A cross-sectional investigation of the mental health and wellbeing among individuals who have been negatively impacted by the COVID-19 international border closure in Australia

Ali, Kathina; Iasiello, Matthew; Agteren, Joep van; Mavrangelos, Teri; Kyrios, Michael; Fassnacht, Daniel B.

doi:10.1186/s12992-022-00807-7

Cited by 16 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 33 publications

(33 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, when compared to DASS in the published COVID-19 studies and especially in studies focused on migrant workers (23)(24)(25), healthcare workers (20) or the general population (19,21,26), the scores of the present study are dramatically higher, over 50% more severe in some cases. Along with research indicating that those negatively impacted by Australian international border closures were at an increased risk of elevated psychological distress (27), these scores combined provide additional evidence that travel restrictions have negative psychological consequences towards those directly impacted by them.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Psychological and financial impacts of COVID-19-related travel measures: An international cross-sectional study

McDermid

Sooppiyaragath²,

Craig

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The impact of COVID-19 international travel restrictions has to date, not been fully explored, and with the ongoing threat that new variants could potentially restrict movement further, it is important to consider the impacts that travel restrictions have on community members. This study aimed to evaluate the psychological and financial impact of COVID-19 travel restrictions on those separated from their partners or immediate families, as well as temporary visa holders who were unable to migrate. Methods: Between 4 November 2021 to 1 December 2021, we executed a cross-sectional online survey targeting three specific groups; (1) those stranded from their partners; (2) those stranded from immediate families; and (3) temporary visa holders unable to migrate or cross international borders. We collected data on respondents demographic profile; the nature of COVID-19-related travel impacts; depression, anxiety, and stress levels (using the validated DASS-21); and finally, data on respondents financial, employment and accommodation situation. Results: 1363 respondents located globally completed the survey. 71.2% reported financial stress, 76.8% reported moderate-to-extremely severe depression, 51.6% moderate-to-extremely severe anxiety, and 62.6% moderate-to-extremely severe stress levels. Statistically significant factors associated with moderate-to-extremely severe depression, anxiety, and stress included being female, chronic illness, and experiencing financial stress. Employment during COVID-19, specifically essential services workers or unemployed, was associated with higher levels of anxiety and stress, with only essential workers being a predictor of higher stress severity. Factors that provided psychological protection included being older and having children. Conclusion: This study is one of the first to explore the impact COVID-19-related international travel restrictions have had on the financial status and psychological health of affected individuals. It highlights the significant human cost associated with the restrictions and identifies psychologically vulnerable populations. These results will help the design of targeted health and social policy responses.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Psychological and financial impacts of COVID-19-related travel measures: An international cross-sectional study

McDermid

Sooppiyaragath²,

Craig

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, in March 2020, the South Australian government declared a public health emergency, which included measures such as closures of state borders and physical distancing requirements (eg, a 3-day lockdown in November 2020). Unsurprisingly, previous studies have found detrimental effects of COVID-19 on mental health in large, representative Australian cohorts [ 99 , 100 ], individuals who have been impacted by the adverse border closure effects of COVID-19 [ 101 ], and university students [ 102 , 103 ]. Thus, it is noteworthy that although the Be Well Plan did not directly target symptoms of depression or anxiety, almost half of the sample (46.7% for depression, 44.0% for anxiety) showed a reliable change in the respective outcomes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Group-Facilitated, Internet-Based Intervention to Promote Mental Health and Well-Being in a Vulnerable Population of University Students: Randomized Controlled Trial of the Be Well Plan Program

Fassnacht¹,

Ali²,

Agteren³

et al. 2022

JMIR Ment Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background A growing literature supports the use of internet-based interventions to improve mental health outcomes. However, most programs target specific symptoms or participant groups and are not tailored to facilitate improvements in mental health and well-being or do not allow for needs and preferences of individual participants. The Be Well Plan, a 5-week group-facilitated, internet-based mental health and well-being group intervention addresses these gaps, allowing participants to select a range of activities that they can tailor to their specific characteristics, needs, and preferences. Objective This study aims to test whether the Be Well Plan program was effective in improving primary outcomes of mental well-being, resilience, anxiety, and depression compared to a waitlist control group during the COVID-19 pandemic; secondary outcomes included self-efficacy, a sense of control, and cognitive flexibility. The study further seeks to examine participants’ engagement and satisfaction with the program. Methods A randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted with 2 parallel arms, an intervention and a waitlist control group. The intervention involved 5 weekly 2-hour sessions, which were facilitated in group format using Zoom videoconferencing software. University students were recruited via social media posts, lectures, emails, flyers, and posters. Results Using an intentional randomization 2:1 allocation strategy, we recruited 215 participants to the trial (n=126, 58.6%, intervention group; n=89, 41.4%, waitlist control group). Of the 126 participants assigned to the intervention group, 75 (59.5%) commenced the program and were included in modified intention-to-treat (mITT) analyses. mITT intervention participants attended, on average, 3.41 sessions (SD 1.56, median 4); 55 (73.3%) attended at least 4 sessions, and 25 (33.3%) attended all 5 sessions. Of the 49 intervention group participants who completed the postintervention assessment, 47 (95.9%) were either very satisfied (n=31, 66%) or satisfied (n=16, 34%). The mITT analysis for well-being (F1,162=9.65, P=.002, Cohen d=0.48) and resilience (F1,162=7.85, P=.006, Cohen d=0.44) showed significant time × group interaction effects, suggesting that both groups improved over time, but the Be Well Plan (intervention) group showed significantly greater improvement compared to the waitlist control group. A similar pattern of results was observed for depression and anxiety (Cohen d=0.32 and 0.37, respectively), as well as the secondary outcomes (self-efficacy, Cohen d=0.50; sense of control, Cohen d=0.42; cognitive flexibility, Cohen d=0.65). Larger effect sizes were observed in the completer analyses. Reliable change analysis showed that the majority of mITT participants (58/75, 77.3%) demonstrated a significant reliable improvement in at least 1 of the primary outcomes. Conclusions The Be Well Plan program was effective in improving mental health and well-being, including mental well-being, resilience, depression, and anxiety. Participant satisfaction scores and attendance indicated a high degree of engagement and satisfaction with the program. Trial Registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12621000180819; https://tinyurl.com/2p8da5sk

show abstract

“…closures were at an increased risk of elevated psychological distress [27], these scores combined provide additional evidence that travel restrictions have negative psychological consequences towards those directly impacted by them. As direct social contact has been shown to be a protective factor for psychological distress [25], it may explain why our respondents had much higher scores compared to the other populations, as they were unable to be with friends or family, either directly because of travel restrictions or indirectly due to quarantine or lockdown.…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 90%

Psychological and financial impacts of COVID-19-related travel measures: An international cross-sectional study

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The impact of COVID-19 international travel restrictions has to date, not been fully explored, and with the ongoing threat that new variants could potentially restrict movement further, it is important to consider the impacts that travel restrictions have on community members. This study aimed to evaluate the psychological and financial impact of COVID-19 travel restrictions on those separated from their partners or immediate families, as well as temporary visa holders who were unable to migrate. Methods Between 4 November 2021 to 1 December 2021, we executed a cross-sectional online survey targeting three specific groups; (1) those stranded from their partners; (2) those stranded from immediate families; and (3) temporary visa holders unable to migrate or cross international borders. We collected data on respondents’ demographic profile; the nature of COVID-19-related travel impacts; depression, anxiety, and stress levels (using the validated DASS-21); and finally, data on respondents financial, employment and accommodation situation. Results 1363 respondents located globally completed the survey. 71.2% reported financial stress, 76.8% (x¯=11.57, SD = 5.94) reported moderate-to-extremely severe depression, 51.6% (x¯=6.80, SD = 5.49) moderate-to-extremely severe anxiety, and 62.6% (x¯=11.52, SD = 5.55) moderate-to-extremely severe stress levels. Statistically significant factors associated with moderate-to-extremely severe depression, anxiety, and stress included being female, chronic illness, and experiencing financial stress. Employment during COVID-19 –specifically essential services workers or unemployed—was associated with higher levels of anxiety and stress, with only essential workers being a predictor of higher stress severity. Factors that provided psychological protection included being older and having children. Conclusion This study is one of the first to explore the impact COVID-19-related international travel restrictions have had on the financial status and psychological health of affected individuals. It highlights the significant human cost associated with the restrictions and identifies psychologically vulnerable populations. These results will help the design of targeted health and social policy responses.

show abstract

A cross-sectional investigation of the mental health and wellbeing among individuals who have been negatively impacted by the COVID-19 international border closure in Australia

Cited by 16 publications

References 33 publications

Psychological and financial impacts of COVID-19-related travel measures: An international cross-sectional study

Psychological and financial impacts of COVID-19-related travel measures: An international cross-sectional study

A Group-Facilitated, Internet-Based Intervention to Promote Mental Health and Well-Being in a Vulnerable Population of University Students: Randomized Controlled Trial of the Be Well Plan Program

Psychological and financial impacts of COVID-19-related travel measures: An international cross-sectional study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About