Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (14)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (14)
Year of publication
Document Type
- Journal article (13)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Keywords
- anxiety (14) (remove)
Institute
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie, Psychosomatik und Psychotherapie (14) (remove)
Sonstige beteiligte Institutionen
EU-Project number / Contract (GA) number
- 602805 (2)
This study examined (1) the availability and content of national CPGs for treatment of peripartum depression, including comorbid anxiety, with antidepressants and other psychotropics across Europe and (2) antidepressant and other psychotropic utilization data as an indicator of prescribers' compliance to the guidelines. We conducted a search using Medline and the Guidelines International Network database, combined with direct e-mail contact with national Riseup-PPD COST ACTION members and researchers within psychiatry. Of the 48 European countries examined, we screened 41 records and included 14 of them for full-text evaluation. After exclusion of ineligible and duplicate records, we included 12 CPGs. Multiple CPGs recommend antidepressant initiation or continuation based on maternal disease severity, non-response to first-line non-pharmacological interventions, and after risk-benefit assessment. Advice on treatment of comorbid anxiety is largely missing or unspecific. Antidepressant dispensing data suggest general prescribers' compliance with the preferred substances of the CPG, although country-specific differences were noted. To conclude, there is an urgent need for harmonized, up-to-date CPGs for pharmacological management of peripartum depression and comorbid anxiety in Europe. The recommendations need to be informed by the latest available evidence so that healthcare providers and women can make informed, evidence-based decisions about treatment choices.
A variety of factors contribute to the degree to which a person feels lonely and socially isolated. These factors may be particularly relevant in contexts requiring social distancing, e.g., during the COVID-19 pandemic or in states of immunodeficiency. We present the Loneliness and Isolation during Social Distancing (LISD) Scale. Extending existing measures, the LISD scale measures both state and trait aspects of loneliness and isolation, including indicators of social connectedness and support. In addition, it reliably predicts individual differences in anxiety and depression. Data were collected online from two independent samples in a social distancing context (the COVID-19 pandemic). Factorial validation was based on exploratory factor analysis (EFA; Sample 1, N = 244) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA; Sample 2, N = 304). Multiple regression analyses were used to assess how the LISD scale predicts state anxiety and depression. The LISD scale showed satisfactory fit in both samples. Its two state factors indicate being lonely and isolated as well as connected and supported, while its three trait factors reflect general loneliness and isolation, sociability and sense of belonging, and social closeness and support. Our results imply strong predictive power of the LISD scale for state anxiety and depression, explaining 33 and 51% of variance, respectively. Anxiety and depression scores were particularly predicted by low dispositional sociability and sense of belonging and by currently being more lonely and isolated. In turn, being lonely and isolated was related to being less connected and supported (state) as well as having lower social closeness and support in general (trait). We provide a novel scale which distinguishes between acute and general dimensions of loneliness and social isolation while also predicting mental health. The LISD scale could be a valuable and economic addition to the assessment of mental health factors impacted by social distancing.
Psychosocial factors affect mental health and health-related quality of life (HRQL) in a complex manner, yet gender differences in these interactions remain poorly understood. We investigated whether psychosocial factors such as social support and personal and work-related concerns impact mental health and HRQL differentially in women and men during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Between June and October 2020, the first part of a COVID-19-specific program was conducted within the “Characteristics and Course of Heart Failure Stages A-B and Determinants of Progression (STAAB)” cohort study, a representative age- and gender-stratified sample of the general population of Würzburg, Germany. Using psychometric networks, we first established the complex relations between personal social support, personal and work-related concerns, and their interactions with anxiety, depression, and HRQL. Second, we tested for gender differences by comparing expected influence, edge weight differences, and stability of the networks. The network comparison revealed a significant difference in the overall network structure. The male (N = 1370) but not the female network (N = 1520) showed a positive link between work-related concern and anxiety. In both networks, anxiety was the most central variable. These findings provide further evidence that the complex interplay of psychosocial factors with mental health and HRQL decisively depends on gender. Our results are relevant for the development of gender-specific interventions to increase resilience in times of pandemic crisis.
Anxious depression represents a subtype of major depressive disorder and is associated with increased suicidality, severity, chronicity and lower treatment response. Only a few studies have investigated the differences between anxious depressed (aMDD) and non-anxious depressed (naMDD) patients regarding treatment dosage, serum-concentration and drug-specific treatment response. In our naturalistic and prospective study, we investigated whether the effectiveness of therapy including antidepressants (SSRI, SNRI, NaSSA, tricyclics and combinations) in aMDD patients differs significantly from that in naMDD patients. In a sample of 346 patients, we calculated the anxiety somatization factor (ASF) and defined treatment response as a reduction (≥50%) in the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS)-21 score after 7 weeks of pharmacological treatment. We did not observe an association between therapy response and the baseline ASF-scores, or differences in therapy outcomes between aMDD and naMDD patients. However, non-responders had higher ASF-scores, and at week 7 aMDD patients displayed a worse therapy outcome than naMDD patients. In subgroup analyses for different antidepressant drugs, venlafaxine-treated aMDD patients showed a significantly worse outcome at week 7. Future prospective, randomized-controlled studies should address the question of a worse therapy outcome in aMDD patients for different psychopharmaceuticals individually.