Background COVID-19 pandemic has the potential to significantly affect the mental health of healthcare workers (HCWs), who stand in the frontline of this crisis. It is, therefore, an immediate priority to monitor rates of mood, sleep and other mental health issues in order to understand mediating factors and inform tailored interventions. The aim of this review is to synthesize and analyze existing evidence on the prevalence of depression, anxiety and insomnia among HCWs during the Covid-19 outbreak. Methods A systematic search of literature databases was conducted up to April 17th, 2020. Two reviewers independently assessed full-text articles according to predefined criteria. Risk of bias for each individual study was assessed and data pooled using random-effects meta-analyses to estimate the prevalence of specific mental health problems. The review protocol is registered in PROSPERO and is available online. Findings Thirteen studies were included in the analysis with a combined total of 33,062 participants. Anxiety was assessed in 12 studies, with a pooled prevalence of 23·2% and depression in 10 studies, with a prevalence rate of 22·8%. A subgroup analysis revealed gender and occupational differences with female HCPs and nurses exhibiting higher rates of affective symptoms compared to male and medical staff respectively. Finally, insomnia prevalence was estimated at 38·9% across 5 studies. Interpretation Early evidence suggests that a considerable proportion of HCWs experience mood and sleep disturbances during this outbreak, stressing the need to establish ways to mitigate mental health risks and adjust interventions under pandemic conditions.

/pdf/prevalence-of-depression-anxiety-and-insomnia-among-mgzryfjla1.pdf

Prevalence of depression, anxiety, and insomnia among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background
During the COVID-19 pandemic general medical complications have received the most attention, whereas only few studies address the potential direct effect on mental health of SARS-CoV-2 and the neurotropic potential. Furthermore, the indirect effects of the pandemic on general mental health are of increasing concern, particularly since the SARS-CoV-1 epidemic (2002–2003) was associated with psychiatric complications.

/pdf/covid-19-pandemic-and-mental-health-consequences-systematic-4zfqin5xqe.pdf

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

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused enormous psychological impact worldwide. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on the psychological and mental impact of COVID-19 among healthcare workers, the general population, and patients with higher COVID-19 risk published between 1 Nov 2019 to 25 May 2020. We conducted literature research using Embase, PubMed, Google scholar and WHO COVID-19 databases. Among the initial search of 9207 studies, 62 studies with 162,639 participants from 17 countries were included in the review. The pooled prevalence of anxiety and depression was 33% (95% confidence interval: 28%-38%) and 28% (23%-32%), respectively. The prevalence of anxiety and depression was the highest among patients with pre-existing conditions and COVID-19 infection (56% [39%-73%] and 55% [48%-62%]), and it was similar between healthcare workers and the general public. Studies from China, Italy, Turkey, Spain and Iran reported higher-than-pooled prevalence among healthcare workers and the general public. Common risk factors included being women, being nurses, having lower socioeconomic status, having high risks of contracting COVID-19, and social isolation. Protective factors included having sufficient medical resources, up-to-date and accurate information, and taking precautionary measures. In conclusion, psychological interventions targeting high-risk populations with heavy psychological distress are in urgent need.

The psychological and mental impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on medical staff and general public - A systematic review and meta-analysis.

How mental health care should change as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The covid-19 pandemic has heavily burdened healthcare systems throughout the world. We performed a rapid systematic review to identify, assess and summarize research on the mental health impact of the covid-19 pandemic on HCWs (healthcare workers). We utilized the Norwegian Institute of Public Health's Live map of covid-19 evidence on 11 May and included 59 studies. Six reported on implementing interventions, but none reported on effects of the interventions. HCWs reported low interest in professional help, and greater reliance on social support and contact. Exposure to covid-19 was the most commonly reported correlate of mental health problems, followed by female gender, and worry about infection or about infecting others. Social support correlated with less mental health problems. HCWs reported anxiety, depression, sleep problems, and distress during the covid-19 pandemic. We assessed the certainty of the estimates of prevalence of these symptoms as very low using GRADE. Most studies did not report comparative data on mental health symptoms before the pandemic or in the general population. There seems to be a mismatch between risk factors for adverse mental health outcomes among HCWs in the current pandemic, their needs and preferences, and the individual psychopathology focus of current interventions.

The mental health impact of the covid-19 pandemic on healthcare workers, and interventions to help them: A rapid systematic review.

Objective: We explored whether medical health workers had more psychosocial problems than nonmedical health workers during the COVID-19 outbreak. Methods: An online survey was run from February 19 to March 6, 2020; a total of 2,182 Chinese subjects participated. Mental health variables were assessed via the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), the Symptom Check List-revised (SCL-90-R), and the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4), which included a 2-item anxiety scale and a 2-item depression scale (PHQ-2). Results: Compared with nonmedical health workers (n = 1,255), medical health workers (n = 927) had a higher prevalence of insomnia (38.4 vs. 30.5%, p < 0.01), anxiety (13.0 vs. 8.5%, p < 0.01), depression (12.2 vs. 9.5%; p< 0.04), somatization (1.6 vs. 0.4%; p < 0.01), and obsessive-compulsive symptoms (5.3 vs. 2.2%; p < 0.01). They also had higher total scores of ISI, GAD-2, PHQ-2, and SCL-90-R obsessive-compulsive symptoms (p ≤ 0.01). Among medical health workers, having organic disease was an independent factor for insomnia, anxiety, depression, somatization, and obsessive-compulsive symptoms (p < 0.05 or 0.01). Living in rural areas, being female, and being at risk of contact with COVID-19 patients were the most common risk factors for insomnia, anxiety, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, and depression (p < 0.01 or 0.05). Among nonmedical health workers, having organic disease was a risk factor for insomnia, depression, and obsessive-compulsive symptoms (p < 0.01 or 0.05). Conclusions: During the COVID-19 outbreak, medical health workers had psychosocial problems and risk factors for developing them. They were in need of attention and recovery programs.

Mental Health and Psychosocial Problems of Medical Health Workers during the COVID-19 Epidemic in China.

Background As the fight against the COVID-19 epidemic continues, medical workers may have allostatic load. Objective During the reopening of society, medical and nonmedical workers were compared in terms of allostatic load. Methods An online study was performed; 3,590 Chinese subjects were analyzed. Socio-demographic variables, allostatic load, stress, abnormal illness behavior, global well-being, mental status, and social support were assessed. Results There was no difference in allostatic load in medical workers compared to nonmedical workers (15.8 vs. 17.8%; p = 0.22). Multivariate conditional logistic regression revealed that anxiety (OR = 1.24; 95% CI 1.18-1.31; p Conclusions In the post-COVID-19 epidemic time, medical and nonmedical workers had similar allostatic load. Psychological distress and abnormal illness behavior were risk factors for it, while social support could relieve it.

/pdf/post-covid-19-epidemic-allostatic-load-among-medical-and-27i070zn0w.pdf

Hai Xia Leng

Papers

Mental Health and Psychosocial Problems of Medical Health Workers during the COVID-19 Epidemic in China.

Post-COVID-19 Epidemic: Allostatic Load among Medical and Nonmedical Workers in China.