Impact of COVID-19 First Wave on Psychological and Psychosocial Dimensions: A Systematic Review

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

A systematic review of the literature investigating the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on psychological and psychosocial factors was completed. Published literature was examined using electronic databases to search psychosocial factors such as beliefs and media persuasion, social support, coping, risk perception, and compliance and social distancing; and psychological factors as anxiety, stress, depression, and other consequences of COVID-19 that impacted mental health among the pandemic. A total of 294 papers referring to the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (December 2019–June 2020) were selected for the review. The findings suggested a general deterioration of mental health, delineating a sort of “psychological COVID-19 syndrome”, characterized by increased anxiety, stress, and depression, and decreased well-being and sleep quality. The COVID-19 effect on the psychological dimensions of interest was not the same for everyone. Indeed, some socio-demographic variables exacerbated mental health repercussions that occurred due to the pandemic. In particular, healthcare workers and young women (especially those in postpartum condition) with low income and low levels of education have been shown to be the least resilient to the consequences of the pandemic.

Related collections

Most cited references 344

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7.

Robert L Spitzer, Kurt Kroenke, Janet B W Williams … (2006)

Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is one of the most common mental disorders; however, there is no brief clinical measure for assessing GAD. The objective of this study was to develop a brief self-report scale to identify probable cases of GAD and evaluate its reliability and validity. A criterion-standard study was performed in 15 primary care clinics in the United States from November 2004 through June 2005. Of a total of 2740 adult patients completing a study questionnaire, 965 patients had a telephone interview with a mental health professional within 1 week. For criterion and construct validity, GAD self-report scale diagnoses were compared with independent diagnoses made by mental health professionals; functional status measures; disability days; and health care use. A 7-item anxiety scale (GAD-7) had good reliability, as well as criterion, construct, factorial, and procedural validity. A cut point was identified that optimized sensitivity (89%) and specificity (82%). Increasing scores on the scale were strongly associated with multiple domains of functional impairment (all 6 Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form General Health Survey scales and disability days). Although GAD and depression symptoms frequently co-occurred, factor analysis confirmed them as distinct dimensions. Moreover, GAD and depression symptoms had differing but independent effects on functional impairment and disability. There was good agreement between self-report and interviewer-administered versions of the scale. The GAD-7 is a valid and efficient tool for screening for GAD and assessing its severity in clinical practice and research.

0 comments Cited 7998 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The Pittsburgh sleep quality index: A new instrument for psychiatric practice and research

Daniel J. Buysse, Charles Reynolds III, Timothy H Monk … (1989)

Despite the prevalence of sleep complaints among psychiatric patients, few questionnaires have been specifically designed to measure sleep quality in clinical populations. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) is a self-rated questionnaire which assesses sleep quality and disturbances over a 1-month time interval. Nineteen individual items generate seven "component" scores: subjective sleep quality, sleep latency, sleep duration, habitual sleep efficiency, sleep disturbances, use of sleeping medication, and daytime dysfunction. The sum of scores for these seven components yields one global score. Clinical and clinimetric properties of the PSQI were assessed over an 18-month period with "good" sleepers (healthy subjects, n = 52) and "poor" sleepers (depressed patients, n = 54; sleep-disorder patients, n = 62). Acceptable measures of internal homogeneity, consistency (test-retest reliability), and validity were obtained. A global PSQI score greater than 5 yielded a diagnostic sensitivity of 89.6% and specificity of 86.5% (kappa = 0.75, p less than 0.001) in distinguishing good and poor sleepers. The clinimetric and clinical properties of the PSQI suggest its utility both in psychiatric clinical practice and research activities.