Psychological distress in the face of a pandemic: An observational study characterizing the impact of COVID-19 on immigrant outpatient mental health.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Serafini RA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7805919 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ImportanceReports of a recent increase in US outpatient mental health care raise questions about whether it has been driven by rising rates of psychological distress and whether mental health treatment has become either more or less focused on people with higher levels of distress.ObjectiveTo characterize national trends in serious psychological distress and trends in outpatient mental health service use by adults with and without serious psychological distress.Design, setting, and participantsThe 2004-2005, 2009-2010, and 2014-2015 Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys (MEPS) were nationally representative surveys taken in US households. The analysis was limited to participants 18 years or older. Dates of this analysis were February 2018 to April 2018.Main outcomes and measuresAnnual national trends in the percentages of adults with serious psychological distress (Kessler 6 scale score ≥13), outpatient mental health service use (outpatient visit with a mental disorder diagnosis, psychotherapy visit, or psychotropic medication), and type of psychotropic medication use (antidepressants, anxiolytics/sedatives, antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, and stimulants). Age- and sex-adjusted odds ratios of the associations of survey period with the odds of serious psychological distress, outpatient mental health service use, and outpatient mental health service use were stratified by level of psychological distress.ResultsThe analysis involved 139 862 adult participants from the 2004-2005, 2009-2010, and 2014-2015 MEPS, including 51.67% women, 48.33% men, 67.11% white adults, and 32.89% nonwhite adults, with an overall mean (SE) age of 46.41 (0.14) years. Serious psychological distress declined overall from 4.82% (2004-2005) to 3.71% (2014-2015), including significant declines among young (3.94% to 3.07%), middle-aged (5.52% to 4.36%), and older adults (5.24% to 3.79%); men (3.94% to 3.09%) and women (5.64% to 4.29%); and major racial/ethnic groups (white, 4.52% to 3.82%; African American, 5.12% to 3.64%; Hispanic, 6.03% to 3.55%; and other, 5.22% to 3.26%). Overall, the percentage of adults receiving any outpatient mental health service increased from 19.08% (2004-2005) to 23.00% (2014-2015) (adjusted odds ratio, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.17-1.34). Although the proportionate increase in outpatient mental health service use for adults with serious psychological distress (54.17% to 68.40%) was larger than that for adults with less serious or no psychological distress (17.26% to 21.08%), the absolute increase in outpatient mental health service use was almost completely the result of growth in outpatient mental health service use by individuals with less serious or no psychological distress.Conclusions and relevanceThe recent increase in outpatient mental health service use occurred during a period of decline in serious psychological distress. Adults with less serious psychological distress accounted for most of the absolute increase in outpatient mental health service use, while adults with serious psychological distress experienced a greater relative increase in outpatient mental health service use.
| S-EPMC6439744 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo identify common pain-related psychological factors among patients seeking care for athletic hip pain, as well as characterize psychological distress phenotypes and compare hip-specific quality-of-life measures across those phenotypes.MethodsA total of 721 patients were recruited from hip preservation clinics. The Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome-Yellow Flag Assessment Tool (OSPRO-YF) was used to identify the presence or absence of 11 different pain-associated psychological distress characteristics (yellow flags), while the International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12) was used to assess hip-related quality of life. Latent class analysis identified patient subgroups (phenotypes) based on naturally occurring combinations of distress characteristics. An analysis of variance was used to compare demographics, number of yellow flags, and iHOT-12 scores across phenotypes.ResultsThe median (interquartile range) number of yellow flags was 6 (3-9), with 13.5% of the sample reporting 11 yellow flags. Latent class analysis (L2 = 543.3, classification errors = 0.082) resulted in 4 phenotypes: high distress (n = 299, 41.5%), low distress (n = 172, 23.9%), low self-efficacy and acceptance (n = 74, 10.3%), and negative pain coping (n = 276, 24.4%). Significant differences in mean yellow flags existed between all phenotypes except low self-efficacy and negative pain coping. There were no differences in demographics between phenotypes. The high distress class had the lowest mean iHOT-12 score (mean [SD], 23.5 [17.6]), with significant differences found between each phenotypic class.ConclusionsThere was a high prevalence of pain-associated psychological distress in patients presenting to tertiary hip arthroscopy clinics with hip pain. Furthermore, hip quality-of-life outcome scores were uniformly lower in patients with higher levels of psychological distress.Level of evidenceLevel III, retrospective cohort study.
| S-EPMC10801259 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo determine whether trends in psychological distress exist in the United States and whether trends in healthcare expenditures and outpatient visits were associated with psychological distress.Study designSequential cross-sectional study of nationally representative data.MethodsWe examined data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) from 1997 to 2004 linked to 2 years of subsequent Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) data. Psychological distress was measured in the NHIS using the K6, a 6-item scale of the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale, which we classified as no/low, mild-moderate, or severe. We examined subsequent annualized total, outpatient, and office-based expenditures, and outpatient and office-based visits from MEPS.ResultsPsychological distress remained stable from 1997 to 2004. There were upward trends in overall healthcare expenditures (P <.001) and outpatient expenditures (P <.001), but not outpatient visits. Overall healthcare expenditures, outpatient expenditures, and outpatient visits significantly increased as psychological distress increased from no/low to mild-moderate to severe. The interaction between psychological distress strata and year was not significant for expenditures or for visits.ConclusionsThe upward trend in total and outpatient healthcare expenditures in the United States appears unrelated to psychological distress, although healthcare expenditures are consistently higher among those with greater psychological distress. Future work will explore the impact of treatment on costs and stability of the nation's mental health over time.
| S-EPMC3322665 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe wellbeing of family caregivers of mentally ill persons has often been ignored, despite that family caregivers can be predisposed to psychiatric morbidities and burden in caring for their mentally ill family members. This study examined the levels of psychological distress and burden of care experienced by family caregivers who care for their mentally ill relatives in Edo State, Nigeria.MethodsThis study assessed psychological distress using the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). Burden of care was measured using the 22-item Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI) questionnaire. Multiple linear regression was done to determine factors associated with burden of care and psychological distress, while factor analysis was used to determine the underlying forms of burden of care and psychological distress among participants.ResultsCaregivers studied were relatives of patients diagnosed for depression (25.1%), substance use disorder (22.2%), schizophrenia (20.2%) and bipolar affective disorder (11.1%). Approximately 15% experienced no-to-mild burden, 51.3% mild-to-moderate burden and 34.0% high-or-severe burden. Nearly halve (49.0%) of participants experienced psychological distress. Severe rate of psychological distress was observed among subjects caring for patients with schizophrenia (60.7%), epilepsy (60.0%), substance use disorder (52.2%) and depression (49.0%). High burden of care was more preponderant among caregivers of relatives with mental retardation and epilepsy (50% each) and schizophrenia (39.3%). Having a higher educational qualification and being self-employed was a predictor of psychological distress. Gender of caregiver and the diagnosis schizophrenia among relatives of caregivers predisposed to burden of care. Three factors including social and emotional dysfunction, psychological distress and cognitive dysfunction were identified as components of psychological health through factor analysis. On the burden scale, six factor components were identified as: personal strain, role strain, intolerance, patients' dependence, guilt and interference in personal life.ConclusionThere is a high prevalence of psychological morbidity and burden of care among family caregivers providing care for persons with mental illness.
| S-EPMC8101711 | biostudies-literature
Project description:[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0130961.].
| S-EPMC4948876 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 crisis has created a "mental health pandemic" throughout the world. Scientific data are not available to fully understand the nature of the resulting mental health impact given the very recent onset of the pandemic, nevertheless, there is a need to act immediately to develop psychotherapeutic strategies that may alleviate pandemic-related distress. The psychological distress, in particular fear and sadness, is a function of the pandemic's negative impact upon people's ability to meet their most basic needs (e.g., physical safety, financial security, social connection, participation in meaningful activities). This paper presents evidence-based cognitive behavioral strategies that should prove useful in reducing the emotional suffering associated with the COVID crisis.
| S-EPMC7320243 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDuring major pandemics such as COVID-19, the fear of being infected, uncertain prognoses, and the imposition of restrictions may result in greater odds of emotional and psychological distress. Hence, the present study examines the predictors of psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada, and how they differ by gender.MethodsData of 2,756 adults aged 18 years and above from a cross-sectional online survey conducted between July and October 2020 was used for this study. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was carried out. The results were presented as adjusted odds ratio (aOR) with their respective confidence interval (CI).ResultsLower odds of psychological distress were found among males compared to females and among individuals aged 45-64 or 65-84 years compared to those aged 18-44. The odds of psychological distress decreased with a rise in income, with individuals whose annual income was greater than or equal to $100,000 being less likely to experience psychological distress compared to those whose income was less than $20,000. The odds of psychological distress were higher among residents of Ontario compared to residents of Quebec. Similarly, the odds of psychological distress were higher among individuals who reported experiencing COVID-19 symptoms compared to those who did not report any COVID-19 symptoms. The disaggregated results by gender showed that age, province, and self-reported COVID-19 symptoms had significant associations with psychological distress in both males and females, but these effects were more pronounced among females compared to males. In addition, income was negatively associated with psychological distress for both males and females, with this effect being stronger among males.ConclusionFive exposure variables (gender, age, province, experiencing COVID-19 symptoms, and total annual income in 2019) significantly predicted the likelihood of reporting psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada. Clearly, there is an imminent need to provide mental health support services to vulnerable groups. Additionally, interventions and policies aimed at combating psychological distress during pandemics such as COVID-19 should be gender specific.
| S-EPMC9671380 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe elderly population is deemed to be the most vulnerable to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. From March 2020 to April 2022, the implementation of psychological distancing is still being applied in Indonesia. In the light of the pandemic, mental health problems among the elderly require further exploration. This study examines the mental health status of the elderly during the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia and the factors that affect their mental health, such as loneliness and attachment to God.MethodsA sequential explanatory type of the mixed-method approach was adopted for the purposes of this study. In particular, the researchers first conducted a quantitative survey, analyzed its results, and then explained them in more detail using qualitative research.ResultsThe results show that loneliness is a predictor of mental health in the elderly, while attachment to God does not correlate with mental health. More specifically, we described that minimal activity, inability to meet children and grandchildren, and inability to recite the Qur'an were the main factors triggering sadness among the elderly during the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, we defined that elderly people use productive and religious activities, and communication as main coping strategies.ConclusionLoneliness has been a serious problem for the elderly during the COVID-19 pandemic, impacting their mental health. The findings of this research can be used as a basis or reference for maintaining the mental health of the elderly during the pandemic.
| S-EPMC11262106 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivePeople with mental disorders might be differentially affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the impact of the pandemic on patients with various psychiatric disorders who were admitted to inpatient treatment.MethodsFive-hundred thirty-eight inpatients with mental disorders participated in a survey about psychological consequences of the pandemic between March-December 2020. We examined the perceived burden by restrictions and worries, changes in health care utilization, and helpfulness of coping strategies.ResultsMore than 50% reported any worsening of symptoms, 40% stated increased need of therapeutic support. High rates of symptom deterioration were observed for depressive symptoms (>55%), anxiety (>40%), and sleeping behavior (>40%). Treatment impairment was stated by 27.9%. Patients with anxiety disorders were less affected by contact restrictions compared with eating disorders and depression. Patients with anorexia nervosa and post-traumatic stress disorder experienced higher helpfulness by daily structuring than patients with depression.DiscussionAbout half of our sample of psychiatric patients experienced symptom deterioration due to the pandemic and about one quarter reported impairment of treatment modalities. Especially patients with eating disorders and depressive disorders were more frequently affected. The results indicate a needed improvement of treatment options during a pandemic.
| S-EPMC8180351 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted lives around the world. Autistic adults are at higher risk for co-occurring medical and psychiatric conditions and may be more prone to difficulties adapting to pandemic-related changes and social distancing mandates and coping with ongoing uncertainties. On the other hand, the pandemic may lead to greater understanding and acceptance of accommodations in the broader community that may facilitate supports for autistic adults beyond the pandemic. To learn more about their early pandemic experiences, online surveys were sent to independent adults enrolled in the Simons Powering Autism Research Knowledge (SPARK). The first survey was open from March 30 to April 19, 2020; a follow-up survey sent to original responders was open from May 27 to June 6, yielding 396 participants with data for both surveys. We found that adults who were female, younger, had prior diagnoses of a mental health condition, personal COVID-19 experience (i.e., knowing someone who had symptoms or tested positive) or less frequent hope for the future reported the greatest negative impacts. Decrease in feelings of hopefulness over time predicted greater psychological distress at T2, accounting for T1 impact and distress levels and increases in total COVID-19 impact. Less perceived benefit of online services also predicted later distress. Although there tends to be a focus on coping with negative effects of the pandemic, mental health providers may consider approaches that focus on positives, such as fostering hope and understanding factors that facilitate benefit from online services. LAY SUMMARY: Autistic adults may be at risk for psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic. The current study suggests that autistic adults who were younger, female, had a mental health diagnosis before the pandemic and knew someone who showed symptoms or tested positive for COVID-19 reported more areas negatively impacted by COVID-19 and greater difficulty coping with those effects. Decreases in hope over time were associated with greater psychological distress. Less perceived benefit from online services also predicted distress 2 months later. These results suggest important areas to further explore as we develop supports for autistic adults during the pandemic.
| S-EPMC8014774 | biostudies-literature