Objective As the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic sweeps across the world, it is causing widespread concern, fear and stress, all of which are natural and normal reactions to the changing and uncertain situation that everyone finds themselves in.Methods In this general review, we examined the literature about the psychological effects of COVID-19 pandemia. In total 65 papers were reviewed using the Medline computer database. Only publications in English were selected.Results Children are likely to be experiencing worry, anxiety and fear and older people are also those with underlying health conditions, having been identified as more vulnerable to COVID-19, can be extremely frightening and very fear-inducing. China and several other countries took strict isolation measures. Medical staff and affiliated healthcare workers (staff) are under both physical and psychological pressure.Conclusion The COVID-19 pandemic is exceptional. Its effect will likely be imprinted on each individual involved. Extensive stressors will emerge or become worsened. Many medical staff workers will be harmfully psychologically affected.
COVID-19 has caused unprecedented societal turmoil, triggering a rapid, still ongoing, transformation of healthcare provision on a global level. In this new landscape, it is highly important to acknowledge the challenges this pandemic poses on the care of the particularly vulnerable cancer patients and the subsequent psychosocial impact on them. We have outlined our clinical experience in managing patients with gastrointestinal, hematological, gynaecological, dermatological, neurological, thyroid, lung and paediatric cancers in the COVID-19 era and have reviewed the emerging literature around barriers to care of oncology patients and how this crisis affects them. Moreover, evolving treatment strategies and novel ways of addressing the needs of oncology patients in the new context of the pandemic are discussed. Contents 1. Introduction 2. Oncology care in general 3. Challenges in managing specific types of cancers 4. Conclusions
The psychological burden is heavier and quality of life is more severely impaired among women with scarring alopecia compared with non-scarring alopecia, probably depicting the poorer prognosis of the former.
Aim: To evaluate validity of the Greek version of a global measure of perceived stress PSS−14 (Perceived Stress Scale-14 item). Materials and Methods: The original PSS−14 (theoretical range 0−56) was translated into Greek and then back-translated. One hundred men and women (39±10 years old, 40 men) participated in the validation process. Firstly, participants completed the Greek PSS−14 and, then they were interviewed by a psychologist specializing in stress management. Cronbach's alpha (α) evaluated internal consistency of the measurement, whereas Kendall's tau-b and Bland & Altman methods assessed consistency with the clinical evaluation. Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor analyses were conducted to reveal hidden factors within the data and to confirm the two-dimensional character of the scale. Results: Mean (SD) PSS−14 score was 25(7.9). Strong internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.847) as well as moderate-to-good concordance between clinical assessment and PSS−14 (Kendall's tau-b = 0.43, p<0.01) were observed. Two factors were extracted. Factor one explained 34.7% of variability and was heavily laden by positive items, and factor two that explained 10.6% of the variability by negative items. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed that the model with 2 factors had chi-square equal to 241.23 (p<0.001), absolute fix indexes were good (i.e. GFI=0.733, AGFI=0.529), and incremental fix indexes were also adequate (i.e. NFI=0.89 and CFI=0.92). Conclusion: The developed Greek version of PSS−14 seems to be a valid instrument for the assessment of perceived stress in the Greek adult population living in urban areas; a finding that supports its local use in research settings as an evaluation tool measuring perceived stress, mainly as a risk factor but without diagnostic properties.
Background: The impact of chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is widely held to be mainly influenced by disease activity and comorbidities. Objective: To assess the correlation between disease activity and HRQoL impairment by using validated disease-specific instruments. Methods: The Chronic Urticaria Quality of Life Questionnaire (CU-Q2oL) was translated into Greek and subsequently applied to 110 CSU patients along with the Dermatology Life Quality Index and the Urticaria Activity Score. After the validity and reliability of the Greek CU-Q2oL had been determined, we assessed the relation between disease activity and HRQoL impairment by computing correlations as well as by performing multiple regression analysis. Results: Exploratory factor analysis revealed a six-scale structure of the Greek CU-Q2oL that explained 67.9% of its total variance. The internal consistency was satisfactory with Cronbach's α >0.7. Disease activity was the only predictor of quality of life impairment, but it only moderately correlated with the CU-Q2oL total score (r = 0.40, p < 0.0001). Conclusion: Our results suggest that there are additional factors to disease activity that are responsible for the pronounced reduction of HRQoL in CSU, and this supports the recommendation to assess and monitor both disease activity and quality of life in CSU patients.
MDD patients showed neuropsychological deficits on tasks of executive function and memory, supporting the model of frontal-temporal dysfunction. MEL vs. non-MEL performed worse overall and demonstrated a qualitative difference in set shifting, perhaps implicating more extensive prefrontal involvement. Cortisol levels did not correlate with depression severity or the observed deficits.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.