scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

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

TL;DR: The 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.
Abstract: 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.
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: 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.
Abstract: 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.

3,909 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The COVID-19 pandemic is associated with highly significant levels of psychological distress that, in many cases, would meet the threshold for clinical relevance.
Abstract: Background As a major virus outbreak in the 21st century, the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to unprecedented hazards to mental health globally. While psychological support is being provided to patients and healthcare workers, the general public's mental health requires significant attention as well. This systematic review aims to synthesize extant literature that reports on the effects of COVID-19 on psychological outcomes of the general population and its associated risk factors. Methods A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and Scopus from inception to 17 May 2020 following the PRISMA guidelines. A manual search on Google Scholar was performed to identify additional relevant studies. Articles were selected based on the predetermined eligibility criteria. Results: Relatively high rates of symptoms of anxiety (6.33% to 50.9%), depression (14.6% to 48.3%), post-traumatic stress disorder (7% to 53.8%), psychological distress (34.43% to 38%), and stress (8.1% to 81.9%) are reported in the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic in China, Spain, Italy, Iran, the US, Turkey, Nepal, and Denmark. Risk factors associated with distress measures include female gender, younger age group (≤40 years), presence of chronic/psychiatric illnesses, unemployment, student status, and frequent exposure to social media/news concerning COVID-19. Limitations A significant degree of heterogeneity was noted across studies. Conclusions The COVID-19 pandemic is associated with highly significant levels of psychological distress that, in many cases, would meet the threshold for clinical relevance. Mitigating the hazardous effects of COVID-19 on mental health is an international public health priority.

3,011 citations


Cites background from "Immediate Psychological Responses a..."

  • ...For example, persons with negative coping styles, cyclothymic, depressive, and anxious temperaments exhibit greater susceptibility to psychological outcomes (Wang et al., 2020; Moccia et al., 2020)....

    [...]

  • ...Individuals with positive coping styles, secure and avoidant attachment styles usually presented fewer symptoms of anxiety and stress (Wang et al., 2020; Moccia et al., 2020)....

    [...]

  • ..., younger age groups and female gender are more likely to develop psychological distress) (Qiu et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2020)....

    [...]

  • ...Other predictive factors included being migrant workers, profound regional severity of the outbreak, unmarried status, the history of visiting Wuhan in the past month, higher self-perceived impacts of the epidemic (Qiu et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2020)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Preliminary evidence suggests that symptoms of anxiety and depression and self-reported stress are common psychological reactions to the COVID-19 pandemic, and may be associated with disturbed sleep.
Abstract: The COVID-19 pandemic is a major health crisis affecting several nations, with over 720,000 cases and 33,000 confirmed deaths reported to date. Such widespread outbreaks are associated with adverse mental health consequences. Keeping this in mind, existing literature on the COVID-19 outbreak pertinent to mental health was retrieved via a literature search of the PubMed database. Published articles were classified according to their overall themes and summarized. Preliminary evidence suggests that symptoms of anxiety and depression (16-28%) and self-reported stress (8%) are common psychological reactions to the COVID-19 pandemic, and may be associated with disturbed sleep. A number of individual and structural variables moderate this risk. In planning services for such populations, both the needs of the concerned people and the necessary preventive guidelines must be taken into account. The available literature has emerged from only a few of the affected countries, and may not reflect the experience of persons living in other parts of the world. In conclusion, subsyndromal mental health problems are a common response to the COVID-19 pandemic. There is a need for more representative research from other affected countries, particularly in vulnerable populations.

2,359 citations


Cites background from "Immediate Psychological Responses a..."

  • ...Four studies, all from Chinese centres, examined the frequency of specific mental health-related variables in persons affected by the COVID-19 outbreak (Wang et al., 2020; Xiao et al., 2020a; Li et al., 2020; Xiao et al., 2020b)....

    [...]

  • ...…suggestive of COVID-19, and poor perceived health were associated with higher rates of anxiety and depression; on the other hand, the availability of accurate information and the use of specific preventive measures, such as hand-washing, seemed to mitigate these effects (Wang et al., 2020)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: 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.
Abstract: 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.

2,306 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This systematic review and meta-analysis of existing research works and findings in relation to the prevalence of stress, anxiety and depression in the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic found that it is essential to preserve the mental health of individuals and to develop psychological interventions that can improve themental health of vulnerable groups during the pandemic.
Abstract: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on public mental health Therefore, monitoring and oversight of the population mental health during crises such as a panedmic is an immediate priority The aim of this study is to analyze the existing research works and findings in relation to the prevalence of stress, anxiety and depression in the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic In this systematic review and meta-analysis, articles that have focused on stress and anxiety prevalence among the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic were searched in the Science Direct, Embase, Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science (ISI) and Google Scholar databases, without a lower time limit and until May 2020 In order to perform a meta-analysis of the collected studies, the random effects model was used, and the heterogeneity of studies was investigated using the I2 index Moreover data analysis was conducted using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) software The prevalence of stress in 5 studies with a total sample size of 9074 is obtained as 296% (95% confidence limit: 243–354), the prevalence of anxiety in 17 studies with a sample size of 63,439 as 319% (95% confidence interval: 275–367), and the prevalence of depression in 14 studies with a sample size of 44,531 people as 337% (95% confidence interval: 275–406) COVID-19 not only causes physical health concerns but also results in a number of psychological disorders The spread of the new coronavirus can impact the mental health of people in different communities Thus, it is essential to preserve the mental health of individuals and to develop psychological interventions that can improve the mental health of vulnerable groups during the COVID-19 pandemic

2,133 citations


Cites background from "Immediate Psychological Responses a..."

  • ...In addition, anxiety levels are significantly higher in people with at least one family member, relative, or a friend with the COVID-19 disease [21, 24, 42]....

    [...]

  • ...number of people who have improved and the progress of medications and vaccines, can reduce anxiety levels [42]....

    [...]

  • ...Previous research works had shown that medical history and chronic illnesses are associated with increased psychiatric distress levels [42, 47]....

    [...]

References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The epidemiological, clinical, laboratory, and radiological characteristics and treatment and clinical outcomes of patients with laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection in Wuhan, China, were reported.
Abstract: A recent cluster of pneumonia cases in Wuhan, China, was caused by a novel betacoronavirus, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). We report the epidemiological, clinical, laboratory, and radiological characteristics and treatment and clinical outcomes of these patients. All patients with suspected 2019-nCoV were admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan. We prospectively collected and analysed data on patients with laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection by real-time RT-PCR and next-generation sequencing. Data were obtained with standardised data collection forms shared by the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium from electronic medical records. Researchers also directly communicated with patients or their families to ascertain epidemiological and symptom data. Outcomes were also compared between patients who had been admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and those who had not.

36,578 citations


"Immediate Psychological Responses a..." refers background in this paper

  • ...Human-to-human transmission has been observed via virus-laden respiratory droplets, as a growing number of patients reportedly did not have animal market exposure, and cases have also occurred in healthcare workers [6]....

    [...]

  • ...most of the research related to this outbreak focuses on identifying the epidemiology and clinical characteristics of infected patients [6,12], the genomic characterization of the virus [22], and challenges for global health governance [23]....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Characteristics of patients who died were in line with the MuLBSTA score, an early warning model for predicting mortality in viral pneumonia, and further investigation is needed to explore the applicability of the Mu LBSTA scores in predicting the risk of mortality in 2019-nCoV infection.
Abstract: In December, 2019, a pneumonia associated with the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) emerged in Wuhan, China. We aimed to further clarify the epidemiological and clinical characteristics of 2019-nCoV pneumonia. In this retrospective, single-centre study, we included all confirmed cases of 2019-nCoV in Wuhan Jinyintan Hospital from Jan 1 to Jan 20, 2020. Cases were confirmed by real-time RT-PCR and were analysed for epidemiological, demographic, clinical, and radiological features and laboratory data. Outcomes were followed up until Jan 25, 2020.

16,282 citations


"Immediate Psychological Responses a..." refers background in this paper

  • ...For the anxiety subscale, 770 (63.6%) were considered to have a normal score (score: 0-6); 91 (7.5%) were considered to suffer from mild anxiety (score: 7-9); 247 (20.4%) were considered to suffer from moderate anxiety (score: [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] ; and 102 (8.4%) were considered to suffer from severe and extremely severe anxiety (score: ....

    [...]

  • ...Older men with medical comorbidities are more likely to get infected, with worse outcomes [12] ....

    [...]

  • ...The total stress subscale score was divided into normal (0-10), mild stress (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) , moderate stress (19) (20) (21) (22) (23) (24) (25) (26) , severe stress (27) (28) (29) (30) (31) (32) (33) (34) , and extremely severe stress (35) (36) (37) (38) (39) (40) (41) (42) ....

    [...]

  • ...Questions 1, 6, 8, 11, 12, 14, and 18 formed the stress subscale....

    [...]

  • ...The total anxiety subscale score was divided into normal (0-6), mild anxiety (7-9), moderate anxiety (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) , severe anxiety (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) , and extremely severe anxiety ....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: There is evidence that human-to-human transmission has occurred among close contacts since the middle of December 2019 and considerable efforts to reduce transmission will be required to control outbreaks if similar dynamics apply elsewhere.
Abstract: Background The initial cases of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV)–infected pneumonia (NCIP) occurred in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, in December 2019 and January 2020. We analyzed data on the...

13,101 citations


"Immediate Psychological Responses a..." refers background in this paper

  • ...The average incubation period is estimated to be 5.2 days, with significant variation among patients [9] , and it may be capable of asymptomatic spread [10, 11] ....

    [...]

  • ...Questions 2, 4, 7, 9, 15, 19 , and 20 formed the anxiety subscale....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The phylogenetic analysis suggests that bats might be the original host of this virus, an animal sold at the seafood market in Wuhan might represent an intermediate host facilitating the emergence of the virus in humans.
Abstract: Summary Background In late December, 2019, patients presenting with viral pneumonia due to an unidentified microbial agent were reported in Wuhan, China. A novel coronavirus was subsequently identified as the causative pathogen, provisionally named 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). As of Jan 26, 2020, more than 2000 cases of 2019-nCoV infection have been confirmed, most of which involved people living in or visiting Wuhan, and human-to-human transmission has been confirmed. Methods We did next-generation sequencing of samples from bronchoalveolar lavage fluid and cultured isolates from nine inpatients, eight of whom had visited the Huanan seafood market in Wuhan. Complete and partial 2019-nCoV genome sequences were obtained from these individuals. Viral contigs were connected using Sanger sequencing to obtain the full-length genomes, with the terminal regions determined by rapid amplification of cDNA ends. Phylogenetic analysis of these 2019-nCoV genomes and those of other coronaviruses was used to determine the evolutionary history of the virus and help infer its likely origin. Homology modelling was done to explore the likely receptor-binding properties of the virus. Findings The ten genome sequences of 2019-nCoV obtained from the nine patients were extremely similar, exhibiting more than 99·98% sequence identity. Notably, 2019-nCoV was closely related (with 88% identity) to two bat-derived severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-like coronaviruses, bat-SL-CoVZC45 and bat-SL-CoVZXC21, collected in 2018 in Zhoushan, eastern China, but were more distant from SARS-CoV (about 79%) and MERS-CoV (about 50%). Phylogenetic analysis revealed that 2019-nCoV fell within the subgenus Sarbecovirus of the genus Betacoronavirus, with a relatively long branch length to its closest relatives bat-SL-CoVZC45 and bat-SL-CoVZXC21, and was genetically distinct from SARS-CoV. Notably, homology modelling revealed that 2019-nCoV had a similar receptor-binding domain structure to that of SARS-CoV, despite amino acid variation at some key residues. Interpretation 2019-nCoV is sufficiently divergent from SARS-CoV to be considered a new human-infecting betacoronavirus. Although our phylogenetic analysis suggests that bats might be the original host of this virus, an animal sold at the seafood market in Wuhan might represent an intermediate host facilitating the emergence of the virus in humans. Importantly, structural analysis suggests that 2019-nCoV might be able to bind to the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptor in humans. The future evolution, adaptation, and spread of this virus warrant urgent investigation. Funding National Key Research and Development Program of China, National Major Project for Control and Prevention of Infectious Disease in China, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shandong First Medical University.

9,474 citations


"Immediate Psychological Responses a..." refers background in this paper

  • ...Linear regression analysis showed that avoiding the sharing of utensils (e.g., chopsticks) during meals was significantly associated with lower scores in the IES-R [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] 1025 (84.7) Reference Reference Reference Reference * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001....

    [...]

  • ...The total stress subscale score was divided into normal (0-10), mild stress (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) , moderate stress (19) (20) (21) (22) (23) (24) (25) (26) , severe stress (27) (28) (29) (30) (31) (32) (33) (34) , and extremely severe stress (35) (36) (37) (38) (39) (40) (41) (42) ....

    [...]

  • ...The total depression subscale score was divided into normal (0-9), mild depression (10) (11) (12) , moderate depression (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) , severe depression (21) (22) (23) (24) (25) (26) (27) , and extremely severe depression (28) (29) (30) (31) (32) (33) (34) (35) (36) (37) (38) (39) (40) (41) (42) ....

    [...]

  • ...Based on our understanding, most of the research related to this outbreak focuses on identifying the epidemiology and clinical characteristics of infected patients [6, 12] , the genomic characterization of the virus [22] , and challenges for global health governance [23] ....

    [...]

  • ...For the stress subscale, 821 (67.9%) were considered to have a normal score (score: 0-10); 292 (24.1%) were considered to suffer from mild stress (score: 11-18); 66 (5.5%) were considered to suffer from moderate stress (score: [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] ; and 31 (2.6%) were considered to suffer from severe and extremely severe stress (score: 27-42)....

    [...]