Search

Background: Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) appear to be effective for improving the mental health of healthcare professionals (HCPs). However, the effectiveness of MBIs on extreme psychological trauma caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is largely unknown. The aim of this paper was to systematically review empirical studies of MBIs for HCPs carried out during the COVID-19 pandemic, to evaluate them and their effectiveness in different areas of mental health. Methods: The electronic databases searched were Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, and PsycINFO. The date when each database was last searched was September 15, 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs), and non-randomized non-controlled trials (NRNCTs) focused on MBIs for health care staff who were working in healthcare centers during the COVID-19 pandemic were included. All of them employed standardized measures of mental health. The review followed the best practices and reported using PRISMA guidelines. A data collection form, adapted from the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, was used to extract and synthesize the results. The methods used to assess the risk of bias in the included studies were the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and the ROBINS-I Tool. Results: Twenty-eight studies were included in the systematic review. Overall, the methodological quality of the studies was moderate. The results showed the effectiveness of MBIs in improving levels of stress, mindfulness, and mental well-being. However, no conclusive results were found regarding the effectiveness of MBIs in improving the levels of burnout, anxiety, depression, sleep quality, and resilience of HCPs. Conclusions: The MBIs for HCPs carried out during the COVID-19 pandemic have mainly contributed to improving stress, mindfulness, and mental well-being at a time of serious health emergency. However, more robust studies at a methodological level would have been desirable. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42021267621 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Access to fertility treatments is considered a reproductive right, but because of the quarantine due to the coronavirus pandemic most infertility treatments were suspended, which might affect the psychological and emotional health of infertile patients. Therefore, this study was conducted to review the mental health of infertile patients facing treatment suspension due to the coronavirus pandemic. Methods: This study was conducted based on the Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guideline. The Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane library databases were searched by two independent researchers, without time limitation until 31 December 2022. All observational studies regarding the mental health of infertile patients facing treatment suspension including anxiety, depression, and stress were included in the study. Qualitative studies, editorials, brief communications, commentaries, conference papers, guidelines, and studies with no full text were excluded. Quality assessment was carried out using Newcastle–Ottawa Scale by two researchers, independently. The random effects model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence of mental health problems. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis were used to confirm the sources of heterogeneity. Results: Out of 681 studies, 21 studies with 5901 infertile patients were systematically reviewed, from which 16 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The results of all pooled studies showed that the prevalence of anxiety, depression, and stress in female patients was 48.4% (95% CI 34.8–62.3), 42% (95% CI 26.7–59.4), and 55% (95% CI 45.4–65), respectively. Additionally, 64.4% (95% CI 50.7–76.1) of patients wished to resume their treatments despite the coronavirus pandemic. Conclusion: Treatment suspension due to the coronavirus pandemic negatively affected the mental health of infertile patients. It is important to maintain the continuity of fertility care, with special attention paid to mental health of infertile patients, through all the possible measures even during a public health crisis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Social prescribing link workers are non-health or social care professionals who connect people with psychosocial needs to non-clinical community supports. They are being implemented widely, but there is limited evidence for appropriate target populations or cost effectiveness. This study aimed to explore the feasibility, potential impact on health outcomes and cost effectiveness of practice-based link workers for people with multimorbidity living in deprived urban communities. Methods: A pragmatic exploratory randomised trial with wait-list usual care control and blinding at analysis was conducted during the COVID 19 pandemic (July 2020 to January 2021). Participants had two or more ongoing health conditions, attended a general practitioner (GP) serving a deprived urban community who felt they may benefit from a one-month practice-based social prescribing link worker intervention.. Feasibility measures were recruitment and retention of participants, practices and link workers, and completion of outcome data. Primary outcomes at one month were health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L) and mental health (HADS). Potential cost effectiveness from the health service perspective was evaluated using quality adjusted life years (QALYs), based on conversion of the EQ-5D-5L and ICECAP-A capability index to utility scoring. Results: From a target of 600, 251 patients were recruited across 13 general practices. Randomisation to intervention (n = 123) and control (n = 117) was after baseline data collection. Participant retention at one month was 80%. All practices and link workers (n = 10) were retained for the trial period. Data completion for primary outcomes was 75%. There were no significant differences identified using mixed effects regression analysis in EQ-5D-5L (MD 0.01, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.09) or HADS (MD 0.05, 95% CI -0.63 to 0.73), and no cost effectiveness advantages. A sensitivity analysis that considered link workers operating at full capacity in a non-pandemic setting, indicated the probability of effectiveness at the €45,000 ICER threshold value for Ireland was 0.787 using the ICECAP-A capability index. Conclusions: While the trial under-recruited participants mainly due to COVID-19 restrictions, it demonstrates that robust evaluations and cost utility analyses are possible. Further evaluations are required to establish cost effectiveness and should consider using the ICE-CAP-A wellbeing measure for cost utility analysis. Registration: This trial is registered on ISRCTN. Title: Use of link workers to provide social prescribing and health and social care coordination for people with complex multimorbidity in socially deprived areas. Trial ID: ISRCTN10287737. Date registered 10/12/2019. Link: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN10287737 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Child and adolescent mental health is a major public health concern worldwide. The development of children's social and emotional skills helps to improve mental health and wellbeing, and prevent anxiety and depression. The school-based social emotional learning (SEL) programmes have proved effective in a number of countries. But in Mainland China, there has been no empirical research of the effectiveness on children's mental health. The study conducted a SEL programme in China during the COVID-19 pandemic and aimed to determine whether: (1) a SEL programme can reduce anxiety and depression, (2) the intervention effect is influenced by sociodemographic characteristics, (3) the programme effects change children's emotion management and communication. Methods: Participants were 230 children aged 8–12 years in the intervention school and 325 in the control school in two poor villages in central China. The study was a quasi-experimental trial, comprising 16 weekly 90-minute sessions. It used a mixed-methods design, with a quantitative survey administered at baseline, post-intervention, and 5-month follow-up, and qualitative interviews. Linear mixed effects regression modeling was used to analyse the intervention effectiveness, linear models were conducted to examine the moderation effect of sociodemographic variables, and the inductive thematic analysis approach was used for interview data. Results: The intervention had no significant effect on anxiety or depression, except that intervention school children who lived with neither parent (left behind children) reported lower depression scores than control school at post-intervention and 5-month follow-up. Qualitative interviews showed after intervention children were more able to control tempers and better communicated their thoughts and feelings, improving their relationships with family and friends. Conclusions: The programme was cheap, easy to implement, and warmly welcomed by children, schools and caregivers, suggesting it was feasible and potentially sustainable. More research is needed on the adaptation of the SEL programme in the Chinese context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A person's sense of coherence (SoC) is likely to affect coping when exposed to a life changing event like the COVID -19 pandemic, which impacted the older population especially hard, an age group that already suffers from a lot of mental illness. Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate the associations between SoC and mental health in older adults using both screening scales and hair cortisol concentrations (HCC). Method: A cross-sectional design studying a cohort of 70–80 years old, N = 260, set in Swedish primary care during the pandemic years 2021–2022. Instruments used are sense of coherence 13 (SoC-13), EQ-5D-3L, Geriatric depression scale 20 (GDS-20), Hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS), and Perceived stress scale 10 (PSS-10). Sociodemography and factors concerning SoC, and mental health are explored. HCC are measured using radioimmunoassay. Outcome measures are factors independently associated with SoC. Linear regression models were performed with SoC as dependent variable, and priory path analyses explored whether associations with SoC were direct, or indirect via anxiety. Results: SoC was significantly associated with anxiety (p < 0.001), perceived economic status (p = 0.003), belief in the future (p = 0.001), and perceived negative mental effect from the COVID -19 pandemic (p = 0.002). The latter was 96% indirectly associated with SoC (p < 0.001), whereas perceived economic status together with belief in the future was 82% directly associated with SoC (p = 0.17). HCC and sex were not significantly associated with SoC, but, noticeably, high HCC was equally distributed between women and men. Women reported significantly lower quality of life (p = 0.03), and more symptoms of anxiety (p = 0.001) and depression (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Anxiety, belief in the future, perceived negative effect on mental health due to the pandemic, and perceived economic status were significantly associated with SoC. Anxiety is suggested to be important in explaining the association between perceived negative mental effect from the COVID-19 pandemic and SoC. Women reported significantly poorer mental health and life quality than men. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Covid-19 has disrupted the lives of many and resulted in high prevalence rates of mental disorders. Despite a vast amount of research into the social determinants of mental health during Covid-19, little is known about whether the results are consistent with the social gradient in mental health. Here we report a systematic review of studies that investigated how socioeconomic condition (SEC)—a multifaceted construct that measures a person's socioeconomic standing in society, using indicators such as education and income, predicts emotional health (depression and anxiety) risk during the pandemic. Furthermore, we examined which classes of SEC indicators would best predict symptoms of emotional disorders. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted search over six databases, including Scopus, PubMed, etc., between November 4, 2021 and November 11, 2021 for studies that investigated how SEC indicators predict emotional health risks during Covid-19, after obtaining approval from PROSPERO (ID: CRD42021288508). Using Covidence as the platform, 362 articles (324 cross-sectional/repeated cross-sectional and 38 longitudinal) were included in this review according to the eligibility criteria. We categorized SEC indicators into 'actual versus perceived' and 'static versus fluid' classes to explore their differential effects on emotional health. Results: Out of the 1479 SEC indicators used in these 362 studies, our results showed that 43.68% of the SEC indicators showed 'expected' results (i.e., higher SEC predicting better emotional health outcomes); 51.86% reported non-significant results and 4.46% reported the reverse. Economic concerns (67.16% expected results) and financial strains (64.16%) emerged as the best predictors while education (26.85%) and living conditions (30.14%) were the worst. Conclusions: This review summarizes how different SEC indicators influenced emotional health risks across 98 countries, with a total of 5,677,007 participants, ranging from high to low-income countries. Our findings showed that not all SEC indicators were strongly predictive of emotional health risks. In fact, over half of the SEC indicators studied showed a null effect. We found that perceived and fluid SEC indicators, particularly economic concerns and financial strain could best predict depressive and anxiety symptoms. These findings have implications for policymakers to further understand how different SEC classes affect mental health during a pandemic in order to tackle associated social issues effectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: COVID-19 has created tensions across different sectors of the society, but the impact has been unequal. Vulnerable people have been most affected, especially those with insecure employment and who have experienced economic hardships due to unemployment and lost wages. The combination of social change and economic hardships due to the pandemic increases the risk of poor mental health. Some countries have utilized financial assistance to alleviate economic hardships caused by COVID-19, and in South Korea, the central and local governments have implemented COVID-19 financial assistance. This study analysed the impact of financial assistance on mental health associated with working status during the COVID-19 pandemic in South Korea. Methods: The participants of this study were randomly selected from residents of Gyeonggi-do after being proportionally allocated by resident registration population status. A total of 1,000 adult males and females aged 19 years or older in Gyeonggi-do who received financial assistance from the central and local governments were selected. A retrospective pre–post-study design was applied, and mental health surveys including the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale (GAD-7) were applied. Results: The results show that depression scores averaged 5.5 and anxiety scores averaged 4.4 before COVID-19 Financial Assistance. It is similar to the national average of 5.1 and 4.5 respectively at that time. After the assistance, depression scores dropped to 4.5, and anxiety scores dropped to 3.2. Before the assistance, depression and anxiety were higher among temporary day labourers with less job security, and they showed the most significant improvement in mental health. For full-time workers, there was no significant change in anxiety or depression after receiving the assistance. Conclusions: Financial assistance can provide material resources and also positively affect mental health. In particular, it had a greater impact on the relatively vulnerable groups, such as those in unstable employment. Key messages: • Those who are particularly socially and economically vulnerable when in dangerous situations, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, have a greater risk of mental health deterioration. • Public financial assistance for these individuals is essential and can have a direct effect on alleviating economic difficulties and helping them feel more financially stable in difficult economic conditions. • Public financial assistance can greatly improve an individual's resilience and capacity to overcome economically difficult situations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Mental health problems among older people are large public health concerns but often go unrecognized and undertreated. During COVID − 19 several restrictions regarding social contacts were launched, primarily for the old. The objective of this study is to investigate which factors that had the main negative affect on mental health in the older population during the pandemic. Method: A cross-sectional cohort study set in Swedish primary care during the pandemic years 2021–2022. The population constitutes of 70–80-years-old, N = 260. Instruments used are Geriatric depression scale 20 (GDS20); Hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS), and Perceived stress scale 10 (PSS10). Sociodemography and risk factors are explored. Outcome measures are factors independently associated with decreased mental health. Analyses were performed for the group as a whole and with logistic regression models comparing individuals who stated they were mentally affected by the pandemic to individuals who stated they were not. Results: Participants who stated they were mentally affected by the COVID − 19 pandemic reported significantly higher levels of anxiety (p < 0.001), depression (p < 0.001), and stress (p = 0.026) compared to those who stated they were not mentally affected. Explanatory regression models of up to 50% showed that following factors were prominent among individuals who reported a decline in their mental health due to the COVID − 19 pandemic (n = 24); impaired social life (OR 20.29, p < 0.001, CI 4.53–90.81), change in physical activity (OR 5.28, p = 0.01, CI 1.49–18.72), perceived family situation (OR 31.90, p = 0,007, CI 2,53–402.42), mild/moderate and high anxiety (OR 4.94, p = 0.034, CI 1.13–21.60, OR 7.96, p = 0.035, CI 1.16–54.53 respectively), and female gender (OR 6.52, p = 0.029, CI 1.22–34.92). Conclusion: Anxiety, family situation, social life and change in physical activity were the main factors influencing the 70–80-years-old's self-perceived mental health during the COVID − 19 pandemic. Long-term effects of social restrictions on mental health in the older population need to be further investigated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]