Depression and anxiety associated with COVID- 19 pandemic among healthcare professionals in India- A systematic review and meta-analysis

Insomnia in teachers at the time of resumption of in-person instruction at schools amidst the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has affected people's economies, lifestyles, and physical, emotional, and sleep health. This research aimed to estimate the prevalence of insomnia and symptoms of stress, anxiety, and depression among teachers with the resumption of in-person instruction at schools following a hiatus after COVID-19 lockdowns in India. We also studied the association of teachers' insomnia with psychological symptoms and demographic variables.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey between October -November 2021 after schools had reopened during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data was collected using standard questionnaires online among schoolteachers. We explored the association of insomnia with teachers' symptoms of stress, anxiety, depression, sex, school boards, and age groups.

RESULTS

Of 124 schoolteachers surveyed, the prevalence of insomnia was 37.9% (subthreshold in 25% and clinical in 12.9%). The prevalence of stress, depression, and anxiety was 20.2%, 30.6%, and 45.2%, respectively. There was a significant association (p<0.001) of insomnia with symptoms of anxiety, stress, and depression in univariate analysis. On multivariate analysis, we found that those feeling stressed had a 6.4 times higher risk of insomnia (95% CI: 1.5-28.3, p - 0.01). There was no association of insomnia with age, sex, school educational boards, and type of institution.

CONCLUSIONS

Over one-third (37.9%) of teachers reported having trouble sleeping when they returned to the school's typical face-to-face instruction modalities through COVID-19 times, and insomnia was more prevalent in those with stress.

Stress, anxiety, depression and sleep disturbance among healthcare professional during the COVID-19 pandemic: An umbrella review of 72 meta-analyses

The outbreak of SARS-CoV-2, which causes COVID-19, has significantly impacted the psychological and physical health of a wide range of individuals, including healthcare professionals (HCPs). This umbrella review aims provide a quantitative summary of meta-analyses that have investigated the prevalence of stress, anxiety, depression, and sleep disturbance among HCPs during the COVID-19 pandemic. An umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses reviews was conducted. The search was performed using the EMBASE, PubMed, CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar databases from 01st January 2020 to 15th January 2024. A random-effects model was then used to estimate prevalence with a 95% confidence interval. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analyses were then conducted to explore the heterogeneity of the sample. Seventy-two meta-analyses involved 2,308 primary studies were included after a full-text review. The umbrella review revealed that the pooled prevalence of stress, anxiety, depression, and sleep disturbance among HCPs during the COVID-19 pandemic was 37% (95% CI 32.87-41.22), 31.8% (95% CI 29.2-34.61) 29.4% (95% CI 27.13-31.84) 36.9% (95% CI 33.78-40.05) respectively. In subgroup analyses the prevalence of anxiety and depression was higher among nurses than among physicians. Evidence from this umbrella review suggested that a significant proportion of HCPs experienced stress, anxiety, depression, and sleep disturbance during the COVID-19 pandemic. This information will support authorities when implementing specific interventions that address mental health problems among HCPs during future pandemics or any other health crises. Such interventions may include the provision of mental health support services, such as counseling and peer support programs, as well as the implementation of organizational strategies to reduce workplace stressors.

Psychological health among healthcare professionals during COVID-19 pandemic: An updated meta-analysis

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic outbreak created a challenge to manage the health, especially the mental health of various care providers involved in treating the patients infected with the virus. Previously published literature has shown a significant effect of the pandemic on the psychological health of healthcare workers (HCWs) globally; so, this study aimed to describe the psychological health outcomes of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among Indian HCWs.

Methods

An extensive literature search was conducted in databases including PubMed and Google Scholar. The search was restricted from the COVID-19 outbreak until June 2022. Cross-sectional studies and other studies (telephonic interviews and survey-based studies) reported the prevalence of anxiety and depression among frontline HCWs since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. All the studies were critically evaluated by two individual authors in terms of screening and methodological quality evaluation. A total of 16 studies were included in the final meta-analysis.

Results

The prevalence of depression among n = 12231 participants of 14 studies was 0.37 CI 95% [0.28-0.48]; the prevalence of anxiety among n = 9467 participants of 12 studies was 0.39 CI 95% [0.29-0.49]. The results of the overall meta-analysis indicate that 37% and 39% of HCWs in this study experienced mild-to-severe depression and anxiety, respectively. During the COVID-19 pandemic, a significant number of HCWs developed mental health issues, with a reported prevalence of depression (37%) and anxiety (39%).

Conclusion

Frontline HCWs' mental health should get full consideration during public health emergencies, screening should be actively conducted, and specific steps should be taken to lower the fear associated with the risk of infections.

Burnout syndrome and anxiety among healthcare workers during global pandemics: An umbrella review

BACKGROUND

Burnout syndrome and anxiety are two mental health symptoms experienced by healthcare workers (HCWs) that can be exacerbated during pandemics due to increased job demands and the global health workforce crisis.

AIM

To provide a comprehensive review and summary of evidence on burnout and anxiety in HCWs during previous global pandemics.

METHODS

A systematic search on electronic databases such as PubMed Central and MEDLINE was conducted to identify high-quality systematic review studies that reported on the prevalence of burnout and/or anxiety in HCWs during any previous global pandemic.

RESULTS

Twenty-four high quality systematic review articles were found to be suitable for inclusion. Twenty articles focused merely on Coronavirus disease 2019, while four articles examined multiple pandemics. Burnout was examined in nine articles, while anxiety was examined in the remaining 21 articles. Female HCWs and nurses were identified to be at a higher risk of developing burnout and anxiety during pandemic. We also observed a variation in the prevalence of burnouts and anxiety across different studies due to different mental health instruments were used in different studies.

CONCLUSION

Nurses and females HCWs had a high prevalence of burnout syndrome and anxiety during pandemic. More emphasis and attention should be paid to safeguarding the psychological well-being of these at-risk populations in the future pandemics.

Psychological distress in healthcare workers during COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Healthcare workers serving during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been exposed to high work overload, which may have had an impact on their physical, mental, and social health. The aim of this study was to assess the risk factors associated with psychological distress among healthcare workers serving during the COVID-19 pandemic from January 2020 to December 2022.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted based on the 2020 PRISMA statement. Articles were searched in the Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases.

RESULTS

A total of 59 articles were included in this systematic review. It was observed that the prevalence of psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic was high. Female sex, being a nurse, being young, living alone/being single, and having a chronic disease or psychiatric disorder history are the main risk factors at the personal level. Other occupational and pandemic-related factors such as having many years of work experience, the presence of COVID-19 symptoms and contact history, not enough sleep, having lower family support and limited social relationships, fear of infecting friends and family, having a reduced perception of protection by personal protective equipment, working on the frontline, and having longer service duration were found to be factors influencing the development of psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

There are personal, interpersonal, and organizational risk factors that can lead to the occurrence of psychological distress among healthcare staff working during the COVID-19 pandemic.

COVID-19 and common mental health symptoms in the early phase of the pandemic: An umbrella review of the evidence

BACKGROUND

There remains uncertainty about the impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on mental health. This umbrella review provides a comprehensive overview of the association between the pandemic and common mental disorders. We qualitatively summarized evidence from reviews with meta-analyses of individual study-data in the general population, healthcare workers, and specific at-risk populations.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

A systematic search was carried out in 5 databases for peer-reviewed systematic reviews with meta-analyses of prevalence of depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms during the pandemic published between December 31, 2019 until August 12, 2022. We identified 123 reviews of which 7 provided standardized mean differences (SMDs) either from longitudinal pre- to during pandemic study-data or from cross-sectional study-data compared to matched pre-pandemic data. Methodological quality rated with the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews checklist scores (AMSTAR 2) instrument was generally low to moderate. Small but significant increases of depression, anxiety, and/or general mental health symptoms were reported in the general population, in people with preexisting physical health conditions, and in children (3 reviews; SMDs ranged from 0.11 to 0.28). Mental health and depression symptoms significantly increased during periods of social restrictions (1 review; SMDs of 0.41 and 0.83, respectively) but anxiety symptoms did not (SMD: 0.26). Increases of depression symptoms were generally larger and longer-lasting during the pandemic (3 reviews; SMDs depression ranged from 0.16 to 0.23) than those of anxiety (2 reviews: SMDs 0.12 and 0.18). Females showed a significantly larger increase in anxiety symptoms than males (1 review: SMD 0.15). In healthcare workers, people with preexisting mental disorders, any patient group, children and adolescents, and in students, no significant differences from pre- to during pandemic were found (2 reviews; SMD's ranging from -0.16 to 0.48). In 116 reviews pooled cross-sectional prevalence rates of depression, anxiety, and PTSD symptoms ranged from 9% to 48% across populations. Although heterogeneity between studies was high and largely unexplained, assessment tools and cut-offs used, age, sex or gender, and COVID-19 exposure factors were found to be moderators in some reviews. The major limitations are the inability to quantify and explain the high heterogeneity across reviews included and the shortage of within-person data from multiple longitudinal studies.

CONCLUSIONS

A small but consistent deterioration of mental health and particularly depression during early pandemic and during social restrictions has been found in the general population and in people with chronic somatic disorders. Also, associations between mental health and the pandemic were stronger in females and younger age groups than in others. Explanatory individual-level, COVID-19 exposure, and time-course factors were scarce and showed inconsistencies across reviews. For policy and research, repeated assessments of mental health in population panels including vulnerable individuals are recommended to respond to current and future health crises.

Anxiety and depression as predictors of life satisfaction during pre-professional health internships in COVID-19 times: the mediating role of psychological well-being

Due to the emotional impact of COVID-19 on university students, the goal was to explore the relationship between anxiety, depression, psychological well-being, and life satisfaction among pre-professional interns. The research was carried out using an explanatory cross-sectional design, with the participation of 1011 pre-professional interns of 13 health networks from the department of Puno (Peru). Data were collected using the Satisfaction with Life Scale, Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale-2, Patient Health Questionnaire 2, and the Psychological Wellbeing Scale. The main data analysis was carried out using the R statistical software, and implementing the confirmatory factor analysis technique, which evidenced that the explanatory model provides an acceptable value. Based on the above, a negative relationship between depression and life satisfaction, (β = -.60, p < .001) and a positive relationship between anxiety and life satisfaction (β = .28, p < .001) was shown, in addition to a mediating effect of the psychological wellbeing related to depression and life satisfaction (p < .001). In conclusion, life satisfaction is explained concerning the degree of depression and anxiety, as well as the moderating effect of psychological well-being. Despite that, there is an urgent need to take preventive actions to strengthen the mental health of the pre-professional health interns, who have also been providing support during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Assessment of psychological distress pattern & its correlates among people receiving COVID-19 vaccination during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study

Background & objectives

There is a possibility that vaccinated people may experience lesser psychological distress due to the sense of safety felt by them against getting the COVID-19 infection as compared to those who are not vaccinated. However, there is a paucity of research examining the mental health status of this important sub-group of population. Thus, the present study was aimed to examine the pattern of psychological distress and its correlates among people receiving COVID-19 vaccine.

Methods

This cross-sectional study assessed individuals receiving COVID-19 vaccine at a tertiary care hospital. Psychological distress and COVID-19-related anxiety were assessed using the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS-21) and the COVID-19 Anxiety Scale-7, respectively.

Results

The study comprised 728 individuals with a mean age of 44.8 yr. Moderate levels of depression, anxiety and stress were reported by about 50, six and 15 per cent of the participants, respectively, as assessed on DASS-21. Generalized linear model and quantile regression analyses revealed COVID-19-related anxiety, and being a healthcare worker or front-line worker as significant correlates of psychological distress.

Interpretation & conclusions

About half of the study participants receiving COVID-19 vaccine reported moderate to severe symptoms of depression. Strategies focusing on alleviation of COVID-19-related fear and anxiety might be effective in improving the symptoms of psychological distress.

Global Healthcare Needs Related to COVID-19: An Evidence Map of the First Year of the Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed gaps and areas of need in health systems worldwide. This work aims to map the evidence on COVID-19-related healthcare needs of adult patients, their family members, and the professionals involved in their care during the first year of the pandemic. We searched the databases MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts and assessed full texts for eligibility. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Descriptive data were extracted and inductive qualitative content analysis was used to generate codes and derive overarching themes. Thirty-six studies met inclusion criteria, with the majority reporting needs from the perspective of professionals (35/36). Professionals' needs were grouped into three main clusters (basic, occupational, and psycho-socio-emotional needs); patients' needs into four (basic, healthcare, psycho-socio-emotional, and other support needs); and family members' needs into two (psycho-socio-emotional and communication needs). Transversal needs across subgroups were also identified and grouped into three main clusters (public safety, information and communication, and coordination and support needs). This evidence map provides valuable insight on COVID-19-related healthcare needs. More research is needed to assess first-person perspectives of patients and their families, examine whether needs differ by country or region, and evaluate how needs have evolved over time.

Depression, Anxiety, Stress, and Insomnia amongst COVID Warriors across Several Hospitals after Second Wave: Have We Acclimatized? A Cross-sectional Survey

Background

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been a cause of significant mental health disturbances in medical health personnel. However, 18 months into the pandemic, healthcare workers (HCWs) have become accustomed to the heightened stress and anxiety that comes with caring for COVID patients. Through this study, we aim to measure depression, anxiety, stress, and insomnia in doctors with the help of validated scales.

Materials and methods

This was a cross-sectional study with an online survey design conducted among doctors from major hospitals in New Delhi. The questionnaire included participant demographics, including designation, specialty, marital status, and living arrangements. This was followed by questions from the validated depression, anxiety, stress scale (DASS-21), and insomnia severity index (ISI). Depression, anxiety, stress, and insomnia scores were calculated for each participant, and the data were analyzed statistically.

Results

The mean scores of the whole study population showed no depression, moderate anxiety, mild stress, and subthreshold insomnia. Female doctors exhibited more psychological issues (mild depression and stress, moderate anxiety, but only subthreshold insomnia) as compared to males (mild anxiety, but no depression, stress, and insomnia). Junior doctors also had higher depression, anxiety, and stress scores than senior doctors. Similarly, single doctors, those living alone, and those not having kids had higher DASS and insomnia scores.

Discussion

HCWs have been under tremendous mental stress during this pandemic which is influenced by multiple factors. Female sex, junior doctors, working on the frontline, not being in a relationship, and living alone may be some of the factors recognized in our study and corroborated by many authors, which may increase the chances of depression, anxiety, and stress in them. HCWs need regular counseling, time off for rejuvenation, and social support to overcome this hurdle.

How to cite this article

Kohli S, Diwan S, Kumar A, Kohli S, Aggarwal S, Sood A, et al. Depression, Anxiety, Stress, and Insomnia amongst COVID Warriors across Several Hospitals after Second Wave: Have We Acclimatized? A Cross-sectional Survey. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(7):825-832.

Effectiveness of virtual mindfulness-based interventions on perceived anxiety and depression of physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic: A pre-post experimental study

BACKGROUND

The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) created unprecedented stress on physicians. Mindfulness is a type of meditation that focuses on being fully present, aware of senses, and emotions in the present moment without analyzing or judging them, and it may help reduce psychological distress in physicians. This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of virtual mindfulness-based intervention (MBI) on physicians' perceived anxiety and depression and different facets of mindfulness.

METHODS

During the COVID-19 pandemic, an online survey was administered to physicians to assess depression, anxiety, and awareness using the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), 7-item General Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7), and Five-Facets Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ), respectively. Physicians that received the virtual MBI sessions also completed post-questionnaires at a 3-week follow-up time point.

RESULTS

A total of 125 physicians responded to the online survey, with 56 completing the MBI. The prevalence of moderate to severe anxiety and depression was 45.0 and 46.7%, respectively. Mindfulness scores were negatively associated with depression (r = -0.38, P < 0.001) and anxiety (r = -0.36, p < 0.001). Mindfulness scores for the 56 physicians who received virtual MBI sessions were significantly improved (mean difference ± SD, 17.7 ± 16.1, p = 0.001). Significant reductions were also evidenced in anxiety (4.4 ± 4.2) and depression (4.5 ± 5.1) scores (p's < 0.001). There was also an improvement in mindfulness facets of observing (5.1 ± 4.7), describing (2.3 ± 4.3), acting with awareness (2.7 ± 5.3), non-judging of inner experience (3.6 ± 6.1), and non-reactivity to inner experience (3.9 ± 4.0) (p's < 0.001). A facet of mindfulness, acting with awareness was most efficiently associated with improved anxiety (B = -0.3, p = 0.02) and depression (B = -0.4, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

This study has demonstrated that virtual MBI improved physicians' psychological wellbeing and mindfulness during the crisis. Regular mindfulness practice may help physicians to tolerate and handle unpleasant circumstances, such as future epidemics or pandemics.