Objective: Since the declaration of the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak as pandemic, there are reports on the increased prevalence of physical symptoms observed in the general population. We investigated the association between psychological outcomes and physical symptoms among healthcare workers. Methods: Healthcare workers from 5 major hospitals, involved in the care for COVID-19 patients, in Singapore and India were invited to participate in a study by performing a self-administered questionnaire within the period of February 19 to April 17, 2020. Healthcare workers included doctors, nurses, allied healthcare workers, administrators, clerical staff and maintenance workers. This questionnaire collected information on demographics, medical history, symptom prevalence in the past month, Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21) and the Impact of Events Scale-Revised (IES-R) instrument. The prevalence of physical symptoms displayed by healthcare workers and the associations between physical symptoms and psychological outcomes of depression, anxiety, stress, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) were evaluated. Results: Out of the 906 healthcare workers who participated in the survey, 48 (5.3%) screened positive for moderate to very-severe depression, 79 (8.7%) for moderate to extremely-severe anxiety, 20 (2.2%) for moderate to extremely-severe stress, and 34 (3.8%) for moderate to severe levels of psychological distress. The commonest reported symptom was headache (32.3%), with a large number of participants (33.4%) reporting more than four symptoms. Participants who had experienced symptoms in the preceding month were more likely to be older, have pre-existing comorbidities and a positive screen for depression, anxiety, stress, and PTSD. After adjusting for age, gender and comorbidities, it was found that depression (OR 2.79, 95% CI 1.54-5.07, p = 0.001), anxiety (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.36-3.48, p = 0.001), stress (OR 3.06, 95% CI 1.27-7.41, p = 0.13), and PTSD (OR 2.20, 95% CI 1.12-4.35, p = 0.023) remained significantly associated with the presence of physical

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Background: The physical and mental health of citizens living in a country that encouraged face masks (China) and discouraged face masks (Poland) during the initial stage of the COVID-19 pandemic remained unknown. We conducted a crosscountry study to compare the psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Poles and Chinese. This study aimed to compare the levels of psychological impact of pandemic and levels of anxiety and depression between China and Poland. Methods: The survey collected information on demographic data, physical symptoms, contact history, and precautionary measures. The psychological impact was assessed using the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), and mental health status was assessed by the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21). The chi-squared test was used to analyze the differences in categorical variables between the two populations. Linear regression was used to calculate the bivariate associations between independents variables (e.g., physical symptoms and precautionary measures) and dependent variables (e.g., mental health outcomes). Results: This study included a total of 2,266 respondents from both countries (1,056 Poles and 1,210 Chinese). There were significantly less Polish respondents who wore face masks (Poles: 35.0%; Chinese: 96.8% p < 0.001). Significantly more Polish respondents reported physical symptoms resembling COVID-19 infection (p < 0.001), recent medical consultation (p < 0.01), recent COVID-19 testing (p < 0.001), and hospitalization (p < 0.01). Furthermore, Polish respondents had significantly higher levels of anxiety, depression and stress (p < 0.001) than Chinese. The mean IES-R scores of Poland

Following recovery from COVID-19, an increasing proportion of individuals have reported the persistence and/or new onset of symptoms which collectively have been identified as post-COVID-19 syndrome by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Although depressive symptoms in the acute phase of COVID-19 have been well characterized, the frequency of depression following recovery of the acute phase remains unknown. Herein, we sought to determine the frequency of depressive symptoms and clinically-significant depression more than 12 weeks following SARS-CoV-2 infection. A systematic search of PubMed, Ovid Medline and Google Scholar for studies published between 1 January 2020 and 5 June 2021 was conducted. Frequency and factors associated with depression in post-COVID-19 syndrome were recorded and qualitatively assessed through narrative synthesis. Methodological quality and risk of bias was assessed using a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for prospective cohort studies. Of 316 articles identified through our systematic search, eight studies were included. The frequency of depressive symptoms +12 weeks following SARS-CoV-2 infection ranged from 11-28%. The frequency of clinically-significant depression and/or severe depressive symptoms ranged from 3-12%. The severity of acute COVID-19 was not associated with the frequency of depressive symptoms. However, the component studies were highly heterogeneous with respect to mode of ascertainment, time of assessment, and location and age of patients. The majority of studies did not include an unexposed control group. Future research should endeavour to produce a standardized classification of post-COVID-19 syndrome, and as well as include unexposed control groups.

Findings from previous studies reporting the levels of serum brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) in patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) have been conflicting. Hence, we performed a meta-analysis to examine the aggregate levels of serum BDNF in patients with AD and individuals with MCI, in comparison with healthy controls. Fifteen studies were included for the comparison between AD and healthy control (HC) (n = 2067). Serum BDNF levels were significantly lower in patients with AD (SMD: −0.282; 95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.535 to −0.028; significant heterogeneity: I2 = 83.962). Meta-regression identified age (p < 0.001) and MMSE scores (p < 0.001) to be the significant moderators that could explain the heterogeneity in findings in these studies. Additionally, there were no significant differences in serum BDNF levels between patients with AD and MCI (eight studies, n = 906) and between MCI and HC (nine studies, n = 5090). In all, patients with AD, but not MCI, have significantly lower serum BDNF levels compared to healthy controls. This meta-analysis confirmed the direction of change in serum BDNF levels in dementia. This finding suggests that a significant change in peripheral BDNF levels can only be detected at the late stage of the dementia spectrum. Molecular mechanisms, implications on interventional trials, and future directions for studies examining BDNF in dementia were discussed.

This study aimed to evaluate the psychological effects of the partial lockdown on the people in Vietnam during the COVID-19 pandemic. An online questionnaire regarding attitudes toward COVID-19 along with psychological parameters, including the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) Depression, Anxiety, Stress Scale-21 (DASS-21) was conducted. From a total of 1,382 questionnaires, the respondents reported low prevalence of depression (4.9%), anxiety (7.0%), and stress (3.4%). The mean DASS-21 scores recorded were also markedly lower compared to similar studies conducted in China, Italy, and Iran. Respondents who reported severe PTSD had significantly higher depression, anxiety, and stress levels. Factors that were associated with an increased level of depression, stress, and anxiety were being single, separated, or widowed, a higher education level, a larger family size, loss of jobs and being in contact with potential COVID-19 patients. Contrary to expectations, the level of depression, stress, and anxiety observed has been low. Our findings can aid in future research on the impact of a partial lockdown and guide mental health professionals in Vietnam and other countries in the preparation of better care for populations under such circumstances.