Cargando…

Living through the psychological consequences of COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review of effective mitigating interventions

OBJECTIVE: This review assesses interventions and their effectiveness in mitigating psychological consequences from pandemic. METHOD: Published English literatures were searched from four databases (Medline, PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO) from January 2020 and September 2021. A total of 27 papers with...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lekagul, Angkana, Piancharoen, Peeraya, Chattong, Anamika, Suradom, Chawisa, Tangcharoensathien, Viroj
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9329730/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35882462
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-060804
_version_ 1784757985287864320
author Lekagul, Angkana
Piancharoen, Peeraya
Chattong, Anamika
Suradom, Chawisa
Tangcharoensathien, Viroj
author_facet Lekagul, Angkana
Piancharoen, Peeraya
Chattong, Anamika
Suradom, Chawisa
Tangcharoensathien, Viroj
author_sort Lekagul, Angkana
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: This review assesses interventions and their effectiveness in mitigating psychological consequences from pandemic. METHOD: Published English literatures were searched from four databases (Medline, PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO) from January 2020 and September 2021. A total of 27 papers with 29 studies (one paper reported three studies) met inclusion criteria. Cochrane risk-of-bias tool is applied to assess the quality of all randomised controlled trials (RCT). RESULTS: All studies were recently conducted in 2020. Publications were from high-income (13, 44.8%), upper middle-income (12, 41.4%) and lower middle-income countries (3, 10.3%) and global (1, 3.5%). Half of the studies conducted for general population (51.7%). One-third of studies (8, 27.6%) provided interventions to patients with COVID-19 and 20.7% to healthcare workers. Of the 29 studies, 14 (48.3%) were RCT. All RCTs were assessed for risk of biases; five studies (15, 35.7%) had low risk as measured against all six dimensions reflecting high-quality study. Of these 29 studies, 26 diagnostic or screening measures were applied; 8 (30.9%) for anxiety, 7 (26.9%) for depression, 5 (19.2%) for stress, 5 (19.2%) for insomnia and 1 (3.8%) for suicide. Measures used to assess the baseline and outcomes of interventions were standardised and widely applied by other studies with high level of reliability and validity. Of 11 RCT studies, 10 (90.9%) showed that anxiety interventions significantly lowered anxiety in intervention groups. Five of the six RCT studies (83.3%) had significantly reduced the level of depression. Most interventions for anxiety and stress were mindfulness and meditation based. CONCLUSIONS: Results from RCT studies (11%, 78.6%) were effective in mitigating psychological consequences from COVID-19 pandemic when applied to healthcare workers, patients with COVID-19 and general population. These effective interventions can be applied and scaled up in other country settings through adaptation of modes of delivery suitable to country resources, pandemic and health system context.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9329730
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93297302022-07-28 Living through the psychological consequences of COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review of effective mitigating interventions Lekagul, Angkana Piancharoen, Peeraya Chattong, Anamika Suradom, Chawisa Tangcharoensathien, Viroj BMJ Open Mental Health OBJECTIVE: This review assesses interventions and their effectiveness in mitigating psychological consequences from pandemic. METHOD: Published English literatures were searched from four databases (Medline, PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO) from January 2020 and September 2021. A total of 27 papers with 29 studies (one paper reported three studies) met inclusion criteria. Cochrane risk-of-bias tool is applied to assess the quality of all randomised controlled trials (RCT). RESULTS: All studies were recently conducted in 2020. Publications were from high-income (13, 44.8%), upper middle-income (12, 41.4%) and lower middle-income countries (3, 10.3%) and global (1, 3.5%). Half of the studies conducted for general population (51.7%). One-third of studies (8, 27.6%) provided interventions to patients with COVID-19 and 20.7% to healthcare workers. Of the 29 studies, 14 (48.3%) were RCT. All RCTs were assessed for risk of biases; five studies (15, 35.7%) had low risk as measured against all six dimensions reflecting high-quality study. Of these 29 studies, 26 diagnostic or screening measures were applied; 8 (30.9%) for anxiety, 7 (26.9%) for depression, 5 (19.2%) for stress, 5 (19.2%) for insomnia and 1 (3.8%) for suicide. Measures used to assess the baseline and outcomes of interventions were standardised and widely applied by other studies with high level of reliability and validity. Of 11 RCT studies, 10 (90.9%) showed that anxiety interventions significantly lowered anxiety in intervention groups. Five of the six RCT studies (83.3%) had significantly reduced the level of depression. Most interventions for anxiety and stress were mindfulness and meditation based. CONCLUSIONS: Results from RCT studies (11%, 78.6%) were effective in mitigating psychological consequences from COVID-19 pandemic when applied to healthcare workers, patients with COVID-19 and general population. These effective interventions can be applied and scaled up in other country settings through adaptation of modes of delivery suitable to country resources, pandemic and health system context. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-07-26 /pmc/articles/PMC9329730/ /pubmed/35882462 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-060804 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Mental Health
Lekagul, Angkana
Piancharoen, Peeraya
Chattong, Anamika
Suradom, Chawisa
Tangcharoensathien, Viroj
Living through the psychological consequences of COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review of effective mitigating interventions
title Living through the psychological consequences of COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review of effective mitigating interventions
title_full Living through the psychological consequences of COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review of effective mitigating interventions
title_fullStr Living through the psychological consequences of COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review of effective mitigating interventions
title_full_unstemmed Living through the psychological consequences of COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review of effective mitigating interventions
title_short Living through the psychological consequences of COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review of effective mitigating interventions
title_sort living through the psychological consequences of covid-19 pandemic: a systematic review of effective mitigating interventions
topic Mental Health
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9329730/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35882462
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-060804
work_keys_str_mv AT lekagulangkana livingthroughthepsychologicalconsequencesofcovid19pandemicasystematicreviewofeffectivemitigatinginterventions
AT piancharoenpeeraya livingthroughthepsychologicalconsequencesofcovid19pandemicasystematicreviewofeffectivemitigatinginterventions
AT chattonganamika livingthroughthepsychologicalconsequencesofcovid19pandemicasystematicreviewofeffectivemitigatinginterventions
AT suradomchawisa livingthroughthepsychologicalconsequencesofcovid19pandemicasystematicreviewofeffectivemitigatinginterventions
AT tangcharoensathienviroj livingthroughthepsychologicalconsequencesofcovid19pandemicasystematicreviewofeffectivemitigatinginterventions