Pre-pandemic mental illness and risk of death from COVID-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Batty GD
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7906744 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Pre-pandemic mental illness and risk of death from COVID-19.
Batty G David GD Gale Catharine R CR
The lancet. Psychiatry 20210301 3
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThere is evidence that the COVID-19 pandemic has negatively affected mental health, but most studies have been conducted in the general population.AimsTo identify factors associated with mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic in individuals with pre-existing mental illness.MethodParticipants (N = 2869, 78% women, ages 18-94 years) from a UK cohort (the National Centre for Mental Health) with a history of mental illness completed a cross-sectional online survey in June to August 2020. Mental health assessments were the GAD-7 (anxiety), PHQ-9 (depression) and WHO-5 (well-being) questionnaires, and a self-report question on whether their mental health had changed during the pandemic. Regressions examined associations between mental health outcomes and hypothesised risk factors. Secondary analyses examined associations between specific mental health diagnoses and mental health.ResultsA total of 60% of participants reported that mental health had worsened during the pandemic. Younger age, difficulty accessing mental health services, low income, income affected by COVID-19, worry about COVID-19, reduced sleep and increased alcohol/drug use were associated with increased depression and anxiety symptoms and reduced well-being. Feeling socially supported by friends/family/services was associated with better mental health and well-being. Participants with a history of anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder or eating disorder were more likely to report that mental health had worsened during the pandemic than individuals without a history of these diagnoses.ConclusionsWe identified factors associated with worse mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic in individuals with pre-existing mental illness, in addition to specific groups potentially at elevated risk of poor mental health during the pandemic.
| S-EPMC8914135 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST1055 | biostudies-other
Project description:IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic has posed a serious health risk, especially in vulnerable populations. Even before the pandemic, people with mental disorders had worse physical health outcomes compared to the general population. This umbrella review investigated whether having a pre-pandemic mental disorder was associated with worse physical health outcomes due to the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsFollowing a pre-registered protocol available on the Open Science Framework platform, we searched Ovid MEDLINE All, Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL, and Web of Science up to the 6th of October 2021 for systematic reviews on the impact of COVID-19 on people with pre-existing mental disorders. The following outcomes were considered: risk of contracting the SARS-CoV-2 infection, risk of severe illness, COVID-19 related mortality risk, risk of long-term physical symptoms after COVID-19. For meta-analyses, we considered adjusted odds ratio (OR) as effect size measure. Screening, data extraction and quality assessment with the AMSTAR 2 tool have been done in parallel and duplicate.ResultsWe included five meta-analyses and four narrative reviews. The meta-analyses reported that people with any mental disorder had an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR: 1.71, 95% CI 1.09-2.69), severe illness course (OR from 1.32 to 1.77, 95%CI between 1.19-1.46 and 1.29-2.42, respectively) and COVID-19 related mortality (OR from 1.38 to 1.52, 95%CI between 1.15-1.65 and 1.20-1.93, respectively) as compared to the general population. People with anxiety disorders had an increased risk of SAR-CoV-2 infection, but not increased mortality. People with mood and schizophrenia spectrum disorders had an increased COVID-19 related mortality but without evidence of increased risk of severe COVID-19 illness. Narrative reviews were consistent with findings from the meta-analyses.Discussion and conclusionsAs compared to the general population, there is strong evidence showing that people with pre-existing mental disorders suffered from worse physical health outcomes due to the COVID-19 pandemic and may therefore be considered a risk group similar to people with underlying physical conditions. Factors likely involved include living accommodations with barriers to social distancing, cardiovascular comorbidities, psychotropic medications and difficulties in accessing high-intensity medical care.
| S-EPMC10026202 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe stress-sensitization hypothesis posits that individuals with prior trauma are at elevated risk for poor mental health when faced with subsequent stressors. Little work has examined whether those who have demonstrated psychological resilience to prior trauma would show either increased resilience or vulnerability to subsequent stressors. We examined pre-pandemic psychological resilience to lifetime trauma in relation to mental health outcomes amid the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, a major societal stressor.MethodsThe sample included 16,900 trauma-exposed women from the Nurses' Health Study II. Pre-pandemic resilience was defined by psychological health in 2017-2019 (characterized by levels of both distress and positive emotional well-being) relative to lifetime trauma. Resilience was defined categorically by cross-classifying unfavorable, adequate, and favorable psychological health by higher versus lower trauma burden, and continuously as the residual difference in predicted versus actual psychological health regressed on trauma burden. Mental health outcomes as of May-August 2020 included psychological distress symptoms and overall positive emotional well-being. Associations were assessed using covariate-adjusted regression models.ResultsPre-pandemic resilience was associated with lower distress and higher well-being early in the COVID-19 pandemic. Relative to the women showing highest resilience (favorable psychological health despite higher trauma), only those with lower trauma and favorable prior psychological health had significantly lower distress and higher positive emotional well-being during the pandemic. Higher continuous pre-pandemic resilience was also significantly associated with lower distress and higher positive emotional well-being during the pandemic.ConclusionPreventing mental health problems following trauma may contribute to protecting population well-being amid major stressors.
| S-EPMC9514982 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceLittle is known about changes in care for individuals with severe mental illness during the COVID-19 pandemic.ObjectiveTo examine changes in mental health care during the pandemic and the use of telemedicine in outpatient care among Medicare beneficiaries with severe mental illness.Design, setting, and participantsThis population-based cohort study included Medicare beneficiaries (age ≥18 years) diagnosed with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-related disorders or bipolar I disorder. Care patterns during January to September 2020 for a cohort defined in 2019 were compared with those during January to September 2019 for a cohort defined in 2018.ExposuresStart of COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, defined as week 12 of 2020.Main outcomes and measuresUse of mental health-related outpatient visits, emergency department visits, inpatient care, and oral prescription fills for antipsychotics and mood stabilizers during 4-week intervals. Multivariable logistic regression analyses examined whether the pandemic was associated with differential changes in outpatient care across patient characteristics.ResultsThe 2019 cohort of 686 214 individuals included 389 245 (53.8%) women, 114 073 (15.8%) Black and 526 301 (72.8%) White individuals, and 477 353 individuals (66.0%) younger than 65 years; the 2020 cohort of 723 045 individuals included 367 140 (53.5%) women, 106 699 (15.6%) Black and 497 885 (72.6%) White individuals, and 442 645 individuals (64.5%) younger than 65 years. Compared with 2019, there were large decreases during the pandemic's first month (calendar weeks 12-15) in individuals with outpatient visits (265 169 [36.7%] vs 200 590 [29.2%]; 20.3% decrease), with antipsychotic and mood stabilizer medication prescription fills (216 468 [29.9%] vs 163 796 [23.9%]; 20.3% decrease), with emergency department visits (12 383 [1.7%] vs 8503 [1.2%]; 27.7% decrease), and with hospital admissions (11 564 [1.6%] vs 7912 [1.2%]; 27.9% decrease). By weeks 32 to 35 of 2020, utilization rebounded but remained lower than in 2019, ranging from a relative decrease of 2.5% (outpatient visits) to 12.9% (admissions). During the full pandemic period (weeks 12-39) in 2020, 1 556 403 of 2 743 553 outpatient visits (56.7%) were provided via telemedicine. In multivariable analyses, outpatient visit use during weeks 12 to 25 of 2020 was lower among those with disability (odds ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.93-0.96), and during weeks 26 to 39 of 2020, it was lower among Black vs non-Hispanic White individuals (OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.99) and those with dual Medicaid eligibility (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.95-0.98).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, despite greater use of telemedicine, individuals with severe mental illness experienced large disruptions in care early in the pandemic. These narrowed but persisted through September 2020. Disruptions were greater for several disadvantaged populations.
| S-EPMC8800078 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic is a global mental health crisis that disproportionately impacts adolescents. Loneliness is a particularly salient pandemic psychosocial outcome to understand; however, research to date on this outcome is sparse and largely cross-sectional. In response, we examined pre-pandemic risk factors for pandemic loneliness. Further, we examined how risk may differ based on key demographics, and whether mediation or moderation models best explained potential disparities in experiencing loneliness. Self-reported, pre-pandemic mental health, trauma exposure, and family conflict survey data were collected at Wave 1 in a diverse sample of 369 adolescents (54.5% female, 45.5% male; 30.1% White; 30.9% Black; 18.4% Hispanic; Mage = 15.04; SD age = 1.10). Subsequently, self-reported experiences of loneliness during the pandemic were collected 6 months (April-June 2020) and 12 months (October-December 2020) later. Using a regression-based framework (i.e., PROCESS), we tested (a) which pre-pandemic risks uniquely predicted prospective loneliness and (b) whether loneliness risk was elevated for certain identities (i.e., mediation models) or whether certain identities were more sensitive to specific risks (i.e., moderation models). Overall, pre-pandemic depressive and aggression symptoms predicted early pandemic loneliness (6-month follow-up), whereas anxiety symptoms specifically predicted mid-pandemic loneliness (12-month follow-up). Environmental stressors were moderated by gender, such that females with pre-pandemic trauma exposure were more likely to report pandemic loneliness. Further, pre-pandemic internalizing distress for girls and externalizing symptoms for boys, reflected gender-specific pathways for loneliness. Implications for mental health prevention in the wake of national disasters are discussed.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12187-022-09984-8.
| S-EPMC9589684 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Questions remain regarding whether the transition and continued use of telehealth was associated with changes in treatment engagement among patients with serious mental illness (SMI). Using NYS Medicaid claims, we identified 116,497 individuals with SMI receiving outpatient mental health services from September 1, 2019-February 28, 2021 and a comparison cohort of 101,995 from September 1, 2017-February 28, 2019 to account for unmeasured and seasonal variation. We characterized engagement in three 6-month increments (T0-T1-T2) using clinically meaningful measures of high, partial, low, and none. Subgroup differences were compared, and telehealth users were compared to those with only in-person visits. Engagement, as characterized, was largely maintained during COVID. The 19.0 % with only in-person visits during COVID had different characteristics than telehealth users. Telehealth use was greater among younger people by T2 (33.1 %), women (57.7 %), non-Hispanic White people (38.9 %), and those with MDD (18.0 %), but lower among non-Hispanic Black people, in NYC, and those with schizophrenia or SUD. Most telehealth users were highly engaged (77.1 %); most using only in-person services had low engagement (47.5 %). The shift to telehealth preserved access to many outpatient services for this SMI population. Exploring reasons for not using telehealth may identify opportunities to increase care access.
| S-EPMC10842636 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceCertain individuals, when infected by SARS-CoV-2, tend to develop the more severe forms of Covid-19 illness for reasons that remain unclear.ObjectiveTo determine the demographic and clinical characteristics associated with increased severity of Covid-19 infection.DesignRetrospective observational study. We curated data from the electronic health record, and used multivariable logistic regression to examine the association of pre-existing traits with a Covid-19 illness severity defined by level of required care: need for hospital admission, need for intensive care, and need for intubation.SettingA large, multihospital healthcare system in Southern California.ParticipantsAll patients with confirmed Covid-19 infection (N = 442).ResultsOf all patients studied, 48% required hospitalization, 17% required intensive care, and 12% required intubation. In multivariable-adjusted analyses, patients requiring a higher levels of care were more likely to be older (OR 1.5 per 10 years, P<0.001), male (OR 2.0, P = 0.001), African American (OR 2.1, P = 0.011), obese (OR 2.0, P = 0.021), with diabetes mellitus (OR 1.8, P = 0.037), and with a higher comorbidity index (OR 1.8 per SD, P<0.001). Several clinical associations were more pronounced in younger compared to older patients (Pinteraction<0.05). Of all hospitalized patients, males required higher levels of care (OR 2.5, P = 0.003) irrespective of age, race, or morbidity profile.Conclusions and relevanceIn our healthcare system, greater Covid-19 illness severity is seen in patients who are older, male, African American, obese, with diabetes, and with greater overall comorbidity burden. Certain comorbidities paradoxically augment risk to a greater extent in younger patients. In hospitalized patients, male sex is the main determinant of needing more intensive care. Further investigation is needed to understand the mechanisms underlying these findings.
| S-EPMC7377468 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The authors review trend and cohort surveys and administrative data comparing prevalence of mental disorders during, versus, and before the COVID-19 pandemic and changes in mental health disparities. Best evidence suggests clinically significant anxiety-depression point prevalence increased by relative-risk (RR) = 1.3 to 1.5 during the pandemic compared with before. This level of increase is much less than the implausibly high RR = 5.0 to 8.0 estimates reported in trend studies early in the pandemic based on less-appropriate comparisons. Changes in prevalence also occurred during the pandemic, but relative prevalence appears not to have changed substantially over this time.
| S-EPMC8585610 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7906735 | biostudies-literature