Search

The ability of the public to remain psychologically resilient in the face of public health emergencies and disasters (such as the COVID-19 pandemic) is a key factor in the effectiveness of a national response to such events. Community resilience and social capital are often perceived as beneficial and ensuring that a community is socially and psychologically resilient may aid emergency response and recovery. This review presents a synthesis of literature which answers the following research questions: How are community resilience and social capital quantified in research?; What is the impact of community resilience on mental wellbeing?; What is the impact of infectious disease outbreaks, disasters and emergencies on community resilience and social capital?; and, What types of interventions enhance community resilience and social capital? A scoping review procedure was followed. Searches were run across Medline, PsycInfo, and EMBASE, with search terms covering both community resilience and social capital, public health emergencies, and mental health. 26 papers met the inclusion criteria. The majority of retained papers originated in the USA, used a survey methodology to collect data, and involved a natural disaster. There was no common method for measuring community resilience or social capital. The association between community resilience and social capital with mental health was regarded as positive in most cases. However, we found that community resilience, and social capital, were initially negatively impacted by public health emergencies and enhanced by social group activities. Several key recommendations are proposed based on the outcomes from the review, which include: the need for a standardised and validated approach to measuring both community resilience and social capital; that there should be enhanced effort to improve preparedness to public health emergencies in communities by gauging current levels of community resilience and social capital; that community resilience and social capital should be bolstered if areas are at risk of disasters or public health emergencies; the need to ensure that suitable short-term support is provided to communities with high resilience in the immediate aftermath of a public health emergency or disaster; the importance of conducting robust evaluation of community resilience initiatives deployed during the COVID-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The ability of the public to remain psychologically resilient in the face of public health emergencies and disasters (such as the COVID-19 pandemic) is a key factor in the effectiveness of a national response to such events. Community resilience and social capital are often perceived as beneficial and ensuring that a community is socially and psychologically resilient may aid emergency response and recovery. This review presents a synthesis of literature which answers the following research questions: How are community resilience and social capital quantified in research?; What is the impact of community resilience on mental wellbeing?; What is the impact of infectious disease outbreaks, disasters and emergencies on community resilience and social capital?; and, What types of interventions enhance community resilience and social capital? A scoping review procedure was followed. Searches were run across Medline, PsycInfo, and EMBASE, with search terms covering both community resilience and social capital, public health emergencies, and mental health. 26 papers met the inclusion criteria. The majority of retained papers originated in the USA, used a survey methodology to collect data, and involved a natural disaster. There was no common method for measuring community resilience or social capital. The association between community resilience and social capital with mental health was regarded as positive in most cases. However, we found that community resilience, and social capital, were initially negatively impacted by public health emergencies and enhanced by social group activities. Several key recommendations are proposed based on the outcomes from the review, which include: the need for a standardised and validated approach to measuring both community resilience and social capital; that there should be enhanced effort to improve preparedness to public health emergencies in communities by gauging current levels of community resilience and social capital; that community resilience and social capital should be bolstered if areas are at risk of disasters or public health emergencies; the need to ensure that suitable short-term support is provided to communities with high resilience in the immediate aftermath of a public health emergency or disaster; the importance of conducting robust evaluation of community resilience initiatives deployed during the COVID-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Access to fertility treatments is considered a reproductive right, but because of the quarantine due to the coronavirus pandemic most infertility treatments were suspended, which might affect the psychological and emotional health of infertile patients. Therefore, this study was conducted to review the mental health of infertile patients facing treatment suspension due to the coronavirus pandemic. Methods: This study was conducted based on the Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guideline. The Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane library databases were searched by two independent researchers, without time limitation until 31 December 2022. All observational studies regarding the mental health of infertile patients facing treatment suspension including anxiety, depression, and stress were included in the study. Qualitative studies, editorials, brief communications, commentaries, conference papers, guidelines, and studies with no full text were excluded. Quality assessment was carried out using Newcastle–Ottawa Scale by two researchers, independently. The random effects model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence of mental health problems. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis were used to confirm the sources of heterogeneity. Results: Out of 681 studies, 21 studies with 5901 infertile patients were systematically reviewed, from which 16 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The results of all pooled studies showed that the prevalence of anxiety, depression, and stress in female patients was 48.4% (95% CI 34.8–62.3), 42% (95% CI 26.7–59.4), and 55% (95% CI 45.4–65), respectively. Additionally, 64.4% (95% CI 50.7–76.1) of patients wished to resume their treatments despite the coronavirus pandemic. Conclusion: Treatment suspension due to the coronavirus pandemic negatively affected the mental health of infertile patients. It is important to maintain the continuity of fertility care, with special attention paid to mental health of infertile patients, through all the possible measures even during a public health crisis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: With the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic, in-person social interactions and opportunities for accessing resources that sustain health and well-being have drastically reduced. We therefore designed the pan-Canadian prospective COVID-19: HEalth and Social Inequities across Neighbourhoods (COHESION) cohort to provide a deeper understanding of how the COVID-19 pandemic context affects mental health and well-being, key determinants of health, and health inequities. Methods: This paper presents the design of the two-phase COHESION Study, and descriptive results from the first phase conducted between May 2020 and September 2021. During that period, the COHESION research platform collected monthly data linked to COVID-19 such as infection and vaccination status, perceptions and attitudes regarding pandemic-related measures, and information on participants' physical and mental health, well-being, sleep, loneliness, resilience, substances use, living conditions, social interactions, activities, and mobility. Results: The 1,268 people enrolled in the Phase 1 COHESION Study are for the most part from Ontario (47%) and Quebec (33%), aged 48 ± 16 years [mean ± standard deviation (SD)], and mainly women (78%), White (85%), with a university degree (63%), and living in large urban centers (70%). According to the 298 ± 68 (mean ± SD) prospective questionnaires completed each month on average, the first year of follow-up reveals significant temporal variations in standardized indexes of well-being, loneliness, anxiety, depression, and psychological distress. Conclusions: The COHESION Study will allow identifying trajectories of mental health and well-being while investigating their determinants and how these may vary by subgroup, over time, and across different provinces in Canada, in varying context including the pandemic recovery period. Our findings will contribute valuable insights to the urban health field and inform future public health interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The public experienced loss of resources, including their health and property during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Conservation of Resources (COR) theory is a useful tool to explain the effect of resource loss on mental health. This paper examines the effect of resource loss on depression and peritraumatic distress considering the situational and social context of the COVID-19 pandemic applying COR theory. Methods: An online survey was conducted for Gyeonggi residents when the second wave of COVID-19 in South Korea declined (5 October to 13 October 2020); 2,548 subjects were included in the hierarchical linear regression analysis. Results: COVID-19 infection-related experiences, resource losses (e.g., financial burden, deterioration of health, and decline of self-esteem), and fear of stigma were related to elevated levels of peritraumatic distress and depression. Risk perception was associated with peritraumatic distress. Reduced income or job loss were related to depression. Social support was a protective factor for mental health. Conclusions: This study suggests that we need to focus on COVID-19 infection-related experiences and loss of daily resources in order to understand mental health deterioration during the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, it is important to monitor the mental health of medically and socially vulnerable groups and those who have lost resources due to the pandemic and to provide them with social support services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Epidemics or pandemics, such as the current Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis, pose unique challenges to healthcare professionals (HCPs). Caring for patients during an epidemic/pandemic may impact negatively on the mental health of HCPs. There is a lack of evidence-based advice on what would be effective in mitigating this impact.Objectives: This rapid review synthesizes the evidence on the psychological impact of pandemics/epidemics on the mental health of HCPs, what factors predict this impact, and the evidence of prevention/intervention strategies to reduce this impact.Method: According to rapid review guidelines, systematic searches were carried out in Embase.com , PubMed, APA PsycINFO-Ovid SP, and Web of Science (core collection). Searches were restricted to the years 2003 or later to ensure inclusion of the most recent epidemic/pandemics, such as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). Papers written in French or English, published in peer-reviewed journals, and of quantitative design using validated measures of mental health outcomes were included. Of 1308 papers found, 50 were included. The full protocol for this rapid review was registered with Prospero (reg.no. CRD42020175985).Results: Results show that exposed HCPs working with patients during an epidemic/pandemic are at heightened risk of mental health problems in the short and longer term, particularly: psychological distress, insomnia, alcohol/drug misuse, and symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, anxiety, burnout, anger, and higher perceived stress. These mental health problems are predicted by organizational, social, personal, and psychological factors and may interfere with the quality of patient care. Few evidence-based early interventions exist so far.Discussion: HCPs need to be provided with psychosocial support to protect their mental wellbeing if they are to continue to provide high quality patient care. Several recommendations relevant during and after an epidemic/pandemic, such as COVID-19, and in preparation for a future outbreak, are proposed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In many countries, including in the United Kingdom (UK), COVID-19 social distancing measures placed substantial restrictions on children's lives in 2020 and 2021, including closure of schools and limitations on play. Many children faced milestones such as transition to secondary school having missed several months of face-to-face schooling in the previous academic years.Methods: This paper examines change in mental health difficulties, life satisfaction, school connectedness, and feelings about transition to secondary school among 10-11-year-olds in Wales, UK, using data from repeat cross-sectional surveys before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants were 4032 10-11-year-old schoolchildren. The first cohort completed a school-based survey in 2019 (prior to introduction of social distancing measures), and the second in 2021 (following full return to school after two rounds of school closure).Results: The percentage of children reporting elevated emotional difficulties rose from 17% in 2019 to 27% in 2021 (Odds Ratio = 1.65; 95%CI = 1.23 to 2.20). There was no evidence of increased behavioural difficulties (OR = 1.04; 95%CI = 0.73 to 1.46). There was a tendency toward declines in life satisfaction in all analyses, but this intersected the null (OR = 0.86; 95%CI = 0.70 to 1.07). Children reported a high degree of school connectedness before and after the pandemic, with no evidence of change in ratings of teacher relationships, pupil relationships or pupil involvement in school life. There was no evidence of impacts of the pandemic on children's feelings about the transition to secondary school, with feelings becoming more positive as transition neared. Most findings were robust to a range of sensitivity analyses.Conclusions: Supporting children's emotional recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic is a public health priority requiring urgent and effective action at multiple levels of society. Maintaining connectedness to school through the pandemic may have played a role in preventing a steeper increase in child mental health difficulties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]