|Year : 2021 | Volume
| Issue : 6 | Page : 1646-1649
Survey of stress in COVID patient post treatment: A qualitative research
Neeraj Kancherla1, Sameer Krishna Prasad Garlapati1, Yeswanth Kumar Raparla1, Maria Jamil2, Javairia Jamil3, Sai Mahitha Mannava4
1 MBBS Interns, King George Hospital, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India
2 Intern, Tawam Hospital, Gulf Medical University, Al Jurf, Ajman, United Arab Emirates
3 Sheikh Shakhbout Medical Center (SSMC), Gulf medical University, Al Jurf, Ajman, United Arab Emirates
4 Kamineni Institute of Medical Sciences, Narketpally, Nalgonda District, Telangana, India
|Date of Submission||08-May-2021|
|Date of Decision||16-May-2021|
|Date of Acceptance||21-May-2021|
|Date of Web Publication||10-Nov-2021|
King George Hospital, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
| Abstract|| |
Aim: The purpose of our study was to examine the mental health status of patients with coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) who were hospitalized. Methodology: In this cross-sectional study, 106 inpatients with COVID-19 who had stable clinical conditions were evaluated psychologically by questionnaire: Depression, anxiety, and stress scales-21 (DASS-21). Results: About one-third of patients had comorbidities. In totality, 97.2% of patients with COVID-19 had some grade of depression. Extent of depression, assessed with the help of the DASS questionnaire, was 85.8%. All patients (100%) had serious (0.9%) and grave level of (99.1%) anxiety. Regarding to stress levels, 97.1% of patients had some degree of stress. In the worsening of stress category, 84.9% of patients had high-stress levels. Conclusion: The presence of such increased prevalence and seriousness of psychiatric disorders among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 underlines the necessity for serious consideration to the mental health standing of these patients.
Keywords: Anxiety, coronavirus disease-19, depression, management, stress
|How to cite this article:|
Kancherla N, Garlapati SK, Raparla YK, Jamil M, Jamil J, Mannava SM. Survey of stress in COVID patient post treatment: A qualitative research. J Pharm Bioall Sci 2021;13, Suppl S2:1646-9
|How to cite this URL:|
Kancherla N, Garlapati SK, Raparla YK, Jamil M, Jamil J, Mannava SM. Survey of stress in COVID patient post treatment: A qualitative research. J Pharm Bioall Sci [serial online] 2021 [cited 2022 Aug 12];13, Suppl S2:1646-9. Available from: https://www.jpbsonline.org/text.asp?2021/13/6/1646/330113
| Introduction|| |
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of the transmission of the novel coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19), which is associated with the ability to transmit the disease from humans to humans. The disease is connected with grave health problems and can be deadly. As some authors have recommended, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) caused by coronavirus, as the primary outbreak of an infectious disease in the 21st century, was not the last one and COVID-19 was presented as a pandemic former this century. A current review of the literature on the psychological effects of quarantine throughout past epidemics and pandemics (e.g., SARS, H1N1, Ebola, MERS, and equine influenza) emphasized that, when associating the psychological outcomes of quarantined versus nonquarantined persons, the former are more likely to show psychological distress. Furthermore, quantitative studies have underlined that quarantined persons have a high prevalence of psychological symptomatology, with posttraumatic and depressive indications, stress, and anxiety.,,, A new study on the influence of the COVID-19 emergency designated that “53.8% of participants rated the psychological influence of outbreak as moderate or severe; 16.5% of respondents reported moderate-to-severe depressive symptoms; 28.8% of respondents reported moderate-to-severe anxiety symptoms; and 8.1% reported moderate-to-severe stress levels.” Similarly, Qiu et al. reported that almost 35% of the 52,730 participants in their study showed psychological distress. With the upsurge in the number of infected patients and their deaths, many patients may have psychological suffering and physical glitches. Randomness and doubt of the disease condition of diverse aspects of epidemiology and effective methods of treatment puts people exposed to stressful situations. Fear of the consequences of a deadly disease, combined with severe anxiety and mental distress, which can coincide with insomnia and the physical effects of the disease, can create unfavorable conditions for patients due to the aggravation of mental health disorders.,, Early in the SARS epidemic, hospitalized patients raised concerns such as fear, loneliness, fatigue, and anger. They had anxiety as a consequence of fever and the ill effects of insomnia. Anxiety is seen as a significant effect of epidemics with high levels of involvement and risk of death, both among people who are directly involved in the disease and among the masses. This can be accompanied by depression and other psychological problems. Duan and Zhu perceiving that the epidemic of diseases can have undesirable effects on individuals, highlight the presence of psychological distress subsequent to the spread of the COVID-19 and the need for active and appropriate intervention in this area. In this regard, Zheng noted the high prevalence of psychiatric disorders among survivors of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic, including depression and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and highlighted the position of prevention, screening and treatment of related psychiatric disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic. Concerning age, both young adults (aged 18–30 years) and the elderly (older than 60 years) have been found to display the highest levels of psychological distress, while results have diversed across studies. A medical history of chronic illness has also been associated with higher levels of distress. Other sociodemographic variables, such as education level, have yielded mixed results, with both higher and lower education levels associated with higher levels of distress., Furthermore, many studies have highlighted significant differences in individuals' reactions to threats, according to specific personality traits., For instance, the literature indicates a relationship between negative affect and detachment–two maladaptive extremes of the five-factor model of personality–and internalizing psychopathology (e.g., depression and anxiety).,, Nonetheless, the above-mentioned literature ropes the view that compulsory isolation has a enormous impact on many facets of people's lives, initiating substantial psychological strain and generating a change of psychological problems.
Aim of the study
Our aim was to examine the mental health status of patients with COVID-19 who were hospitalized and to know about their severity of anxiety and depression.
| Methodology|| |
This study was a cross-sectional study conducted in one of the city's referral centers for patients with COVID-19 requiring hospitalization. Three psychiatric nurses achieved preliminary screening of patients based on inclusion norms to select patients to be included in the project. These patients were designated from inpatients in secluded treatment wards. All psychiatric nurses had complete personal protective equipment during screening. All information collected was transmitted electronically. Patients were consulted and if desired, entered the study after obtaining informed consent. Members in the project were adults who were affected with COVID-19 and were clinically steady and eager to participate in the research project. Above the age of 18 was one of the conditions for entering the study. Patients “demographic info was recorded with the help of patients” medical archives and were cross-checked with the patient. These comprised genders, age, marital status, employment status, and education. Patients were assessed through two questionnaires, the depression, anxiety, and stress scales-21 (DASS-21). Around 120 patients were assessed and later 106 patients were encompassed in the study. DASS-21 is an appropriate instrument for determining depression, anxiety, and stress, for research and clinical determinations and is a validated tool among varied ethnicity and population clusters. This tool has three scales, each comprising seven questions. The concluding score is also attained with the sum of the scores. Each question differs from zero (”it is not related to me”) to 3 (”it is related to me”). Since this questionnaire is a condensed form of the key scale (42 questions), the last score of each subscale must be doubled. Each of the subscales is divided into four groups based on the score got: Normal, moderate, severe, and very severe. The data were entered into the IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 23.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp. IBM Corp. version 23. Categorical variables were denoted as mean (standard deviation [SD]) and frequency (percentage), respectively. Pearson correlation test was used to assess correlation. P < 0.05 was determined as statistically noteworthy.
| Results|| |
The average age of the patients was 55 (SD = 16.92) years. About 51.9%were men and 48.1%were women. About 86.8% of the participants were married and the rest were single [Table 1].
|Table 1: Demographic information of hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (n=106)|
Click here to view
The prevalence of underlying diseases in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in our study was as follows: Hypertension (38.7%), diabetes mellitus (31.1%), hyperlipidemia (31.1%), ischemic heart disease (25.5%), asthma (7.5%), renal disease (6.6%), Cerebro Vascular Accidents (CVA) (5.7%), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (3.8%), cancer (1.9%), and rheumatological diseases (1.9%). Furthermore, 11.3% of patients were taking corticosteroids. Overall, 97.2% of patients with COVID-19 had some degree of depression. Degree of depression, based on DASS questionnaire, was 85.8% [Table 2]. All patients (100%) had severe (0.9%) and very severe (99.1%) anxiety. Regarding to stress levels, 97.1% of patients had some degree of stress. In the severity of stress category, 84.9% of patients had severe and very severe stress. There was no statistically noteworthy relation between gender and age with depression, anxiety, stress, and insight of stress [Table 3].
|Table 2: Depression, anxiety and stress scales-21 data from questionnaire of hospitalized patients affected with coronavirus disease-2019|
Click here to view
|Table 3: Prevalence of severe depression, anxiety, and stress in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease-2019|
Click here to view
| Discussion|| |
Facing the misery related to COVID-19 may result in increased occurrence of PTSD, a mental ailment directed to serious suffering and incapacity amid survivors, family members, people who deliver first aids and care, and general public. While regulation of the epidemic and maintenance of patients with COVID-19 is one of the leading tasks of the whole world, this calls for consideration to initial interference and prevention of PTSD among affected populations. In 2007, the inter-agency standing committee (IASC) announced guidelines on mental health and psychosocial support in emergency settings, which has been widely adapted to direct mental health service after disasters, including infectious disease epidemics. The IASC rules are shaped round a 4-tiered intercession pyramid: (1) Reestablishing basic upkeep and security for the concerned population, (2) consolidation family and community systems, (3) giving distraught individuals with psychosocial assistance, and (4) giving dedicated mental health services for severely affected survivors. Additional policies of intervention have also been experienced in various of situations. With deliberations of the previously large and will still growing number of people unprotected to the current COVID-19, so it crucial to provide mental health service embattled at prevention of PTSD to survivors and other people infected with COVID-19. Conceivable plans comprise health education, psychosocial support, and therapy aid to the general population, as well as early involvement, including psychosocial support, psychotherapies, and pharmacological treatments to vulnerable and high-risk groups. Is Hak et al. examined a group of hospitalized patients and described that the occurrence of depression amid these patients was amongst 5% and 60% and mean of 33%. They recommended that hospitalized patients be diagnosed for depression. Depression amongst hospitalized patients has been related with inferior functional consequences, inferior physical health, and re-hospitalization. As noted, in our study, 97.1% of patients had some degree of depression during hospitalization. Concerning all accessible indication and the consequences of our study, it is vital to pay vivid consideration to the mental health complaints of patients with COVID-19 in order to better control possible psychiatric disorders in future.
| Conclusion|| |
Depression, anxiety, stress, and apparent stress were decidedly widespread amongst patients with COVID-19 in the study. There was also a deep association between depression and anxiety with alleged stress.
Financial support and sponsorship
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
| References|| |
Li W, Yang Y, Liu ZH, Zhao YJ, Zhang Q, Zhang L, et al.
Progression of mental health services during the COVID-19 outbreak in China. Int J Biol Sci 2020;16:1732-8.
Brooks SK, Webster RK, Smith LE, Woodland L, Wessely S, Greenberg N, et al.
The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: Rapid review of the evidence. Lancet 2020;395:912-20.
Hawryluck L, Gold WL, Robinson S, Pogorski S, Galea S, Styra R. SARS control and psychological effects of quarantine, Toronto, Canada. Emerg Infect Dis 2004;10:1206-12.
DiGiovanni C, Conley J, Chiu D, Zaborski J. Factors influencing compliance with quarantine in Toronto during the 2003 SARS outbreak. Biosecur Bioterror 2004;2:265-72.
Jeong H, Yim HW, Song YJ, Ki M, Min JA, Cho J, et al
. Mental health status of people isolated due to Middle East respiratory syndrome. Epidemiol Health 2016;38:e2016048.
Holmes EA, O'Connor RC, Perry VH, Tracey I, Wessely S, Arseneault L, et al
. Multidisciplinary research priorities for the COVID-19 pandemic. A call for action for mental health science. Lancet Psychiatry 2020;7:547-60.
Wang C, Pan R, Wan X, Tan Y, Xu L, Ho CS, et al
. Immediate psychological responses and associated factors during the initial stage of the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic among the general population in China. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020;17:1729.
Qiu J, Shen B, Zhao M, Wang Z, Xie B, Xu Y. A nationwide survey of psychological distress among Chinese people in the COVID-19 epidemic: Implication and policy recommendations. Gen Psychiatr 2020;33:e100213.
Bo HX, Li W, Yang Y, Wang Y, Zhang Q, Cheung T, et al.
Posttraumatic stress symptoms and attitude toward crisis mental health services among clinically stable patients with COVID-19 in China. Psychol Med 2020;51:1052-53.
Zandifar A, Badrfam R. Iranian mental health during the COVID-19 epidemic. Asian J Psychiatr 2020;51:101990.
Sinelnikova EM, Dvoretskova TV, Kagan ZS. Intermediate plateaux in kinetics of the reaction catalyzed by biodegradative L-threonine dehydratase from Escherichia coli
. Biokhimiia 1975;40:645-51.
Zandifar A, Badrfam R, Mohammadian Khonsari N, Mohammadi MR, Asayesh H, Qorbani M. Prevalence and associated factors of posttraumatic stress symptoms and stigma among health care workers in contact with COVID-19 patients. Iran J Psychiatry 2020;15:340-50.
Maunder R, Hunter J, Vincent L, Bennett J, Peladeau N, Leszcz M, et al.
The immediate psychological and occupational impact of the 2003 SARS outbreak in a teaching hospital. CMAJ 2003;168:1245-51.
Lima CK, Carvalho PM, Lima IA, Nunes JV, Saraiva JS, de Souza RI, et al.
The emotional impact of Coronavirus 2019-nCoV (new Coronavirus disease). Psychiatry Res 2020;287:112915.
Duan L, Zhu G. Psychological interventions for people affected by the COVID-19 epidemic. Lancet Psychiatry 2020;7:300-2.
Zheng W. Mental health and a novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in China. J Affect Disord 2020;269:201-2.
Ioannou MC, Mogg K, Bradley BP. Vigilance for threat: Effect of anxiety and defensiveness. Pers Individ Dif 2004;36:1879-91.
Oathes DJ, Squillante CM, Ray WJ, Nitschke JB. The impact of worry on attention to threat. PLoS One 2010;5:e13411.
Anderson JL, Sellbom M, Salekin RT. Utility of the personality inventory for DSM-5 – Brief form (PID-5-BF) in the measurement of maladaptive personality and psychopathology. Assessment 2018;25:596-607.
Combaluzier S, Gouvernet B, Menant F, Rezrazi A. Erratum to “Validation of a French translation of Krueger's personality inventory for DSM-5 in its brief form (PID-5 BF)” [Encéphale 2018 44 (1) (2018) 9-13]. Encephale 2019;45:535.
Hyatt CS, Maples-Keller JL, Crowe ML, Sleep CE, Carter ST, Michopoulos V, et al.
Psychometric properties of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 – Brief Form in a community sample with high rates of trauma exposure. J Pers Assess 2020;103:204-13.
Norton PJ. Depression anxiety and stress scales (DASS-21): Psychometric analysis across four racial groups. Anxiety Stress Coping 2007;20:253-65.
Inter-Agency Standing Committee. IASC Guidelines on Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in Emergency Settings. Geneva: Inter-Agency Standing Committee; 2007.
Cénat JM, Mukunzi JN, Noorishad PG, Rousseau C, Derivois D, Bukaka J. A systematic review of mental health programs among populations affected by the Ebola virus disease. J Psychosom Res 2020;131:109966.
Hak WW, Collison K, Danovitch I, Shek L, Kharazi P, Kim T, et al.
Screening for depression in hospitalized medical patients. J Hosp Med 2017;12:118-25.
[Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3]