Search

Aim: The extent to which recent potentially traumatic events (PTEs) hinder the recovery from pre‐existing mental health problems is largely unknown. The same applies to the extent to which non‐recovery from pre‐existing mental health problems increases the risk of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The aim of the present study is to gain insight in these effects. Methods: Data were extracted from six annual surveys of the Dutch population‐based Victims in Modern Society (VICTIMS) study. Of the adult respondents who participated in two subsequent surveys (labeled T1 and T2, n = 6942), those with severe anxiety and depression symptoms (ADS) at T1 (n = 487) were selected. We distinguished respondents exposed to PTEs (PTE‐group, n = 162) and not exposed to PTEs (comparison group, n = 325) between T1 and T2. We applied five indicators of recovery [based on the Reliable Change Index (RCI), degrees of symptom reduction, and the cut‐off score at T2]. Differences in the recovery from ADS and probable PTSD at T2 were examined using multivariate logistic regression. Results: The PTE group less often recovered from severe ADS between T1 and T2 than the comparison group according to all five indicators of recovery, while controlling for 11 different variables (0.40 ≤ adjusted OR's ≤ 0.66). Those in the PTE group who did not recover, considerably more often suffered from probable PTSD at T2 (63%–82%) than those who did recover (0%–29%; 8.96 ≤ adjusted OR ≤ 26.33). Conclusion: Recent potentially traumatic events hinder the recovery from pre‐existing anxiety and depression symptomatology and thereby increase the risk of probable PTSD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Victims of violence, accidents, theft, and serious threat (hereafter abbreviated as victims) are more than nonvictims at risk for problems in different domains, varying from mental health to legal problems. However, the extent to which victims with these problems compared to nonvictims with similar problems receive problem-related professional or formal help is unclear. It is unknown if predictors of unmet needs differ between victims and nonvictims. Aim of the present study is to fill this gap of knowledge. Methods: Data was extracted from surveys of the VICTIMS-study (2018, 2019 and 2020), conducted with the Dutch population-based longitudinal LISS panel. Each survey assessed 1.) experiences with physical violence, accidents, theft, and serious threat and other traumatic or stressful events in the past 12 months and 2.) various problems and use of professional help, e.g. do receive help, do not need help, could use help but do not use it, cannot find or afford help for these problems. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to assess differences in problems, in the use of problem-related professional help, and in predictors of unmet needs between victims (N = 1,756) and nonvictims (N = 5,000). Results: Victims more often had assessed problems than nonvictims. Victims compared to nonvictims with similar problems had 1.5 to 2 times more often unmet needs: they could not find or afford professional help for their mental, physical, partner/family, financial and legal problems. In addition, victims less often received help for legal and administrative problems. Most predictors of unmet needs, e.g. could use help but do not use it, cannot find or afford help, were not significant and hardly differed between both groups. Conclusions: The findings that victims compared to nonvictims more often have various problems and more often cannot find or afford problem-related professional help, suggest that there is room for improvement for victims services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research suggests that victims of partner physical violence (PPV) often face multiple distinct problems, but comparative population-based studies focusing on the prevalence of multiple problems are lacking. Aim of the present study is to gain insight in the prevalence of multiple problems among individuals victimized by PPV in the past 12 months, compared with matched nonvictims and victims of non-partner physical violence (non-PPV). For this purpose, data were extracted from two population-based surveys conducted in 2018 and 2019 on potentially traumatic events in the Netherlands. We focused on problems identified in previous studies on PPV and non-PPV and related problems, varying from physical health, mental health, financial and legal problems, to lack of social support and being exposed to other potentially traumatic and stressful life events (LFEs). In total, 49 respondents were victimized by PPV and 89 by non-PPV in the past 12 months. They were compared with pairwise matched groups not affected by any traumatic or stressful LFEs in this period (n PPV victims comparison group = 245, n non-PPV comparison group = 445). Results showed that PPV victims significantly more often faced all 12 distinct problems than matched nonvictims (2.31 ≤ odds ratio [OR] ≤ 15.48) and non-PPV victims (2.12 ≤ OR ≤ 4.52). PPV victims more often had any problem than non-PPV victims (OR = 8.19), but no significant differences were found between PPV and non-PPV victims with regard to mental health problems. Findings stress the necessity of a multidisciplinary coordinated community response to help PPV victims. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Examine the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health and loneliness in the general population. More specifically, the study focused on prevalence of anxiety and depression symptoms, the extent to which individuals with existing symptoms recovered or not, the prevalence of subtypes of loneliness, and the extent to which loneliness before and during this pandemic was associated with anxiety and depression symptoms. Methods: Data was extracted from the longitudinal LISS panel, based on a probability sample of the Dutch population, with assessments on loneliness in October 2019 (T1) and June 2020 (T4), and anxiety and depression symptoms in November 2019 (T2), March 2020 (T3) and June 2020 (T4; Ntotal = 4,084). Loneliness was examined with the De Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale and anxiety and depression symptoms with the Mental Health Inventory (MHI-5). Results: Repeated measures multivariate logistic regression analyses (RMMLRA) showed a statistical significant lower prevalence of anxiety and depression symptoms after the outbreak (T4 = 15.3%) than before (T2 = 16.8%) and during the COVID-19 outbreak (T3 = 17.2%). According to the Reliable Change Index, the distribution of recovery categories (remission, improvement, unchanged and worsening symptoms) after the outbreak did not differ significantly from the distribution of these categories before the outbreak. RMMLRA revealed that the prevalence of emotional loneliness increased significantly after the outbreak (T1 = 18.4%, T4 = 24.8%). Among individuals who were not lonely before and after the outbreak the prevalence of symptoms decreased significantly (T2 = 7.0%, T4 = 4.4%) and, likewise, among those who were not lonely anymore after the outbreak (T2 = 21.5%, T4 = 14.5%). However, the prevalence of symptoms increased significantly among those who became lonely during the pandemic (T2 = 17.9%, T4 = 26.3%). Conclusions: Findings suggest that this pandemic did not negatively affect the prevalence of anxiety and depression symptoms nor the normal recovery of symptoms among the general population during the first four months, but that emotional loneliness increased. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Assess how people perceive the risks of coronavirus infection, whether people take preventive measures, and which pre-outbreak factors contribute to the perceived risks and measures taken, such as pre-outbreak respiratory problems, heart problems, diabetes, anxiety and depression symptoms, loneliness, age, gender, marital and employment status and education level. Methods: Data were collected in the longitudinal LISS panel, based on a random sample of the Dutch population. The coronavirus survey started on March 2, and the data collection ended on March 17 2020. Data were linked with surveys on health and social integration conducted at the end of 2019 (Nstudy sample = 3,540). Results: About 15% perceived the risk of infection as high, and 11% the risk becoming ill when infected. Multivariable logistic regression analyses showed the following. Older age-groups perceived the risk for coronavirus infection as lower (all adjusted Odd Ratio's [aOR] ≤.070). In total, 43.8% had taken preventive measures, especially females (aOR = 1.46, 95% CI = 1.26–1.70). Those with lower education levels less often used preventive measures (aOR = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.45–0.67). Those with pre-outbreak respiratory problems (aOR = 2.75, 95% CI = 2.11–3.57), heart problems (aOR = 1.97, 95% CI = 1.34–2.92) and diabetes (aOR = 3.12, 95% CI = 2.02–4.82) perceived the risk becoming ill when infected as higher than others. However, respondents with pre-outbreak respiratory problems and diabetes did not more often take preventive measures. Conclusions: Vulnerable patients more often recognize that they are at risk becoming ill when infected by the coronavirus, but many do not take preventive measures. Interventions to stimulate the use of preventive measures should pay additional attention to physically vulnerable patients, males and those with lower education levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Little is known about the 12-month prevalence of potentially traumatic events (PTEs) and to what extent the type of PTE is a risk factor for post-event lack of social support. In addition, it is largely unknown if pre-event mental health problems and loneliness, and demographics are risk factors for a lack of support. Aim of the present prospective study is to fill these gaps in evidence-based knowledge. Methods: A survey was conducted among a large random sample of the Dutch adult population (i.e. the longitudinal LISS panel) in March-April 2018, and linked with pre-event mental health and loneliness data from surveys conducted in 2016 (n = 5,879). We distinguished four forms of perceived social support: emotional and esteem support, and social recognition and general disapproval. Results: Loss of a significant other and/or colleague (28%) was the most prevalent 12-month PTE. The 12-month prevalence of violence, accidents and/or, and theft-related events was 13%. Multivariate logistic regression analyses revealed no differences in lack of emotional and esteem support, or in lack of recognition across non-death PTEs and death-related PTEs. However, victims of threat and physical (sexual) violence more often faced disapproval than those affected by burglary and accidents. Results furthermore showed that pre-event mental health problems, pre-event loneliness and stress during the PTE were important independent predictors of forms of support and acknowledgment. Affected individuals with a non-Western background more often lacked support and acknowledgment. Conclusions: Many adults are confronted with a PTE during a year. In general, pre-event factors and stress during the event are better predictors of a perceived lack of support and acknowledgment than type of event. Early screening programs should especially assess pre-event mental health and loneliness, besides levels of stress during the event, to identify affected people who are at risk for a lack of social support and acknowledgment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• There is concern about increasing mental health problems (MHP) among young adults. • We examined prevalence and latent profiles of MHP among three young Dutch cohorts. • The 2007, 2012 and 2017 cohorts (19–24 year) did not differ in prevalence of MHP. • Latent profile analyses identified four classes of MHP. • The four classes were equally distributed among the three Dutch young cohorts. The aim of the study reported here was to assess whether the prevalence of mental health problems (MHP) among Dutch 19–24 year old adults increased in the past decade and/or whether the distribution of latent profiles of mental health problems changed over the years. For this purpose, data was extracted from the LISS panel, based on a representative national sample of the Dutch population. We focused on three exclusive groups who were 19–24 years old in 2007 (n = 383), 2012 (n = 351) or 2017 (n = 362). Multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that the 2012 and 2017 group did not have more MHP according to seven mental health-related indicators including mental health services utilization. Latent profile analysis identified 4 classes of MHP profiles, labeled "healthy" (82.2%), "at risk" (9.6%), "clinical" (4.2%) and "treatment" (3.9%). The 2007, 2012 and 2017 cohorts were equally distributed across these four classes. However, females had systematically more health problems than males and more often belonged to the "at risk", "clinical" and "treatment" class. In sum, our findings do not support concerns about an increase in MHP or that problems have become more complex among Dutch young adults over the past decade. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract It is unclear to what extent the use of social networking sites (SNS-use) predicts mental health or sleep problems, over and above prior problems. The aim of this study is to examine the independent predictive values of SNS-use. We extracted data from the Longitudinal Internet studies for the Social Sciences panel (LISS panel), based on a random sample of Dutch residents. Using logistic and multiple regression analyses, we assessed the predictive values of SNS-use (Read, Post, Chat) among the total study sample (N = 3486), six age categories, and subgroups with low and high loneliness levels. The three types of SNS-use were significant predictors for mental health and sleep problems on the short and longer term among the total sample, but not after controlling for prior mental health and sleep problems, loneliness and demographics. Analyses among the six age groups revealed some mixed but very weak effects. Among a few age categories, more SNS-use was very associated with more sleep problems. No differences were observed within subgroups with low or high loneliness levels. We conclude that, when controlling for prior problems and loneliness, SNS-use does not or hardly predict mental health and sleep problems on the short or long term. Highlights • On a bivariate level, SNS-use predict mental health problems and sleep problems on the short and long term. • When controlling for previous mental health and sleep problems and loneliness, SNS-use does not or hardly predict problems. • Different age groups and those with low or high levels of previous loneliness, show a similar pattern. • High levels of SNS may be more a symptom than a cause of mental health and sleep problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Each year a consisiderable minority is affected by serious threat and violence. • These events may cause PTSD, anxiety and depression symptoms, and lack of support. • Very little is known about whether pre-event support protects against these effects. • We therefore conducted a population-based prospective study among (non)victims. • Findings offer strong evidence for protective role of pre-event emotional support. Our knowledge about the effects of perceived emotional support on PTSD, anxiety and depressive symptoms after serious threat and violence is primarily based on post-event studies. Very little is known about the extent to which (1) victims lacking pre-event emotional support are more at risk of post-event symptoms and lack of post-event support than victims with pre-event emotional support, and (2) victims with pre-event emotional support and victims lacking emotional support are more at risk of post-event anxiety and depressive symptoms than nonvictims with similar pre-event support levels. For this purpose, we conducted a 2-wave prospective study (VICTIMS) using the Dutch population-based longitudinal LISS panel. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted, controlling for pre-event demographics, symptoms, and physical, work-related and financial problems. As hypothesized, victims (Nvictims total = 187) lacking pre-event support more often had high post-event PTSD, anxiety and depressive symptoms than victims with pre-event support. No significant differences were found between victims and nonvictims with pre-event emotional support (Nnonvictims total = 2,828, not exposed to any event). Since victims and nonvictims with pre-event support did not differ in post-event symptoms and support, the findings offer strong evidence for the buffering hypothesis of emotional support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]