7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Drastic Reductions in Mental Well-Being Observed Globally During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Results From the ASAP Survey

      brief-report

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          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.

          Abstract

          Most countries affected by the COVID-19 pandemic have repeatedly restricted public life to control the contagion. However, the health impact of confinement measures is hitherto unclear. We performed a multinational survey investigating changes in mental and physical well-being (MWB/PWB) during the first wave of the pandemic. A total of 14,975 individuals from 14 countries provided valid responses. Compared to pre-restrictions, MWB, as measured by the WHO-5 questionnaire, decreased considerably during restrictions (68.1 ± 16.9 to 51.9 ± 21.0 points). Whereas 14.2% of the participants met the cutoff for depression screening pre-restrictions, this share tripled to 45.2% during restrictions. Factors associated with clinically relevant decreases in MWB were female sex (odds ratio/OR = 1.20, 95% CI: 1.11–1.29), high physical activity levels pre-restrictions (OR = 1.29, 95% CI 1.16–1.42), decreased vigorous physical activity during restrictions (OR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.05–1.23), and working (partially) outside the home vs. working remotely (OR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.16–1.44/OR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.23–1.47). Reductions, although smaller, were also seen for PWB. Scores in the SF-36 bodily pain subscale decreased from 85.8 ± 18.7% pre-restrictions to 81.3 ± 21.9% during restrictions. Clinically relevant decrements of PWB were associated with female sex (OR = 1.62, 95% CI: 1.50–1.75), high levels of public life restrictions (OR = 1.26, 95% CI: 1.18–1.36), and young age (OR = 1.10, 95% CI: 1.03–1.19). Study findings suggest lockdowns instituted during the COVID-19 pandemic may have had substantial adverse public health effects. The development of interventions mitigating losses in MWB and PWB is, thus, paramount when preparing for forthcoming waves of COVID-19 or future public life restrictions.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence

          Summary The December, 2019 coronavirus disease outbreak has seen many countries ask people who have potentially come into contact with the infection to isolate themselves at home or in a dedicated quarantine facility. Decisions on how to apply quarantine should be based on the best available evidence. We did a Review of the psychological impact of quarantine using three electronic databases. Of 3166 papers found, 24 are included in this Review. Most reviewed studies reported negative psychological effects including post-traumatic stress symptoms, confusion, and anger. Stressors included longer quarantine duration, infection fears, frustration, boredom, inadequate supplies, inadequate information, financial loss, and stigma. Some researchers have suggested long-lasting effects. In situations where quarantine is deemed necessary, officials should quarantine individuals for no longer than required, provide clear rationale for quarantine and information about protocols, and ensure sufficient supplies are provided. Appeals to altruism by reminding the public about the benefits of quarantine to wider society can be favourable.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Immediate Psychological Responses and Associated Factors during the Initial Stage of the 2019 Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Epidemic among the General Population in China

            Background: The 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic is a public health emergency of international concern and poses a challenge to psychological resilience. Research data are needed to develop evidence-driven strategies to reduce adverse psychological impacts and psychiatric symptoms during the epidemic. The aim of this study was to survey the general public in China to better understand their levels of psychological impact, anxiety, depression, and stress during the initial stage of the COVID-19 outbreak. The data will be used for future reference. Methods: From 31 January to 2 February 2020, we conducted an online survey using snowball sampling techniques. The online survey collected information on demographic data, physical symptoms in the past 14 days, contact history with COVID-19, knowledge and concerns about COVID-19, precautionary measures against COVID-19, and additional information required with respect to COVID-19. Psychological impact was assessed by the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), and mental health status was assessed by the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21). Results: This study included 1210 respondents from 194 cities in China. In total, 53.8% of respondents rated the psychological impact of the outbreak as moderate or severe; 16.5% reported moderate to severe depressive symptoms; 28.8% reported moderate to severe anxiety symptoms; and 8.1% reported moderate to severe stress levels. Most respondents spent 20–24 h per day at home (84.7%); were worried about their family members contracting COVID-19 (75.2%); and were satisfied with the amount of health information available (75.1%). Female gender, student status, specific physical symptoms (e.g., myalgia, dizziness, coryza), and poor self-rated health status were significantly associated with a greater psychological impact of the outbreak and higher levels of stress, anxiety, and depression (p < 0.05). Specific up-to-date and accurate health information (e.g., treatment, local outbreak situation) and particular precautionary measures (e.g., hand hygiene, wearing a mask) were associated with a lower psychological impact of the outbreak and lower levels of stress, anxiety, and depression (p < 0.05). Conclusions: During the initial phase of the COVID-19 outbreak in China, more than half of the respondents rated the psychological impact as moderate-to-severe, and about one-third reported moderate-to-severe anxiety. Our findings identify factors associated with a lower level of psychological impact and better mental health status that can be used to formulate psychological interventions to improve the mental health of vulnerable groups during the COVID-19 epidemic.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Generalized anxiety disorder, depressive symptoms and sleep quality during COVID-19 outbreak in China: a web-based cross-sectional survey

              Highlights • The COVID-19 outbreak significantly affects the mental health of Chinese public • During the outbreak, young people had a higher risk of anxiety than older people • Spending too much time thinking about the outbreak is harmful to mental health • Healthcare workers were at high risk for poor sleep
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Med (Lausanne)
                Front Med (Lausanne)
                Front. Med.
                Frontiers in Medicine
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                2296-858X
                26 March 2021
                2021
                26 March 2021
                : 8
                : 578959
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Department of Sports Medicine, Goethe University Frankfurt , Frankfurt, Germany
                [2] 2Faculty of Medicine, Medical School Hamburg , Hamburg, Germany
                [3] 3Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital and Harvard Medical School , Charlestown, MA, United States
                [4] 4Inter-University Laboratory of Human Movement Science (LIBM EA 7424), University of Lyon, University Jean Monnet , Saint Etienne, France
                [5] 5Department of Clinical and Exercise Physiology, Sports Medicine Unity, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital of Saint-Etienne , Saint-Etienne, France
                [6] 6Department of Movement, Human and Health Sciences, University of Rome “Foro Italico” , Rome, Italy
                [7] 7ImFine Research Group, Department of Health and Human Performance, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid , Madrid, Spain
                [8] 8Exercise is Medicine Spain , Madrid, Spain
                [9] 9School of Physical Activity Sciences, University of Santiago de Chile , Santiago, Chile
                [10] 10Fundación Instituto Superior de Ciencias de la Salud , Buenos Aires, Argentina
                [11] 11Department of Sport and Exercise Medicine, Changi General Hospital , Singapore, Singapore
                [12] 12Department of Basic Medical Sciences, Durban University of Technology , Durban, South Africa
                [13] 13MOVE-IT Research Group, Department of Physical Education, Faculty of Education Sciences, University of Cádiz , Cádiz, Spain
                [14] 14Institute of Human Movement Science, Sport and Health, University of Graz , Graz, Austria
                [15] 15Department of Orthopedics, University Children's Hospital Basel, University of Basel , Basel, Switzerland
                [16] 16School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, The University of Queensland , Brisbane, QLD, Australia
                [17] 17Institute of Biomechanics and Orthopaedics, German Sport University Cologne , Cologne, Germany
                [18] 18Amsterdam Collaboration on Health and Safety in Sports, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam UMC, University Medical Centers—Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam , Amsterdam, Netherlands
                [19] 19Masters and Doctoral Programs in Physical Therapy, Universidade Cidade de São Paulo (UNICID) , São Paulo, Brazil
                Author notes

                Edited by: Marion C. Aichberger, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany

                Reviewed by: Luiz Ricardo Berbert, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; Tam Thi Minh Ta, Charité University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany

                *Correspondence: Jan Wilke wilke@ 123456sport.uni-frankfurt.de

                This article was submitted to Infectious Diseases - Surveillance, Prevention and Treatment, a section of the journal Frontiers in Medicine

                Article
                10.3389/fmed.2021.578959
                8032868
                33842492
                e7ed5e02-3507-4249-b3bd-5acd811dfb9c
                Copyright © 2021 Wilke, Hollander, Mohr, Edouard, Fossati, González-Gross, Sánchez Ramírez, Laiño, Tan, Pillay, Pigozzi, Jimenez-Pavon, Sattler, Jaunig, Zhang, van Poppel, Heidt, Willwacher, Vogt, Verhagen, Hespanhol and Tenforde.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 01 July 2020
                : 17 February 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 2, Equations: 0, References: 22, Pages: 6, Words: 4202
                Categories
                Medicine
                Brief Research Report

                coronavirus,who-5,sf-36,psychological health,pain,lockdowns
                coronavirus, who-5, sf-36, psychological health, pain, lockdowns

                Comments

                Comment on this article