A Cross-Cultural Study of Distress during COVID-19 Pandemic: Some Protective and Risk Factors.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kosic A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8305545 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic and an anxiety-provoking event. There are few studies to identify potential risk and protective factors related to anxiety during COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe collected information on demographic data and lifestyles by a web-based survey of 19,802 participants from 34 provinces in China during COVID-19 pandemic. Level of anxiety was evaluated using the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale. We used ordinal multivariable logistic regression to estimate the associations of anxiety level with potential risk and protective factors. We further developed a new score to simplify the assessment of anxiety during COVID-19 crisis.ResultsAmong 19,802 participants, we found that those who were front-line medical personnel, suffered from chronic disease, with present symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection or contact history had 112, 93, 40 and 15% increased risk of higher anxiety level; while those with knowledge about personal protective measures or wore masks had 75 and 29% lower risk of higher anxiety level respectively. We developed a risk score by calculating the sum of single score of 17 factors. Each one increase of the risk score was associated with a 297% increase in anxiety index score. In categorical analysis, low risk (the risk score between 1 to 2), the moderate risk group (the risk score of 3) and high risk group (the risk score ≥ 4) had - 0.40 (95% CI: - 1.55, 0.76), 1.44 (95% CI: 0.27, 2.61) and 9.18 (95% CI: 8.04, 10.33) increase in anxiety index score, and 26% (95% CI: - 7, 72%), 172% (95% CI: 100, 270%), and 733% (95% CI: 516, 1026%) higher risk of anxiety respectively, when compared with the very low risk group (the risk score of 0). The AUC was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.72, 0.74) for the model fitted the developed risk score, with the cut-off point of 3.5.ConclusionsThese findings revealed protective and risk factors associated with anxiety, and developed a simple method of identifying people who are at an increased risk of anxiety during COVID-19 pandemic.
| S-EPMC8177261 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective Mindfulness disposition is associated with various psychological factors and prevents emotional distress in chronic diseases. In the present study, we analyzed the key role of mindfulness dispositions in protecting the individual against psychological distress consequent to COVID-19 social distancing and quarantining. Methods An online survey was launched on March 13, 2020, with 6,412 responses by April 6, 2020. Socio-demographic information, exposure to the pandemic, and quarantining were assessed together with psychological distress and mindfulness disposition. Multivariate linear regression analysis was performed to study the influence of predictive factors on psychological distress and quality of life in Italian responders during the early days of lockdown. Pearson correlations were calculated to study the relationship between mindfulness and psychiatric symptoms. Results Multivariate linear regression run on socio-demographics, COVID-19-related variables, and mindfulness disposition as moderators of overall psychological distress showed that mindfulness was the best predictor of psychological distress (? = ?0.504; p < 0.0001). High negative correlations were found between mindfulness disposition and the overall Global Severity Index (r = ?0.637; p < 0.0001), while moderate to high associations were found between mindfulness and all SCL-90 sub-scales. Discussion Findings showed that high dispositional mindfulness enhances well-being and helps in dealing with stressful situations such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Mindfulness-based mental training could represent an effective intervention to stem post-traumatic psychopathological beginnings and prevent the onset of chronic mental disorders.
| S-EPMC7516078 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The present study examined the relationship between perceived uncertainty and depression/ anxiety symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic and it tested the moderating roles of resilience and perceived social support in this relationship. A cross-sectional study was conducted between March 31st and May 15th, 2020, using an online, multi-language, international survey built within Qualtrics. We collected data on sociodemographic features, perceived uncertainty, perceived social support, depression and anxiety symptoms, and resilience. A moderation model was tested using model 2 of Hayes' PROCESS macro for SPSS. The study included 3786 respondents from 94 different countries, 47.7% of whom reported residence in the United States of America. Results demonstrated that higher perceived uncertainty was associated with more symptoms of depression and anxiety. Higher resilience levels and higher perceived social support were associated with fewer depression and anxiety symptoms. The moderation hypotheses were supported; the relationship between uncertainty and symptoms of depression and anxiety decreased as levels of resilience increased and as perceived social support increased. The results suggest that resilience and social support could be helpful targets to reduce the negative effects of uncertainty on depression and anxiety symptoms.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-022-03244-2.
| S-EPMC9145118 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTrauma, natural and man-made catastrophic events can be predictors of postpartum psychological distress. In a public health response due to coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak, the Italian government imposed a lockdown from March 9 to May 3. This extraordinary situation may have been challenging for maternal psychological health. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of depressive and post-traumatic stress symptoms in women giving birth during the Covid-19 pandemic and its associations with quarantine measures, obstetrical factors, and relational attachment style.MethodsWomen who gave birth in a high-volume obstetric/gynaecological medical centre located in an epidemic area during the Covid-19 pandemic (March 8 to June 15) were asked to complete an online survey about their childbirth experience and the perceived effect of the pandemic. The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), and the Relationship Questionnaire (RQ) were administered to assess levels of postpartum depressive and post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) and relational style of attachment, respectively. Multivariate analysis was applied to identify associations between quarantine measures, childbirth experience, attachment style, and EPDS and IES-R scores.ResultsThe survey was completed by 163 women (response rate 60.8%). The prevalence of depressive symptoms was 44.2% (EPDS cut-off score ≥ 11) and the PTSS rate was 42.9% (IES-R cut-off score ≥ 24). Dismissive and fearful avoidant attachment styles were significantly associated with the risk of depression and PTSS, respectively. Perceived pain during birth was a risk factor for postpartum depression. Perceived support provided by healthcare staff was a protective factor against depression and PTSS. Another protective factor against PTSS was quiet on the ward due to the absence of hospital visitors.ConclusionThis study reports a high prevalence of postpartum depressive and PTSS in women who gave birth during the Covid-19 pandemic. Postnatal psychological distress seemed to be associated more with the prenatal experience and other individual factors than with the pandemic hospital restrictions. Early detection during pregnancy of an insecure attachment style is fundamental to provide targeted preventive and therapeutic psychological interventions.
| S-EPMC7671935 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe global COVID-19 pandemic confronts people with their fragility, vulnerability, and mortality. To date, scales to measure death awareness mainly focus on the anxiety-provoking aspect of mortality cues. This study aims to cross-culturally adapt and validate the Death Reflection Scale (DRS), a scale for measuring positive, growth-oriented cognitions of life reflection and prosocial behavior following confrontation with the finiteness of life.Materials and methodsThe Death Reflection Scale was translated and adapted in a multi-step process to the German language. In this anonymous, cross-sectional, online survey at a large university in Germany, students, healthcare professionals (HCP) and other staff completed the DRS alongside comparison measures. Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis was used to assess configural, metric, and scalar measurement equivalence across four age and occupational groups. Convergent/divergent validity testing was done via Spearman correlations.Results1,703 participants provided data for a response rate of ∼5%. 24% of respondents were HCP, 22% students. Confirmatory factor analysis showed a higher-order structure of the DRS with a strong general factor and the originally proposed five subscales (CFI 0.945, SRMR 0.045, RMSEA 0.055). Multi-group CFA showed partial metric equivalence across age groups and partial scalar invariance across occupational groups. Non-invariant scales were the Motivation to live, Putting life into perspective, and Legacy subscales. In the convergent validity testing, two hypotheses were fully confirmed, two partially and four were not confirmed. Experiencing a propensity for increased contemplation and life reflection during the pandemic together with spirituality showed correlations of moderate to large size to the DRS and its subscales (Spearman's rho ranging from 0.31 to 0.52).ConclusionFurther conceptual work for death awareness to explore the construct's stability in different population groups needs to be undertaken. However, the DRS can be mostly used to assess positive and growth-oriented aspects of death awareness and death reflection which may be an important avenue when developing counseling and support interventions for groups experiencing a high burden during the pandemic.
| S-EPMC9382129 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic is related to multiple stressors and therefore may be associated with psychological distress. The aim of this study was to longitudinally assess symptoms of (un-)specific anxiety and depression along different stages of the pandemic to generate knowledge about the progress of psychological consequences of the pandemic and to test the role of potential risk and resilience factors that were derived from cross-sectional studies and official recommendations.MethodsThe present study uses a longitudinal observational design with four waves of online data collection (from March 27 to June 15, 2020) in a convenience sample of the general population in Germany. A total of N = 2376 participants that completed at least two waves of the survey were included in the analyses.FindingsSpecific COVID-19-related anxiety and the average daily amount of preoccupation with the pandemic decreased continuously over the four waves. Unspecific worrying and depressive symptoms decreased on average but not on median level. Self-efficacy, normalization, maintaining social contacts, and knowledge, where to get medical support, were associated with fewer symptoms relative to baseline. Suppression, unhealthy habits, and a longer average daily time of thinking about the pandemic were correlated with a relative increase of symptoms.InterpretationOur findings provide insight into the longitudinal changes of symptoms of psychological distress along the first three months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. Furthermore, we were able to reaffirm the anticipated protective and risk factors that were extracted from previous studies and recommendations.
| S-EPMC7744907 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Measures to prevent and contain the COVID-19 health crisis include population confinement, with the consequent isolation and interruption of their usual activities. The aim of the study is to analyse psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic. For this, a cross-sectional observational study with a sample of 4180 people over the age of 18 during quarantine was developed. Variables considered were sociodemographic variables, physical symptoms, health conditions, COVID-19 contact history and psychological adjustment. The data were collected through a self-developed questionnaire and the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). Bivariate analyses were performed, including Chi-Squared test and Student's T-test. Predictive ability was calculated through logistic regression. Results obtained showed a high level of psychological distress (72.0%), with a higher percentage in women and people of lower middle age. Statistically significant differences were found in the variable working situation (?² = 63.139, p ? 0.001, V = 0.123) and living with children under the age of 16 (?² = 7.393, p = 0.007, V = 0.042). The predictive variables with the highest weight were sex (OR = 1.952, 95% IC = (1.667, 2.286)), presence of symptoms (OR = 1.130, 95% CI = (1.074, 1.190)), and having had close contact with an individual with confirmed COVID-19 (OR = 1.241, 95% CI = (1.026, 1.500)). These results could enrich prevention interventions in public health and, in particular, in mental health in similar pandemic situations.
| S-EPMC7312369 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may have a negative impact on mental health of the population, leading to higher suicide rates, in many countries. However, little is known about risk factors associated with worsened mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. To investigate the factors associated with serious psychological distress (SPD) during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan. A cross-sectional study using a large-scale internet survey conducted between August 25 and September 30, 2020, in Japan. Demographics (age, gender, marital status, family composition, and caregiving burden), socio-economic status (income level, employment type, educational attainment), the experience of domestic violence (DV), the state of emergency, fear of COVID-19, and stigma related to COVID-19. Prevalence of SPD, defined as Kessler 6 scale score ≥13. Among 25,482 individuals included in this study, 2,556 (10%) met the criteria of SPD. Overall, women (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.59; 95%CI, 1.17-2.16; P=0.003), ages 15-29 (aOR compared with ages 45-59, 2.35; 95%CI, 1.64-3.38; P<0.001), low income (aOR compared with intermediate income, 1.70; 95%CI, 1.16-2.49; P=0.007), providing caregiving to family members (aOR, 5.48; 95%CI, 3.51-8.56; P<0.001), experiencing DV (aOR, 5.72; 95%CI, 3.81-8.59; P<0.001), and fear of COVID-19 (aOR, 1.96; 95%CI, 1.55-2.48; P<0.001) were associated with a higher rate of SPD. Among women aged 15-29 years, who experienced the highest rate of SPD, caregiving, DV, fear of COVID-19, and COVID-19-related stigma were associated with a higher rate of SPD; whereas economic situation (income level and employment type) and social isolation (marital status) were not associated with the prevalence of SPD. Economic situation, caregiving burden, DV, and fear of COVID-19 were independently associated with SPD during the COVID-19 pandemic. Among young women-who have a higher risk of suicide during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan-similar factors, except economic situation, were associated with a higher rate of SPD. Targeted interventions based on age and gender may be more effective in mitigating the negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the population's mental health.
| S-EPMC7941641 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study investigates the forces that contributed to severe shortages in personal protective equipment in the US during the COVID-19 crisis. Problems from a dysfunctional costing model in hospital operating systems were magnified by a very large demand shock triggered by acute need in healthcare and panicked marketplace behavior that depleted domestic PPE inventories. The lack of effective action on the part of the federal government to maintain and distribute domestic inventories, as well as severe disruptions to the PPE global supply chain, amplified the problem. Analysis of trade data shows that the US is the world's largest importer of face masks, eye protection, and medical gloves, making it highly vulnerable to disruptions in exports of medical supplies. We conclude that market prices are not appropriate mechanisms for rationing inputs to health because health is a public good. Removing the profit motive for purchasing PPE in hospital costing models, strengthening government capacity to maintain and distribute stockpiles, developing and enforcing regulations, and pursuing strategic industrial policy to reduce US dependence on imported PPE will help to better protect healthcare workers with adequate supplies of PPE.
| S-EPMC7531934 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Given the worldwide spread of the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19), there is an urgent need to identify risk and protective factors and expose areas of insufficient understanding. Emerging tools, such as the Rapid Evidence Map (rEM), are being developed to systematically characterize large collections of scientific literature. We sought to generate an rEM of risk and protective factors to comprehensively inform areas that impact COVID-19 outcomes for different sub-populations in order to better protect the public. Methods: We developed a protocol that includes a study goal, study questions, a PECO statement, and a process for screening literature by combining semi-automated machine learning with the expertise of our review team. We applied this protocol to reports within the COVID-19 Open Research Dataset (CORD-19) that were published in early 2020. SWIFT-Active Screener was used to prioritize records according to pre-defined inclusion criteria. Relevant studies were categorized by risk and protective status; susceptibility category (Behavioral, Physiological, Demographic, and Environmental); and affected sub-populations. Using tagged studies, we created an rEM for COVID-19 susceptibility that reveals: (1) current lines of evidence; (2) knowledge gaps; and (3) areas that may benefit from systematic review. Results: We imported 4,330 titles and abstracts from CORD-19. After screening 3,521 of these to achieve 99% estimated recall, 217 relevant studies were identified. Most included studies concerned the impact of underlying comorbidities (Physiological); age and gender (Demographic); and social factors (Environmental) on COVID-19 outcomes. Among the relevant studies, older males with comorbidities were commonly reported to have the poorest outcomes. We noted a paucity of COVID-19 studies among children and susceptible sub-groups, including pregnant women, racial minorities, refugees/migrants, and healthcare workers, with few studies examining protective factors. Conclusion: Using rEM analysis, we synthesized the recent body of evidence related to COVID-19 risk and protective factors. The results provide a comprehensive tool for rapidly elucidating COVID-19 susceptibility patterns and identifying resource-rich/resource-poor areas of research that may benefit from future investigation as the pandemic evolves.
| S-EPMC7732416 | biostudies-literature