Prevalence of Mental Health Problems During Virus Epidemics in the General Public, Health Care Workers and Survivors: A Rapid Review of the Evidence

Abstract

Background: The swift spread of SARS-CoV-2 provides a challenge worldwide. As a consequence of restrictive public health measures like isolation, quarantine, and community containment, the provision of mental health services is a major challenge. Evidence from past virus epidemics and the current SARS-CoV-2 outbreak indicate high prevalence rates of mental health problems (MHP) as short- and long-term consequences. However, a broader picture of MHP among different populations is still lacking. Methods: We conducted a rapid review on MHP prevalence rates published since 2000, during and after epidemics, including the general public, health care workers, and survivors. Any quantitative articles reporting on MHP rates were included. Out of 2855 articles screened, a total of 74 were included in this review. Results: Most original studies on MHP were conducted in China in the context of SARS-CoV-1, and reported on anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress symptoms/disorder, general psychiatric morbidity, and psychological symptoms. The MHP rates across studies, populations, and epidemics vary substantially. While some studies show high and persistent rates of MHP in populations directly affected by isolation, quarantine, threat of infection, infection, or life-threatening symptoms (e.g. health care workers), other studies report minor effects. Furthermore, even less affected populations (e.g. distant to epidemic epicenter, no contact history with suspected or confirmed cases) can show high rates of MHP. Discussion: MHP vary largely across countries and risk-groups in reviewed studies. The results call attention to potentially high MHP during epidemics. Individuals affected directly by an epidemic might be at a higher risk of short or even long-term mental health impairments. This study delivers insights stemming from a wide range of psychiatric instruments and questionnaires. The results call for the use of validated and standardized instruments, reference norms, and pre-post measurements to better understand the magnitude of the MHP during and after the epidemics. Nevertheless, emerging MHP should be considered during epidemics including the provision of access to mental health care to mitigate potential mental impairments.

Mental health problems in the general population during and after the first lockdown phase due to the SARS-Cov-2 pandemic: Rapid review of multi-wave studies

“…This is particularly the case during this pandemic as various confounding factors need to be considered when trying to get a clearer perspective on the complexity of mental health problems in such a crisis. No valid instrument (7) Data not extractable (6) Not general population (5) Only one time point during/after lockdown (5) Valid instrument in one wave only (1) No data from lockdown (1) Review paper (1) Duplicate data (1) Studies included in qualitative synthesis (n = 23)…”

“…Previous epidemics had tremendous negative consequences on the mental health of various population groups such as health care workers and survivors of the infectious disease. However, past epidemics have also negatively impacted the mental health of general populations at large 1 . Therefore, during the first wave of the Coronavirus pandemic and the first phase of lockdowns, there were widespread fears concerning mental health problems beyond population groups that were directly affected by the illness 2 .…”

Mental Health and Its Predictors during the Early Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic Experience in the United States

“…As the pandemic and public health measures escalated, experts in various fields quickly began to note the probability of negative impact on mental health in the general public and the need for additional or improved mental health services [ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ]). Indeed, the probability that COVID-19 will have at least short-term negative effects on mental health among the U.S. general public is suggested by research from prior pandemics, especially SARS-CoV-1 [ 6 ] and by recently-published studies (for a review, see [ 7 ]), especially those conducted with Chinese citizens who first experienced the pandemic’s outbreak and their government’s extensive measures to prevent the disease from spreading [ 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 ]. These studies document detrimental effects of COVID-19 on depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress, and sleep quality.…”

<p>Depression, Anxiety and Associated Factors Among Chronic Medical Patients Amid COVID-19 Pandemic in Mettu Karl Referral Hospital, Mettu, Ethiopia, 2020</p>

“…12 One review study of viral epidemic impacts revealed that the pooled anxiety and depression prevalence was 45% and 38%, respectively and high impacts were associated with female gender and younger age. 13 Generally, existing materials pointed out that, the occurrence of psychological distress due to the pandemic is heterogeneous 14 and individuals with a chronic medical illness were anticipated to have high levels of anxiety and depression. 12 Therefore, this study aimed to measure the prevalence of depression and anxiety among people with a chronic medical condition during the COVID-19 pandemic as they are one of the at risk groups.…”