studies lacked controls.ObjectiveExamine major organ damage postdischarge among adults hospitalised for COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 controls.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library from 1 January 2020 to 19 May 2021.Study eligibility criteriaEnglish language studies of adults discharged from hospital for COVID-19; reporting major organ damage. Single review of abstracts; independent dual review of full text.Study appraisal and synthesis methodsStudy quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Appraisal Checklist for Cohort Studies. Outcome data were not pooled due to heterogeneity in populations, study designs and outcome assessment methods; findings are narratively synthesised.ResultsOf 124 studies in a full evidence report, 9 included non-COVID controls and are described here. Four of the nine (three USA, one UK) used large administrative databases. Four of the remaining five studies enrolled <600 COVID-19 patients. Mean or median age ranged from 49 to 70 years with 46%-94% male and 48%-78% White race; 10%-40% had been in intensive care units. Follow-up ranged from 4 weeks to 22 weeks postdischarge. Four used hospitalised controls, three non-hospitalised controls and two were unclear. Studies used various definitions of, and methods to assess, major organ damage outcomes. While the magnitude of effect differed across studies, incident cardiac, pulmonary, liver, acute and chronic kidney, stroke, diabetes, and coagulation disorders were consistently greater in adults hospitalised for COVID-19 compared with non-COVID-19 controls.LimitationsApplicability to subgroups (age, gender, COVID-19 severity, treatment, vaccination status) and non-hospitalised patients is unknown.Conclusions and implications of key findingsPostacute COVID-19 major organ damage is common and likely higher than controls. However, there is substantial uncertainty. More consistent reporting of clinical outcomes and pre-COVID health status along with careful selection of control groups are needed to address evidence gaps.Prospero registration numberCRD42020204788.
| S-EPMC9412042 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo review published economic evaluations of antiviral treatment for pandemics and outbreaks of respiratory illnesses.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review to identify economic evaluations of antiviral treatment for pandemics and outbreaks of respiratory illnesses, including coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We searched Medline (EBSCOhost), EMBASE (Ovid), EconLit (Ovid), National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (Ovid), and Health Technology Assessment (Ovid). The search was last rerun on July 5, 2020. Citation tracking and reference checking were used. Only full economic evaluations published as peer-reviewed articles in the last 10 years were included. Studies were quality assessed using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence economic evaluation checklist.ResultsOverall, 782 records were identified, of which 14 studies met the inclusion criteria. The studies were mostly conducted in high-income countries. All were model-based. Seven (50%) were cost-utility analyses, 4 (28.6%) were cost-effectiveness analyses, 2 (14.3%) were cost-consequences analyses, and 1 (7.1%) was a cost-benefit analysis. Strategies including antiviral treatment were found to be either cost-saving or cost-effective, at the study-specific willingness-to-pay thresholds. Empirical treatment was more cost-effective than test-guided treatment for young adults but less so for older adults.ConclusionsAntiviral treatment for managing pandemics and outbreaks of respiratory illnesses that have very high case fatality rate, similar to COVID-19 pandemic, are likely to be cost-effective either as a standalone intervention or part of a multifaceted strategy. Investing in the development of such curative treatments and promptly evaluating their cost-effectiveness, relative to other strategies in use at the time of their introduction should be the focus going forward to inform resource allocation decisions particularly in low- and middle-income countries.
| S-EPMC7474825 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has devastatingly affected Long-Term Care Facilities (LTCF), exposing aging people, staff members, and visitors. The world has learned through the pandemic and lessons can be taken to adopt effective measures to deal with COVID-19 outbreaks in LTCF. We aimed to systematically review the available evidence on the effect of measures to minimize the risk of transmission of COVID-19 in LTCs during outbreaks since 2021.MethodsThe search method was guided by the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews (PRISMA) and the reporting guideline synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) in systematic reviews. The search was performed in April 2023. Observational and interventional studies from the databases of PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Systematic Reviews, CINAHL, and Academic Search were systematically reviewed. We included studies conducted in the LTCF with outbreaks that quantitatively assess the effect of non-pharmacological measures on cases of COVID-19. Two review authors independently reviewed titles for inclusion, extracted data, and undertook the risk of bias according to pre-specified criteria. The quality of studies was analyzed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal.ResultsThirteen studies were included, with 8442 LTCF experiencing COVID-19 outbreaks and 598 thousand participants (residents and staff members). Prevention and control of COVID-19 infection interventions were grouped into three themes: strategic, tactical, and operational measures. The strategic measures reveal the importance of COVID-19 prevention and control as LTCF structural characteristics, namely the LTCF size, new admissions, infection control surveillance, and architectural structure. At the tactical level, the lack of personal and long staff shifts is related to COVID-19's spread. Operational measures with a favorable effect on preventing COVID-19 transmission are sufficient. Personal protective equipment stock, correct mask use, signaling, social distancing, and resident cohorting.ConclusionsOperational, tactical, and strategic approaches may have a favorable effect on preventing the spread of COVID-19 in LTCFs experiencing outbreaks. Given the heterogeneous nature of the measures, performing a meta-analysis was not possible. Future research should use more robust study designs to explore similar infection control measures in LTCFs during endemic situations with comparable outbreaks.Trial registrationThe protocol of this systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020214566).
| S-EPMC10546730 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) outbreak currently puts health care workers at high risk of both physical and mental health problems. This study aimed to identify the risk and protective factors for mental health outcomes in health care workers during coronavirus epidemics.MethodsA rapid systematic review was performed in three databases (March 24, 2020) and a current COVID-19 resource (May 28, 2020). Following study selection, study characteristics and effect measures were tabulated, and data were synthesized by using vote counting. Meta-analysis was not possible because of high variation in risk factors, outcomes and effect measures. Risk of bias of each study was assessed and the certainty of evidence was appraised according to the GRADE methodology.ResultsOut of 2605 references, 33 observational studies were selected and the identified risk and protective factors were categorized in ten thematic categories. Most of these studies (n = 23) were performed during the SARS outbreak, seven during the current COVID-19 pandemic and three during the MERS outbreak. The level of disease exposure and health fear were significantly associated with worse mental health outcomes. There was evidence that clear communication and support from the organization, social support and personal sense of control are protective factors. The evidence was of very low certainty, because of risk of bias and imprecision.ConclusionSafeguarding mental health of health care workers during infectious disease outbreaks should not be treated as a separate mental health intervention strategy, but could benefit from a protective approach. This study suggests that embedding mental health support in a safe and efficient working environment which promotes collegial social support and personal sense of control could help to maximize resilience of health care workers. Low quality cross-sectional studies currently provide the best possible evidence, and further research is warranted to confirm causality.
| S-EPMC7737991 | biostudies-literature
Project description:During the coronavirus disease pandemic, international travel controls have been widely adopted. To determine the effectiveness of these measures, we analyzed data from 165 countries and found that early implementation of international travel controls led to a mean delay of 5 weeks in the first epidemic peak of cases.
| S-EPMC8714230 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the novel virus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), began in December 2019 in China and has led to a global public health emergency. Previously, it was known as 2019-nCoV and caused disease mainly through respiratory pathways. The COVID-19 outbreak is ranked third globally as the most highly pathogenic disease of the twenty-first century, after the outbreak of SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome in 2002 and 2012, respectively. Clinical, laboratory, and diagnostic methodology have been demonstrated in some observational studies. No systematic reviews on COVID-19 have been published regarding the integration of COVID-19 outbreaks (monitoring, fate and treatment) with environmental and human health perspectives. Accordingly, this review systematically addresses environmental aspects of COVID-19 outbreak such as the origin of SARS-CoV-2, epidemiological characteristics, diagnostic methodology, treatment options and technological advancement for the prevention of COVID-19 outbreaks. Finally, we integrate COVID-19 outbreaks (monitoring, fate and treatment) with environmental and human health perspectives. We believe that this review will help to understand the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak as a multipurpose document, not only for the scientific community but also for global citizens. Countries should adopt emergency preparedness such as prepare human resources, infrastructure and facilities to treat severe COVID-19 as the virus spreads rapidly globally.
| S-EPMC8475003 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSuicide is the second leading cause of death for college-aged individuals worldwide and in the United States. Recent studies have identified preliminary evidence of widening disparities in suicidal behaviors across sex, sexual orientation, race/ethnicity, age, and socioeconomic status among college students. Few systematic reviews and meta-analyses offer a comprehensive understanding of on-campus and off-campus suicide interventions, nor is collated information available for different types of screening, assessment, treatment, and postvention plans. Further challenges have been identified since the COVID-19 pandemic, calling for cost-effective and innovative interventions to address increased rates of suicidal behaviors among college students facing unprecedented stressors.ObjectiveThis research protocol describes the first systematic review and meta-analysis to identify the most effective and cost-effective intervention components for universal and targeted (indicated and selected) suicide prevention among college students in a global context. Special attention will be placed on disparities in suicide prevention across sociodemographic subgroups, inclusive interventions beyond campus, global context, and intervention responses to the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsA sensitive search strategy will be executed across MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE, PsycINFO (EBSCO), ERIC (EBSCO), Cochrane Library, Dissertations and Theses Global (ProQuest), Scopus, Global Index Medicus, SciELO, African Journals Online, Global Health (CABI), and Google Scholar. Data extraction and evaluation will be conducted by three independent researchers. Risk of bias will be assessed. A multilevel meta-regression model and subgroup analysis will be used to analyze the data and estimate effect sizes.ResultsThe initial search was completed in December 2020 and updated with additional other-language studies in March 2020. We expect the results to be submitted for publication in mid-2021.ConclusionsDespite increasing rates of suicidal behaviors among college students, few preventative efforts have targeted this population, and fewer focus on factors that might place specific demographic groups at heightened risk. The impact of COVID-19 on suicidal behaviors among college students highlights and exacerbates the urgent need for rapid and effective interventions that might differ from traditional approaches. This equity-focused study will address these gaps and provide a valuable analysis of the effectiveness of suicide prevention programs and interventions. Findings will inform clinicians, researchers, policy makers, families, and organizations about evidence-based interventions for reducing the gaps in the suicide crisis among college students from different sociodemographic groups.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42020225429; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=225429.International registered report identifier (irrid)DERR1-10.2196/26948.
| S-EPMC8130819 | biostudies-literature