To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge-org.demo.remotlog.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This perspective offers a personal insight into COVID-19 in Bahrain along with the response to this unprecented pandemic. In a country where a robust health care system and economic prosperity have allowed it to cope with the medical sequelae, the mental health consequences may have been less anticipated but more problematic. An unforeseen positive emerging from the pandemic might be the nation’s recognition of the importance of mental health well-being and a new openness to discussing it.
With the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have witnessed the greatest global challenge in a generation. The full extent of the mental health impact is, as yet, unknown, but is anticipated to be severe and enduring. In this Special Issue dedicated to mental health and the COVID-19 pandemic, we aim to lay the foundation for an improved understanding of how COVID-19 is affecting mental health services both in Ireland and globally. This Special Issue highlights how the mental health effects of COVID-19 stretch to almost every element of society. The issue includes perspectives from several countries across multiple disciplines and healthcare settings. The drive for rapid innovation and service development is clearly evident throughout and provides hope that by working collaboratively we can positively impact population mental health in the months and years ahead.
In times of crisis, people have historically had to band together to overcome. What happens when they cannot? This article examines the reality of people forced to isolate from one another during one of the most turbulent events of their lives: the COVID-19 pandemic. Connecting the dots of topics including fear, social stigmas, global public response and previous disease outbreaks, this article discusses the negative mental health effects that individuals and communities will likely suffer as the result of social distancing, isolation and physical infection.
For several decades, mental health services within the UK's National Health Service were provided by specialist mental health trusts. More recently many of these trusts have integrated community physical health services into their operations. We describe here how two integrated mental health trusts in England were able to make an enhanced response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The COVID-19 outbreak required the significantly increased working time and intensity for health professionals in China, which may cause stress signs.
Methods.
From March 2–13 of 2020, 4,618 health professionals in China were included in an anonymous, self-rated online survey regarding their concerns on exposure to the COVID-19 outbreak. The questionnaires consisted of five parts: basic demographic information and epidemiological exposure; occupational and psychological impact; concerns during the episode; coping strategies; and the Huaxi Emotional-Distress Index (HEI).
Results.
About 24.2% of respondents experienced high levels of anxiety or/and depressive symptoms since the COVID-19 outbreak. Respondents who worried about their physical health and those who had COVID-19 infected friends or close relatives were more likely to have high HEI levels, than those without these characteristics. Further, family relationship was found to have an independent protective effect against high HEI levels. Their main concerns were that their families would not be cared for and that they would not be able to work properly. Compared to respondents with clear emotional problems, those with somewhat hidden emotional issues adopted more positive coping measures.
Conclusions.
About a quarter of medical staff experienced psychological problems during the pandemic of COVID-19. The psychological impact of stressful events was related to worrying about their physical health, having close COVID-19 infected acquaintances and family relationship issues. Therefore, the psychological supprot for medical staff fighting in the COVID-19 pandemic may be needed.
As COVID-19 has plagued our world, the term “social distancing” has been widely used with the aim to encourage the general population to physically distance themselves from others in order to reduce the spread of the virus. However, this term can have unintended but detrimental effects, as it evokes negative feelings of being ignored, unwelcome, left alone with one's own fears, and even excluded from society. These feelings may be stronger in people with mental illnesses and in socio-economically disadvantaged groups, such as stigmatized minorities, migrants, and homeless persons [1], many of them also having high risk for suicidal behaviors [2]. Mental health disorders are pervasive worldwide; the global burden accounting for approximately 21.2–32.4% of years lived with disability—more than any other group of illnesses [3]. So, the vulnerable group of people with mental health disorders represents a considerable share of the total global population.
The pandemic caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has forced governments to implement strict social mitigation strategies to reduce the morbidity and mortality from acute infections. These strategies, however, carry a significant risk for mental health, which can lead to increased short-term and long-term mortality and is currently not included in modeling the impact of the pandemic.
Methods.
We used years of life lost (YLL) as the main outcome measure, applied to Switzerland as an example. We focused on suicide, depression, alcohol use disorder, childhood trauma due to domestic violence, changes in marital status, and social isolation, as these are known to increase YLL in the context of imposed restriction in social contact and freedom of movement. We stipulated a minimum duration of mitigation of 3 months based on current public health plans.
Results.
The study projects that the average person would suffer 0.205 YLL due to psychosocial consequence of COVID-19 mitigation measures. However, this loss would be entirely borne by 2.1% of the population, who will suffer an average of 9.79 YLL.
Conclusions.
The results presented here are likely to underestimate the true impact of the mitigation strategies on YLL. However, they highlight the need for public health models to expand their scope in order to provide better estimates of the risks and benefits of mitigation.
The COVID-19 pandemic has raised significant concerns for population mental health and the effective provision of mental health services in the light of increased demands and barriers to service delivery [1]. Particular attention is being directed toward the possible neuropsychiatric sequelae of both COVID-19 and of the stringent societal mitigation steps deployed by national governments, concerns that are informed by historical increases in the incidence of psychotic disorders following influenza pandemics [2]. However, so far there has been scant attention paid to other important areas of psychiatry during COVID-19, including medico-legal aspects and human rights. In this paper, we discuss the legal implications for psychiatry of the COVID-19 pandemic and report a novel situation in which psychiatric patients may experience diminution of their statutory protections. We believe that this represents a paradigm shift in psychiatric care and that the consideration of the fundamental rights of psychiatric patients as “less important” than infection control measures compel mental health professionals to “advocate for … patients and their caregivers” in this time of crisis [1].
As the COVID-19 pandemic escalates worldwide, it is apparent that many patients with more severe illness will also experience delirium. These patients pose a particular challenge in the application of optimal care due to issues with infectious risk, respiratory compromise and potential interactions between medications that can be used to manage delirium with antiviral and other treatments used for COVID-19. We describe a guidance resource adapted from existing guidelines for delirium management that has been tailored to the specific challenge of managing delirium in patients with COVID-19 infection. Issues around the assessment and treatment of these patients are examined and distilled into a simple (one-paged guidance resource that can assist clinicians in managing suspected delirium.
In response to the global pandemic COVID-19, the Irish government has called upon the Garda Síochána to implement an unparalleled mode of policing to mitigate and contain the spread of the Coronavirus. Studies investigating smaller scale epidemics, such as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), indicate that staff at the frontlines of an outbreak are exposed to an insuperable amount of stress and experience increased psychological morbidities as a result. Furthermore, research not only indicates that heighted levels of psychological distress are an occupational hazard associated with the law enforcement profession, but that members of the Garda Síochána feel their mental health needs are largely unmet by their organisation. Given the pandemic’s propensity to expose officers to indeterminate echelons of physical and psychological threat; there has never been a more appropriate time to explore the potential burdens associated with ‘policing’ a pandemic, question the governments capacity to address the psychological support needs of frontline professionals, and plan future research for best practice.
The COVID-19 pandemic is a global health emergency, the scale, speed and nature of which is beyond anything most of us have experienced in our lifetimes. The mental health burden associated with this pandemic is also likely to surpass anything we have previously experienced. In this editorial, we seek to anticipate the nature of this additional mental health burden and make recommendations on how to mitigate against and prepare for this significant increase in mental health service demand.