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:BackgroundSeveral risk factors for anxious-depressive symptomatology during the COVID-19 pandemic have been established. However, few studies have examined the relationship between personality traits, hardiness, and such symptomatology during the pandemic. These constructs might serve as risk- and/or protective factors for such mental distress through the pandemic.MethodsA sample of 5783 Norwegians responded to a survey at two time points within the first year of the pandemic. The first data collection was in April 2020 (T1) and the second in December 2020 (T2). Measures included the Ten-Item Personality-Inventory, the Revised Norwegian Dispositional Resilience Scale, and the Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety and Depression Scale. Analyses were performed using Pearson's correlations, multiple linear regression, and a moderation analysis.ResultsAnxious-depressive symptomatology in early phases (T1) of the pandemic was the strongest predictor for the presence of such symptomatology 9 months after the outbreak (T2). Personality and hardiness correlated significantly with mental distress at T1 and T2. Personality traits explained 5% variance in symptoms when controlling for age, gender, solitary living, negative economic impact, and mental distress at baseline. Higher neuroticism predicted higher mental distress, whereas higher conscientiousness and extraversion predicted less mental distress. Hardiness did not explain variance in outcome beyond personality traits. Hardiness did not significantly moderate the relationship between neuroticism and mental distress.ConclusionIndividuals with high levels of neuroticism had greater difficulties adapting to the circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic and were more prone to mental distress. Contrastingly, higher conscientiousness and extraversion may have served as protective factors for mental distress during the pandemic. The current findings might aid identification of vulnerable individuals and groups. Consequently, preventive interventions could be offered to those who need it the most.
| S-EPMC9476397 | 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:ObjectiveTo identify the risk factors for psychological distress in electroencephalography (EEG) technicians during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.MethodIn this national-level cross-sectional survey initiated by Japan Young Epilepsy Section (YES-Japan), which is a national chapter of The Young Epilepsy Section of the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE-YES), a questionnaire was administered to 173 technicians engaged in EEG at four clinics specializing in epilepsy care and 20 hospitals accredited as (quasi-) epilepsy centers or epilepsy training facilities in Japan from March 1 to April 30, 2021. We collected data on participants' profiles, information about work, and psychological distress outcome measurements, such as the K-6 and Tokyo Metropolitan Distress Scale for Pandemic (TMDP). Linear regression analysis was used to identify the risk factors for psychological distress. Factors that were significantly associated with psychological distress in the univariate analysis were subjected to multivariate analysis.ResultsAmong the 142 respondents (response rate: 82%), 128 were included in the final analysis. As many as 35.2% of EEG technicians have been under psychological distress. In multivariate linear regression analysis for K-6, female sex, examination for patients (suspected) with COVID-19, and change in salary or bonus were independent associated factors for psychological distress. Contrastingly, in multivariate linear regression analysis for TMDP, female sex, presence of cohabitants who had to be separated from the respondent due to this pandemic, and change in salary or bonus were independent associated factors for psychological distress.ConclusionWe successfully identified the risk factors associated with psychological distress in EEG technicians during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our results may help in understanding the psychological stress in EEG technicians during the COVID-19 pandemic and improving the work environment, which is necessary to maintain the mental health of EEG technicians.
| S-EPMC8491964 | 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: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: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