No abstract

No abstract

Purpose Psychometric validity/reliability of 10-item and 2-item abbreviations of the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-10; CD-RISC-2) was investigated via item response theory and classic approaches. Methods We sampled 5023 adult American participants in a June/July 2020 survey on the COVID-19 pandemic’s psychological effects. Our questionnaire incorporated the CD-RISC-10 with other validated measures. CD-RISC-10 items were ranked on item-to-scale correlations, loadings on a one-factor confirmatory factor analysis model, and item slope/threshold parameters plus information curves from a unidimensional graded response model. Concurrent validity of the highest ranked item pair was evaluated vis-à-vis the CD-RISC-10 and CD-RISC−2. Internal consistency, based on average variance extracted (AVE) and multiple reliability coefficients, was also compared. Convergent/divergent validity was tested by correlating anxiety, depression, fear of COVID-19, anxiety sensitivity, coping, and personality measures with both scales and the highest ranked item pair. Binary agreement/classification indexes assessed inter-rater reliability. Results Items 2 and 9 from CD-RISC-10 ranked the highest. Reliability coefficients were > 0.93, > 0.72, and > 0.82 for the CD-RISC-10, CD-RISC-2, vs summation of items 2 and 9. AVEs were 0.66, 0.67, and 0.77. CD-RISC abbreviations and the summation of items 2 and 9 correlated negatively with anxiety (> − 0.43), depression (> − 0.42), and fear of COVID-19 (> − 0.34); positively with emotional stability (> 0.53) and conscientiousness (> 0.40). Compared to the CD-RISC-2, summative scores of items 2 and 9 more efficiently classified/discriminated high resilience on the CD-RISC-10. Conclusion We confirmed construct validity/reliability of copyrighted CD-RISC abbreviations. The CD-RISC-10’s items 2 and 9 were psychometrically more salient than the CD-RISC−2. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11136-022-03125-y.

The National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center estimates 294,000 people in the US live with a spinal cord injury (SCI), with approximately 17,810 new cases each year. Although the physical outcomes associated with SCI have been widely studied, the psychological consequences of sustaining a SCI remain largely unexplored. Scant research has focused on posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in this population, despite prevalence estimates suggesting that up to 60% of individuals with SCI experience PTSD post-injury, compared to only 7% of the general US population. Fortunately, prolonged exposure therapy (PE) is a well-researched and highly effective treatment for PTSD. However, no trauma focused exposure-based therapy for PTSD (e.g. PE) has not yet been tested in a SCI population. Thus, we aim to conduct the first test of an evidence-based intervention for PTSD among patients with SCI. Adults with SCI and PTSD ( N = 60) will be randomly assigned to either: (1) 12-sessions of PE (2–3 sessions per week) or (2) a treatment as usual (TAU) control group who will receive the standard inpatient rehabilitation care for SCI patients. Primary outcomes will be assessed at 0, 6, 10, and 32 weeks.

Objectives: Nonpharmacologic pain management strategies are needed because of the growing opioid epidemic. While studies have examined the efficacy of virtual reality (VR) for pain reduction, there is little research in adult inpatient settings, and no studies comparing the relative efficacy of standard animated computer-generated imagery (CGI) VR to Video Capture VR (360 degrees 3D/stereoscopic Video Capture VR). Here, we report on a randomized controlled trial of the relative efficacy of standard CGI VR versus Video Capture VR (matched for content) and also compared the overall efficacy of VR to a waitlist control group.Materials and Methods: Participants (N = 103 hospitalized inpatients reporting pain) were randomized to 1 of 3 conditions: (1) waitlist control, (2) CGI VR, or (3) Video Capture VR. The VR and waitlist conditions were 10 minutes in length. Outcomes were assessed pretreatment, post-treatment, and after a brief follow-up.Results: Consistent with hypotheses, both VR conditions reduced pain significantly more relative to the waitlist control condition (d = 1.60, P < 0.001) and pain reductions were largely maintained at the brief follow-up assessment. Both VR conditions reduced pain by ∼50% and led to improvements in mood, anxiety, and relaxation. Contrary to prediction, the Video Capture VR condition was not significantly more effective at reducing pain relative to the CGI VR condition (d = 0.25, P = 0.216). However, as expected, patients randomized to the Video Capture VR rated their experience as more positive and realistic (d = 0.78, P = 0.002).Discussion: Video Capture VR was as effective as CGI VR for pain reduction and was rated as more realistic.

No abstract

Purpose: Illness stigma has been observed across previous outbreaks including Ebola, SARS, HIV/AIDS, and now COVID-19. Although both the stigma of having COVID-19 as well as mental health impacts of COVID-19 have been studied, limited research exists regarding the relationship of stigma and mental health in this population. Thus, the primary purpose of the present study was to examine the relationship between stigma and mental health in adults with COVID-19. Method: Adult respondents with a diagnosis of COVID-19 (N = 632) completed an online questionnaire distributed between April 17, 2020, and April 18, 2021. The study measures included the Patient Health Questionnaire 8 (PHQ-8), the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item (GAD-7), and the 8-Item Stigma Scale for Chronic Illness (SSCI-8) tailored to measure perceived stigmatization from a COVID-19 diagnosis. Results: Participants (mean age = 51) were mostly female (71%), White (73%), married (70%), obese (56%), and had a chronic health condition (56%). Female sex, education status, working from home or not working owing to COVID-19, previous mental health diagnosis, history of chronic illness, and being a current/former smoker were associated with higher stigma scores, whereas older age and Black race were associated with lower stigma scores. Conclusions: Greater stigma and psychological distress was observed in females with a previously diagnosed psychiatric illness and/or chronic health condition. Our findings suggest a disproportionate burden of mental health/psychiatric symptoms/sequelae, including stigma and PTSD, among COVID-19 survivors with a history of mental illness. Further studies are needed to fully characterize COVID-19 related stigma and subsequent mental health experiences. Impact and ImplicationsResults from this study suggest that, when treating individuals with COVID-19, particular attention should be paid to those with underlying mental health history and female gender because those individuals appear to be more at risk for experiencing stigma. This stigma could potentially lead to avoiding testing, treatments, or other health care services, including those related to prevention and treatment of COVID-19. Results from this study also indicate future research should include the longitudinal assessment of the association between stigma and mental health to determine the interaction over time, especially as COVID-19 continues to evolve.

No abstract