Psychological impact on COVID-19 patients during the outbreak in China: A case-control study

Was China's zero-COVID policy the right choice? The multiple factor analysis of variables that affected the course of COVID-19 pandemic in China

Background

After 3 years of the COVID-19 pandemic and zero-COVID policy, a rapid increase in the number of daily COVID-19 infections was observed in China from November to December 2022. Therefore, we decided to analyze the factors that have been related to the COVID-19 pandemic in China.

Methods

The multiple factor analysis was conducted, using the data from publicly available databases from the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic to 30 January 2023.

Results

Our study showed that each year of the pandemic in China had different profiles and can be described by different variables: year 2020 was characterized by restrictions, such as international travel controls, stay at home requirements, and health system policies including contact tracing and protection of older adults; year 2021 was characterized by Alpha, Beta, Gamma, and Delta variants; 2022 was characterized by new cases per million, Omicron lineages, and a few restrictions-related variables; and year 2023 was mainly described by the number of new deaths per million and Omicron variant 22B (BA.5) but also by testing and vaccination policies, as well as the number of people fully vaccinated per 100 and total boosters per 100.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed over time. Therefore, the anti-pandemic policies implemented must be dynamic and adapted to the current situation.

Prevalence of suicidal ideation and correlated risk factors during the COVID-19 pandemic: A meta-analysis of 113 studies from 31 countries

The purpose of this study was to estimate the prevalence of suicidal ideation and correlated risk factors during the COVID-19 pandemic. Web of Science (WOS) and PubMed were searched according to a pre-set strategy. A total of 132 studies were identified, 104 of which were included in the meta-analysis. The prevalence of suicidal ideation was approximately 14.7% (95%CI: 12.5%, 16.8%, P < 0.01) in the general population, approximately 22.4% (95%CI: 17.1%, 27.8%, P < 0.01）in adolescents, approximately 21.0% (95%CI: 12.8%, 29.2%, P < 0.01) in psychiatric patients, approximately 20.6% (95%CI: 18.7%, 22.5%, P < 0.01）in university students, approximately 18.9% (95%CI: 8.3%, 29.5%, P < 0.01) in younger adults, approximately 10.6% (95%CI: 1.0%, 20.2%, P = 0.031) in COVID-19 patients and approximately 7.4% (95%CI: 4.3%, 10.5%, P < 0.01) in healthcare workers. The prevalence in North America was approximately 16.0% (95%CI: 13.6%-18.4%, P < 0.001), approximately 14.5% in Asia (95%CI: 9.5%-19.4%, P < 0.001), approximately 10.5% in Europe (95%CI: 8.5%-12.4%, P < 0.001), and approximately 20.5% in South America (95%CI: 19.5%-21.5%, P < 0.001). The following were risk factors which might be correlated with suicidal ideation: severe anxiety symptoms, mild to moderate depression, a strong feeling of loneliness/social isolation, poor sleep quality, having COVID-19-related experience, having quarantine or lockdown experience, being female, being single or divorced, having financial problems and having a history of suicidal ideation/attempt. This article reports the prevalence of suicidal ideation and discussing potential risk factors during the pandemic among general population and vulnerable groups. Early detection and follow-up were necessary for the noteworthy population.

Substance use and self-harm emergency department presentations during COVID19: evidence from a National Clinical Programme for Self-Harm

INTRODUCTION

Given the evidence that drinking patterns and self-harm hospital presentations have changed during COVID-19, this study aimed to examine any change in self-harm and suicide-related ideation presentations, together with any possible contribution made by alcohol or substance misuse, to Irish Emergency Departments in 2020, compared with 2018 and 2019.

METHODS

A population-based cohort with self-harm and suicide-related ideation presenting to Irish hospitals derived from the National Clinical Programme for Self-Harm was analysed. Descriptive analyses were conducted based on sociodemographic variables and types of presentation for the period January to August 2020 and compared with the same period in 2018 and 2019. Binomial regression analyses were performed to investigate the independent effect of demographic characteristics and pre/during COVID-19 periods on the use of substances as contributory factors in the self-harm and suicide-related ideation presentations.

RESULTS

12,075 presentations due to self-harm and suicide-related ideation were recorded for the periods January-August 2018-2020 across nine emergency departments. The COVID-19 year was significantly associated with substances contributing to self-harm and suicide-related ideation ED presentations (OR = 1.183; 95% CI, 1.075-1.301, p < 0.001). No changes in the demographic characteristics were found for those with self-harm or suicide-related ideation across the years. Suicide-related ideation seemed to be increased after May 2020 compared with previous years. In terms of self-harm episodes with comorbid drug and alcohol overdose and poisoning, these were significantly increased in January-August 2020, compared with previous timepoints (χ2 = 42.424, df = 6, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

An increase in suicide-related ideation and substance-related self-harm presentations may indicate longer term effects of the pandemic and its relevant restrictions. Future studies might explore whether those presenting with ideation will develop a risk of suicide in post-pandemic periods.

Research on the psychological status of medical staff during the COVID-19 epidemic in China: A longitudinal study

An online questionnaire, including the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) and Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS), was used to assess the psychological status of medical staff in Wuhan during the COVID-19 epidemic. Lasso-Logistic regression analysis was performed to analyze the risk factors of abnormal psychological status (anxiety or depression). 36.6% of the study subjects experienced anxiety, and 41.5% experienced depression. Female (OR [odds ratio] = 7.22, 95% CI [confidence interval]: 0.58-89.33), basic diseases (OR = 17.95, 95% CI: 1.59-202.49), suspected exposure history (OR = 9.63, 95% CI: 1.40-66.29), smoking (OR = 6.07, 95% CI: 0.38-96.78) were risk factors for anxiety. Female (OR = 5.00, 95% CI: 0.45-55.91), basic diseases (OR = 37.19, 95% CI: 2.70-512.73), suspected exposure history (OR = 5.10, 95% CI: 0.78-33.10), drinking wine (OR = 6.27, 95% CI: 0.38-103.85) were risk factors for depression. The results of the re-sampling evaluation after 2 years showed that some medical staff still showed anxiety (42.4%) and depression (27.3%), and the proportion of females was higher. Early intervention should be carried out, and short-term and long-term intervention plans should be formulated.

Does COVID-19 related symptomatology indicate a transdiagnostic neuropsychiatric disorder? - Multidisciplinary implications

The clinical presentation that emerges from the extensive coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mental health literature suggests high correlations among many conventional psychiatric diagnoses. Arguments against the use of multiple comorbidities for a single patient have been published long before the pandemic. Concurrently, diagnostic recommendations for use of transdiagnostic considerations for improved treatment have been also published in recent years. In this review, we pose the question of whether a transdiagnostic mental health disease, including psychiatric and neuropsychiatric symptomology, has emerged since the onset of the pandemic. There are many attempts to identify a syndrome related to the pandemic, but none of the validated scales is able to capture the entire psychiatric and neuropsychiatric clinical presentation in infected and non-infected individuals. These scales also only marginally touch the issue of etiology and prevalence. We suggest a working hypothesis termed Complex Stress Reaction Syndrome (CSRS) representing a global psychiatric reaction to the pandemic situation in the general population (Type A) and a neuropsychiatric reaction in infected individuals (Type B) which relates to neurocognitive and psychiatric features which are part (excluding systemic and metabolic dysfunctions) of the syndrome termed in the literature as long COVID. We base our propositions on multidisciplinary scientific data regarding mental health during the global pandemic situation and the effects of viral infection reviewed from Google Scholar and PubMed between February 1, 2022 and March 10, 2022. Search in-clusion criteria were “mental health”, “COVID-19” and “Long COVID”, English language and human studies only. We suggest that this more comprehensive way of understanding COVID-19 complex mental health reactions may promote better prevention and treatment and serve to guide implementation of recommended administrative regulations that were recently published by the World Psychiatric Association. This review may serve as a call for an international investigation of our working hypothesis.