Since its emergence in Wuhan, China, covid-19 has spread and had a profound effect on the lives and health of people around the globe. As of 4 July 2021, more than 183 million confirmed cases of covid-19 had been recorded worldwide, and 3.97 million deaths. Recent evidence has shown that a range of persistent symptoms can remain long after the acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, and this condition is now coined long covid by recognized research institutes. Studies have shown that long covid can affect the whole spectrum of people with covid-19, from those with very mild acute disease to the most severe forms. Like acute covid-19, long covid can involve multiple organs and can affect many systems including, but not limited to, the respiratory, cardiovascular, neurological, gastrointestinal, and musculoskeletal systems. The symptoms of long covid include fatigue, dyspnea, cardiac abnormalities, cognitive impairment, sleep disturbances, symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, muscle pain, concentration problems, and headache. This review summarizes studies of the long term effects of covid-19 in hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients and describes the persistent symptoms they endure. Risk factors for acute covid-19 and long covid and possible therapeutic options are also discussed.

https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/374/bmj.n1648.full.pdf

Long covid-mechanisms, risk factors, and management.

Background Telemental health (delivering mental health care via video calls, telephone calls, or SMS text messages) is becoming increasingly widespread. Telemental health appears to be useful and effective in providing care to some service users in some settings, especially during an emergency restricting face-to-face contact, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. However, important limitations have been reported, and telemental health implementation risks the reinforcement of pre-existing inequalities in service provision. If it is to be widely incorporated into routine care, a clear understanding is needed of when and for whom it is an acceptable and effective approach and when face-to-face care is needed. Objective This rapid realist review aims to develop a theory about which telemental health approaches work (or do not work), for whom, in which contexts, and through what mechanisms. Methods Rapid realist reviewing involves synthesizing relevant evidence and stakeholder expertise to allow timely development of context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations in areas where evidence is urgently needed to inform policy and practice. The CMO configurations encapsulate theories about what works for whom and by what mechanisms. Sources included eligible papers from 2 previous systematic reviews conducted by our team on telemental health; an updated search using the strategy from these reviews; a call for relevant evidence, including “gray literature,” to the public and key experts; and website searches of relevant voluntary and statutory organizations. CMO configurations formulated from these sources were iteratively refined, including through discussions with an expert reference group, including researchers with relevant lived experience and frontline clinicians, and consultation with experts focused on three priority groups: children and young people, users of inpatient and crisis care services, and digitally excluded groups. Results A total of 108 scientific and gray literature sources were included. From our initial CMO configurations, we derived 30 overarching CMO configurations within four domains: connecting effectively; flexibility and personalization; safety, privacy, and confidentiality; and therapeutic quality and relationship. Reports and stakeholder input emphasized the importance of personal choice, privacy and safety, and therapeutic relationships in telemental health care. The review also identified particular service users likely to be disadvantaged by telemental health implementation and a need to ensure that face-to-face care of equivalent timeliness remains available. Mechanisms underlying the successful and unsuccessful application of telemental health are discussed. Conclusions Service user choice, privacy and safety, the ability to connect effectively, and fostering strong therapeutic relationships need to be prioritized in delivering telemental health care. Guidelines and strategies coproduced with service users and frontline staff are needed to optimize telemental health implementation in real-world settings. Trial Registration International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO); CRD42021260910; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021260910

/pdf/synthesis-of-the-evidence-on-what-works-for-whom-in-cymadvl5.pdf

Synthesis of the Evidence on What Works for Whom in Telemental Health: Rapid Realist Review

In March 2020, a rapid shift to telehealth occurred in community mental health settings in response to the need for physical distancing to decrease transmission of the virus causing COVID-19. Whereas treatment delivered over telehealth was previously utilized sparingly in community settings, it quickly became the primary mode of treatment delivery for the vast majority of clinicians, many of whom had little time to prepare for this shift and limited to no experience using telehealth. Little is known about community mental health clinicians' experiences using telehealth. Although telehealth may make mental health treatment more accessible for some clients, it may create additional barriers for others given the high rates of poverty among individuals seeking treatment from community mental health centers.We examined community mental health clinicians' perspectives on using telehealth to deliver trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy to youth. We sought to better understand the acceptability of using telehealth, as well as barriers and facilitators to usage.We surveyed 45 clinicians across 15 community clinics in Philadelphia. Clinicians rated their satisfaction with telehealth using a quantitative scale and shared their perspectives on telehealth in response to open-ended questions. Therapists' responses were coded using an open-coding approach wherein coders generated domains, themes, and subthemes.Clinicians rated telehealth relatively positively on the quantitative survey, expressing overall satisfaction with their current use of telehealth during the pandemic, and endorsing telehealth as a helpful mode of connecting with clients. Responses to open-ended questions fell into five domains. Clinicians noted that (1) telehealth affects the content (ie, what is discussed) and process (ie, how it is discussed) of therapy; (2) telehealth alters engagement, retention, and attendance; (3) technology is a crucial component of utilizing telehealth; (4) training, resources, and support are needed to facilitate telehealth usage; and (5) the barriers, facilitators, and level of acceptability of telehealth differ across individual clinicians and clients.First, telehealth is likely a better fit for some clients and clinicians than others, and attention should be given to better understanding who is most likely to succeed using this modality. Second, although telehealth increased convenience and accessibility of treatment, clinicians noted that across the board, it was difficult to engage clients (eg, young clients were easily distracted), and further work is needed to identify better telehealth engagement strategies. Third, for many clients, the telehealth modality may actually create an additional barrier to care, as children from families living in poverty may not have the requisite devices or quality broadband connection to make telehealth workable. Better strategies to address disparities in access to and quality of digital technologies are needed to render telehealth an equitable option for all youth seeking mental health services. 

/pdf/community-mental-health-clinicians-perspectives-on-c103xxq2.pdf

Community Mental Health Clinicians’ Perspectives on Telehealth During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Mixed Methods Study

Remote group therapies for cognitive health in schizophrenia-spectrum disorders: Feasible, acceptable, engaging

Aim To explore the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic first wave in Quebec, Canada on practices in early intervention services (EIS) for first-episode psychosis, including reorganization of clinical and administrative practices and teleconsultation use. Methods Adopting a cross-sectional descriptive study design, a 41 questions online survey was sent to the team leaders of all the 33 Quebec EIS, of which 100% responded. Data were collected from 18 May to 4 June 2020 and analysed using descriptive statistics and content analysis. Programmes were categorized as urban/non-urban and results were compared between these. Results All 33 existing Quebec EIS (16 urban and 17 non-urban) completed the survey. Among them, 85% did not experience redeployment of EIS team staff and 58% reported stable frequency of patient interactions, either in-person or through telemedicine. During the studied period, 64% of programmes reported that all professionals used teleconsultation at least occasionally. However, 73% of programmes, mostly in non-urban areas, reported some limitations regarding clinicians' degree of ease with teleconferencing platforms and half of EIS could not access technical support to use them. The majority of EIS (94%) expressed interest to participate in a training program about the use of technologies for teleconsultations. Many smaller clinics reported interest in offering multiregional/multiclinics group teletherapy, therefore merging their pool of patients and clinical staff workforce. Conclusions Further studies are warranted to improve access to and use of technology-mediated treatment, which seems to be a promising alternative to provide high-quality mental healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

COVID-19 pandemic's effects and telehealth in Early Psychosis Services of Quebec, Canada: Will changes last?

Aim The COVID-19 pandemic has introduced many mental health professionals to therapy via videoconferencing. Mostly individual teletherapy has been offered and studied, although group therapy is often offered in clinics. In fact, little is known regarding group therapy's acceptability, feasibility, and potential impact when offered via videoconferencing. Methods This pilot study offered group cognitive-behavioural therapy for psychosis via videoconferencing to 14 individuals with early psychosis either living in remote areas or confined during the pandemic. Results The rate of consenting to the study (79%) and actual participation rates were acceptable (18.5 sessions out of 24). Although some technological obstacles were encountered, solutions offered allowed the videoconferencing group to be considered feasible for most participants and therapists. Prepost results on symptoms and self-esteem were comparable to those of other studies using the same group treatment but in-person. Alliance scores seemed similar as well. Conclusions More studies are warranted on the efficacy of group therapy via videoconferencing. This pilot study does offer promising results, suggesting that a wider range of people with early psychosis can be reached and benefit from the advantages of receiving an evidence-based group intervention.

Amélie Leboeuf

Papers

Group therapy via videoconferencing for individuals with early psychosis: A pilot study.