LIVIVO - The Search Portal for Life Sciences

zur deutschen Oberfläche wechseln
Advanced search

Search results

Result 1 - 2 of total 2

Search options

  1. Article ; Online: A cross-sectional investigation of the mental health and wellbeing among individuals who have been negatively impacted by the COVID-19 international border closure in Australia

    Kathina Ali / Matthew Iasiello / Joep van Agteren / Teri Mavrangelos / Michael Kyrios / Daniel B. Fassnacht

    Globalization and Health, Vol 18, Iss 1, Pp 1-

    2022  Volume 10

    Abstract: Abstract Background The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in the Australian government implementing strict international border closures. However, research has not yet investigated the mental health status of individuals impacted negatively by these ... ...

    Abstract Abstract Background The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in the Australian government implementing strict international border closures. However, research has not yet investigated the mental health status of individuals impacted negatively by these international border closures. Methods The present study was a cross-sectional online survey of 3968 adults who reported being negatively affected by the border closure during June and July 2021. Psychological distress was measured with the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10), stress with the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) and wellbeing with the Mental Health Continuum Short Form (MHC-SF). Results In total, 3968 participants reported being negatively affected by the current restrictions (63.4% in Australia, 36.6% overseas). The vast majority of respondents (83.6%) reported high or very high levels of psychological distress (mean K10 score > 22), and 74.8% reported poor mental wellbeing, with similar risk profiles for participants in Australia or overseas. The most common scenarios of affected individuals included 1) wanting to enter Australia (30.8%), 2) wanting to leave Australia (29.6%) and 3) wanting someone to enter Australia (25.6%). Reasons included wanting to be with partners, family and friends (81.1%), for employment/economic reasons (4.9%), study (4.1%), personal safety/health (2.6%) or holiday (1.4%). While psychological distress was extremely high across all groups, separated partners and those with interrupted study experienced the highest distress (mean K10 = 35.7, n = 155). Conclusion The data suggests a highly elevated mental health risk profile among individuals who report being negatively affected by current Australian international border closures. The results provide valuable data to inform future policy decisions and have clear implications regarding effective service provision for this vulnerable group.
    Keywords COVID-19 ; Coronavirus ; International border closures ; Mental health ; Psychological distress ; Wellbeing ; Public aspects of medicine ; RA1-1270
    Subject code 150 ; 360
    Language English
    Publishing date 2022-02-01T00:00:00Z
    Publisher BMC
    Document type Article ; Online
    Database BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (life sciences selection)

    Full text online

    More links

    Kategorien

    Inter-library loan at ZB MED

    Your chosen title can be delivered directly to ZB MED Cologne location if you are registered as a user at ZB MED Cologne.

  2. Article ; Online: Contemporary treatment of anxiety in primary care

    Erin L. Parker / Michelle Banfield / Daniel B. Fassnacht / Timothy Hatfield / Michael Kyrios

    BMC Family Practice, Vol 22, Iss 1, Pp 1-

    a systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes in countries with universal healthcare

    2021  Volume 15

    Abstract: Abstract Background Anxiety disorders are highly prevalent mental health conditions and are managed predominantly in primary care. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of psychological and pharmacological treatments in countries with ... ...

    Abstract Abstract Background Anxiety disorders are highly prevalent mental health conditions and are managed predominantly in primary care. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of psychological and pharmacological treatments in countries with universal healthcare, and investigated the influence of treatment provider on the efficacy of psychological treatment. Method PubMed, Cochrane, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Scopus were searched in April 2017 for controlled studies of evidence-based anxiety treatment in adults in primary care, published in English since 1997. Searches were repeated in April 2020. We synthesised results using a combination of meta-analysis and narrative methods. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects multi-level model to account for intercorrelation between effects contributed different treatment arms of the same study. Moderator variables were explored using meta-regression analyses. Results In total, 19 articles (from an initial 2,247) reporting 18 studies were included. Meta-analysis including ten studies (n = 1,308) found a pooled effect size of g = 1.16 (95%CI = 0.63 – 1.69) for psychological treatment compared to waitlist control, and no significant effect compared to care as usual (p = .225). Substantial heterogeneity was present (I2 = 81.25). Specialist treatment produced large effects compared to both waitlist control (g = 1.46, 95%CI = 0.96 – 1.96) and care as usual (g = 0.76, 95%CI = 0.27 – 1.25). Treatment provided by non-specialists was only superior to waitlist control (g = 0.80, 95%CI = 0.31 – 1.28). We identified relatively few studies (n = 4) of medications, which reported small to moderate effects for SSRI/SNRI medications and hydroxyzine. The quality of included studies was variable and most studies had at least “unclear” risk of bias in one or more key domains. Conclusions Psychological treatments for anxiety are effective in primary care and are more effective when provided by a specialist (psychologist or clinical psychologist) than a non-specialist (GP, nurse, ...
    Keywords Anxiety ; Systematic review ; Meta-analysis ; Psychological treatment ; Pharmacological treatment ; Primary care ; Medicine (General) ; R5-920
    Subject code 150
    Language English
    Publishing date 2021-05-01T00:00:00Z
    Publisher BMC
    Document type Article ; Online
    Database BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (life sciences selection)

    Full text online

    More links

    Kategorien

    Inter-library loan at ZB MED

    Your chosen title can be delivered directly to ZB MED Cologne location if you are registered as a user at ZB MED Cologne.

To top