Consequences of Confinement Due to COVID-19 in Spain on Anxiety, Sleep and Executive Functioning of Children and Adolescents with ADHD

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

The outbreak and the quick expansion of SARS-CoV-2, from December 2019 to today, has forced countries around the world to resolve virus containment measures in order to slow down the contagion curve. Between these measures, the situation of lockdown, and the isolation or limitation of social contact between the citizens, there has been an unknown psychological impact. Certain groups (the elderly, children and teenagers, and the clinical population, for instance) arouse serious fears among professionals due to their greater vulnerability and ignorance regarding the short- and long-term consequences. The main purposes of this work are first of all to evaluate the consequences of the lockdown in children and teenagers diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), sleep-related problems, and problems with executive functions. Secondly, we aim to compare the effects produced with respect to the previously mentioned variables with normotypic subjects; that is to say, between a group that was subject to lockdown and another group that was not confined. The findings show that the clinic confined group had high levels of state anxiety and problems with sleep and executive functions; differences could also be seen between the two groups, with the confined ADHD group being more negatively affected in all measured variables.

Related collections

Most cited references 74

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects.

(2013)

0 comments Cited 6282 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

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

Samantha K. Brooks, Rebecca K Webster, Louise E. Smith … (2022)

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.

0 comments Cited 5503 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

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

Cuiyan Wang, Riyu Pan, Xiaoyang Wan … (2020)

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.