14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Social Isolation and Loneliness during COVID-19 Lockdown: Associations with Depressive Symptoms in the German Old-Age Population

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic increase the risk of social isolation and loneliness, which may affect mental wellbeing. Therefore, we aimed to investigate associations between social isolation and loneliness with depressive symptoms in the German old-age population during the first COVID-19 lockdown. A representative sample of randomly selected individuals at least 65 years old ( n = 1005) participated in a computer-assisted standardized telephone interview in April 2020. Sociodemographic data, aspects of the personal life situation, attitudes towards COVID-19 and standardized screening measures on loneliness (UCLA 3-item loneliness scale), depression (Brief Symptom Inventory/BSI-18), and resilience (Brief Resilience Scale/BRS) were assessed. Associations were inspected using multivariate regression models. Being lonely, but not isolated (β = 0.276; p < 0.001) and being both isolated and lonely (β = 0.136; p < 0.001) were associated with higher depressive symptoms. Being isolated, but not lonely was not associated with depressive symptoms. Thus, the subjective emotional evaluation, i.e., feeling lonely, of the social situation during lockdown seems more relevant than the objective state, i.e., being isolated. Normal (β = −0.203; p < 0.001) and high resilience (β = −0.308; p < 0.001) were associated with lower depressive symptoms across groups. Therefore, strengthening coping skills may be a support strategy during lockdowns, especially for lonely older individuals.

          Related collections

          Most cited references39

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: a retrospective cohort study

          Summary Background Since December, 2019, Wuhan, China, has experienced an outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-19 have been reported but risk factors for mortality and a detailed clinical course of illness, including viral shedding, have not been well described. Methods In this retrospective, multicentre cohort study, we included all adult inpatients (≥18 years old) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 from Jinyintan Hospital and Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital (Wuhan, China) who had been discharged or had died by Jan 31, 2020. Demographic, clinical, treatment, and laboratory data, including serial samples for viral RNA detection, were extracted from electronic medical records and compared between survivors and non-survivors. We used univariable and multivariable logistic regression methods to explore the risk factors associated with in-hospital death. Findings 191 patients (135 from Jinyintan Hospital and 56 from Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital) were included in this study, of whom 137 were discharged and 54 died in hospital. 91 (48%) patients had a comorbidity, with hypertension being the most common (58 [30%] patients), followed by diabetes (36 [19%] patients) and coronary heart disease (15 [8%] patients). Multivariable regression showed increasing odds of in-hospital death associated with older age (odds ratio 1·10, 95% CI 1·03–1·17, per year increase; p=0·0043), higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (5·65, 2·61–12·23; p<0·0001), and d-dimer greater than 1 μg/mL (18·42, 2·64–128·55; p=0·0033) on admission. Median duration of viral shedding was 20·0 days (IQR 17·0–24·0) in survivors, but SARS-CoV-2 was detectable until death in non-survivors. The longest observed duration of viral shedding in survivors was 37 days. Interpretation The potential risk factors of older age, high SOFA score, and d-dimer greater than 1 μg/mL could help clinicians to identify patients with poor prognosis at an early stage. Prolonged viral shedding provides the rationale for a strategy of isolation of infected patients and optimal antiviral interventions in the future. Funding Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences; National Science Grant for Distinguished Young Scholars; National Key Research and Development Program of China; The Beijing Science and Technology Project; and Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found

            The continuing 2019-nCoV epidemic threat of novel coronaviruses to global health — The latest 2019 novel coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, China

            The city of Wuhan in China is the focus of global attention due to an outbreak of a febrile respiratory illness due to a coronavirus 2019-nCoV. In December 2019, there was an outbreak of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan, Hubei province in China, with an epidemiological link to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market where there was also sale of live animals. Notification of the WHO on 31 Dec 2019 by the Chinese Health Authorities has prompted health authorities in Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan to step up border surveillance, and generated concern and fears that it could mark the emergence of a novel and serious threat to public health (WHO, 2020a, Parr, 2020). The Chinese health authorities have taken prompt public health measures including intensive surveillance, epidemiological investigations, and closure of the market on 1 Jan 2020. SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, avian influenza, influenza and other common respiratory viruses were ruled out. The Chinese scientists were able to isolate a 2019-nCoV from a patient within a short time on 7 Jan 2020 and perform genome sequencing of the 2019-nCoV. The genetic sequence of the 2019-nCoV has become available to the WHO on 12 Jan 2020 and this has facilitated the laboratories in different countries to produce specific diagnostic PCR tests for detecting the novel infection (WHO, 2020b). The 2019-nCoV is a β CoV of group 2B with at least 70% similarity in genetic sequence to SARS-CoV and has been named 2019-nCoV by the WHO. SARS is a zoonosis caused by SARS-CoV, which first emerged in China in 2002 before spreading to 29 countries/regions in 2003 through a travel-related global outbreak with 8,098 cases with a case fatality rate of 9.6%. Nosocomial transmission of SARS-CoV was common while the primary reservoir was putatively bats, although unproven as the actual source and the intermediary source was civet cats in the wet markets in Guangdong (Hui and Zumla, 2019). MERS is a novel lethal zoonotic disease of humans endemic to the Middle East, caused by MERS-CoV. Humans are thought to acquire MERS-CoV infection though contact with camels or camel products with a case fatality rate close to 35% while nosocomial transmission is also a hallmark (Azhar et al., 2019). The recent outbreak of clusters of viral pneumonia due to a 2019-nCoV in the Wuhan market poses significant threats to international health and may be related to sale of bush meat derived from wild or captive sources at the seafood market. As of 10 Jan 2020, 41 patients have been diagnosed to have infection by the 2019-nCoV animals. The onset of illness of the 41 cases ranges from 8 December 2019 to 2 January 2020. Symptoms include fever (>90% cases), malaise, dry cough (80%), shortness of breath (20%) and respiratory distress (15%). The vital signs were stable in most of the cases while leucopenia and lymphopenia were common. Among the 41 cases, six patients have been discharged, seven patients are in critical care and one died, while the remaining patients are in stable condition. The fatal case involved a 61 year-old man with an abdominal tumour and cirrhosis who was admitted to a hospital due to respiratory failure and severe pneumonia. The diagnoses included severe pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, septic shock and multi-organ failure. The 2019-nCoV infection in Wuhan appears clinically milder than SARS or MERS overall in terms of severity, case fatality rate and transmissibility, which increases the risk of cases remaining undetected. There is currently no clear evidence of human to human transmission. At present, 739 close contacts including 419 healthcare workers are being quarantined and monitored for any development of symptoms (WHO, 2020b, Center for Health Protection and HKSAR, 2020). No new cases have been detected in Wuhan since 3 January 2020. However the first case outside China was reported on 13th January 2020 in a Chinese tourist in Thailand with no epidemiological linkage to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market. The Chinese Health Authorities have carried out very appropriate and prompt response measures including active case finding, and retrospective investigations of the current cluster of patients which have been completed; The Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market has been temporarily closed to carry out investigation, environmental sanitation and disinfection; Public risk communication activities have been carried out to improve public awareness and adoption of self-protection measures. Technical guidance on novel coronavirus has been developed and will continue to be updated as additional information becomes available. However, many questions about the new coronavirus remain. While it appears to be transmitted to humans via animals, the specific animals and other reservoirs need to be identified, the transmission route, the incubation period and characteristics of the susceptible population and survival rates. At present, there is however very limited clinical information of the 2019-nCoV infection and data are missing in regard to the age range, animal source of the virus, incubation period, epidemic curve, viral kinetics, transmission route, pathogenesis, autopsy findings and any treatment response to antivirals among the severe cases. Once there is any clue to the source of animals being responsible for this outbreak, global public health authorities should examine the trading route and source of movement of animals or products taken from the wild or captive conditions from other parts to Wuhan and consider appropriate trading restrictions or other control measures to limit. The rapid identification and containment of a novel coronavirus virus in a short period of time is a re-assuring and a commendable achievement by China’s public health authorities and reflects the increasing global capacity to detect, identify, define and contain new outbreaks. The latest analysis show that the Wuhan CoV cluster with the SARS CoV.10 (Novel coronavirus - China (01): (HU) WHO, phylogenetic tree Archive Number: 20200112.6885385). This outbreak brings back memories of the novel coronavirus outbreak in China, the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in China in 2003, caused by a novel SARS-CoV-coronavirus (World Health Organization, 2019a). SARS-CoV rapidly spread from southern China in 2003 and infected more than 3000 people, killing 774 by 2004, and then disappeared – never to be seen again. However, The Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) (World Health Organization, 2019b), a lethal zoonotic pathogen that was first identified in humans in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) in 2012 continues to emerge and re-emerge through intermittent sporadic cases, community clusters and nosocomial outbreaks. Between 2012 and December 2019, a total of 2465 laboratory-confirmed cases of MERS-CoV infection, including 850 deaths (34.4% mortality) were reported from 27 countries to WHO, the majority of which were reported by KSA (2073 cases, 772 deaths. Whilst several important aspects of MERS-CoV epidemiology, virology, mode of transmission, pathogenesis, diagnosis, clinical features, have been defined, there remain many unanswered questions, including source, transmission and epidemic potential. The Wuhan outbreak is a stark reminder of the continuing threat of zoonotic diseases to global health security. More significant and better targeted investments are required for a more concerted and collaborative global effort, learning from experiences from all geographical regions, through a ‘ONE-HUMAN-ENIVRONMENTAL-ANIMAL-HEALTH’ global consortium to reduce the global threat of zoonotic diseases (Zumla et al., 2016). Sharing experience and learning from all geographical regions and across disciplines will be key to sustaining and further developing the progress being made. Author declarations All authors have a specialist interest in emerging and re-emerging pathogens. FN, RK, OD, GI, TDMc, CD and AZ are members of the Pan-African Network on Emerging and Re-emerging Infections (PANDORA-ID-NET) funded by the European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership the EU Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation. AZ is a National Institutes of Health Research senior investigator. All authors declare no conflicts of interest.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Mental health before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal probability sample survey of the UK population

              Summary Background The potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on population mental health is of increasing global concern. We examine changes in adult mental health in the UK population before and during the lockdown. Methods In this secondary analysis of a national, longitudinal cohort study, households that took part in Waves 8 or 9 of the UK Household Longitudinal Study (UKHLS) panel, including all members aged 16 or older in April, 2020, were invited to complete the COVID-19 web survey on April 23–30, 2020. Participants who were unable to make an informed decision as a result of incapacity, or who had unknown postal addresses or addresses abroad were excluded. Mental health was assessed using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). Repeated cross-sectional analyses were done to examine temporal trends. Fixed-effects regression models were fitted to identify within-person change compared with preceding trends. Findings Waves 6–9 of the UKHLS had 53 351 participants. Eligible participants for the COVID-19 web survey were from households that took part in Waves 8 or 9, and 17 452 (41·2%) of 42 330 eligible people participated in the web survey. Population prevalence of clinically significant levels of mental distress rose from 18·9% (95% CI 17·8–20·0) in 2018–19 to 27·3% (26·3–28·2) in April, 2020, one month into UK lockdown. Mean GHQ-12 score also increased over this time, from 11·5 (95% CI 11·3–11·6) in 2018–19, to 12·6 (12·5–12·8) in April, 2020. This was 0·48 (95% CI 0·07–0·90) points higher than expected when accounting for previous upward trends between 2014 and 2018. Comparing GHQ-12 scores within individuals, adjusting for time trends and significant predictors of change, increases were greatest in 18–24-year-olds (2·69 points, 95% CI 1·89–3·48), 25–34-year-olds (1·57, 0·96–2·18), women (0·92, 0·50–1·35), and people living with young children (1·45, 0·79–2·12). People employed before the pandemic also averaged a notable increase in GHQ-12 score (0·63, 95% CI 0·20–1·06). Interpretation By late April, 2020, mental health in the UK had deteriorated compared with pre-COVID-19 trends. Policies emphasising the needs of women, young people, and those with preschool aged children are likely to play an important part in preventing future mental illness. Funding None.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                ijerph
                International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
                MDPI
                1661-7827
                1660-4601
                31 March 2021
                April 2021
                : 18
                : 7
                : 3615
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Institute of Social Medicine, Occupational Health and Public Health (ISAP), Medical Faculty, University of Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany; susanne.roehr@ 123456medizin.uni-leipzig.de (S.R.); steffi.riedel-heller@ 123456medizin.uni-leipzig.de (S.G.R.-H.)
                [2 ]Global Brain Health Institute (GBHI), Trinity College Dublin, D02 PN40 Dublin, Ireland
                [3 ]Department of Public Mental Health, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, 68159 Mannheim, Germany; ulrich.reininghaus@ 123456zi-mannheim.de
                [4 ]Centre for Epidemiology and Public Health, Health Service and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King’s College London, London WC2R 2LS, UK
                [5 ]ESRC Centre for Society and Mental Health, King’s College London, London WC2R 2LS, UK
                Author notes
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9385-0669
                Article
                ijerph-18-03615
                10.3390/ijerph18073615
                8036754
                33807232
                51028e32-9ff9-4a2d-8051-5ab7778e1319
                © 2021 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 04 March 2021
                : 26 March 2021
                Categories
                Article

                Public health
                covid-19,lockdown,social isolation,loneliness,mental health,depressive symptoms,resilience,old age,survey

                Comments

                Comment on this article