Background Many studies have previously compared the prevalence or sample means of distress and mental health problems from before to during the COVID-19 pandemic, while results on changes at the individual-level, and regarding multiple outcome measures are demanded. Methods This online study investigated individual changes in stress and mental health from before the COVID-19 pandemic to the first lockdown in adults from Southeastern Germany. This region was selected as it was where SARS-CoV-2 was first documented in Germany, and also due to the implementation of strict stay-at-home orders and social contact prohibitions. From April 10–27, 2020, we collected state measures and their clinical relevance for the subareas of perceived stress: worries, tension, joy, and demands. We also collected information regarding the following mental health problems: depression, anxiety, pathological worry, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and health anxiety; as well as retrospective measures of how participants felt they have changed in comparison to before the pandemic, ranging from worse to better. Results The analytical sample comprised 396 adult participants. On average, participants experienced increases in worries, tension, and lack of joy, and increases in mental health problems, but a decrease in demands. Perceived increases in symptoms of depression (26.0%) and PTSD (25.5%) were significantly more frequent than in symptoms of anxiety (particularly acute fear and panic) (5.6%), pathological worry (9.8%), and health anxiety (7.3%) (ps<.001). One per 10 participants (10.4%) reported an increase in depressive symptoms, and nearly two per 10 (18.4%) an increase in PTSD symptoms and additionally showed a clinically relevant symptom strain during lockdown. Interestingly, mainly non-specific PTSD symptoms associated with a general stress reaction were experienced to be increased. Conclusion The findings suggest a dissociation of perceived changes in subareas of stress and mental health with a particular experience of increases in depressive and general stress symptoms and a decrease in external demands. This points to a need for a more differentiated view on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on stress and mental health, and for targeted interventions for mental health problems arising frequently during the pandemic.
Background Habits and behaviors in everyday life currently need to be modified as quickly as possible due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Two of the most effective tools to prevent infection seem to be regular and thorough hand-washing and physical distancing during interpersonal interactions. Method Two hundred and eighty-four participants completed a short survey to investigate how previous habits regarding hand-washing and physical distancing have changed in the general population as a function of the current pandemic and the thereby increased information and constant recommendations regarding these behaviors. Results Participants aged 51 and older reported a greater change in everyday hand-washing behavior than younger participants. In addition, participants aged 31 and older selected significantly greater distances to have a conversation than younger participants. However, that was not the case if participants had to actively stop their conversational partner from approaching. Conclusion Participants aged 51 years and older seem to be well aware of their at-risk status during the current pandemic and might therefore be willing to change their behavior more strongly than younger survey participants. Nevertheless, they seem to struggle with enforcing the current rules towards others. The group aged between 31 and 50 years, however, reports a comparable level of fear, but no corresponding change in hand-washing behavior. Future surveys should try to provide more insight into why this might be the case.
INTRODUCTION Recently, tumor treating fields (TTFields) were established for the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma (nGBM). A crucial parameter for TTFields efficacy is compliance to treatment. In this prospective study, we assessed 5 psychological domains known to influence treatment compliance using a standardized interview in nGBM patients. The results of this psychological assessment were correlated to TTF compliance. METHODS A cohort of 49 nGBM patients (female 22; male 27, median age 62 years) were recruited. Most patients received a gross total resection (51%), the postsurgical treatment consisted of concomitant radiochemotherapy plus TTF in most cases (81%), only 2 patients received chemotherapy only, and 7 patients were additionally enrolled in clinical drug trials. The psychological assessment system consisted of 5 domains: Social support, confidence in treatment efficacy, communication status about treatment, anxiety, and depression. The interview was repeated every 8 weeks over a period of 8 months or if patients stopped treatment or developed second tumor progression. Additional phone interviews were conducted every 4 weeks. RESULTS Median and mean compliance was 98% and 81.6%, respectively (range 5%-100%), drops of compliance below 75%, which were classified as a threshold value, occurred 2259 times. Over-dispersed Poisson and multivariate negative binomial regression analysis revealed depression to be significantly correlated with the number of drops below 75% and with the mean compliance in the first 4 months of treatment. In addition, at later time points, confidence in treatment efficacy significantly correlated with the number of drops below 75%. All other domains did not appear to be associated with TTF treatment compliance. CONCLUSION Overall, compliance to TTF was high, however, drops below 75% of compliance occurred frequently during the measurement periods. In the initial treatment phase, depression was associated with these events, whereas confidence in treatment efficacy was correlated at later time points.
To our knowledge, this study represents the first report of lower EGFR amplification rates in patients from Asia with glioblastoma. This observation requires further study.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.