Social participation, inclusion and mental well-being following SARS-CoV-2 related lockdown restrictions in adults with and without mental disorders. Results from a follow-up study in Germany

Abstract

Objectives: In Germany, as in many other countries, several lockdown restrictions were put in place with the aim of curbing the spread of SARS-CoV-2 infections. This study investigated the impact of the coronavirus pandemic and the related lockdown restrictions on opportunities for social participation, social inclusion and psychological well-being for adults with and without mental disorders within a follow-up study based on pre- and post-lockdown assessments. Methods: Study participants (n=132) were assigned to one of three groups, depending on the mental health status at the initial survey. Parameters of interest were assessed using the Measure of Participation and Social Inclusion for Use in People with a Chronic Mental Disorder (F-INK), the Index for the Assessment of Health Impairments (IMET), and the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI-18).Results: The impact on opportunities for social participation and social participation considerably differed depending on the participants’ mental health status at the first assessment. Independent of this, we found no detrimental effects on the psychological well-being of participants four weeks after the implementation of lockdown restrictions.Conclusion: Findings imply a general resilience in well-being during the preliminary stages of the coronavirus pandemic. This result adds to the growing number of existing studies which show a heterogeneous pattern overall and especially in international comparison. Further follow-up studies with larger samples should address the divergent effects. Besides, efforts are needed to improve social participation and inclusion opportunities that are severely impaired for individuals with chronic mental disorders regardless of lockdown or physical distancing restrictions.

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

“…Again, studies on people with pre-existing mental disorders, for example, do not generally suggest worse outcomes during the first lockdown phase. While some studies see more distress in this group (Liu et al, 2020;O'Connor et al, 2020), others reject this hypothesis (Pinkham et al, 2020;Schutzwohl and Mergel, 2020). Our conclusion does not disregard that there is a certain risk for increasing mental illness and demand for mental health care in the general population the longer the pandemic and its economic and psychosocial consequences will last.…”

The psychological impact of COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns: a review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies and natural experiments

“…Online Supplementary Table S1 provides an overview of all included studies. Thirteen studies were conducted in Europe (Bojanowska, Kaczmarek, Kościelniak, & Urbańska, 2020;Daly & Robinson, 2020;Jackson, Garnett, Shahab, Oldham, & Brown, 2020;Kwong et al, 2020;Niedzwiedz et al, 2020; Ozamiz-Etxebarria, Dosil-Santamaria, Picaza-Gorrochategui, & Idoiaga-Mondragon, 2020; Pierce et al, 2020;Recchi et al, 2020;Schützwohl & Mergel, 2020;Shanahan et al, 2020;Stevenson, Wakefield, Drury, & Felsner, 2020;Zacher & Rudolph, 2020), six in Asia (Guo, Feng, Wang, & van Ijzendoorn, 2020;Lei et al, 2020;Li, Cao, Leung, & Mak, 2020;Liu et al, 2020;Wang & Zhao, 2020;Xin et al, 2020), five in North America (Bryan, Bryan, & Baker, 2020;Gratz et al, 2020;Luchetti et al, 2020;Tull et al, 2020;Zimmermann, Bledsoe, & Papa, 2020), and one in Oceania (Sibley et al, 2020). The majority of the included studies (n = 16) were peer-reviewed.…”

The Psychological Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic Lockdowns: A Review and Meta-Analysis of Longitudinal Studies and Natural Experiments

“…Thirteen studies were conducted in Europe (Bojanowska, Kaczmarek, Kościelniak, & Urbańska, 2020;Daly & Robinson, 2020;Jackson, Garnett, Shahab, Oldham, & Brown, 2020;Kwong et al, 2020;Niedzwiedz et al, 2020;Ozamiz-Etxebarria, Dosil-Santamaria, Picaza-Gorrochategui, & Idoiaga-Mondragon, 2020;Pierce et al, 2020;Recchi et al, 2020;Schützwohl & Mergel, 2020;Shanahan et al, 2020;Stevenson, Wakefield, Drury, & Felsner, 2020;Zacher & Rudolph, 2020), six in Asia (Guo, Feng, Wang, & van Ijzendoorn, 2020;Lei et al, 2020;Li, Cao, Leung, & Mak, 2020;Liu et al, 2020;Wang & Zhao, 2020;Xin et al, 2020), five in North America (Bryan, Bryan, & Baker, 2020;Gratz et al, 2020;Luchetti et al, 2020;Tull et al, 2020;Zimmermann, Bledsoe, & Papa, 2020), and one in Oceania (Sibley et al, 2020).…”