计量经济分析 = Econometric analysis

Depression and anxiety are the most common psychiatric conditions in late life. Despite their prevalence, we know relatively little about their unique manifestation in older adults. And, Although the most common intervention for late-life depression and anxiety continues to be medication, research on psychosocial interventions for late-life depression and anxiety has burgeoned in the past several years. Unfortunately, this growing body of intervention research has yet to be widely translated into improved systems of care for late-life depression. This article is one step toward synthesizing the knowledge in this growing area of research. The review of literature presents the conclusions of several meta-analyses that have reviewed psychosocial interventions for late-life depression and anxiety. In addition, intervention studies concerning the effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy, interpersonal therapy, reminiscence therapy, and alternative therapies with depressed and/or anxious older adults are reviewed. A brief description of various approaches to psychosocial intervention with anxious and/or depressed older adults is also presented.

Depression and anxiety.

Background It remains unclear whether COVID-19 is associated with psychiatric symptoms during or after the acute illness phase. Being affected by the disease exposes the individual to an uncertain prognosis and a state of quarantine. These factors can predispose individuals to the development of mental symptoms during or after the acute phase of the disease. There is a need for prospective studies assessing psychiatric symptoms in COVID-19 patients in the post-infection period. Methods In this prospective cohort study, nasopharyngeal swabs for COVID-19 tests were collected at patients' homes under the supervision of trained healthcare personnel. Patients who tested positive for COVID-19 and were classified as mild cases (N = 895) at treatment intake were further assessed for the presence of psychiatric symptoms (on average, 56.6 days after the intake). We investigated the association between the number of COVID-19 symptoms at intake and depressive, anxiety and post-traumatic symptoms approximately two months later, adjusting for previous mental health status, time between baseline and outcome, and other confounders. Multivariate logistic regression and generalized linear models were employed for categorical and continuous outcomes, respectively. Results A clinically significant level of depressive, anxiety and post-traumatic stress symptoms were reported by 26.2% (N = 235), 22.4% (N = 201), and 17.3% (N = 155) of the sample. Reporting an increased number of COVID-related symptoms was associated with the presence of clinically significant levels of depressive (aOR = 1.059;95%CI = 1.002–1.119), anxiety (aOR = 1.072;95%CI = 1.012–1.134), and post-traumatic stress (aOR = 1.092;95%CI = 1.024–1.166) symptoms. Sensitivity analyses supported findings for both continuous and categorical measures. Conclusion Exposure to an increased number of COVID-19 symptoms may be associated with depressive, anxiety and post-traumatic symptoms after the acute phase of the disease. These patients should be monitored for the development of psychiatric symptoms after COVID-19 treatment discharge. Early interventions, such as brief interventions of psychoeducation on coping strategies, could benefit these individuals.

Post-infection depressive, anxiety and post-traumatic stress symptoms: A prospective cohort study in patients with mild COVID-19.

An online survey was conducted to identify factors associated with financial insecurity, food insecurity and poor quality of daily lives of adults in Nigeria during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The associations between the outcome (experience of financial loss, changes in food intake and impact of the pandemic on daily lives) and the explanatory (age, sex, education level, anxiety, depression, HIV status) variables were determined using logistic regression analysis. Of the 4439 respondents, 2487 (56.0%) were financially insecure, 907 (20.4%) decreased food intake and 4029 (90.8%) had their daily life negatively impacted. Males (AOR:0.84), people who felt depressed (AOR:0.62) and people living with HIV -PLHIV- (AOR:0.70) had significantly lower odds of financial insecurity. Older respondents (AOR:1.01) had significantly higher odds of financial insecurity. Those depressed (AOR:0.62) and PLHIV (AOR:0.55) had significantly lower odds of reporting decreased food intake. Respondents who felt anxious (AOR:0.07), depressed (AOR: 0.48) and who were PLHIV (AOR:0.68) had significantly lower odds of reporting a negative impact of the pandemic on their daily lives. We concluded the study findings may reflect a complex relationship between financial insecurity, food insecurity, poor quality of life, mental health, and socioeconomic status of adults living in Nigeria during the COVID-19 pandemic.

https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/15/7925/pdf

Factors Associated with Financial Security, Food Security and Quality of Daily Lives of Residents in Nigeria during the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7) are self-report measures of major depressive disorder and generalised anxiety disorder. The primary aim of this study was to test for differential item functioning (DIF) on the PHQ-9 and GAD-7 items based on age, sex (males and females), and country.Data from nationally representative surveys in UK, Ireland, Spain, and Italy (combined N = 6,054) were used to fit confirmatory factor analytic and multiple-indictor multiple-causes models.Spain and Italy had higher latent variable means than the UK and Ireland for both anxiety and depression, but there was no evidence for differential items functioning.The PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores were found to be unidimensional, reliable, and largely free of DIF in data from four large nationally representative samples of the general population in the UK, Ireland, Italy and Spain. 

/pdf/measurement-invariance-of-the-patient-health-questionnaire-1ftpfbo8.pdf

Measurement invariance of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7) across four European countries during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 physical distancing measures can potentially increase the likelihood of mental disorders. It is unknown whether these measures are associated with depression and anxiety. OBJECTIVES: To investigate meta-analytic global levels of depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic and how the implementation of mitigation strategies (i.e. public transportation closures, stay-at-home orders, etc.) impacted such disorders. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, BIOSIS Citation Index, Current Content Connect, PsycINFO, CINAHL, medRxiv, and PsyArXiv databases for depression and anxiety prevalences; Oxford Covid-19 Government Response Tracker for the containment and closure policies indexes; Global Burden of Disease Study for previous levels of depression and anxiety. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Original studies conducted during COVID-19 pandemic, which assessed categorical depression and anxiety, using PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scales (cutoff â©¾10). PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: General population, healthcare providers, students, and patients. National physical distancing measures. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: Meta-analysis and meta-regression. RESULTS: In total, 226 638 individuals were assessed within the 60 included studies. Global prevalence of both depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic was 24.0% and 21.3%, respectively. There were differences in the prevalence of both anxiety and depression reported across regions and countries. Asia (17.6% and 17.9%), and China (16.2% and 15.5%) especially, had the lowest prevalence of both disorders. Regarding the impact of mitigation strategies on mental health, only public transportation closures increased the prevalence of anxiety, especially in Europe. LIMITATIONS: Country-level data on physical distancing measures and previous anxiety/depression may not necessarily reflect local (i.e. city-specific) contexts. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: Mental health concerns should not be viewed only as a delayed consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic, but also as a concurrent epidemic. Our data provide support for policy-makers to consider real-time enhanced mental health services, and increase initiatives to foster positive mental health outcomes.

/pdf/investigating-the-effect-of-national-government-physical-3jsgfq50v5.pdf

Investigating the effect of national government physical distancing measures on depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic through meta-analysis and meta-regression.

(following PRISMA statement) Background COVID-19 physical distancing measures can potentially increase the likelihood of mental disorders. It is unknown whether these measures are associated with depression and anxiety. Objectives To investigate meta-analytic global levels of depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic and how implementation of mitigation strategies (i.e. public transportation closures, stay-at-home orders, etc.) impacted such disorders. Data sources Pubmed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, BIOSIS Citation Index, Current Content Connect, PsycINFO, CINAHL, medRxiv, and PsyArXiv databases for depression and anxiety prevalences; Oxford Covid-19 Government Response Tracker for the containment and closure policies indexes; Global Burden of Disease Study for previous levels of depression and anxiety. Study eligibility criteria Original studies conducted during COVID-19 pandemic, which assessed categorical depression and anxiety, using PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scales (cutoff ≥ 10). Participants and interventions General population, healthcare providers, students, and patients. National physical distancing measures. Study appraisal and synthesis methods Meta-analysis and meta-regresssion. Results In total, 226,638 individuals were assessed within the 60 included studies. Global prevalence of both depression and anxiety during COVID-19 pandemic were 24.0% and 21.3%, respectively. There was a wide variance in the prevalence of both anxiety and depression reported in different regions of the world and countries. Asia, and China particularly, had the lowest prevalence of both disorders. Regarding the impact of mitigation strategies on mental health, only public transportation closures increased anxiety prevalence. Limitations Country-level data on physical distancing measures and previous anxiety/depression may not necessarily reflect local (i.e., city-specific) contexts. Conclusions and implications of key findings Mental health concerns should not be viewed only as a delayed consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic, but also as a concurrent epidemic. Our data provides support for policy-makers to consider real-time enhanced mental health services, and increase initiatives to foster positive mental health outcomes. Systematic review registration number https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/JQGSF

/pdf/investigating-the-effect-of-national-government-physical-3hk5vpho0s.pdf

Investigating the effect of national government physical distancing measures on depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic through meta-analysis and meta-regression

Ziyin Lu

Papers

Investigating the effect of national government physical distancing measures on depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic through meta-analysis and meta-regression.

Investigating the effect of national government physical distancing measures on depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic through meta-analysis and meta-regression