Dataset Information

Long-term effects of COVID-19 on mental health: A systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Acute effects of COVID-19 can be life-threatening. Alterations in mental health during the active infection have been documented, but the long-term consequences are less clear.

Method

A systematic review was undertaken to investigate the effect of COVID-19 infection on long-term mental health outcomes. Three databases [PubMed, Medline (Ovid) and Cochrane library] were searched between 1st October 2019 and 29th August 2021 with additional hand searching to identify all published studies reporting symptoms of generalised anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), or sleep disturbance in participants at least one month after COVID-19 infection. The prevalence and mean symptom score of each were assessed.

Results

Eight hundred and eighty five studies were found, of which 33 were included in the review involving a total of 6743 participants. The studies' risk of bias were typically fair quality. The median study age of participants was 57.8 years (IQR 49.3-60.7), with 63.0% male (IQR 57.0%-73.0%). Participants typically experienced no or mild symptoms of long-term anxiety (GAD-7, STAI-S, HADS) and depression (PHQ-9, BDI, PHQ-2, HADS). Prevalence varied depending on the measurement tool. Sleep disturbances (primarily insomnia) were most commonly reported as mild. PTSD prevalence was similar to anxiety and depression.

Conclusion

The overall effect of the pandemic has been linked with worsening psychiatric symptoms. However, the long-term effect from direct COVID-19 infection has been associated with no or mild symptoms. Studies exhibited the long-term prevalence of anxiety, depression, PTSD, and sleep disturbances to be comparable to general population levels.

SUBMITTER: Bourmistrova NW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8758130 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background. COVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2, can involve sequelae and other medical complications that last weeks to months after initial recovery, which has come to be called Long-COVID or COVID long-haulers. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to identify studies assessing long-term effects of COVID-19 and estimates the prevalence of each symptom, sign, or laboratory parameter of patients at a post-COVID-19 stage. Methods . LitCOVID (PubMed and Medline) and Embase were searched by two independent researchers. All articles with original data for detecting long-term COVID-19 published before 1 st of January 2021 and with a minimum of 100 patients were included. For effects reported in two or more studies, meta-analyses using a random-effects model were performed using the MetaXL software to estimate the pooled prevalence with 95% CI. Heterogeneity was assessed using I 2 statistics. This systematic review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviewers and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, although the study protocol was not registered. Results. A total of 18,251 publications were identified, of which 15 met the inclusion criteria. The prevalence of 55 long-term effects was estimated, 21 meta-analyses were performed, and 47,910 patients were included. The follow-up time ranged from 14 to 110 days post-viral infection. The age of the study participants ranged between 17 and 87 years. It was estimated that 80% (95% CI 65-92) of the patients that were infected with SARS-CoV-2 developed one or more long-term symptoms. The five most common symptoms were fatigue (58%), headache (44%), attention disorder (27%), hair loss (25%), and dyspnea (24%). All meta-analyses showed medium (n=2) to high heterogeneity (n=13). Conclusions . In order to have a better understanding, future studies need to stratify by sex, age, previous comorbidities, the severity of COVID-19 (ranging from asymptomatic to severe), and duration of each symptom. From the clinical perspective, multi-disciplinary teams are crucial to developing preventive measures, rehabilitation techniques, and clinical management strategies with whole-patient perspectives designed to address long COVID-19 care.

Project description:COVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2, can involve sequelae and other medical complications that last weeks to months after initial recovery, which has come to be called Long-COVID or COVID long-haulers. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to identify studies assessing long-term effects of COVID-19 and estimates the prevalence of each symptom, sign, or laboratory parameter of patients at a post-COVID-19 stage. LitCOVID (PubMed and Medline) and Embase were searched by two independent researchers. All articles with original data for detecting long-term COVID-19 published before 1st of January 2021 and with a minimum of 100 patients were included. For effects reported in two or more studies, meta-analyses using a random-effects model were performed using the MetaXL software to estimate the pooled prevalence with 95% CI. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviewers and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) reporting guideline was followed. A total of 18,251 publications were identified, of which 15 met the inclusion criteria. The prevalence of 55 long-term effects was estimated, 21 meta-analyses were performed, and 47,910 patients were included. The follow-up time ranged from 15 to 110 days post-viral infection. The age of the study participants ranged between 17 and 87 years. It was estimated that 80% (95% CI 65-92) of the patients that were infected with SARS-CoV-2 developed one or more long-term symptoms. The five most common symptoms were fatigue (58%), headache (44%), attention disorder (27%), hair loss (25%), and dyspnea (24%). All meta-analyses showed medium (n=2) to high heterogeneity (n=13). In order to have a better understanding, future studies need to stratify by sex, age, previous comorbidities, severity of COVID-19 (ranging from asymptomatic to severe), and duration of each symptom. From the clinical perspective, multi-disciplinary teams are crucial to developing preventive measures, rehabilitation techniques, and clinical management strategies with whole-patient perspectives designed to address long COVID-19 care.

Project description:WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Working on the frontline during the pandemic has had a negative impact on the mental health of health professionals. A significant proportion experienced anxiety, insomnia, posttraumatic stress or depression. WHAT THE PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: Analysis and synthesis of the evidence of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of nurses based on their work context. There exists a gap in the literature as no studies were found that analysed the effects on nurses' mental health according to the level of care they worked in (hospital-primary care-nursing home). WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: There is an urgent need to assess and respond to the impact of COVID-19 on the physical and mental well-being of nurses, and to monitor international policies for the improvement of nurses' working conditions. ABSTRACT: Introduction Health professionals have suffered negative consequences during the COVID-19 pandemic. No review has specifically addressed the impact of the pandemic on the mental health of nurses exclusively according to the work context. Aim To analyse the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of nurses who have worked in hospitals, primary care centres and social health centres. Method PubMed, CINAHL, PsychINFO and Cochrane databases were searched (Prospero number: CRD42021249513). Out of 706 papers, 31 studies (2020-2021) were included in the systematic review. A qualitative synthesis method was used to analyse the data. Results Most studies were conducted in hospitals or frontline settings. The prevalence of moderate-to-severe symptoms was for anxiety 29.55%, depression 38.79%, posttraumatic stress disorder 29.8%, and insomnia 40.66%. Discussion This review highlights the mental health effects among nurses working in acute hospital settings. It also evidences a data gap on mental health effects among nurses working in primary health care and in nursing homes. Implications for practice In the post phase of the pandemic, there is an urgent need to assess and respond to the impact on the mental well-being of nurses, and to monitor international policies for the improvement of nurses' working conditions.

Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate the literature and determine if prematurity has an impact on long-term adverse kidney outcomes.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesOVID Medline, PubMed, SCOPUS, CINAHL and EMBASE databases were searched for studies relating to the adverse outcomes of prematurity from 1990 to April 2021.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesAll articles published between January 1990 and April 2021 that investigated whether premature infants developed long-term adverse renal outcomes were included in this review. Articles must have been human studies and written in English. Case series with less than 20 participants and case studies were excluded.Data extraction and synthesisOne reviewer completed the database searches. Article selection was performed independently and in a non-blinded manner by both reviewers. Initial screening was by title and abstract. Full texts of remaining articles were reviewed. Articles for which inclusion was unclear were re-reviewed by both reviewers, and a unanimous decision was taken as to whether they should be included. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used for quality assessment of the included articles.ResultsThe literature search yielded 31 human studies, which investigated the short-term and long-term kidney outcomes of prematurity. These studies were conducted in 17 different countries. The most common outcomes measured were blood pressure (BP) and glomerular filtration rate. Other common outcomes measured included kidney size and mass, proteinuria, albuminuria, chronic kidney disease (CKD) and physical parameters such as height, weight and body mass index.ConclusionPrematurity is likely linked to increased risk of kidney dysfunction and high BP in childhood and into early adulthood. Premature birth conferred a twofold increased risk of CKD and extremely premature birth conferred a threefold increased risk of CKD. However, further larger multicentre studies are needed to draw definitive conclusions on the long-term kidney outcomes of prematurity.