Lockdown, quarantine measures, and social distancing: Associations with depression, anxiety and distress at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic among adults from Germany

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Highlights

•

sociodemographic and COVID-19 related predictors were related to immediate mental health consequences in Germany
•

greater reduction of social contacts and perceived changes in everyday life were related to psychopathological symptoms
•

Subjectively perceived, but not officially announced stay-at-home orders are associated with mental health impairments
•

results do not support that public health measures per se are associated with mental health problems

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic is suggested to have a negative impact on mental health. To prevent the spread of Sars-CoV-2, governments worldwide have implemented different forms of public health measures ranging from physical distancing recommendations to stay-at-home orders, which have disrupted individuals’ everyday life tremendously. However, evidence on the associations of the COVID-19 pandemic and public health measures with mental health are limited so far. In this study, we investigated the role of sociodemographic and COVID-19 related factors for immediate mental health consequences in a nationwide community sample of adults from Germany ( N = 4335). Specifically, we examined the effects of different forms and levels of restriction resulting from public health measures (e.g. quarantine, stay-at-home order) on anxiety and depression symptomatology, health anxiety, loneliness, the occurrence of fearful spells, psychosocial distress and life-satisfaction. We found that higher restrictions due to lockdown measures, a greater reduction of social contacts and greater perceived changes in life were associated with higher mental health impairments. Importantly, a subjectively assumed but not an officially announced stay-at-home order was associated with poorer mental health. Our findings underscore the importance of adequate risk communication and targeted mental health recommendations especially for vulnerable groups during these challenging times.

Related collections

Most cited references 14

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Multidisciplinary research priorities for the COVID-19 pandemic: a call for action for mental health science

Emily A. Holmes, Rory C O'Connor, V. Perry … (2020)

Summary The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is having a profound effect on all aspects of society, including mental health and physical health. We explore the psychological, social, and neuroscientific effects of COVID-19 and set out the immediate priorities and longer-term strategies for mental health science research. These priorities were informed by surveys of the public and an expert panel convened by the UK Academy of Medical Sciences and the mental health research charity, MQ: Transforming Mental Health, in the first weeks of the pandemic in the UK in March, 2020. We urge UK research funding agencies to work with researchers, people with lived experience, and others to establish a high level coordination group to ensure that these research priorities are addressed, and to allow new ones to be identified over time. The need to maintain high-quality research standards is imperative. International collaboration and a global perspective will be beneficial. An immediate priority is collecting high-quality data on the mental health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic across the whole population and vulnerable groups, and on brain function, cognition, and mental health of patients with COVID-19. There is an urgent need for research to address how mental health consequences for vulnerable groups can be mitigated under pandemic conditions, and on the impact of repeated media consumption and health messaging around COVID-19. Discovery, evaluation, and refinement of mechanistically driven interventions to address the psychological, social, and neuroscientific aspects of the pandemic are required. Rising to this challenge will require integration across disciplines and sectors, and should be done together with people with lived experience. New funding will be required to meet these priorities, and it can be efficiently leveraged by the UK's world-leading infrastructure. This Position Paper provides a strategy that may be both adapted for, and integrated with, research efforts in other countries.

0 comments Cited 2583 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

COVID-19 pandemic and mental health consequences: systematic review of the current evidence

Nina Vindegaard, Michael Eriksen Benros (2020)

Highlights • COVID-19 patients displayed high levels of PTSS and increased levels of depression. • Patients with preexisting psychiatric disorders reported worsening of psychiatric symptoms. • Higher levels of psychiatric symptoms were found among health care workers. • A decrease in psychological well-being was observed in the general public. • However, well conducted large-scale studies are highly needed.

0 comments Cited 1375 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Mental health before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal probability sample survey of the UK population

Matthias Pierce, Holly F Hope, Tamsin Ford … (2021)

Summary Background The potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on population mental health is of increasing global concern. We examine changes in adult mental health in the UK population before and during the lockdown. Methods In this secondary analysis of a national, longitudinal cohort study, households that took part in Waves 8 or 9 of the UK Household Longitudinal Study (UKHLS) panel, including all members aged 16 or older in April, 2020, were invited to complete the COVID-19 web survey on April 23–30, 2020. Participants who were unable to make an informed decision as a result of incapacity, or who had unknown postal addresses or addresses abroad were excluded. Mental health was assessed using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). Repeated cross-sectional analyses were done to examine temporal trends. Fixed-effects regression models were fitted to identify within-person change compared with preceding trends. Findings Waves 6–9 of the UKHLS had 53 351 participants. Eligible participants for the COVID-19 web survey were from households that took part in Waves 8 or 9, and 17 452 (41·2%) of 42 330 eligible people participated in the web survey. Population prevalence of clinically significant levels of mental distress rose from 18·9% (95% CI 17·8–20·0) in 2018–19 to 27·3% (26·3–28·2) in April, 2020, one month into UK lockdown. Mean GHQ-12 score also increased over this time, from 11·5 (95% CI 11·3–11·6) in 2018–19, to 12·6 (12·5–12·8) in April, 2020. This was 0·48 (95% CI 0·07–0·90) points higher than expected when accounting for previous upward trends between 2014 and 2018. Comparing GHQ-12 scores within individuals, adjusting for time trends and significant predictors of change, increases were greatest in 18–24-year-olds (2·69 points, 95% CI 1·89–3·48), 25–34-year-olds (1·57, 0·96–2·18), women (0·92, 0·50–1·35), and people living with young children (1·45, 0·79–2·12). People employed before the pandemic also averaged a notable increase in GHQ-12 score (0·63, 95% CI 0·20–1·06). Interpretation By late April, 2020, mental health in the UK had deteriorated compared with pre-COVID-19 trends. Policies emphasising the needs of women, young people, and those with preschool aged children are likely to play an important part in preventing future mental illness. Funding None.

0 comments Cited 1295 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Psychiatry Res

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Psychiatry Res

Title: Psychiatry Research

Publisher: Elsevier B.V.

ISSN (Print): 0165-1781

ISSN (Electronic): 1872-7123

Publication date PMC-release: 18 September 2020

Publication date (Electronic): 18 September 2020

Electronic Location Identifier: 113462

Affiliations

[a ]Department of Psychology, Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Philipps University of Marburg, Gutenbergstraße 18, 35032 Marburg, Germany

[b ]Department of Psychology, Personality Psychology, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Rudower Chaussee 18, 10099 Berlin, Germany

Author notes

[* ]Corresponding author: Christoph Benke, Phone: +49 6421 28-24091, Fax: + 49 3834 420 3790

Article

Publisher ID: S0165-1781(20)33123-1 Publisher ID: 113462

DOI: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113462

PMC ID: 7500345

PubMed ID: 32987222

SO-VID: 994f4ffa-58ba-4a77-acb4-64765f01b45d

License:

Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

Lockdown, quarantine measures, and social distancing: Associations with depression, anxiety and distress at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic among adults from Germany

Read this article at

Highlights

Abstract

Related collections

Novel Coronavirus Disease COVID-19

Most cited references 14

Multidisciplinary research priorities for the COVID-19 pandemic: a call for action for mental health science

COVID-19 pandemic and mental health consequences: systematic review of the current evidence

Mental health before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal probability sample survey of the UK population

Author and article information

Journal

Affiliations

Author notes

Article

History

Categories

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 305

Cited by 254

Most referenced authors 3,651