Search

Resumen Antecedentes: Los pacientes en hemodiálisis padecen, debido a su diagnóstico y tratamiento, mayores niveles de ansiedad y depresión que la población general. El objetivo de esta investigación es conocer el impacto emocional generado por la COVID-19 en pacientes hemodializados. Método: Estudio transversal analítico en una muestra total de 88 pacientes mayores de 18 años que reciben hemodiálisis entre abril de 2021 y marzo de 2022. Se recogen variables sociodemográficas y clínicas incluyendo aquellas relacionadas con COVID-19. A todos los pacientes se les administran las escalas HADS y Kessler-10. Resultados: La puntuación media de la escala HADS-A fue de 5,3 (±3,732), de la HADS-D de 5,45 (±4,052) y de la Kessler-10 de 20,11(±7,499). Se observaron diferencias significativas entre aislados y no aislados en las escalas clínicas HADS-A (p=,002) y HADS-D (p=,005). Igualmente, aquellos pacientes con antecedentes psicopatológicos fueron significativamente más jóvenes (p=,014) y con una mayor puntuación en las escalas HADS-D (p=,016) y Kessler-10 (p=,035) que aquellos sin antecedentes. Conclusiones: No hubo asociación entre infección por COVID-19 y la clínica ansioso-depresiva en pacientes hemodializados. El aislamiento, en estos pacientes, no se asocia a la aparición de clínica psicopatológica, mientras que el hecho de haber presentado antecedentes psicopatológicos previos se asocia a su desarrollo.

Background: The 2022 War in Ukraine has significantly affected the psychological well-being and daily lives of people in many countries. Objective: Two aims of this transnational study were (1) to compare psychological distress and coping strategies among people living in Ukraine, Poland, and Taiwan, (2) to examine whether the associations between various coping strategies (ie. problem-focused coping, emotion-focused coping, and avoidance) and psychological distress (ie. depression, anxiety, stress, posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms, and hopelessness about the ongoing war) differed among people of various countries during the initial stage of the 2022 War in Ukraine. Method: In total, 1,598 participants (362 from Ukraine, 1,051 from Poland, and 185 from Taiwan) were recruited using an online advertisement to complete online survey questionnaires, including the Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced inventory; the 21-item Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale; the Impact of Event Scale-Revised; and a questionnaire devised to assess the level of hopelessness about the ongoing war. Results: Psychological distress and adoption of coping strategies differed across people of various countries. Among Taiwanese and Polish respondents, avoidant coping strategies were most strongly associated with all categories of psychological distress compared with problem- and emotion-focused coping strategies. However, the associations of various coping strategies with psychological distress differed to a less extent among Ukrainian respondents. In addition, problem- and emotion-focused coping strategies had comparable associations with psychological distress among the people of Ukraine, Poland, and Taiwan. Conclusions: The 2022 War in Ukraine has affected the psychological well-being of people, especially the Ukrainians. Because of the strong association between the adoption of avoidance coping strategies and psychological distress, despite a less extent among Ukrainian respondents, adaptive coping strategies such as (problem- and emotion-focused) are suggested to help people during times of war. The 2022 War in Ukraine affected the psychological well-being in Ukraine and elsewhere. Compared with problem- and emotion-focused coping strategies, avoidant coping strategies had stronger association with psychological distress, but it varied among different cultures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Psicooncologia is the property of Universidad Complutense de Madrid and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objective. To analyze the relationship between binge drinking and psychological discomfort in Mexican adults. Materials and methods. We used data from the 2011 National Survey on Addictions in Mexico. A two-stage bivariate probit model with instrumental variables was used to address the potential reverse causality in the association between binge drinking and psychological discomfort. Results. Individuals who had at least one episode of binge drinking in the last year and in the last month are more likely to experience psychological discomfort. Conclusion. This study shows the relevance of developing prevention and treatment programs for people who consume alcohol in excess due to its negative effects on mental health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Faced the health emergency caused by COVID-19, health staff shows a greater psychological condition, presenting symptoms of anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress, fear of infection, frustration, hopelessness, and worry, due to long working hours, irregular schedules, lack of protective goons, the collapse of hospitals which affects their quality of life, job performance and their mental capacity; making it difficult to fight this virus. The level of resilience and the dealing strategies placed by everyone have an important influence on this impact. The objective of this research is to determine the psychological impact, resilience, and coping of the health professionals at Hospital Santa Inés during the COVID-19 descriptive-correlational approach with a quantitative approach, with a sample of 120 health workers from Hospital Santa Inés, the information will be presented in tables of frequency and percentage with their descriptive analysis. The results obtained from the research showed that about 1/3 of the research subjects present some kind of psychological distress, at the same time they use coping strategies to continue with their hard work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Within the health prevention programs, stress has been considered as a cardiovascular risk factor. It is called psychological discomfort and it has been interpreted as a pathological adaptation process. The aim of this study was to evaluate the presence of psychological risk factors defined as psychological discomfort and represented in symptoms such as anxiety anguish, depression and hostility in a population of patients who had a cardiovascular event. The results indicated that the presence of psychological discomfort in this population manifested mostly by symptoms of anxiety and anguish. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

According to studies conducted in different countries, it is estimated that approximately 30% to 50% of people with mental health problems are not recognized by the general practitioner. Given this situation, it has been proposed that the practitioner at the primary care services must play a decisive role in the early detection of cases by establishing a definitive diagnostic and a timely treatment. Several organizations have pointed out that one of the first actions that need to be implemented to fulfill the aims in the care of people with mental disorders is to prepare the first-contact doctors and to have a brief, low cost, self-applied, valid and reliable scale. The studies mention that using screening tests at the primary care level is crucial for the success of the programs. The detection and recognition of psychiatric symptomatology rates vary depending on the type of scale applied. The tools that have been widely used are the Goldberg's General Health Questionnaire (GHQ), Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale, Beck Depression Inventory, the Depression Symptom Checklist (DS 20), the Hopkins Symptom Checklist (SCL), the Hamilton Depression Scale, the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS), the self-administered computerized assessment (PROQSY), the criteria of the 3rd revised edition of the Diagnostical and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III-R), the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID), and the criteria of the Symptom Driven Diagnostic System for Primary Care (SDDS-PC), among others. The preliminary results confirm the existence of a high percentage of possible psychiatric cases (46.9%), but only 4% of cases are referral. The low capability of the general practitioner at the primary care level in detecting these pathologies has been confirmed as well. These scales have been applied in different scenarios and to different types of population. Although the dominating criteria for choosing the tool are sensitivity and specificity, some authors mention that strategies for adequately handling cases, such as the confirmation of the diagnosis and followup of the patients, are required once the treatment has started. In this paper, we present the psychometric characteristics of the Kessler (K-10) scale in detecting depression and anxiety disorders in the primary care. Material and methods The study is a methodological process that aims to validate the Kessler Psychological Distress scale (K-10). It was conducted in two health care centers of primary care level in Mexico City. The subjects were 280 individuals who requested attention at the mentioned centers and to whom the K-10 test was applied after giving their informed consent. Later on, the computerized version of the International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), which uses the diagnostic criteria of the DSM-IV, was applied to the subjects in order to confirm the diagnostics for depression and anxiety. The MINI is a version adapted to Latin American Spanish by the National Institute of Psychiatry Ramon de la Fuente Muñiz. The diagnostic accuracy was processed following the MINI diagnoses for depression and anxiety closely, and the scores on the scale K-10 as a predictor. The sensitivity and specificity were calculated for all possible cut points in order to establish the optimal cut off point. The efficiency and maximum likelihood ratios were also calculated. The area under the ROC curve as well as the probability quotients, positive and negative (LR+ and LR-), were also calculated. The K-10 is a brief screening tool that can be easily applied by the primary care personnel which measures the psychological distress of a person during the four weeks prior to the application. It consists of ten questions with Likert-like answers that range from 1 to 5 and are categorized in a five level ordinal scale: Always, Very Often, Sometimes, Rarely, Never; where «Never» has an assigned value of 1, and «Always» has assigned value of 5. It has a minimum score of 10 and a maximum of 50. The ranges of the instrument are four levels: low (10-15), moderate (16-21), high (22-29) and very high (30-50). The instrument showed an internal consistency of 0.90 and it has been used in various population studies promoted by the World Health Organization as well as government organizations in Australia, Spain, Colombia and Peru. Results Out of 280 individuals to whom the tool was applied, 78.9% (221) were female and 21.1% (59) male. These values represent the proportion of patients attending the primary care services (95% confidence interval=±5.4%). The mean age of women was 39 years, and the mean age of men was 41. The 70.6% of the women manifested more psychological distress than men (52.5%)[χ²(1)=6.05,p=0.014. No other sociodemographic variable showed significant differences. The instrument is highly precise, it can detect up to 87% of depression cases, and 82.4% of anxiety cases. The scale was compared with the MINI and it presented a prevalence of 26.8% and 10.6%, respectively. Of the total of depression cases, 26.4% also presented anxiety; these represent a co-morbidity of 5.4%. The construct validity presented one factor alone that explains the 53.4% of the total variance, this is why the scale is considered as onedimensional. In other words, the scale only measures the construct of the psychological distress. The internal consistency was α=0.901. Once the sensitivity and specificity for all cut off points had been determined using the MINI as a golden rule, it was observed that the cut off point for maximum sensitivity and specificity corresponded to 21 for the diagnosis of depression, and 22 for anxiety. Conclusions The K-10 is a good instrument for the detection of depression and anxiety cases at the primary care level which meets the criteria of validity and reliability. However, given that only one diagnosis was considered for all the range of anxiety disorders, the scale must be chosen carefully for all the other disorders that are not included in this paper. The use of the instrument is recommended for the general practitioners at the primary care level, mainly for diagnosing depression. Various studies in which other screening instruments have been used for the detection of depressive disorder at primary care point out that any screening method are useful in making the diagnosis. By using these instruments, the depression diagnosis at primary care level increases from 10% to 47%. The latter supports the fact that the selection of a good instrument turns out to be effective in detection, treatment and clinical outcomes of the entity. Since this recommendation is only one of the activities required in primary care level for good handling of detected cases, it is noteworthy to mention that a comprehensive care model that encompasses both the detection as well as the pharmacological and psychosocial treatments is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]