Search

Background: Many diagnostic evaluations abruptly shifted to telehealth during the COVID‐19 pandemic; however, little is known about the impact on diagnosis patterns for children evaluated for autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The purpose of this clinical research study was to examine (1) the frequency of diagnoses evaluated beyond ASD; (2) the frequency of diagnoses made, including ASD; and (3) clinician diagnostic certainty for all diagnoses evaluated for children who received an evaluation due to primary concerns about ASD via telehealth during the pandemic compared to those evaluated in person before the pandemic at an ASD specialty clinic. Methods: The sample included 2192 children, 1–17 years (M = 6.5 years; SD = 3.9), evaluated by a physician/psychologist at an ASD specialty center. A total of 649 children were evaluated in‐person September 1, 2019–March 13, 2020 (pre‐pandemic) and 1543 were evaluated via telehealth March 14, 2020–July 26, 2021 (during pandemic). Upon completion of each evaluation, clinicians provided a final diagnostic determination (i.e., "Yes," "No," "Possible," or "Not Assessed") for the following DSM‐5 conditions: ASD, attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), intellectual developmental disorder (IDD), anxiety (ANX), depression (DEP), and behavioral disorder (BD). "Possible" indicated lower certainty and the diagnosis was not provided. "Not Assessed" indicated the disorder was not evaluated. Results: Diagnostic certainty for ASD and ADHD was lower and clinicians evaluated for and made diagnoses of IDD less often during evaluations that occurred via telehealth during the pandemic versus in person before the pandemic. DEP and BD were diagnosed more frequently, diagnostic certainty of DEP was lower, and no differences in the frequency of ANX diagnoses emerged during evaluations conducted via telehealth during the pandemic compared to those conducted in person before the pandemic. Conclusions: Differences emerged in the frequency of diagnoses evaluated and made and diagnostic certainty for evaluations conducted via telehealth during the pandemic compared to in person before the pandemic, which likely impacted patients and reflect real‐word challenges. Future work should examine whether these patterns are generalizable and the mechanisms that contribute to these differences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To examine changes in drinking behavior among United States (US) adults between March 10 and July 21, 2020, a critical period during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Design Longitudinal, internet‐based panel survey. Setting: The Understanding America Study (UAS), a nationally representative panel of US adults age 18 or older. Participants: A total of 4298 US adults who reported alcohol use. Measurements Changes in number of reported drinking days from March 11, 2020 through July 21, 2020 in the overall sample and stratified by sex, age, race/ethnicity, household structure, poverty status, and census region. Findings Compared with March 11, the number of drinking days per week was significantly higher on April 1 by an average of 0.36 days (95% CI = 0.30, 0.43), on May 1 by an average of 0.55 days (95% CI = 0.47, 0.63), on June 1 by an average of 0.41 days (95% CI = 0.33, 0.49), and on July 1 by an average of 0.39 days (95% CI = 0.31, 0.48). Males, White participants, and older adults reported sustained increases in drinking days, whereas female participants and individuals living under the federal poverty line had attenuated drinking days in the latter part of the study period. Conclusions: Between March and mid‐July 2020, adults in the United States reported increases in the number of drinking days, with sustained increases observed among males, White participants, and older adults. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although general anxiety has increased markedly since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, little has been reported about the demographic distribution of COVID-19 related worry, its relationship with psychological features, and its association with depression symptoms in the United States (US). 2117 participants, selected to represent the age, gender, and race/ethnic distributions of the US population, completed an online survey. Analysis of variance and correlation analyses were used to assess relationships between the COVID-19 related worry score and demographic characteristics, past psychiatric diagnoses, personality dimensions, and current psychological symptoms. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between the COVID-19 worry score and depression symptoms. The COVID-19 worry score was markedly higher in younger (18-49 year-olds) than older participants, and moderately higher in men, those who were married or cohabiting, with post-college education, and/or living in large urban areas. The COVID-19 worry score also was markedly higher in those who reported having been diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder. The COVID-19 worry score correlated with neuroticism, current psychological symptoms, and COVID-19 risk and COVID-19 behavior scores. The COVID-19 worry score was associated with current depression symptoms (OR = 1.10, 95% CI = 1.09–1.11; p < 0.001) in univariable models and remained significant after adjustment for other correlates of depression, including COVID-19 risk. In this US sample, the COVID-19 worry score was inversely related to age, strongly related to psychological symptoms, and independently associated with depression symptoms. These findings have implications for the community mental health response to the COVID-19 pandemic in the US. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Contamination-prevention behaviors such as mask wearing and physical distancing are crucial to reduce coronavirus transmission during the COVID-19 pandemic. We hypothesized that engagement in these behaviors could provoke obsessions and phobias in vulnerable individuals in the community. A total of 2117 participants, systematically selected to represent the age, gender, and race distributions of the US population, completed an online survey that assessed demographic characteristics, clinical features, COVID-19 risks, and COVID-19 contamination-prevention behaviors. Logistic regression was used to estimate the magnitude of the relationships between the COVID-19 behavior score and clinically significant contamination obsessions, contamination compulsions, and pre-COVID-19 to current change in obsessive-compulsive symptom scores. The COVID-19 behavior score was significantly associated with contamination obsessions (odds ratio (OR) = 1.15, 95% CI = 1.12–1.16; p < 0.001) and contamination phobias (OR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.12–1.16; p < 0.001). The COVID-19 behavior score also was associated with pre-pandemic to current increase in the overall obsessive-compulsive symptom score (OR = 1.16, 95% CI = 1.09–1.23; p < 0.001), as well as increase in obsessive-compulsive symptom score excluding washing items (OR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.07–1.19; p < 0.001). The magnitude of these relationships did not appreciably change, after adjustment for other variables associated with the outcomes. Moreover, the relationship was significant in those with or without OCD, and in individuals with different levels of doubt and COVID-19 risk. Contamination safety measures are critical for reducing the spread of COVID-19 in the community. However, they may be related to the development of contamination-related symptoms and OCD in vulnerable individuals, complicating the diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders during this period. • Safety behaviors might provoke psychopathology in some people during COVID-19. • We investigated these behaviors in a population-based U.S. sample (N = 2117). • These behaviors were associated with contamination obsessions and phobias. • These behaviors were associated with increase in OC symptom scores. • The findings have implications for treatment of mental disorders during pandemics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cross-sectional studies have found that the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has negatively affected population-level mental health. Longitudinal studies are necessary to examine trajectories of change in mental health over time and identify sociodemographic groups at risk for persistent distress.Purpose: To examine the trajectories of mental distress between March 10 and August 4, 2020, a key period during the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods: Participants included 6,901 adults from the nationally representative Understanding America Study, surveyed at baseline between March 10 and 31, 2020, with nine follow-up assessments between April 1 and August 4, 2020. Mixed-effects logistic regression was used to examine the association between date and self-reported mental distress (measured with the four-item Patient Health Questionnaire) among U.S. adults overall and among sociodemographic subgroups defined by sex, age, race/ethnicity, household structure, federal poverty line, and census region.Results: Compared to March 11, the odds of mental distress among U.S. adults overall were 1.84 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.65-2.07) times higher on April 1 and 1.92 (95% CI = 1.62-2.28) times higher on May 1; by August 1, the odds of mental distress had returned to levels comparable to March 11 (odds ratio [OR] = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.66-0.96). Females experienced a sharper increase in mental distress between March and May compared to males (females: OR = 2.29, 95% CI = 1.85-2.82; males: OR = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.15-2.02).Conclusions: These findings highlight the trajectory of mental health symptoms during an unprecedented pandemic, including the identification of populations at risk for sustained mental distress. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental distress in US adults. Methods. Participants were 5065 adults from the Understanding America Study, a probability-based Internet panel representative of the US adult population. The main exposure was survey completion date (March 10–16, 2020). The outcome was mental distress measured via the 4-item version of the Patient Health Questionnaire. Results. Among states with 50 or more COVID-19 cases as of March 10, each additional day was significantly associated with an 11% increase in the odds of moving up a category of distress (odds ratio = 1.11; 95% confidence interval = 1.01, 1.21; P =.02). Perceptions about the likelihood of getting infected, death from the virus, and steps taken to avoid infecting others were associated with increased mental distress in the model that included all states. Individuals with higher consumption of alcohol or cannabis or with history of depressive symptoms were at significantly higher risk for mental distress. Conclusions. These data suggest that as the COVID-19 pandemic continues, mental distress may continue to increase and should be regularly monitored. Specific populations are at high risk for mental distress, particularly those with preexisting depressive symptoms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Exposure to disaster-related media may be a risk factor for mental distress, but this has not been examined in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study assesses whether exposure to social and traditional media during the rise of the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with mental distress among U.S. adults.Methods: Data came from the Understanding America Study, conducted with a cross-sectional, nationally representative sample of adults who completed surveys online. Participants included 6,329 adults surveyed between March 10 and March 31, 2020. Regression analyses examined the associations of (1) self-reported average time spent on social media in a day (hours) and (2) number of traditional media sources (radio, TV, and newspaper) consulted to learn about COVID-19 with self-reported mental distress (4-item Patient Health Questionnaire). Data were analyzed in April 2020.Results: Participants responding at later survey dates reported more time spent on social media (β=0.02, 95% CI=0.01, 0.03), a greater number of traditional media sources consulted to learn about COVID-19 (β=0.01, 95% CI=0.01, 0.02), and greater mental distress (β=0.07, 95% CI=0.04, 0.09). Increased time spent on social media and consulting a greater number of traditional media sources to learn about COVID-19 were independently associated with increased mental distress, even after adjusting for potential confounders (social media: β=0.14, 95% CI=0.05, 0.23; traditional media: β=0.14, 95% CI=0.08, 0.20).Conclusions: Exposure to a greater number of traditional media sources and more hours on social media was modestly associated with mental distress during the rise of the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most individuals in the United States have no history of a mental health condition yet are at risk for psychological distress due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The objective of this study was to assess the frequency and risk and protective factors of psychological distress, during the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, in this group. Data comes from the Pew Research Center's American Trends Panel (ATP), a probability-based online survey panel representative of the US adult population. The analytic sample consisted of 9687 individuals with no prior history of a mental health condition who completed the survey between March 19-24, 2020. Explanatory variables included sociodemographic factors and items related to behavior, perceptions, and experiences surrounding the pandemic. The outcome was psychological distress, measured by five items on symptoms of anxiety, depression, loneliness, sleep difficulties, and hyperarousal. A multivariable linear regression model was used to identify risk and protective factors for psychological distress. Fifteen percent of the sample experienced 2 psychological distress symptoms for at least 3 days over the past week; 13% had three or more symptoms. Risk factors for higher distress included searching online or using social media to post about coronavirus, reporting that the outbreak caused major changes to personal life, and perception that the virus was a threat to the US economy, the individual's personal health or finances. This has important implications for mental health service delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Psychological responses to potentially traumatic events tend to be heterogeneous, with some individuals displaying resilience. Longitudinal associations between resilience and mental distress during the COVID-19 pandemic, however, are poorly understood. The objective of this study was to examine the association between resilience and trajectories of mental distress during the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods: Participants were 6,008 adults from the Understanding America Study, a probability-based Internet-panel representative of the US adult population. Baseline data were collected between March 10 and March 31, 2020, with nine follow-up waves conducted between April 1 and August 4. Mixed-effects logistic regression was used to examine the association between date and mental distress, stratified by resilience level (low, normal, or high).Results: In contrast to the high resilience group, participants in the low and normal resilience groups experienced increases in mental distress in the early months of the pandemic (low: OR=2.94, 95% CI=1.93-4.46; normal: OR=1.91, 95% CI=1.55-2.35). Men, middle-aged and older adults, Black adults, and adults with a graduate degree were more likely to report high resilience, whereas adults living below the poverty line were less likely to report high resilience.Limitations: These associations should not be interpreted as causal, and resilience was measured at only one time-point.Conclusions: Trajectories of mental distress varied markedly by resilience level during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, with low-resilience adults reporting the largest increases in mental distress during this crisis. Activities that foster resilience should be included in broader strategies to support mental health throughout the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]