A living systematic review of the psychological problems in people suffering from COVID-19

Abstract

Objectives : We aimed to investigate the psychological problems on people infected with SARS-CoV-2 during the pandemic. Methods : In this living systematic review and meta-analyses, we searched seven electronic databases for cross-sectional studies and longitudinal studies on psychological problems on COVID-19 patients from Jan 1, 2020 to Oct 7, 2020. The primary outcome was prevalence of various psychological problems such as anxiety, depression, stress, insomnia, somatization, and fear. We pooled data for prevalence with their 95% confidence interval (CI) using random effect models and assessed the study quality based on the 11-item checklist recommended by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Results : Fourty-four studies, including studies from China(35), Italy(2), Iran(2), India(1), Korea(1), Ecuador(1), Switzerland(1), Germany(1), were identified by comprising a total of 8587 completed questionnaires and 38 studies for meta-analyses. The prevalence of anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder(PTSD), insomnia, somatization, and fear in patients with COVID-19 was 16.6% (10.1%-23.1%), 37.7% (29.3%-46.2%), 41.5% (9.3%-73.7%), 68.3% (48.6%-88.0%), 36.5% (20.2%-52.8%), 47.6% (9.4%-85.7%), respectively. The prevalence of anxiety, depression, and insomnia in severe COVID-19 patients (intensive care unit inpatients) was higher than mild or clinically stable COVID-19 patients. Limitations : A significant degree of heterogeneity in terms of populations, sampling methods, scales was noted across studies. Conclusions : There existed high proportions of COVID-19 patients with psychological problem. The prevalence of psychological problems was closely related to the patients themselves, their surroundings and social support. It is imperative to provide ontime psychological care service for COVID-19 patients and to follow-up them for a longer period.

Acute COVID-19 severity and mental health morbidity trajectories in patient populations of six nations: an observational study

“…Our findings are in line with the limited existing literature on both inpatients and outpatients, indicating a link between COVID-19 diagnosis and mental health status. 1 , 2 , 3 , 32 However, the longest follow-up in these studies was 6 months, except for one recent study with 1-year follow-up involving only patients admitted to hospital. In that study, 331 (26%) of 1271 patients with COVID-19 had anxiety or depression at 12-month follow-up, 32 which is similar to the results of our study.…”

“…Adverse mental health symptoms 1 , 2 , 3 and comorbid psychiatric disorders 3 , 4 among patients with COVID-19 have been documented up to 6 months after hospital discharge. 3 , 5 , 6 Yet, in addition to the reported methodological shortcomings of the existing literature on this topic (ie, inpatient samples and absence of comparison groups), 5 , 7 little is still known about the long-term mental health of non-hospitalised patients with COVID-19 with varying illness severities.…”

Traditional Chinese medicine for COVID-19 pandemic and emerging challenges: An online cross-sectional survey in China

“…Mental health problems had been addressed from the results, as 17 respondents reported their mental health problems which was ranked as the most unhealthy condition among 341 respondents, details results in supplementary table 3. A recent living systematic review of the psychological disorders in people suffering from COVID-19 showed that a high proportion of COVID-19 patients manifested psychological problems such as anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), insomnia, somatization, and fear [60] . In addition to the patients with COVID-19, another study has shown that the epidemic has also caused adverse mental health consequences on the general population [61] .…”

Validation of the Japanese Version of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale—Revised: A Preliminary Analysis

“…As mentioned in the introduction, more than forty years have passed since the publication of the original CES-D scale [ 12 ], and the CESD-R was undertaken to update the scale to reflect the DSM-IV text revision (TR) or DSM-5 classification [ 17 ]. This resulted in the creation of the CESD-R scale, consisting of 20 statements regarding well-being and behavior over the previous two weeks.…”

“…The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) scale has been one of the most widespread scales for assessing depression since it was published in 1977; it was originally devised for screening and research in general population epidemiological studies and primary care [ 12 ]. However, more than forty years have passed since its publication, which necessitated the creation of the CES-D—Revised (CESD-R) scale.…”