Search

Background: The current study argues that population prevalence estimates for mental health disorders, or changes in mean scores over time, may not adequately reflect the heterogeneity in mental health response to the COVID-19 pandemic within the population. Methods: The COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study is a longitudinal, nationally representative, online survey of UK adults. The current study analysed data from its first three waves of data collection: Wave 1 (March 2020, N = 2025), Wave 2 (April 2020, N = 1406) and Wave 3 (July 2020, N = 1166). Anxiety-depression was measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety and Depression Scale (a composite measure of the PHQ-9 and GAD-7) and COVID-19-related posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) with the International Trauma Questionnaire. Changes in mental health outcomes were modelled across the three waves. Latent class growth analysis was used to identify subgroups of individuals with different trajectories of change in anxiety-depression and COVID-19 PTSD. Latent class membership was regressed on baseline characteristics. Results: Overall prevalence of anxiety-depression remained stable, while COVID-19 PTSD reduced between Waves 2 and 3. Heterogeneity in mental health response was found, and hypothesised classes reflecting (i) stability, (ii) improvement and (iii) deterioration in mental health were identified. Psychological factors were most likely to differentiate the improving, deteriorating and high-stable classes from the low-stable mental health trajectories. Conclusions: A low-stable profile characterised by little-to-no psychological distress ('resilient' class) was the most common trajectory for both anxiety-depression and COVID-19 PTSD. Monitoring these trajectories is necessary moving forward, in particular for the ~30% of individuals with increasing anxiety-depression levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Allocation of trainee therapist cases is often performed based on intuition and clinical circumstances, with lack of empirical evidence on the role of severity of presenting problem. This has the potential to be anxiety-provoking for supervisors, trainees and service users themselves. Aims: To determine how therapist experience interacts with symptom severity in predicting client outcomes. Method: An intention-to-treat analysis of annual outcome data for primary and secondary care clients seen by a specialist anxiety disorders service. 196 clients were stratified into mild, moderate and baseline severe symptoms of anxiety (GAD-7) and depression (PHQ-9). We measured percentage change on these measures, as well as number of sessions and therapy dropout. We also examined rates of reliable and clinically significant change on disorder-specific measures. We hypothesized that qualified therapists would achieve better outcomes than trainees, particularly for severe presentations. Results: Overall, outcomes were comparable between trainee and qualified therapists on all measures, and trainees additionally utilized fewer therapy sessions. There was however an interaction between anxiety severity (GAD-7) and therapist group, such that severely anxious clients achieved greater symptom improvement with qualified as compared to trainee therapists. Further, for trainee but not qualified therapists, baseline anxiety was negatively associated with rate of reliable and clinically significant change on disorder-specific measures. Conclusions: These findings indicate generally favourable outcomes for trainee therapists delivering manualized treatments for anxiety disorders. They additionally suggest that trainee therapists may benefit from additional support when working with clients that present with severe anxiety. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emergency has led to numerous attempts to assess the impact of the pandemic on population mental health. The findings indicate an increase in depression and anxiety but have been limited by the lack of specificity about which aspects of the pandemic (e.g. viral exposure or economic threats) have led to adverse mental health outcomes., Methods: Network analyses were conducted on data from wave 1 (N = 2025, recruited 23 March-28 March 2020) and wave 2 (N = 1406, recontacts 22 April-1 May 2020) of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium Study, an online longitudinal survey of a representative sample of the UK adult population. Our models included depression (PHQ-9), generalized anxiety (GAD-7) and trauma symptoms (ITQ); and measures of COVID-specific anxiety, exposure to the virus in self and close others, as well as economic loss due to the pandemic., Results: A mixed graphical model at wave 1 identified a potential pathway from economic adversity to anxiety symptoms via COVID-specific anxiety. There was no association between viral exposure and symptoms. Ising network models using clinical cut-offs for symptom scores at each wave yielded similar findings, with the exception of a modest effect of viral exposure on trauma symptoms at wave 1 only. Anxiety and depression symptoms formed separate clusters at wave 1 but not wave 2., Conclusions: The psychological impact of the pandemic evolved in the early phase of lockdown. COVID-related anxiety may represent the mechanism through which economic consequences of the pandemic are associated with psychiatric symptoms.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has created an unprecedented global crisis, necessitating drastic changes to living conditions, social life, personal freedom and economic activity. No study has yet examined the presence of psychiatric symptoms in the UK population under similar conditions., Aims: We investigated the prevalence of COVID-19-related anxiety, generalised anxiety, depression and trauma symptoms in the UK population during an early phase of the pandemic, and estimated associations with variables likely to influence these symptoms., Method: Between 23 and 28 March 2020, a quota sample of 2025 UK adults aged 18 years and older, stratified by age, gender and household income, was recruited by online survey company Qualtrics. Participants completed standardised measures of depression, generalised anxiety and trauma symptoms relating to the pandemic. Bivariate and multivariate associations were calculated for demographic and health-related variables., Results: Higher levels of anxiety, depression and trauma symptoms were reported compared with previous population studies, but not dramatically so. Anxiety or depression and trauma symptoms were predicted by young age, presence of children in the home, and high estimates of personal risk. Anxiety and depression were also predicted by low income, loss of income and pre-existing health conditions in self and others. Specific anxiety about COVID-19 was greater in older participants., Conclusions: This study showed a modest increase in the prevalence of mental health problems in the early stages of the pandemic, and these problems were predicted by several specific COVID-related variables. Further similar surveys, particularly of those with children at home, are required as the pandemic progresses.