The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has been declared a pandemic and has affected both patients and health-care workers. This study was conducted to explore the extent of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) experiences among nurses because of the COVID-19 pandemic in Jordan.

This study used a cross-sectional study design with a convenience sampling approach. A sample of 259 participants completed the study questionnaires, including a socio-demographic questionnaire and the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5 between May and July 2020.

The prevalence of PTSD among the study participants was 37.1%. Most study participants who exhibited PTSD symptoms presented the lowest level of PTSD (17%). The results showed significant differences in overall COVID-19-related PTSD according to the participant’s age (F = 14.750; P = 0.000), gender (F = 30.340; P = 0.000), level of education (F = 51.983; P = 0.000), years of experience (F = 52.33, P = 0.000), place of work (F = 19.593; P = 0.000), and working position (F = 11.597; P = 0.000), as determined by 1-way ANOVA.

Nurses must be qualified and accredited to cope with reported PTSD cases and their consequences in relation to COVID-19 outbreaks. A close collaboration with a multidisciplinary team is required to recognize, manage, and encourage safety literacy among health-care professionals and individuals diagnosed with or suspected of PTSD due to COVID-19 outbreaks or any other viral outbreaks.

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused myriad health, social, and economic stressors. To date, however, no known study has examined changes in mental health during the pandemic in the U.S. military veteran population.

Data were analyzed from the 2019–2020 National Health and Resilience in Veterans Study, a nationally representative, prospective cohort survey of 3078 veterans. Pre-to-peri-pandemic changes in psychiatric symptoms were evaluated, as well as pre-pandemic risk and protective factors and pandemic-related correlates of increased psychiatric distress.

The prevalence of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) positive screens increased from pre- to peri-pandemic (7.1% to 9.4%; p < 0.001) and was driven by an increase among veterans aged 45–64 years (8.2% to 13.5%; p < 0.001), but the prevalence of major depressive disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder positive screens remained stable. Using a continuous measure of psychiatric distress, an estimated 13.2% of veterans reported a clinically meaningful pre-to-peri-pandemic increase in distress (mean = 1.1 standard deviation). Veterans with a larger pre-pandemic social network size and secure attachment style were less likely to experience increased distress, whereas veterans reporting more pre-pandemic loneliness were more likely to experience increased distress. Concerns about pandemic-related social losses, mental health COVID-19 effects, and housing stability during the pandemic were associated with increased distress, over-and-above pre-pandemic factors.

Although most U.S. veterans showed resilience to mental health problems nearly 1 year into the pandemic, the prevalence of GAD positive screens increased, particularly among middle-aged veterans, and one of seven veterans experienced increased distress. Clinical implications of these findings are discussed.

Depression is globally a crucial communal psychiatric disorder, which is more common in older adults. The situation is considerably worse among millions of older (forcibly displaced Myanmar nationals or FDMNs) Rohingya adults, and the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may exacerbate the already existing precarious situation. The present study investigated depressive symptoms and their associated factors in older adult Rohingya FDMNs in Cox Bazar, Bangladesh, during the COVID-19 pandemic.

A total of 416 older adults aged 60 years and above residing in Rohingya camps situated in the South Eastern part of Bangladesh were interviewed using a 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15) in Bengali language. Chi-square test was performed to compare the prevalence of depressive symptoms within different categories of a variable and a binary logistic regression model was performed to determine the factors associated with depressive symptoms.

More than 41% of Rohingya older adults had depressive symptoms (DS). Socio-demographic and economic factors such as living alone, dependency on family for living, poor memory, feelings of being left out, difficulty in getting medicine and routine medical care during COVID-19, perception that older adults are at highest risk of COVID-19 and pre-existing non-communicable chronic conditions were found to be significantly associated with developing DS. Higher DS was also evident among older female Rohingya FDMNs.

DS are highly prevalent in older Rohingya FDMNs during COVID-19. The findings of the present study call for immediate arrangement of mental health care services and highlight policy implications to ensure the well-being of older FDMNs.

Clinical and Translational Science Award Program (CTSA)-funded institutions were charged with developing clinical and translational science programs and transforming clinical research at their institutions. Community engagement (CE) was recognized as a key component and catalyst of that transformation. CE hub capacities for working with communities and translating knowledge into practice have been illustrated through their COVID-19 responses.

CE hub leaders met and discussed their CTSA’s early responses regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. The 2-hour discussion was distilled into themes which were sent to the CE hub leaders with a request for written accounts describing actions taken to engage local partners, communities, and institutions. The written reports form the basis for this compendium.

Eighteen institutions submitted written reports describing activities in relation to six themes: (1) listen to the community and respond to concerns, (2) collect data to understand the impact of COVID-19 on distinct communities and groups, (3) communicate science and address misinformation, (4) collaborate with health departments, (5) engage hubs and underrepresented populations in COVID-19 research, and (6) support our own well-being and that of others.

Bidirectional interactions comprise the foundation of CE, which requires trusted partnerships that sustain communication through a series of activities and goals. The nimble responses to the pandemic substantiate the need for CE programs to maintain the infrastructure necessary to achieve the primary CTSA goals of improving health within and across communities and localities as well as expanding research participation of community members.

To explore women’s perceptions of changes in specific food habits at home, specifically the food budget and shopping, and food preparation, during the COVID-19 period.

Non-probabilistic, exploratory study. Participants completed an online self-administered questionnaire. Perceptions of food habit changes were measured on a five-point Likert scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree). Data analysis was conducted in STATA v16.0.

Chile.

Adult women between 25 and 65 years old (n 2047).

Of the participants, 72 % were responsible for cooking, 69 % for buying food and 85 % for child care. Difficulties in organising and doing food budget works were observed in groups with a lower educational level, lower income and single mothers with children. Younger participants, dependent workers, women from biparental families with children and those in mandatory quarantine perceived more changes in their food shopping and budget management tasks. Participants more educated, with higher income and non-mandatory quarantine perceived to cook and eat healthier. Older participants perceived minor changes in their food preparation tasks at home; in contrast, more educated women and women from biparental families with children perceived more changes. If women were in charge of the kids or grocery shopping, more food environment changes were noticed.

Women perceived changes in their food environments. Some of these changes are perceived worse in the more vulnerable population. COVID-19 presents a challenge for the food system and gender perspectives. This information should be considered in the design of food-related interventions.

When vaccination depends on injection, it is plausible that the blood-injection-injury cluster of fears may contribute to hesitancy. Our primary aim was to estimate in the UK adult population the proportion of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy explained by blood-injection-injury fears.

In total, 15 014 UK adults, quota sampled to match the population for age, gender, ethnicity, income and region, took part (19 January–5 February 2021) in a non-probability online survey. The Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale assessed intent to be vaccinated. Two scales (Specific Phobia Scale-blood-injection-injury phobia and Medical Fear Survey–injections and blood subscale) assessed blood-injection-injury fears. Four items from these scales were used to create a factor score specifically for injection fears.

In total, 3927 (26.2%) screened positive for blood-injection-injury phobia. Individuals screening positive (22.0%) were more likely to report COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy compared to individuals screening negative (11.5%), odds ratio = 2.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.97–2.40, p < 0.001. The population attributable fraction (PAF) indicated that if blood-injection-injury phobia were absent then this may prevent 11.5% of all instances of vaccine hesitancy, AF = 0.11; 95% CI 0.09–0.14, p < 0.001. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was associated with higher scores on the Specific Phobia Scale, r = 0.22, p < 0.001, Medical Fear Survey, r = 0.23, p = <0.001 and injection fears, r = 0.25, p < 0.001. Injection fears were higher in youth and in Black and Asian ethnic groups, and explained a small degree of why vaccine hesitancy is higher in these groups.

Across the adult population, blood-injection-injury fears may explain approximately 10% of cases of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Addressing such fears will likely improve the effectiveness of vaccination programmes.

Unpaid carers who look after another member of their household (home-carers) have poorer mental health than the general population. The first COVID-19 national lockdown led to an increasing reliance on home-carers and we investigate the short- and longer-term impacts of lockdown on their mental health.

Data from 9737 adult participants (aged 16+) from the UK Household Longitudinal Study (Understanding Society) were used to explore changes in 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) score between (a) pre-pandemic (2019) and early lockdowns (April 2020) and (b) early and later (July 2020) lockdowns.

GHQ-12 scores among home-carers were higher pre-lockdown and increased more than for non-carers from 2019 to April 2020 with further increases for home-carers compared with non-carers between April and July. Compared with respondents caring for a spouse/partner, those caring for a child under 18 had a particularly marked increase in GHQ-12 score between 2019 and April, as did those caring for someone with a learning disability. Home-carers of children under 18 improved from April to July while those caring for adult children saw a marked worsening of their mental health. Home-carers with greater care burden saw larger increases in GHQ-12 score from 2019 to April and from April to July, and increases through both periods were greater for home-carers who had formal help prior to lockdown but then lost it.

The mental health of home-carers deteriorated more during lockdown than non-carers. Policies that reinstate support for them and their care-recipients will benefit the health of both vulnerable groups.

The COVID-19 pandemic caused an unprecedented worldwide crisis affecting several sectors, including health, social care, economy and society at large. The World Health Organisation has emphasized that mental health care should be considered as one of the core sectors within the overall COVID-19 health response. By March 2020, recommendations for the organization of mental health services across Europe have been developed by several national and international mental health professional associations.

The European Psychiatric Association (EPA) surveyed a large European sample of psychiatrists, namely the “EPA Ambassadors”, on their clinical experience of the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the treatment of psychiatric patients during the month of April 2020 in order to: a) identify and report the views and experiences of European psychiatrists; and b) represent and share these results with mental health policy makers at European level. Based on the recommendations issued by national psychiatric associations and on the results of our survey, we identified important organisational aspects of mental health care during the peak of the first wave of the COVID-19.

While most of the recommendations followed the same principles, significant differences between countries emerged in service delivery, mainly relating to referrals to outpatients and for inpatient admission, assessments and treatment for people with mental disorders. Compared to previous months, the mean number of patients treated by psychiatrists in outpatient settings halved in April 2020. In the same period, the number of mentally ill patients tested for, or developing, COVID-19 was low. In most of countries, traditional face-to-face visits were replaced by online remote consultations.

Based on our findings we recommend: 1) to implement professional guidelines into practice and harmonize psychiatric clinical practice across Europe; 2) to monitor the treatment outcomes of patients with COVID-19 and pre-existing mental disorders; 3) to keep psychiatric services active by using all available options (for example telepsychiatry); 4) to increase communication and cooperation between different health care providers.