Disagio psichico e sociale in genitori e bambini 0-6 anni durante la pandemia da COVID-19: conseguenze emotive e comportamentali tra lockdown e post-lockdown

Abstract

Numerose ricerche sugli effetti della pandemia da COVID-19 su famiglie e bambini si sono focalizzate sul periodo del lockdown, evidenziando importanti conseguenze disadattive, mentre minori sono i dati sulle fasi successive, analizzate invece nel nostro studio attraverso un questionario online compilato da 945 genitori di bambini in età prescolare. L'analisi dei dati evidenzia un aumento delle problematiche emotive e comportamentali dei bambini durante il lockdown, e un decremento nei mesi successivi, ma con consistenti strascichi dei sintomi, che permangono più alti rispetto alla fase non emergenziale, con differenze associate a genere ed età dei bambini, clima familiare e vissuti emotivi genitoriali. È, dunque, fondamentale intervenire per ridurre i fattori di rischio attraverso la presa in carico delle vulnerabilità del sistema familiare e promuovere strategie di resilienza.

Emotions in Times of Pandemic Crisis among Italian Children: A Systematic Review

“…The quality appraisal of the 13 studies is reported in Table S1 (Supplementary Material) . The overall mean value of the ten cross-sectional studies [ 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 68 , 69 ] was good with 7.1 stars. Three studies [ 58 , 59 , 64 ] were at the satisfactory level since they obtained values equal to 6, and seven studies [ 60 , 61 , 63 , 65 , 66 , 68 , 69 ] were in the good level since they obtained values ranging from 7 to 8 as total scores).…”

“…The overall mean value of the ten cross-sectional studies [ 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 68 , 69 ] was good with 7.1 stars. Three studies [ 58 , 59 , 64 ] were at the satisfactory level since they obtained values equal to 6, and seven studies [ 60 , 61 , 63 , 65 , 66 , 68 , 69 ] were in the good level since they obtained values ranging from 7 to 8 as total scores). The overall mean value of the quality check for the three longitudinal studies [ 62 , 67 ] was satisfactory with 5 stars.…”

“…After reviewing the full texts, nine articles were excluded since the samples included a population over 12 years, from adolescents to young adults [ 2 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 ]; eight studies focused on wrong outcomes [ 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 ]; two studies enrolled children living outside Italy [ 53 , 54 ]; one study was not focused on the variables within the context of the lockdown effects [ 55 ]; and two studies were excluded for other reasons, i.e., the first recruited participants had a pre-existing neuropsychiatric diagnosis [ 56 ] and the second one reported only qualitative data [ 57 ]. As a result, a total of 12 articles, including 13 studies, were eligible for inclusion in the qualitative assessment [ 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 ]. Figure 1 depicts the PRISMA flowchart of the literature search process.…”

“…The sample sizes ranged from N = 72 to N = 9688. In terms of gender proportions, six studies [ 60 , 61 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 69 ] had more male participants than females (i.e., >52% males), and seven studies [ 58 , 59 , 62 , 63 , 67 , 68 ] had more females than males (i.e., >52% females). Across studies, the distribution of the sample according to gender was 52% males and 48% females.…”

“…Ten studies included in the review were cross-sectional in design [ 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 68 , 69 ] and three studies were longitudinal [ 62 , 67 ]. Nine studies recruited parents through online surveys distributed in schools and used social media platforms and a snowball sampling strategy.…”