Key Points
Question
What is the burden of depression symptoms among US adults during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic compared with before COVID-19, and what are the risk factors associated with depression symptoms?
Findings
In this survey study that included 1441 respondents from during the COVID-19 pandemic and 5065 respondents from before the pandemic, depression symptom prevalence was more than 3-fold higher during the COVID-19 pandemic than before. Lower income, having less than $5000 in savings, and having exposure to more stressors were associated with greater risk of depression symptoms during COVID-19.
Meaning
These findings suggest that there is a high burden of depression symptoms in the US associated with the COVID-19 pandemic and that this burden falls disproportionately on individuals who are already at increased risk.
Health systems resilience is key to learning lessons from country responses to crises such as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In this perspective, we review COVID-19 responses in 28 countries using a new health systems resilience framework. Through a combination of literature review, national government submissions and interviews with experts, we conducted a comparative analysis of national responses. We report on domains addressing governance and financing, health workforce, medical products and technologies, public health functions, health service delivery and community engagement to prevent and mitigate the spread of COVID-19. We then synthesize four salient elements that underlie highly effective national responses and offer recommendations toward strengthening health systems resilience globally.
Background
The COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences have been associated with an increase in poor population mental health. We assessed how depressive symptoms changed among U.S. adults over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic and identified the key risk factors for these symptoms.
Methods
Longitudinal panel study of a nationally representative group of U.S. adults ages 18 years and older surveyed in March-April 2020 (Time 1; N=1441) and March-April 2021 (Time 2; N=1161) in the COVID-19 and Life Stressors Impact on Mental Health and Well-being study (CLIMB). The Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) was used to define elevated depressive symptoms (cut-off ≥10) and depressive symptoms score (0-27).
Findings
The prevalence of elevated depressive symptoms persisted from 27.8% in 2020 (95% CI: 24.9, 30.9) to 32.8% in 2021 (95% CI: 29.1, 36.8). Over time, the central drivers of depressive symptoms were low household income, not being married, and experiencing multiple stressors during the COVID-19 pandemic. The odds ratio of elevated depressive symptoms for low income relative to high income persons increased from 2.3 (95% CI: 1.2, 4.2) in 2020 to 7.0 (95% CI: 3.7, 13.3) in 2021. Fewer people reported experiencing 4 or more COVID-19 stressors in 2021 than in 2020 (47.5% in 2020 vs 37.1% in 2021), but the odds ratio of elevated depressive symptoms associated with 4 or more stressors relative to 1 stressor or less increased from 1.9 (95% CI: 1.2, 3.1) in 2020 to 5.4 (95% CI: 3.2, 9.2) in 2021.
Interpretation
The burden of depressive symptoms in the U.S. adult population increased over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. Mental health gaps grew between populations with different assets and stressor experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Funding
CLIMB Time 1 was sponsored by the Rockefeller Foundation-Boston University 3-D Commission. CLIMB Time 2 was sponsored by the de Beaumont Foundation.
BackgroundCOVID-19 and related containment policies have caused or heightened financial stressors for many in the USA. We assessed the relation between assets, financial stressors and probable depression during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsBetween 31 March 2020 and 13 April 2020, we surveyed a probability-based, nationally representative sample of US adults ages 18 and older using the COVID-19 and Life stressors Impact on Mental Health and Well-being survey (n=1441). We calculated the prevalence of probable depression using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (cut-off ≥10) and exposure to financial stressors by financial, physical and social assets categories (household income, household savings, home ownership, educational attainment and marital status). We estimated adjusted ORs and predicted probabilities of probable depression across assets categories and COVID-19 financial stressor exposure groups.ResultsWe found that (1) 40% of US adults experienced COVID-19-related financial stressors during this time period; (2) low assets (OR: 3.0, 95% CI 2.1 to 4.2) and COVID-19 financial stressor exposure (OR: 2.8, 95% CI 2.1 to 3.9) were each associated with higher odds of probable depression; and (3) among persons with low assets and high COVID-19 financial stressors, 42.7% had probable depression; and among persons with high assets and low COVID-19 financial stressors, 11.1% had probable depression. Persons with high assets and high COVID-19 financial stressors had a similar prevalence of probable depression (33.5%) as persons with low assets and low COVID-19 financial stressors (33.5%). The more assets a person had, the lower the level of probable depression.ConclusionPopulations with low assets are bearing a greater burden of mental illness during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The leading three symptoms were nasal blockage/congestion, altered taste/smell and the need to blow the nose in terms of severity and prevalence. The total Sino-Nasal Outcome Test 22 and all individual symptom scores improved significantly after surgery.
Child labor remains a major public health concern in LMICs, being associated with adverse physical and mental health outcomes. Current efforts against child labor need to be revisited, at least in LMICs. Further studies following a longitudinal design, and using common methods to assess the health impact of child labor in different country contexts would inform policy making.
IMPORTANCE Income disparity between persons with the most resources (the top 20% of earners) and the remainder of the population in the United States has dramatically widened over the past few decades. Given the well-established association between income and health, this increasing income gap may provide insights into the dynamics of cardiovascular disease (CVD) burden among adults in the US. OBJECTIVE To quantify the contribution of people in the highest-resources group and the remainder of the population to the burden of CVD, and to estimate the trends in the prevalence of CVD for the 2 groups in the United States from 1999 to 2016. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This serial cross-sectional analysis used nationally representative data from 9 cycles of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) between 1999 and 2016. Survey participants were adults 20 years or older. Statistical analysis of the data was conducted in December 2019. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Age-standardized prevalence of CVD was calculated using the 2010 census estimates. Participants were stratified by income group using the NHANES income to poverty ratio, which was converted into a binary variable: a ratio of 5 or greater for the highestresources group and a ratio of less than 5 for the remainder of the population. RESULTS This analysis included 44 986 participants. Among the 7926 participants in the highestresources group, 3290 (50.3%) were in the 40-to 59-year age group and 4094 (51.9%) were men. Among the 37 060 participants in the remainder of the population, 10 840 (34.1%) were in the 40to 59-year age group and 19 470 (53.2%) were women. The age-standardized prevalence of CVD decreased in the highest-resources group during the study period (1999-2016): angina from 3.4% (n = 24) to 0.3% (n = 5), heart attack from 3.2% (n = 24) to 1.4% (n = 19), congestive heart failure (CHF) from 1.2% (n = 11) to 0.5% (n = 7), and stroke from 1.1% to 1.0% (n = 8). In the remainder of the population, the prevalence of angina decreased from 3.3% (n = 131) in 1999 to 2.6% (n = 118) in 2016 and heart attack from 4.0% (n = 160) in 1999 to 3.6% (n = 201) in 2016. Conversely, an increase was
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.