Background: Isolation measures used to contain epidemics generate social interaction restrictions and impose changes in routines of the public that increase negative psychological outcomes. Anxiety and depression are the most common symptoms. Objective: To evaluate the mental health of the Brazilian population during the SARs-CoV-2 pandemic and its relationship with demographic and health characteristics. Methods: Adults from all Brazilian States participated (n = 12,196; women: 69.8%, mean age = 35.2 years). The Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale, and the Impact of Event Scale–revised were used (online survey). Data validity and reliability were verified by confirmatory factor analysis and ordinal alpha coefficient. The probability of presenting psychological symptoms was calculated by multiple logistic regression and odds ratio (OR) (0 = without symptoms, 1 = with mild, moderate, and severe levels of symptoms). Results: High prevalence of depression (61.3%), anxiety (44.2%), stress (50.8%), and psychological impact (54.9%) due to the isolation experienced from the pandemic was found. Younger individuals (OR = 1.58–3.58), those that felt unsafe (OR = 1.75–2.92), with a previous diagnosis of mental health (OR = 1.72–2.64) and/or had general health problems before the pandemic (OR = 1.17–1.51), who noticed changes in their mental state due to the pandemic context (OR = 2.53–9.07), and excessively exposed to the news (OR = 1.19–2.18) were at increased risk of developing symptoms. Women (OR = 1.35–1.65) and those with lower economic status (OR = 1.38–2.69) were more likely to develop psychological symptoms. Lower educational levels increased the likelihood of depressive (OR = 1.03–1.34) and intrusive symptoms (OR = 1.09–1.51). Conclusions: The pandemic and related factors can have a high impact on the mental health of the population. Demographic characteristics can influence the occurrence of psychological symptoms.

The Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14) has been used to assess the impact that oral health problems can have on an individual’s life. Different theoretical models were proposed to evaluate the results. The aims of this study were to evaluate the fit of different factorial models of the OHIP-14 to non-dental patients (NDP) and dental patients (DP) samples from Brazil and Finland and to estimate the differential functioning of the items in the OHIP-14 between the samples. Two studies were conducted, one in Brazil and the other in Finland, composed of five samples (Brazil—Sample 1 (S1): DP, n = 434, age: 25.3 [SD = 6.3] years; S2: NDP, n = 1486, age: 24.7 [SD = 5.6] years; S3: DP, n = 439, age: 29.0 [SD = 6.7] years; Finland—S4: DP, n = 482, age: 26.3 [SD = 5.4] years; S5: NDP, n = 2425, age: 26.7 [DP = 5.5] years). The fit of the OHIP-14 models to the data was estimated using a confirmatory strategy (validity based on the internal structure). Differential item functioning (DIF) between samples was estimated. For NDP from both countries, the response pattern severely violated the normality assumption in six items of the OHIP-14, indicating that the instrument does not fit for these samples. For DP, the model with the best fit was unifactorial, which deals with the estimation of the general impact of oral health on an individual’s life, without addressing specific dimensions. Configural invariance was refuted between samples. DIF indicated that the characteristic of the sample (NDP and DP) in both countries interfered in the response given to the items, with the response level being more adequate for the latent PD trait. The validity of data related to the impact of oral health problems on an individual’s life was confirmed through a unifactorial model. OHIP-14 works properly in DP samples and was limited in NDP samples, being also influenced by cultural context and age.

Background Studies of previous pandemics indicate that healthcare workers have a high risk of developing symptoms related to mental health, especially depression, anxiety, and stress. Objective To identify mental disorder symptoms among Brazilian healthcare workers during the Sars-Cov-2 pandemic and compare findings in different work categories. Methods This was an online cross-sectional study. Information related to the pandemic and mental disorder symptoms was collected. The Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale and the Impact of Event Scale-revised were used. Associations were estimated by the chi-square test. The mean scores were compared among work categories with ANOVA (α = 5%) and the prevalence of symptoms was estimated. Results 1,609 healthcare workers participated in the survey [mean age: 36.9 (SD = 11.6) years, women = 83.6%]. There was no association between work category and changes in mental health during the pandemic (p = 0.288) or prevalence of unsafe feeling (p = 0.218). A significant relationship was observed between maintaining work activities during the pandemic and work category (p < 0.001). Physicians had the lowest out-of-work prevalence (9.5%) while dentists had the highest (32.3%). Physicians and nurses showed the highest prevalence of in-person work routine. Psychologists presented the highest prevalence of remote work (64.0%) while dentists had the lowest (20.2%). A high prevalence of depression (D), anxiety (A), and stress (S) symptoms was observed in all professional categories (