Dataset Information

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the mental health symptoms during the Covid-19 pandemic in Southeast Asia.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

The Covid-19 pandemic has had a substantial impact on the mental health of the general public and high-risk groups worldwide. Due to its proximity and close links to China, Southeast Asia was one of the first regions to be affected by the outbreak. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the prevalence of anxiety, depression and insomnia in the general adult population and healthcare workers (HCWs) in Southeast Asia during the course of the first year of the pandemic.

Methods

Several literature databases were systemically searched for articles published up to February 2021 and two reviewers independently evaluated all relevant studies using pre-determined criteria. The prevalence rates of mental health symptoms were calculated using a random-effect meta-analysis model.

Results

In total, 32 samples from 25 studies with 20 352 participants were included. Anxiety was assessed in all 25 studies and depression in 15 studies with pooled prevalence rates of 22% and 16%, respectively. Only two studies assessed insomnia, which was estimated at 19%. The prevalence of anxiety and depression was similar among frontline HCWs (18%), general HCWs (17%), and students (20%) while being noticeably higher in the general population (27%).

Conclusions

This is the first systematic review to investigate the mental health impact of the Covid-19 pandemic in Southeast Asia. A considerable proportion of the general population and HCWs reported mild to moderate symptoms of anxiety and depression; the pooled prevalence rater, however, remain significantly lower than those reported in other areas such as China and Europe.

SUBMITTER: Pappa S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8661667 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Mental health burden has been massively reported during the COVID-19 pandemic period. Aiming to summarise these data, we present a meta-review of meta-analyses that evaluated the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on anxiety, depressive and stress symptoms, psychological distress, post-traumatic stress disorder/symptoms (PTSD), and sleep disturbance, reporting its prevalence on general public (GP) and health care workers (HCW). Methods: A search was performed in the PubMed, EMBASE, and the Web of Science. Sleep disturbances, psychological distress, stress, and burnout were grouped as "Psychophysiological stress," and anxiety, depression, and PTSD were grouped as "Psychopathology." A random-effects model, calculating the pooled prevalence together with 95% confidence interval was performed for each domain. Subgroup analyses were performed for each population type (GP and HCW) and for each mental health outcome. For anxiety and depression, subgroup analysis for population type was performed. Heterogeneity is reported as I 2. Publication bias was assessed through visual inspection of the funnel plot, and further tested by Egger's test and trim and fill analyses. Results: A total of 18 meta-analyses were included. The prevalence of psychophysiological stress was 31.99% (CI: 26.88-37.58, I 2 = 99.9%). HCW showed a higher prevalence (37.74%, CI: 33.26-42.45, I 2 = 99.7%) than the GP (20.67%, 15.07-27.66, I 2 = 99.9%). The overall prevalence of insomnia, psychological distress, and stress were, respectively, 32.34% (CI: 25.65-39.84), 28.25% (CI: 18.12-41.20), and 36% (CI: 29.31-43.54). Psychopathology was present at 26.45% (CI: 24.22-28.79, I 2 = 99.9%) of the sample, with similar estimates for population (HCW 26.14%, CI: 23.37-29.12, I 2 = 99.9%; GP: 26.99%, CI: 23.41-30.9, I 2 = 99.9%). The prevalence of anxiety, depression, and PTSD was 27.77% (CI: 24.47-31.32), 26.93% (CI: 23.92-30.17), and 20% (CI: 15.54-24.37), respectively. Similar proportions between populations were found for anxiety (HCW = 27.5%, CI: 23.78-31.55; GP = 28.33%, CI: 22.1-35.5) and depression (HCW = 27.05%, CI: 23.14-31.36; GP = 26.7%, CI: 22.32-31.59). Asymmetry in the funnel plot was found, and a slight increase in the estimate of overall psychopathology (29.08%, CI: 26.42-31.89) was found after the trim and fill analysis. Conclusions: The prevalence of mental health problems ranged from 20 to 36%. HCW presented a higher prevalence of psychophysiological stress than the general population. Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=252221, identifier: CRD42021252221.

Project description:ObjectiveThis meta-review aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of overall mental health of healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodWe conducted a comprehensive literature search on Academic Search Premier, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and MEDLINE. A predefined eligibility criterion was used to screen the articles. The methodology quality of eligible studies was assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for systematic reviews. The data were narratively synthesised in line with the meta-review aim.ResultForty systematic reviews (represented as K = 40), which reported data from 1,828 primary studies (N) and 3,245,768 participants, met the inclusion criteria. The findings from a pooled prevalence indicate that anxiety (16-41%, K = 30, N = 701), depression (14-37%, K = 28, N = 584), and stress/post-traumatic stress disorder (18.6-56.5%, K = 24, N = 327) were the most prevailing COVID-19 pandemic-related mental health conditions affecting healthcare workers. Other reported concerns included insomnia, burnout, fear, obsessive-compulsive disorder, somatization symptoms, phobia, substance abuse, and suicidal thoughts. Considering regions/countries, the highest anxiety was reported in the United-Kingdom [22.3, 95% Confidence Interval (CI):7-38, N = 4] compared to other countries, while the highest depression was in the Middle-East, (41, 95% CI:16-60, N = 5) and stress in the Eastern Mediterranean region (61.6, 95% CI:56.4-66.8, N = 2) compared to other regions. The most significant risk factors include female gender, younger age, being a nurse, and frontline professional. The most-reported coping strategies include individual/group psychological support, family/relative support, training/orientation, and the adequacy of personal protective equipment.ConclusionIt was concluded that healthcare professionals (nurses, doctors, allied health) have experienced various mental health issues during COVID-19 pandemic. The meta-review, therefore, recommends targeted interventions and health policies that address specific mental health issues to support health professionals worldwide during the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic and similar future health crises.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD4202126200, identifier: CRD42021262001.