User login
Schizophrenia meds a key contributor to cognitive impairment
Anticholinergic medication burden from antipsychotics, antidepressants, and other psychotropics has a cumulative effect of worsening cognitive function in patients with schizophrenia, new research indicates.
“The link between long-term use of anticholinergic medications and cognitive impairment is well-known and growing,” lead researcher Yash Joshi, MD, department of psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, said in an interview.
“While this association is relevant for everyone, it is particularly important for those living with schizophrenia, who often struggle with cognitive difficulties conferred by the illness itself,” said Dr. Joshi.
“Brain health in schizophrenia is a game of inches, and even small negative effects on cognitive functioning through anticholinergic medication burden may have large impacts on patients’ lives,” he added.
The study was published online May 14 in the American Journal of Psychiatry.
‘Striking’ results
Dr. Joshi and colleagues set out to comprehensively characterize how the cumulative anticholinergic burden from different classes of medications affect cognition in patients with schizophrenia.
They assessed medical records, including all prescribed medications, for 1,120 adults with a diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.
For each participant, prescribed medications were rated and summed using a modified anticholinergic cognitive burden (ACB) scale. Cognitive functioning was assessed by performance on domains of the Penn Computerized Neurocognitive Battery (PCNB).
The investigators found that 63% of participants had an ACB score of at least 3, which is “striking,” said Dr. Joshi, given that previous studies have shown that an ACB score of 3 in a healthy, older adult is associated with cognitive dysfunction and a 50% increased risk of developing dementia.
About one-quarter of participants had an ACB score of 6 or higher.
Yet, these high ACB scores are not hard to achieve in routine psychiatric care, the researchers note.
For example, a patient taking olanzapine daily to ease symptoms of psychosis would have an ACB score of 3; if hydroxyzine was added for anxiety or insomnia, the patient’s ACB score would rise to 6, they point out.
Lightening the load
Antipsychotics contributed more than half of the anticholinergic burden, while traditional anticholinergics, antidepressants, mood stabilizers, and benzodiazepines accounted for the remainder.
“It is easy even for well-meaning clinicians to inadvertently contribute to anticholinergic medication burden through routine and appropriate care. The unique finding here is that this burden comes from medications we don’t usually think of as typical anticholinergic agents,” senior author Gregory Light, PhD, with University of California, San Diego, said in a news release.
Anticholinergic medication burden was significantly associated with generalized impairments in cognitive functioning across all cognitive domains on the PCNB with comparable magnitude and after controlling for multiple proxies of functioning or disease severity.
Higher anticholinergic medication burden was associated with worse cognitive performance. The PCNB global cognitive averages for none, low, average, high, and very high anticholinergic burdens were, respectively (in z values), -0.51, -0.70, -0.85, -0.96, and -1.15.
The results suggest “total cumulative anticholinergic burden – rather than anticholinergic burden attributable to a specific antipsychotic or psychotropic medication class – is a key contributor to cognitive impairment in schizophrenia,” the researchers write.
“The results imply that if it is clinically safe and practical,” said Dr. Joshi.
“This may be accomplished by reducing overall polypharmacy or transitioning to equivalent medications with lower overall anticholinergic burden. While ‘traditional’ anticholinergic medications should always be scrutinized, all medications should be carefully evaluated to understand whether they contribute to cumulative anticholinergic medication burden,” he added.
Confirmatory findings
Commenting on the study for this news organization, Jessica Gannon, MD, assistant professor of psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, said the author’s findings “aren’t surprising, but the work that they did was pretty comprehensive [and] further fleshed out some of our concerns about the impact of anticholinergics on cognitive function in patients with schizophrenia.”
“We certainly have to use some of these medications for patients, like antipsychotics that do have some anticholinergic burden associated with them. We don’t really have other options,” Dr. Gannon said.
“But certainly I think this calls us to be better stewards of medication in general. And when we prescribe for comorbid conditions, like depression and anxiety, we should be careful in our prescribing practices, try not to prescribe an anticholinergic medication, and, if they have been prescribed, to deprescribe them,” Dr. Gannon added.
The study was supported by grants from the National Institute of Mental Health; the Sidney R. Baer, Jr. Foundation; the Brain and Behavior Research Foundation; the VISN-22 Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center; and the Department of Veterans Affairs. Dr. Joshi and Dr. Gannon have reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Anticholinergic medication burden from antipsychotics, antidepressants, and other psychotropics has a cumulative effect of worsening cognitive function in patients with schizophrenia, new research indicates.
“The link between long-term use of anticholinergic medications and cognitive impairment is well-known and growing,” lead researcher Yash Joshi, MD, department of psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, said in an interview.
“While this association is relevant for everyone, it is particularly important for those living with schizophrenia, who often struggle with cognitive difficulties conferred by the illness itself,” said Dr. Joshi.
“Brain health in schizophrenia is a game of inches, and even small negative effects on cognitive functioning through anticholinergic medication burden may have large impacts on patients’ lives,” he added.
The study was published online May 14 in the American Journal of Psychiatry.
‘Striking’ results
Dr. Joshi and colleagues set out to comprehensively characterize how the cumulative anticholinergic burden from different classes of medications affect cognition in patients with schizophrenia.
They assessed medical records, including all prescribed medications, for 1,120 adults with a diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.
For each participant, prescribed medications were rated and summed using a modified anticholinergic cognitive burden (ACB) scale. Cognitive functioning was assessed by performance on domains of the Penn Computerized Neurocognitive Battery (PCNB).
The investigators found that 63% of participants had an ACB score of at least 3, which is “striking,” said Dr. Joshi, given that previous studies have shown that an ACB score of 3 in a healthy, older adult is associated with cognitive dysfunction and a 50% increased risk of developing dementia.
About one-quarter of participants had an ACB score of 6 or higher.
Yet, these high ACB scores are not hard to achieve in routine psychiatric care, the researchers note.
For example, a patient taking olanzapine daily to ease symptoms of psychosis would have an ACB score of 3; if hydroxyzine was added for anxiety or insomnia, the patient’s ACB score would rise to 6, they point out.
Lightening the load
Antipsychotics contributed more than half of the anticholinergic burden, while traditional anticholinergics, antidepressants, mood stabilizers, and benzodiazepines accounted for the remainder.
“It is easy even for well-meaning clinicians to inadvertently contribute to anticholinergic medication burden through routine and appropriate care. The unique finding here is that this burden comes from medications we don’t usually think of as typical anticholinergic agents,” senior author Gregory Light, PhD, with University of California, San Diego, said in a news release.
Anticholinergic medication burden was significantly associated with generalized impairments in cognitive functioning across all cognitive domains on the PCNB with comparable magnitude and after controlling for multiple proxies of functioning or disease severity.
Higher anticholinergic medication burden was associated with worse cognitive performance. The PCNB global cognitive averages for none, low, average, high, and very high anticholinergic burdens were, respectively (in z values), -0.51, -0.70, -0.85, -0.96, and -1.15.
The results suggest “total cumulative anticholinergic burden – rather than anticholinergic burden attributable to a specific antipsychotic or psychotropic medication class – is a key contributor to cognitive impairment in schizophrenia,” the researchers write.
“The results imply that if it is clinically safe and practical,” said Dr. Joshi.
“This may be accomplished by reducing overall polypharmacy or transitioning to equivalent medications with lower overall anticholinergic burden. While ‘traditional’ anticholinergic medications should always be scrutinized, all medications should be carefully evaluated to understand whether they contribute to cumulative anticholinergic medication burden,” he added.
Confirmatory findings
Commenting on the study for this news organization, Jessica Gannon, MD, assistant professor of psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, said the author’s findings “aren’t surprising, but the work that they did was pretty comprehensive [and] further fleshed out some of our concerns about the impact of anticholinergics on cognitive function in patients with schizophrenia.”
“We certainly have to use some of these medications for patients, like antipsychotics that do have some anticholinergic burden associated with them. We don’t really have other options,” Dr. Gannon said.
“But certainly I think this calls us to be better stewards of medication in general. And when we prescribe for comorbid conditions, like depression and anxiety, we should be careful in our prescribing practices, try not to prescribe an anticholinergic medication, and, if they have been prescribed, to deprescribe them,” Dr. Gannon added.
The study was supported by grants from the National Institute of Mental Health; the Sidney R. Baer, Jr. Foundation; the Brain and Behavior Research Foundation; the VISN-22 Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center; and the Department of Veterans Affairs. Dr. Joshi and Dr. Gannon have reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Anticholinergic medication burden from antipsychotics, antidepressants, and other psychotropics has a cumulative effect of worsening cognitive function in patients with schizophrenia, new research indicates.
“The link between long-term use of anticholinergic medications and cognitive impairment is well-known and growing,” lead researcher Yash Joshi, MD, department of psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, said in an interview.
“While this association is relevant for everyone, it is particularly important for those living with schizophrenia, who often struggle with cognitive difficulties conferred by the illness itself,” said Dr. Joshi.
“Brain health in schizophrenia is a game of inches, and even small negative effects on cognitive functioning through anticholinergic medication burden may have large impacts on patients’ lives,” he added.
The study was published online May 14 in the American Journal of Psychiatry.
‘Striking’ results
Dr. Joshi and colleagues set out to comprehensively characterize how the cumulative anticholinergic burden from different classes of medications affect cognition in patients with schizophrenia.
They assessed medical records, including all prescribed medications, for 1,120 adults with a diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.
For each participant, prescribed medications were rated and summed using a modified anticholinergic cognitive burden (ACB) scale. Cognitive functioning was assessed by performance on domains of the Penn Computerized Neurocognitive Battery (PCNB).
The investigators found that 63% of participants had an ACB score of at least 3, which is “striking,” said Dr. Joshi, given that previous studies have shown that an ACB score of 3 in a healthy, older adult is associated with cognitive dysfunction and a 50% increased risk of developing dementia.
About one-quarter of participants had an ACB score of 6 or higher.
Yet, these high ACB scores are not hard to achieve in routine psychiatric care, the researchers note.
For example, a patient taking olanzapine daily to ease symptoms of psychosis would have an ACB score of 3; if hydroxyzine was added for anxiety or insomnia, the patient’s ACB score would rise to 6, they point out.
Lightening the load
Antipsychotics contributed more than half of the anticholinergic burden, while traditional anticholinergics, antidepressants, mood stabilizers, and benzodiazepines accounted for the remainder.
“It is easy even for well-meaning clinicians to inadvertently contribute to anticholinergic medication burden through routine and appropriate care. The unique finding here is that this burden comes from medications we don’t usually think of as typical anticholinergic agents,” senior author Gregory Light, PhD, with University of California, San Diego, said in a news release.
Anticholinergic medication burden was significantly associated with generalized impairments in cognitive functioning across all cognitive domains on the PCNB with comparable magnitude and after controlling for multiple proxies of functioning or disease severity.
Higher anticholinergic medication burden was associated with worse cognitive performance. The PCNB global cognitive averages for none, low, average, high, and very high anticholinergic burdens were, respectively (in z values), -0.51, -0.70, -0.85, -0.96, and -1.15.
The results suggest “total cumulative anticholinergic burden – rather than anticholinergic burden attributable to a specific antipsychotic or psychotropic medication class – is a key contributor to cognitive impairment in schizophrenia,” the researchers write.
“The results imply that if it is clinically safe and practical,” said Dr. Joshi.
“This may be accomplished by reducing overall polypharmacy or transitioning to equivalent medications with lower overall anticholinergic burden. While ‘traditional’ anticholinergic medications should always be scrutinized, all medications should be carefully evaluated to understand whether they contribute to cumulative anticholinergic medication burden,” he added.
Confirmatory findings
Commenting on the study for this news organization, Jessica Gannon, MD, assistant professor of psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, said the author’s findings “aren’t surprising, but the work that they did was pretty comprehensive [and] further fleshed out some of our concerns about the impact of anticholinergics on cognitive function in patients with schizophrenia.”
“We certainly have to use some of these medications for patients, like antipsychotics that do have some anticholinergic burden associated with them. We don’t really have other options,” Dr. Gannon said.
“But certainly I think this calls us to be better stewards of medication in general. And when we prescribe for comorbid conditions, like depression and anxiety, we should be careful in our prescribing practices, try not to prescribe an anticholinergic medication, and, if they have been prescribed, to deprescribe them,” Dr. Gannon added.
The study was supported by grants from the National Institute of Mental Health; the Sidney R. Baer, Jr. Foundation; the Brain and Behavior Research Foundation; the VISN-22 Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center; and the Department of Veterans Affairs. Dr. Joshi and Dr. Gannon have reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Child suicides drive Colorado hospital to declare state of emergency
On May 25, Jena Hausmann, CEO of Children’s Hospital Colorado, Aurora, declared a state of emergency in youth mental health in response to an astronomical increase in pediatric mental health cases, including suicide, which has overwhelmed the institution.
From April 2019 to April 2021, the demand for pediatric behavioral health treatment at the hospital system increased by 90%. In Colorado, suicide is now the number one cause of death among youth and occurs in children as young as 10 years of age.
“Now we are seeing our pediatric emergency departments and our inpatient units overrun with kids attempting suicide and suffering from other forms of major mental health illness,” Dr. Hausmann said in a press release.
“We had to draw attention to what we’re seeing in our hospital and our community on an everyday basis – an unprecedented number of suicidal children who need acute treatment for behavioral health problems – and when I say ‘unprecedented,’ I’m serious – I’ve been in pediatrics for two decades and have never seen anything like this before,” David Brumbaugh, MD, a pediatric gastroenterologist and chief medical officer for Children’s Colorado, told this news organization.
Christine Crawford, MD, associate medical director of the National Alliance on Mental Illness, stated in an interview that she “commends the CEO of the hospital for making this announcement, because it is outrageous to see what is happening with more and more children with significant psychiatric symptoms who are not getting adequate care.”
Jenna Glover, PhD, child psychologist and director of psychology training at Children’s Hospital, said that during the past decade, there has been a steady increase in depression, anxiety, and suicide among youth in Colorado. Suicide, she added, is now the number one cause of death in youth, “so we were already in a state of crisis.” She added that COVID-19 was “the straw that broke the camel’s back.”
“In January to April of this year, behavioral health ED visits to Children’s Hospital were 72% higher than they were 2 years ago at this time,” she said. “Colorado Springs had a 145% increase for ED behavioral health visits during the first 4 months of 2021, compared to the first 4 months of 2020.”
COVID’s impact
Other problems that have been “skyrocketing” in youth are self-harm, substance use, and eating disorders. Younger children are experiencing an increase in behavioral problems, including developmental regression, such as tantrums, and problems with sleeping, toileting, and eating, Dr. Glover noted.
The youth mental health crisis has mushroomed, although social distancing requirements are now beginning to ease and we are in the “home stretch of the pandemic,” Dr. Brumbaugh said.
One possible reason “is that we took kids out of their normal routines, social circles, friendships, etc., for 12 months, and that was the limit of their physiological or mental resistance, and they got to the end of their rope,” he speculated.
Dr. Glover said, “Kids are burned out, and although they’re asking to return to their life, they don’t feel they have the resources. They feel so behind; they don’t know how to catch up.”
Dr. Brumbaugh said that there are not enough child psychiatrists to provide outpatient services or enough inpatient beds for children in crisis.
“This is an unacceptable situation. We would never allow a child with leukemia or appendicitis to go several weeks without treatment,” he said.
Community donors have come forward, enabling an anticipated 50% increase in Children’s Hospital’s mental health outpatient, inpatient, and day services by March 2022.
“On a hospital level, we are continuing to do things to expand access to care, like opening units that provide different levels of care for patients with psychiatric problems, as well as expanding into areas that are more rural,” Dr. Glover said.
However, the “blueprint is not in action yet, and a lot of money still needs to be allocated. A workforce has to be created, because there are not enough clinicians to fill these roles,” she added.
Chronic underfunding
Dr. Brumbaugh said Colorado has always had a “relatively underfunded behavioral health system for kids.” A 2021 report by
However, Dr. Glover noted that Colorado is “not exceptional.” The increased vulnerability to youth mental illness and suicide is characteristic of other mountain states, which have larger rural areas, less access to care, and increased access to guns, she said.
Mass shootings may have amped up stress levels. “For some kids, this is happening in their schools or towns, and they feel traumatized and unsafe,” Dr. Glover added.
Dr. Crawford, who is an assistant professor of psychiatry at Boston University, also pointed out that the mental health crisis in youth is not unique to Colorado.
“Throughout the country, we’ve seen these colliding pandemics – inadequate mental health resources for children and COVID-19, which exacerbated the existing mental health crisis,” she said.
“The pandemic led to an increase in telehealth services, making individual and group psychotherapy available to kids in areas that never had access to these before, which is a ‘silver lining’ of the pandemic,” Dr. Glover said.
Dr. Crawford is “encouraged that we are having more conversations about pediatric mental health, because the pandemic amplified what was already going on and made it impossible to ignore.”
Screening is essential
Screening for mental health problems should be at the top of the mind of pediatricians and other clinicians who work with children, Dr. Glover said.
“Pediatricians are in the best place to catch potentially suicidal kids, because they are more likely to see these kids than therapists,” she noted.
She suggested using a rapid screen for depression, such as the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) modified for adolescents. Parents can also fill out a PHQ-9 for younger children and even for themselves.
“Depression, anxiety, and suicidality affect the whole family, so screening for these conditions in adults will benefit the children too,” she said. Teachers should also “be aware of what depression and anxiety symptoms look like in kids, because sometimes they can manifest more as irritability,” Dr. Glover added.
Policymakers and insurers need to prioritize pediatric mental health when determining allocation of health care, said Dr. Crawford.
“Financial incentives should be provided for hospitals to want to reserve beds for psychiatric patients, and in the outpatient setting, we also need to look at the payment structure of psychiatric visits,” she added.
Many psychiatrists do not want to accept insurance because of the increased bureaucracy and low reimbursement rates of insurance companies, and families cannot afford to pay out of pocket, “so we really need to look at the insurance issue at a policy level,” Dr. Crawford said.
Dr. Brumbaugh, Dr. Glover, and Dr. Crawford have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
On May 25, Jena Hausmann, CEO of Children’s Hospital Colorado, Aurora, declared a state of emergency in youth mental health in response to an astronomical increase in pediatric mental health cases, including suicide, which has overwhelmed the institution.
From April 2019 to April 2021, the demand for pediatric behavioral health treatment at the hospital system increased by 90%. In Colorado, suicide is now the number one cause of death among youth and occurs in children as young as 10 years of age.
“Now we are seeing our pediatric emergency departments and our inpatient units overrun with kids attempting suicide and suffering from other forms of major mental health illness,” Dr. Hausmann said in a press release.
“We had to draw attention to what we’re seeing in our hospital and our community on an everyday basis – an unprecedented number of suicidal children who need acute treatment for behavioral health problems – and when I say ‘unprecedented,’ I’m serious – I’ve been in pediatrics for two decades and have never seen anything like this before,” David Brumbaugh, MD, a pediatric gastroenterologist and chief medical officer for Children’s Colorado, told this news organization.
Christine Crawford, MD, associate medical director of the National Alliance on Mental Illness, stated in an interview that she “commends the CEO of the hospital for making this announcement, because it is outrageous to see what is happening with more and more children with significant psychiatric symptoms who are not getting adequate care.”
Jenna Glover, PhD, child psychologist and director of psychology training at Children’s Hospital, said that during the past decade, there has been a steady increase in depression, anxiety, and suicide among youth in Colorado. Suicide, she added, is now the number one cause of death in youth, “so we were already in a state of crisis.” She added that COVID-19 was “the straw that broke the camel’s back.”
“In January to April of this year, behavioral health ED visits to Children’s Hospital were 72% higher than they were 2 years ago at this time,” she said. “Colorado Springs had a 145% increase for ED behavioral health visits during the first 4 months of 2021, compared to the first 4 months of 2020.”
COVID’s impact
Other problems that have been “skyrocketing” in youth are self-harm, substance use, and eating disorders. Younger children are experiencing an increase in behavioral problems, including developmental regression, such as tantrums, and problems with sleeping, toileting, and eating, Dr. Glover noted.
The youth mental health crisis has mushroomed, although social distancing requirements are now beginning to ease and we are in the “home stretch of the pandemic,” Dr. Brumbaugh said.
One possible reason “is that we took kids out of their normal routines, social circles, friendships, etc., for 12 months, and that was the limit of their physiological or mental resistance, and they got to the end of their rope,” he speculated.
Dr. Glover said, “Kids are burned out, and although they’re asking to return to their life, they don’t feel they have the resources. They feel so behind; they don’t know how to catch up.”
Dr. Brumbaugh said that there are not enough child psychiatrists to provide outpatient services or enough inpatient beds for children in crisis.
“This is an unacceptable situation. We would never allow a child with leukemia or appendicitis to go several weeks without treatment,” he said.
Community donors have come forward, enabling an anticipated 50% increase in Children’s Hospital’s mental health outpatient, inpatient, and day services by March 2022.
“On a hospital level, we are continuing to do things to expand access to care, like opening units that provide different levels of care for patients with psychiatric problems, as well as expanding into areas that are more rural,” Dr. Glover said.
However, the “blueprint is not in action yet, and a lot of money still needs to be allocated. A workforce has to be created, because there are not enough clinicians to fill these roles,” she added.
Chronic underfunding
Dr. Brumbaugh said Colorado has always had a “relatively underfunded behavioral health system for kids.” A 2021 report by
However, Dr. Glover noted that Colorado is “not exceptional.” The increased vulnerability to youth mental illness and suicide is characteristic of other mountain states, which have larger rural areas, less access to care, and increased access to guns, she said.
Mass shootings may have amped up stress levels. “For some kids, this is happening in their schools or towns, and they feel traumatized and unsafe,” Dr. Glover added.
Dr. Crawford, who is an assistant professor of psychiatry at Boston University, also pointed out that the mental health crisis in youth is not unique to Colorado.
“Throughout the country, we’ve seen these colliding pandemics – inadequate mental health resources for children and COVID-19, which exacerbated the existing mental health crisis,” she said.
“The pandemic led to an increase in telehealth services, making individual and group psychotherapy available to kids in areas that never had access to these before, which is a ‘silver lining’ of the pandemic,” Dr. Glover said.
Dr. Crawford is “encouraged that we are having more conversations about pediatric mental health, because the pandemic amplified what was already going on and made it impossible to ignore.”
Screening is essential
Screening for mental health problems should be at the top of the mind of pediatricians and other clinicians who work with children, Dr. Glover said.
“Pediatricians are in the best place to catch potentially suicidal kids, because they are more likely to see these kids than therapists,” she noted.
She suggested using a rapid screen for depression, such as the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) modified for adolescents. Parents can also fill out a PHQ-9 for younger children and even for themselves.
“Depression, anxiety, and suicidality affect the whole family, so screening for these conditions in adults will benefit the children too,” she said. Teachers should also “be aware of what depression and anxiety symptoms look like in kids, because sometimes they can manifest more as irritability,” Dr. Glover added.
Policymakers and insurers need to prioritize pediatric mental health when determining allocation of health care, said Dr. Crawford.
“Financial incentives should be provided for hospitals to want to reserve beds for psychiatric patients, and in the outpatient setting, we also need to look at the payment structure of psychiatric visits,” she added.
Many psychiatrists do not want to accept insurance because of the increased bureaucracy and low reimbursement rates of insurance companies, and families cannot afford to pay out of pocket, “so we really need to look at the insurance issue at a policy level,” Dr. Crawford said.
Dr. Brumbaugh, Dr. Glover, and Dr. Crawford have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
On May 25, Jena Hausmann, CEO of Children’s Hospital Colorado, Aurora, declared a state of emergency in youth mental health in response to an astronomical increase in pediatric mental health cases, including suicide, which has overwhelmed the institution.
From April 2019 to April 2021, the demand for pediatric behavioral health treatment at the hospital system increased by 90%. In Colorado, suicide is now the number one cause of death among youth and occurs in children as young as 10 years of age.
“Now we are seeing our pediatric emergency departments and our inpatient units overrun with kids attempting suicide and suffering from other forms of major mental health illness,” Dr. Hausmann said in a press release.
“We had to draw attention to what we’re seeing in our hospital and our community on an everyday basis – an unprecedented number of suicidal children who need acute treatment for behavioral health problems – and when I say ‘unprecedented,’ I’m serious – I’ve been in pediatrics for two decades and have never seen anything like this before,” David Brumbaugh, MD, a pediatric gastroenterologist and chief medical officer for Children’s Colorado, told this news organization.
Christine Crawford, MD, associate medical director of the National Alliance on Mental Illness, stated in an interview that she “commends the CEO of the hospital for making this announcement, because it is outrageous to see what is happening with more and more children with significant psychiatric symptoms who are not getting adequate care.”
Jenna Glover, PhD, child psychologist and director of psychology training at Children’s Hospital, said that during the past decade, there has been a steady increase in depression, anxiety, and suicide among youth in Colorado. Suicide, she added, is now the number one cause of death in youth, “so we were already in a state of crisis.” She added that COVID-19 was “the straw that broke the camel’s back.”
“In January to April of this year, behavioral health ED visits to Children’s Hospital were 72% higher than they were 2 years ago at this time,” she said. “Colorado Springs had a 145% increase for ED behavioral health visits during the first 4 months of 2021, compared to the first 4 months of 2020.”
COVID’s impact
Other problems that have been “skyrocketing” in youth are self-harm, substance use, and eating disorders. Younger children are experiencing an increase in behavioral problems, including developmental regression, such as tantrums, and problems with sleeping, toileting, and eating, Dr. Glover noted.
The youth mental health crisis has mushroomed, although social distancing requirements are now beginning to ease and we are in the “home stretch of the pandemic,” Dr. Brumbaugh said.
One possible reason “is that we took kids out of their normal routines, social circles, friendships, etc., for 12 months, and that was the limit of their physiological or mental resistance, and they got to the end of their rope,” he speculated.
Dr. Glover said, “Kids are burned out, and although they’re asking to return to their life, they don’t feel they have the resources. They feel so behind; they don’t know how to catch up.”
Dr. Brumbaugh said that there are not enough child psychiatrists to provide outpatient services or enough inpatient beds for children in crisis.
“This is an unacceptable situation. We would never allow a child with leukemia or appendicitis to go several weeks without treatment,” he said.
Community donors have come forward, enabling an anticipated 50% increase in Children’s Hospital’s mental health outpatient, inpatient, and day services by March 2022.
“On a hospital level, we are continuing to do things to expand access to care, like opening units that provide different levels of care for patients with psychiatric problems, as well as expanding into areas that are more rural,” Dr. Glover said.
However, the “blueprint is not in action yet, and a lot of money still needs to be allocated. A workforce has to be created, because there are not enough clinicians to fill these roles,” she added.
Chronic underfunding
Dr. Brumbaugh said Colorado has always had a “relatively underfunded behavioral health system for kids.” A 2021 report by
However, Dr. Glover noted that Colorado is “not exceptional.” The increased vulnerability to youth mental illness and suicide is characteristic of other mountain states, which have larger rural areas, less access to care, and increased access to guns, she said.
Mass shootings may have amped up stress levels. “For some kids, this is happening in their schools or towns, and they feel traumatized and unsafe,” Dr. Glover added.
Dr. Crawford, who is an assistant professor of psychiatry at Boston University, also pointed out that the mental health crisis in youth is not unique to Colorado.
“Throughout the country, we’ve seen these colliding pandemics – inadequate mental health resources for children and COVID-19, which exacerbated the existing mental health crisis,” she said.
“The pandemic led to an increase in telehealth services, making individual and group psychotherapy available to kids in areas that never had access to these before, which is a ‘silver lining’ of the pandemic,” Dr. Glover said.
Dr. Crawford is “encouraged that we are having more conversations about pediatric mental health, because the pandemic amplified what was already going on and made it impossible to ignore.”
Screening is essential
Screening for mental health problems should be at the top of the mind of pediatricians and other clinicians who work with children, Dr. Glover said.
“Pediatricians are in the best place to catch potentially suicidal kids, because they are more likely to see these kids than therapists,” she noted.
She suggested using a rapid screen for depression, such as the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) modified for adolescents. Parents can also fill out a PHQ-9 for younger children and even for themselves.
“Depression, anxiety, and suicidality affect the whole family, so screening for these conditions in adults will benefit the children too,” she said. Teachers should also “be aware of what depression and anxiety symptoms look like in kids, because sometimes they can manifest more as irritability,” Dr. Glover added.
Policymakers and insurers need to prioritize pediatric mental health when determining allocation of health care, said Dr. Crawford.
“Financial incentives should be provided for hospitals to want to reserve beds for psychiatric patients, and in the outpatient setting, we also need to look at the payment structure of psychiatric visits,” she added.
Many psychiatrists do not want to accept insurance because of the increased bureaucracy and low reimbursement rates of insurance companies, and families cannot afford to pay out of pocket, “so we really need to look at the insurance issue at a policy level,” Dr. Crawford said.
Dr. Brumbaugh, Dr. Glover, and Dr. Crawford have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Emotional support animals help lick symptoms of depression, anxiety in serious mental illness
Use of emotional support animals (ESAs) yields quantifiable reductions in depression, anxiety, and loneliness for patients with serious mental illness (SMI) who live alone, early research suggests.
Investigators followed 11 community-dwelling adults with SMI who were paired with a shelter dog or cat for 1 year. Participants’ depression, anxiety, and loneliness were assessed at baseline and 12 months after receipt of their ESAs.
At regular home visits during the study, participants also underwent saliva testing before playing with their pets and after 10 minutes of enjoyable pet interaction to assess levels of oxytocin – a biomarker associated with bonding – as well as cortisol and alpha amylase, which are markers of stress.
Significant reductions in measures of anxiety, depression, and loneliness were found between baseline and 12 months for all participants. Moreover, there was a pattern of an increase in levels of oxytocin and a decrease in levels of cortisol after 10 minutes of ESA interaction, but the degree of change did not reach statistical significance.
“Although this was a small pilot study and the findings are correlational, rather than causal, we can nevertheless say from the self-report of this group of participants and from the data collected that having an emotional support animal was beneficial to their mental health,” lead author Janet Hoy-Gerlach, PhD, professor of social work, University of Toledo (Ohio), said in an interview.
“We feel this data is a strong justification for additional study, and we hope that it will be a catalyst for future research with larger samples and more rigorous methodology,” said Dr. Hoy-Gerlach, author of “Human-Animal Interaction: A Social Work Guide,” published by NASW Press in 2017.
The study was published online May 20 in Human Animal Interaction Bulletin.
Everyday interactions
An ESA is a “companion animal (pet) who helps to reduce disability-related impairment for a particular person through the animal’s presence and everyday interactions,” the authors wrote.
Unlike service animals, which perform specific functions, ESAs “provide benefits that fall along the same dimensions as the benefits of pets – physical, social, emotional, and psychological – and there is research supporting the role that animals can play in each of these arenas,” Dr. Hoy-Gerlach said.
ESAs require no special training. All that is needed is a letter from a medical or mental health professional “that the individual meets the definition of ‘disability’ under the Fair Housing Act and a companion animal is a needed disability-ameliorating accommodation and should be allowed in buildings that don’t ordinarily permit pets,” she noted.
There is currently no peer-reviewed research that focuses explicitly on the impact of ESAs in individuals with SMI. To investigate, the researchers turned to the Hope and Recovery Pet Program (HARP) – a community partnership of the University of Toledo, the Toledo Humane Society, and ProMedica, a large regional nonprofit Toledo-based health care system – that pairs community-living individuals who have depression and/or anxiety with shelter animals that require adoption. The program pays for pet food, supplies, and veterinary care for those unable to afford these.
Participants (n = 11; mean age, 53.67 years; 78% women) were recruited from the HARP program. Participants were required to be psychiatrically stable, have stable housing, live alone, be at risk for social isolation, have low income, be sober, and have no history of violence. Their primary diagnoses were major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, and schizoaffective disorder (63%, 18%, and 18%, respectively).
Six participants adopted a cat, and five adopted a dog.
Prior to ESA adoption and at 12 months, participants completed the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), and the UCLA Loneliness Scale Version 3.
Prior to ESA adoption and at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months, saliva samples were collected from participants by researchers at the beginning of a home visit and then after 10 minutes of “focused pleasant interaction” with the ESA. The saliva was tested for oxytocin, alpha amylase, and cortisol.
Motivation, comfort, calm
The researchers found statistically significant decreases in UCLA Loneliness Scale scores from pre-ESA (mean [SD],59.20 [9.47]) to 12 months (49.90 [13.66], P = .004). The eta-squared statistic (.62) indicated a large effect size.
For 18 of the 20 items on the loneliness scale, mean values were lower after the intervention than before the intervention. Of these, four were statistically significant.
A statistically significant decrease in BDI total scores was also seen from pre-ESA to 12 months (21.09 [8.43] to 14.64 [7.03], respectively; P = .03). The eta-squared statistic (.41) indicated a large effect size.
Of the 21 items on the BDI scale, the mean value was lower for 19 after the intervention. Of these, five were statistically significant.
Similarly, a statistically significant decrease in BAI score was found from pre-ESA to 12 months (23.55 [9.81] to 17.73 [11.79], P = .049). The eta-squared statistic (.36) indicated a large effect size, although there were no statistically significant changes in individual item scores.
The researchers found “observable patterns” of decreases in cortisol and increases in oxytocin after the 10-minute enjoyable ESA interactions. The highest oxytocin increase occurred at 12 months; however, these improvements did not reach statistical significance.
Participants offered open-ended statements about the positive impact of their ESA on their mental health, Dr. Hoy-Gerlach said. “For example, they described feeling motivated to take better care of themselves because their ESA needed them. Some described feeling ‘comforted,’ distracted from symptoms, soothed, and calmed.
“There is definitely a place for ESAs, especially with mental health post pandemic, when we need all the resources that we can for those who can benefit,” she added.
Postpandemic mental health
Commenting on the study for this news organization, Christine Crawford, MD, MPH, assistant professor of psychiatry, Boston University, observed that ESAs “are not on the radar for a lot of clinicians, and a lot of clinicians don’t know about the science [supporting their use] or what an emotional support pet entails.
“
The Kenneth A. Scott Charitable Trust provided grant funding. Dr. Hoy-Gerlach, her coauthors, and Dr. Crawford have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Use of emotional support animals (ESAs) yields quantifiable reductions in depression, anxiety, and loneliness for patients with serious mental illness (SMI) who live alone, early research suggests.
Investigators followed 11 community-dwelling adults with SMI who were paired with a shelter dog or cat for 1 year. Participants’ depression, anxiety, and loneliness were assessed at baseline and 12 months after receipt of their ESAs.
At regular home visits during the study, participants also underwent saliva testing before playing with their pets and after 10 minutes of enjoyable pet interaction to assess levels of oxytocin – a biomarker associated with bonding – as well as cortisol and alpha amylase, which are markers of stress.
Significant reductions in measures of anxiety, depression, and loneliness were found between baseline and 12 months for all participants. Moreover, there was a pattern of an increase in levels of oxytocin and a decrease in levels of cortisol after 10 minutes of ESA interaction, but the degree of change did not reach statistical significance.
“Although this was a small pilot study and the findings are correlational, rather than causal, we can nevertheless say from the self-report of this group of participants and from the data collected that having an emotional support animal was beneficial to their mental health,” lead author Janet Hoy-Gerlach, PhD, professor of social work, University of Toledo (Ohio), said in an interview.
“We feel this data is a strong justification for additional study, and we hope that it will be a catalyst for future research with larger samples and more rigorous methodology,” said Dr. Hoy-Gerlach, author of “Human-Animal Interaction: A Social Work Guide,” published by NASW Press in 2017.
The study was published online May 20 in Human Animal Interaction Bulletin.
Everyday interactions
An ESA is a “companion animal (pet) who helps to reduce disability-related impairment for a particular person through the animal’s presence and everyday interactions,” the authors wrote.
Unlike service animals, which perform specific functions, ESAs “provide benefits that fall along the same dimensions as the benefits of pets – physical, social, emotional, and psychological – and there is research supporting the role that animals can play in each of these arenas,” Dr. Hoy-Gerlach said.
ESAs require no special training. All that is needed is a letter from a medical or mental health professional “that the individual meets the definition of ‘disability’ under the Fair Housing Act and a companion animal is a needed disability-ameliorating accommodation and should be allowed in buildings that don’t ordinarily permit pets,” she noted.
There is currently no peer-reviewed research that focuses explicitly on the impact of ESAs in individuals with SMI. To investigate, the researchers turned to the Hope and Recovery Pet Program (HARP) – a community partnership of the University of Toledo, the Toledo Humane Society, and ProMedica, a large regional nonprofit Toledo-based health care system – that pairs community-living individuals who have depression and/or anxiety with shelter animals that require adoption. The program pays for pet food, supplies, and veterinary care for those unable to afford these.
Participants (n = 11; mean age, 53.67 years; 78% women) were recruited from the HARP program. Participants were required to be psychiatrically stable, have stable housing, live alone, be at risk for social isolation, have low income, be sober, and have no history of violence. Their primary diagnoses were major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, and schizoaffective disorder (63%, 18%, and 18%, respectively).
Six participants adopted a cat, and five adopted a dog.
Prior to ESA adoption and at 12 months, participants completed the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), and the UCLA Loneliness Scale Version 3.
Prior to ESA adoption and at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months, saliva samples were collected from participants by researchers at the beginning of a home visit and then after 10 minutes of “focused pleasant interaction” with the ESA. The saliva was tested for oxytocin, alpha amylase, and cortisol.
Motivation, comfort, calm
The researchers found statistically significant decreases in UCLA Loneliness Scale scores from pre-ESA (mean [SD],59.20 [9.47]) to 12 months (49.90 [13.66], P = .004). The eta-squared statistic (.62) indicated a large effect size.
For 18 of the 20 items on the loneliness scale, mean values were lower after the intervention than before the intervention. Of these, four were statistically significant.
A statistically significant decrease in BDI total scores was also seen from pre-ESA to 12 months (21.09 [8.43] to 14.64 [7.03], respectively; P = .03). The eta-squared statistic (.41) indicated a large effect size.
Of the 21 items on the BDI scale, the mean value was lower for 19 after the intervention. Of these, five were statistically significant.
Similarly, a statistically significant decrease in BAI score was found from pre-ESA to 12 months (23.55 [9.81] to 17.73 [11.79], P = .049). The eta-squared statistic (.36) indicated a large effect size, although there were no statistically significant changes in individual item scores.
The researchers found “observable patterns” of decreases in cortisol and increases in oxytocin after the 10-minute enjoyable ESA interactions. The highest oxytocin increase occurred at 12 months; however, these improvements did not reach statistical significance.
Participants offered open-ended statements about the positive impact of their ESA on their mental health, Dr. Hoy-Gerlach said. “For example, they described feeling motivated to take better care of themselves because their ESA needed them. Some described feeling ‘comforted,’ distracted from symptoms, soothed, and calmed.
“There is definitely a place for ESAs, especially with mental health post pandemic, when we need all the resources that we can for those who can benefit,” she added.
Postpandemic mental health
Commenting on the study for this news organization, Christine Crawford, MD, MPH, assistant professor of psychiatry, Boston University, observed that ESAs “are not on the radar for a lot of clinicians, and a lot of clinicians don’t know about the science [supporting their use] or what an emotional support pet entails.
“
The Kenneth A. Scott Charitable Trust provided grant funding. Dr. Hoy-Gerlach, her coauthors, and Dr. Crawford have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Use of emotional support animals (ESAs) yields quantifiable reductions in depression, anxiety, and loneliness for patients with serious mental illness (SMI) who live alone, early research suggests.
Investigators followed 11 community-dwelling adults with SMI who were paired with a shelter dog or cat for 1 year. Participants’ depression, anxiety, and loneliness were assessed at baseline and 12 months after receipt of their ESAs.
At regular home visits during the study, participants also underwent saliva testing before playing with their pets and after 10 minutes of enjoyable pet interaction to assess levels of oxytocin – a biomarker associated with bonding – as well as cortisol and alpha amylase, which are markers of stress.
Significant reductions in measures of anxiety, depression, and loneliness were found between baseline and 12 months for all participants. Moreover, there was a pattern of an increase in levels of oxytocin and a decrease in levels of cortisol after 10 minutes of ESA interaction, but the degree of change did not reach statistical significance.
“Although this was a small pilot study and the findings are correlational, rather than causal, we can nevertheless say from the self-report of this group of participants and from the data collected that having an emotional support animal was beneficial to their mental health,” lead author Janet Hoy-Gerlach, PhD, professor of social work, University of Toledo (Ohio), said in an interview.
“We feel this data is a strong justification for additional study, and we hope that it will be a catalyst for future research with larger samples and more rigorous methodology,” said Dr. Hoy-Gerlach, author of “Human-Animal Interaction: A Social Work Guide,” published by NASW Press in 2017.
The study was published online May 20 in Human Animal Interaction Bulletin.
Everyday interactions
An ESA is a “companion animal (pet) who helps to reduce disability-related impairment for a particular person through the animal’s presence and everyday interactions,” the authors wrote.
Unlike service animals, which perform specific functions, ESAs “provide benefits that fall along the same dimensions as the benefits of pets – physical, social, emotional, and psychological – and there is research supporting the role that animals can play in each of these arenas,” Dr. Hoy-Gerlach said.
ESAs require no special training. All that is needed is a letter from a medical or mental health professional “that the individual meets the definition of ‘disability’ under the Fair Housing Act and a companion animal is a needed disability-ameliorating accommodation and should be allowed in buildings that don’t ordinarily permit pets,” she noted.
There is currently no peer-reviewed research that focuses explicitly on the impact of ESAs in individuals with SMI. To investigate, the researchers turned to the Hope and Recovery Pet Program (HARP) – a community partnership of the University of Toledo, the Toledo Humane Society, and ProMedica, a large regional nonprofit Toledo-based health care system – that pairs community-living individuals who have depression and/or anxiety with shelter animals that require adoption. The program pays for pet food, supplies, and veterinary care for those unable to afford these.
Participants (n = 11; mean age, 53.67 years; 78% women) were recruited from the HARP program. Participants were required to be psychiatrically stable, have stable housing, live alone, be at risk for social isolation, have low income, be sober, and have no history of violence. Their primary diagnoses were major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, and schizoaffective disorder (63%, 18%, and 18%, respectively).
Six participants adopted a cat, and five adopted a dog.
Prior to ESA adoption and at 12 months, participants completed the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), and the UCLA Loneliness Scale Version 3.
Prior to ESA adoption and at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months, saliva samples were collected from participants by researchers at the beginning of a home visit and then after 10 minutes of “focused pleasant interaction” with the ESA. The saliva was tested for oxytocin, alpha amylase, and cortisol.
Motivation, comfort, calm
The researchers found statistically significant decreases in UCLA Loneliness Scale scores from pre-ESA (mean [SD],59.20 [9.47]) to 12 months (49.90 [13.66], P = .004). The eta-squared statistic (.62) indicated a large effect size.
For 18 of the 20 items on the loneliness scale, mean values were lower after the intervention than before the intervention. Of these, four were statistically significant.
A statistically significant decrease in BDI total scores was also seen from pre-ESA to 12 months (21.09 [8.43] to 14.64 [7.03], respectively; P = .03). The eta-squared statistic (.41) indicated a large effect size.
Of the 21 items on the BDI scale, the mean value was lower for 19 after the intervention. Of these, five were statistically significant.
Similarly, a statistically significant decrease in BAI score was found from pre-ESA to 12 months (23.55 [9.81] to 17.73 [11.79], P = .049). The eta-squared statistic (.36) indicated a large effect size, although there were no statistically significant changes in individual item scores.
The researchers found “observable patterns” of decreases in cortisol and increases in oxytocin after the 10-minute enjoyable ESA interactions. The highest oxytocin increase occurred at 12 months; however, these improvements did not reach statistical significance.
Participants offered open-ended statements about the positive impact of their ESA on their mental health, Dr. Hoy-Gerlach said. “For example, they described feeling motivated to take better care of themselves because their ESA needed them. Some described feeling ‘comforted,’ distracted from symptoms, soothed, and calmed.
“There is definitely a place for ESAs, especially with mental health post pandemic, when we need all the resources that we can for those who can benefit,” she added.
Postpandemic mental health
Commenting on the study for this news organization, Christine Crawford, MD, MPH, assistant professor of psychiatry, Boston University, observed that ESAs “are not on the radar for a lot of clinicians, and a lot of clinicians don’t know about the science [supporting their use] or what an emotional support pet entails.
“
The Kenneth A. Scott Charitable Trust provided grant funding. Dr. Hoy-Gerlach, her coauthors, and Dr. Crawford have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Naomi Osaka withdraws from the French Open: When athletes struggle
In 2018, when Naomi Osaka won the U.S. Open by defeating Serena Williams, the trophy ceremony was painful to watch.
Ms. Williams had argued with an umpire over a controversial call, and the ceremony began with the crowd booing. Ms. Osaka, the victor, cried while Ms. Williams comforted her and quietly assured Ms. Osaka that the crowd was not booing at her. When asked how her dream of playing against Ms. Williams compared with the reality, the new champion, looking anything but victorious, responded: “Umm, I’m gonna sort of defer from your question, I’m sorry. I know that everyone was cheering for her, and I’m sorry it had to end like this.”
It was hardly the joyous moment it should have been in this young tennis player’s life.
Ms. Osaka, now 23, entered this year’s French Open as the Women’s Tennis Association’s second-ranked player and as the highest-paid female athlete of all time. She is known for her support of Black Lives Matter. Ms. Osaka announced that she would not be attending press conferences in an Instagram post days before the competition began. “If the organizations think they can keep saying, ‘do press or you’re going to get fined,’ and continue to ignore the mental health of the athletes that are the centerpiece of their cooperation then I just gotta laugh,” Ms. Osaka posted.
She was fined $15,000 on Sunday, May 30, when she did not appear at a press conference after winning her first match. Officials noted that she would be subjected to higher fines and expulsion from the tournament if she did not attend the mandatory media briefings. On June 1, Ms. Osaka withdrew from the French Open and explained her reasons on Instagram in a post where she announced that she has been struggling with depression and social anxiety and did not mean to become a distraction for the competition.
Psychiatrists weigh in
Sue Kim, MD, a psychiatrist who both plays and watches tennis, brought up Ms. Osaka’s resignation for discussion on the Maryland Psychiatric Society’s listserv. “[Ms.] Osaka put out on social media her depression and wanted to have rules reviewed and revised by the governing body of tennis, for future occasions. I feel it is so unfortunate and unfair and I am interested in hearing your opinions.”
Yusuke Sagawa, MD, a psychiatrist and tennis fan, wrote in: “During the COVID-19 pandemic, I rekindled my interest in tennis and I followed what transpired this past weekend. Naomi Osaka is an exceptionally shy and introverted person. I have noted that her speech is somewhat akin to (for lack of a better term) ‘Valley Girl’ talk, and from reading comments on tennis-related blogs, it appears she has garnered a significant amount of hatred as a result. Most of it is along the lines of people feeling her shyness and modesty is simply a masquerade.
“I have also seen YouTube videos of her signing autographs for fans. She is cooperative and pleasant, but clearly uncomfortable around large groups of people.
“Having seen many press conferences after a match,” Dr. Sagawa continued, “tennis journalists have a penchant for asking questions that are either personal or seemingly an attempt to stir up acrimony amongst players. Whatever the case, I truly do believe that this is not some sort of ruse on her part, and I hope that people come to her defense. It is disturbing to hear the comments already coming out from the ‘big names’ in the sport that have mostly been nonsupportive. Fortunately, there have also been a number of her contemporaries who have expressed this support for her.”
In the days following Ms. Osaka’s departure from the French Open, the situation has become more complex. as it is used in these types of communications.
Maryland psychiatrist Erik Roskes, MD, wrote: “I have followed this story from a distance and what strikes me is the intermixing of athleticism – which is presumably why we watch sports – and entertainment, the money-making part of it. The athletes are both athletes and entertainers, and [Ms.] Osaka seems to be unable to fully fulfill the latter part due to her unique traits. But like many, I wonder what if this had been Michael Phelps? Is there a gender issue at play?”
Stephanie Durruthy, MD, added: “[Ms.] Osaka brings complexity to the mental health conversations. There is no one answer to her current plight, but her being a person of color cannot be minimized. She magnified the race conversation in tennis to a higher level.
“When she was new to the Grand Slam scene, her Haitian, Japanese, and Black heritage became an issue with unending curiosity.
“[Ms.] Osaka used her platform during the 2020 U.S. Open to single-handedly highlight Black Lives Matter,” Dr. Durruthy continued. “Afterward, the tennis fans could not avoid seeing her face mask. In each match, she displayed another mask depicting the name of those killed. She described on social media her fears of being a Black person in America. The biases of gender and race are well described in the sports world.”
Lindsay Crouse wrote June 1 in the New York Times: “When Naomi Osaka dropped out of the French Open, after declining to attend media interviews that she said could trigger her anxiety, she wasn’t just protecting her mental health. She was sending a message to the establishment of one of the world’s most elite sports: I will not be controlled. This was a power move – and it packed more punch coming from a young woman of color. When the system hasn’t historically stood for you, why sacrifice yourself to uphold it? Especially when you have the power to change it instead.”
Professional sports are grueling on athletes, both physically and mentally. People will speculate about Ms. Osaka’s motives for refusing to participate in the media briefings that are mandated by her contract. Some will see it as manipulative, others as the desire of a young woman struggling with anxiety and depression to push back against a system that makes few allowances for those who suffer. As psychiatrists, we see how crippling these illnesses can be and admire those who achieve at these superhuman levels, often at the expense of their own well-being.
Dr. Kim, who started the MPS listserv discussion, ended it with: “I feel bad if Naomi Osaka needs to play a mental ‘illness’ card, as opposed to mental ‘wellness’ card.”
Let’s hope that Ms. Osaka’s withdrawal from the French Open sparks more conversation about how to accommodate athletes as they endeavor to meet both the demands of their contracts and when it might be more appropriate to be flexible for those with individual struggles.
Dr. Miller is coauthor of “ Committed: The Battle Over Involuntary Psychiatric Care ” (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2016). She has a private practice and is assistant professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Johns Hopkins University, both in Baltimore.
In 2018, when Naomi Osaka won the U.S. Open by defeating Serena Williams, the trophy ceremony was painful to watch.
Ms. Williams had argued with an umpire over a controversial call, and the ceremony began with the crowd booing. Ms. Osaka, the victor, cried while Ms. Williams comforted her and quietly assured Ms. Osaka that the crowd was not booing at her. When asked how her dream of playing against Ms. Williams compared with the reality, the new champion, looking anything but victorious, responded: “Umm, I’m gonna sort of defer from your question, I’m sorry. I know that everyone was cheering for her, and I’m sorry it had to end like this.”
It was hardly the joyous moment it should have been in this young tennis player’s life.
Ms. Osaka, now 23, entered this year’s French Open as the Women’s Tennis Association’s second-ranked player and as the highest-paid female athlete of all time. She is known for her support of Black Lives Matter. Ms. Osaka announced that she would not be attending press conferences in an Instagram post days before the competition began. “If the organizations think they can keep saying, ‘do press or you’re going to get fined,’ and continue to ignore the mental health of the athletes that are the centerpiece of their cooperation then I just gotta laugh,” Ms. Osaka posted.
She was fined $15,000 on Sunday, May 30, when she did not appear at a press conference after winning her first match. Officials noted that she would be subjected to higher fines and expulsion from the tournament if she did not attend the mandatory media briefings. On June 1, Ms. Osaka withdrew from the French Open and explained her reasons on Instagram in a post where she announced that she has been struggling with depression and social anxiety and did not mean to become a distraction for the competition.
Psychiatrists weigh in
Sue Kim, MD, a psychiatrist who both plays and watches tennis, brought up Ms. Osaka’s resignation for discussion on the Maryland Psychiatric Society’s listserv. “[Ms.] Osaka put out on social media her depression and wanted to have rules reviewed and revised by the governing body of tennis, for future occasions. I feel it is so unfortunate and unfair and I am interested in hearing your opinions.”
Yusuke Sagawa, MD, a psychiatrist and tennis fan, wrote in: “During the COVID-19 pandemic, I rekindled my interest in tennis and I followed what transpired this past weekend. Naomi Osaka is an exceptionally shy and introverted person. I have noted that her speech is somewhat akin to (for lack of a better term) ‘Valley Girl’ talk, and from reading comments on tennis-related blogs, it appears she has garnered a significant amount of hatred as a result. Most of it is along the lines of people feeling her shyness and modesty is simply a masquerade.
“I have also seen YouTube videos of her signing autographs for fans. She is cooperative and pleasant, but clearly uncomfortable around large groups of people.
“Having seen many press conferences after a match,” Dr. Sagawa continued, “tennis journalists have a penchant for asking questions that are either personal or seemingly an attempt to stir up acrimony amongst players. Whatever the case, I truly do believe that this is not some sort of ruse on her part, and I hope that people come to her defense. It is disturbing to hear the comments already coming out from the ‘big names’ in the sport that have mostly been nonsupportive. Fortunately, there have also been a number of her contemporaries who have expressed this support for her.”
In the days following Ms. Osaka’s departure from the French Open, the situation has become more complex. as it is used in these types of communications.
Maryland psychiatrist Erik Roskes, MD, wrote: “I have followed this story from a distance and what strikes me is the intermixing of athleticism – which is presumably why we watch sports – and entertainment, the money-making part of it. The athletes are both athletes and entertainers, and [Ms.] Osaka seems to be unable to fully fulfill the latter part due to her unique traits. But like many, I wonder what if this had been Michael Phelps? Is there a gender issue at play?”
Stephanie Durruthy, MD, added: “[Ms.] Osaka brings complexity to the mental health conversations. There is no one answer to her current plight, but her being a person of color cannot be minimized. She magnified the race conversation in tennis to a higher level.
“When she was new to the Grand Slam scene, her Haitian, Japanese, and Black heritage became an issue with unending curiosity.
“[Ms.] Osaka used her platform during the 2020 U.S. Open to single-handedly highlight Black Lives Matter,” Dr. Durruthy continued. “Afterward, the tennis fans could not avoid seeing her face mask. In each match, she displayed another mask depicting the name of those killed. She described on social media her fears of being a Black person in America. The biases of gender and race are well described in the sports world.”
Lindsay Crouse wrote June 1 in the New York Times: “When Naomi Osaka dropped out of the French Open, after declining to attend media interviews that she said could trigger her anxiety, she wasn’t just protecting her mental health. She was sending a message to the establishment of one of the world’s most elite sports: I will not be controlled. This was a power move – and it packed more punch coming from a young woman of color. When the system hasn’t historically stood for you, why sacrifice yourself to uphold it? Especially when you have the power to change it instead.”
Professional sports are grueling on athletes, both physically and mentally. People will speculate about Ms. Osaka’s motives for refusing to participate in the media briefings that are mandated by her contract. Some will see it as manipulative, others as the desire of a young woman struggling with anxiety and depression to push back against a system that makes few allowances for those who suffer. As psychiatrists, we see how crippling these illnesses can be and admire those who achieve at these superhuman levels, often at the expense of their own well-being.
Dr. Kim, who started the MPS listserv discussion, ended it with: “I feel bad if Naomi Osaka needs to play a mental ‘illness’ card, as opposed to mental ‘wellness’ card.”
Let’s hope that Ms. Osaka’s withdrawal from the French Open sparks more conversation about how to accommodate athletes as they endeavor to meet both the demands of their contracts and when it might be more appropriate to be flexible for those with individual struggles.
Dr. Miller is coauthor of “ Committed: The Battle Over Involuntary Psychiatric Care ” (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2016). She has a private practice and is assistant professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Johns Hopkins University, both in Baltimore.
In 2018, when Naomi Osaka won the U.S. Open by defeating Serena Williams, the trophy ceremony was painful to watch.
Ms. Williams had argued with an umpire over a controversial call, and the ceremony began with the crowd booing. Ms. Osaka, the victor, cried while Ms. Williams comforted her and quietly assured Ms. Osaka that the crowd was not booing at her. When asked how her dream of playing against Ms. Williams compared with the reality, the new champion, looking anything but victorious, responded: “Umm, I’m gonna sort of defer from your question, I’m sorry. I know that everyone was cheering for her, and I’m sorry it had to end like this.”
It was hardly the joyous moment it should have been in this young tennis player’s life.
Ms. Osaka, now 23, entered this year’s French Open as the Women’s Tennis Association’s second-ranked player and as the highest-paid female athlete of all time. She is known for her support of Black Lives Matter. Ms. Osaka announced that she would not be attending press conferences in an Instagram post days before the competition began. “If the organizations think they can keep saying, ‘do press or you’re going to get fined,’ and continue to ignore the mental health of the athletes that are the centerpiece of their cooperation then I just gotta laugh,” Ms. Osaka posted.
She was fined $15,000 on Sunday, May 30, when she did not appear at a press conference after winning her first match. Officials noted that she would be subjected to higher fines and expulsion from the tournament if she did not attend the mandatory media briefings. On June 1, Ms. Osaka withdrew from the French Open and explained her reasons on Instagram in a post where she announced that she has been struggling with depression and social anxiety and did not mean to become a distraction for the competition.
Psychiatrists weigh in
Sue Kim, MD, a psychiatrist who both plays and watches tennis, brought up Ms. Osaka’s resignation for discussion on the Maryland Psychiatric Society’s listserv. “[Ms.] Osaka put out on social media her depression and wanted to have rules reviewed and revised by the governing body of tennis, for future occasions. I feel it is so unfortunate and unfair and I am interested in hearing your opinions.”
Yusuke Sagawa, MD, a psychiatrist and tennis fan, wrote in: “During the COVID-19 pandemic, I rekindled my interest in tennis and I followed what transpired this past weekend. Naomi Osaka is an exceptionally shy and introverted person. I have noted that her speech is somewhat akin to (for lack of a better term) ‘Valley Girl’ talk, and from reading comments on tennis-related blogs, it appears she has garnered a significant amount of hatred as a result. Most of it is along the lines of people feeling her shyness and modesty is simply a masquerade.
“I have also seen YouTube videos of her signing autographs for fans. She is cooperative and pleasant, but clearly uncomfortable around large groups of people.
“Having seen many press conferences after a match,” Dr. Sagawa continued, “tennis journalists have a penchant for asking questions that are either personal or seemingly an attempt to stir up acrimony amongst players. Whatever the case, I truly do believe that this is not some sort of ruse on her part, and I hope that people come to her defense. It is disturbing to hear the comments already coming out from the ‘big names’ in the sport that have mostly been nonsupportive. Fortunately, there have also been a number of her contemporaries who have expressed this support for her.”
In the days following Ms. Osaka’s departure from the French Open, the situation has become more complex. as it is used in these types of communications.
Maryland psychiatrist Erik Roskes, MD, wrote: “I have followed this story from a distance and what strikes me is the intermixing of athleticism – which is presumably why we watch sports – and entertainment, the money-making part of it. The athletes are both athletes and entertainers, and [Ms.] Osaka seems to be unable to fully fulfill the latter part due to her unique traits. But like many, I wonder what if this had been Michael Phelps? Is there a gender issue at play?”
Stephanie Durruthy, MD, added: “[Ms.] Osaka brings complexity to the mental health conversations. There is no one answer to her current plight, but her being a person of color cannot be minimized. She magnified the race conversation in tennis to a higher level.
“When she was new to the Grand Slam scene, her Haitian, Japanese, and Black heritage became an issue with unending curiosity.
“[Ms.] Osaka used her platform during the 2020 U.S. Open to single-handedly highlight Black Lives Matter,” Dr. Durruthy continued. “Afterward, the tennis fans could not avoid seeing her face mask. In each match, she displayed another mask depicting the name of those killed. She described on social media her fears of being a Black person in America. The biases of gender and race are well described in the sports world.”
Lindsay Crouse wrote June 1 in the New York Times: “When Naomi Osaka dropped out of the French Open, after declining to attend media interviews that she said could trigger her anxiety, she wasn’t just protecting her mental health. She was sending a message to the establishment of one of the world’s most elite sports: I will not be controlled. This was a power move – and it packed more punch coming from a young woman of color. When the system hasn’t historically stood for you, why sacrifice yourself to uphold it? Especially when you have the power to change it instead.”
Professional sports are grueling on athletes, both physically and mentally. People will speculate about Ms. Osaka’s motives for refusing to participate in the media briefings that are mandated by her contract. Some will see it as manipulative, others as the desire of a young woman struggling with anxiety and depression to push back against a system that makes few allowances for those who suffer. As psychiatrists, we see how crippling these illnesses can be and admire those who achieve at these superhuman levels, often at the expense of their own well-being.
Dr. Kim, who started the MPS listserv discussion, ended it with: “I feel bad if Naomi Osaka needs to play a mental ‘illness’ card, as opposed to mental ‘wellness’ card.”
Let’s hope that Ms. Osaka’s withdrawal from the French Open sparks more conversation about how to accommodate athletes as they endeavor to meet both the demands of their contracts and when it might be more appropriate to be flexible for those with individual struggles.
Dr. Miller is coauthor of “ Committed: The Battle Over Involuntary Psychiatric Care ” (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2016). She has a private practice and is assistant professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Johns Hopkins University, both in Baltimore.
Psychiatric fallout from long-COVID: How to prepare
As mounting evidence points to a significant psychiatric component of COVID-19, experts are concerned about an influx of survivors presenting with persistent mental health problems and how best to prepare.
Clinicians should be aware that patients who have had COVID frequently develop psychiatric symptoms, Silvia S. Martins, MD, PhD, associate professor of epidemiology, Columbia University, New York, said in an interview.
“There should be more screening of all patients recovering from a COVID infection for anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder, and depression, as well as referral to services, including psychotherapy, and medication as needed,” said Dr. Martins, who, along with colleagues, uncovered a high rate of these symptoms in patients who had the disease.
The COVID-19 pandemic has taken an enormous social, emotional, and public health toll. It has disrupted lives and caused stress, fear, and uncertainty about loss of health and income, not to mention forced isolation.
In addition, a significant number of patients who contract COVID-19 continue to have symptoms after the acute phase of the illness. This post-COVID, or “long-haul,” syndrome isn’t well defined; experts cite a range of symptoms that persist for weeks or months.
These ongoing symptoms can include cough, fatigue, and chronic pain, as well as psychiatric complaints. As reported by this news organization, an observational study of more than 230,000 U.S. patient health records revealed that one in three COVID-19 survivors received a psychiatric or neurologic diagnosis within 6 months of contracting the virus.
The most common psychiatric diagnoses were anxiety disorders, mood disorders, substance misuse disorders, and insomnia.
Significant symptoms even in mild cases
Another study showed that even those with mild COVID-19 may experience psychiatric symptoms independently of previous psychiatric diagnoses. Results revealed that 26% of the sample of almost 900 patients reported depression, 22% reported anxiety, and 17% reported symptoms of posttraumatic stress 2 months after testing positive for the virus. This finding is important because the majority of individuals who contract COVID-19 have a mild case.
“We saw very high levels of clinically significant depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress symptoms in people who had mild disease,” study investigator João Mauricio Castaldelli-Maia, MD, PhD, postdoctoral fellow, department of epidemiology, Columbia University, said in an interview.
He attributed these symptoms in part to long periods of isolation, even from relatives in the same household, in cramped spaces typical of large cities such as São Paulo.
Social isolation can have a huge impact on persons who depend on social connections and relationships, Vivian Pender, MD, president of the American Psychiatric Association and clinical professor of psychiatry, Weill Cornell Medical Center, New York, said in an interview.
“The fact that we have not been able to see our colleagues, our friends, our family, and in the case of psychiatrists, even our patients has taken a toll on everyone, and that leads to more stress, more anxiety,” she said.
National surveys show that psychiatric symptoms occur after acute COVID. One survey revealed that over 50% of 3,900 respondents who had COVID reported having at least moderate symptoms of major depression.
Unique depression subtype?
Another survey, slated for publication later this year, shows that
lead investigator Roy Perlis, MD, professor of psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, said in an interview.This might suggest a neurobiological element. Researchers are speculating as to whether lingering psychiatric problems that occur after having COVID are linked to the psychosocial impact of the disease or to pathological processes, such as inflammation, that affect the brain.
Although rates of post-COVID psychiatric symptoms vary from study to study, “they seem to be pretty enduring,” noted Faith Gunning, PhD, vice chair of research, department of psychology, Weill Cornell Medicine, who specializes in clinical neuropsychology.
“So they’re not just a brief response” to getting sick, a fact that points to the possible need for treatment, she told this news organization. “In some of the work that’s starting to emerge, it does appear that the symptoms persist, at least for a relatively large subset of individuals.”
Although depression typically affects twice as many women as men, these new surveys show that, after COVID, “that difference is not so distinct,” said Dr. Gunning.
It’s unclear why this is, but it could be cause by financial stresses that may affect men to a greater extent, she added. “There is so much we’re still learning.”
Increased suicide risk?
Other researchers, including Leo Sher, MD, professor of psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, and director of inpatient psychiatry, James J. Peters Veterans Affairs Medical Center, both in New York, are concerned that higher rates of psychiatric symptoms among patients with long-haul COVID raise the risk for suicidal ideation and behavior.
Studies of suicidality in COVID-19 survivors “are urgently needed,” said Dr. Sher in an article published in the Monthly Journal of the Association of Physicians.
“We need to study what factors may increase suicide risk among the COVID-19 survivors during and after the recovery. We also need to investigate whether there is a long-term increased suicide risk among COVID-19 survivors,” Dr. Sher said.
COVID-19 is not unique among viral respiratory diseases in being associated with long-term mental health problems. Research shows that survivors of the 2003 outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome experienced increased psychological distress that persisted for at least a year, as did patients who in 2015 had Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV).
Some experts believe clinicians should screen patients for mental health symptoms after the acute phase of COVID and offer early and prolonged care.
“Early mental health intervention such as psychotherapy and supportive groups could play an important role in preventing incident mental health problems for post-COVID sufferers,” said Dr. Castaldelli-Maia.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
As mounting evidence points to a significant psychiatric component of COVID-19, experts are concerned about an influx of survivors presenting with persistent mental health problems and how best to prepare.
Clinicians should be aware that patients who have had COVID frequently develop psychiatric symptoms, Silvia S. Martins, MD, PhD, associate professor of epidemiology, Columbia University, New York, said in an interview.
“There should be more screening of all patients recovering from a COVID infection for anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder, and depression, as well as referral to services, including psychotherapy, and medication as needed,” said Dr. Martins, who, along with colleagues, uncovered a high rate of these symptoms in patients who had the disease.
The COVID-19 pandemic has taken an enormous social, emotional, and public health toll. It has disrupted lives and caused stress, fear, and uncertainty about loss of health and income, not to mention forced isolation.
In addition, a significant number of patients who contract COVID-19 continue to have symptoms after the acute phase of the illness. This post-COVID, or “long-haul,” syndrome isn’t well defined; experts cite a range of symptoms that persist for weeks or months.
These ongoing symptoms can include cough, fatigue, and chronic pain, as well as psychiatric complaints. As reported by this news organization, an observational study of more than 230,000 U.S. patient health records revealed that one in three COVID-19 survivors received a psychiatric or neurologic diagnosis within 6 months of contracting the virus.
The most common psychiatric diagnoses were anxiety disorders, mood disorders, substance misuse disorders, and insomnia.
Significant symptoms even in mild cases
Another study showed that even those with mild COVID-19 may experience psychiatric symptoms independently of previous psychiatric diagnoses. Results revealed that 26% of the sample of almost 900 patients reported depression, 22% reported anxiety, and 17% reported symptoms of posttraumatic stress 2 months after testing positive for the virus. This finding is important because the majority of individuals who contract COVID-19 have a mild case.
“We saw very high levels of clinically significant depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress symptoms in people who had mild disease,” study investigator João Mauricio Castaldelli-Maia, MD, PhD, postdoctoral fellow, department of epidemiology, Columbia University, said in an interview.
He attributed these symptoms in part to long periods of isolation, even from relatives in the same household, in cramped spaces typical of large cities such as São Paulo.
Social isolation can have a huge impact on persons who depend on social connections and relationships, Vivian Pender, MD, president of the American Psychiatric Association and clinical professor of psychiatry, Weill Cornell Medical Center, New York, said in an interview.
“The fact that we have not been able to see our colleagues, our friends, our family, and in the case of psychiatrists, even our patients has taken a toll on everyone, and that leads to more stress, more anxiety,” she said.
National surveys show that psychiatric symptoms occur after acute COVID. One survey revealed that over 50% of 3,900 respondents who had COVID reported having at least moderate symptoms of major depression.
Unique depression subtype?
Another survey, slated for publication later this year, shows that
lead investigator Roy Perlis, MD, professor of psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, said in an interview.This might suggest a neurobiological element. Researchers are speculating as to whether lingering psychiatric problems that occur after having COVID are linked to the psychosocial impact of the disease or to pathological processes, such as inflammation, that affect the brain.
Although rates of post-COVID psychiatric symptoms vary from study to study, “they seem to be pretty enduring,” noted Faith Gunning, PhD, vice chair of research, department of psychology, Weill Cornell Medicine, who specializes in clinical neuropsychology.
“So they’re not just a brief response” to getting sick, a fact that points to the possible need for treatment, she told this news organization. “In some of the work that’s starting to emerge, it does appear that the symptoms persist, at least for a relatively large subset of individuals.”
Although depression typically affects twice as many women as men, these new surveys show that, after COVID, “that difference is not so distinct,” said Dr. Gunning.
It’s unclear why this is, but it could be cause by financial stresses that may affect men to a greater extent, she added. “There is so much we’re still learning.”
Increased suicide risk?
Other researchers, including Leo Sher, MD, professor of psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, and director of inpatient psychiatry, James J. Peters Veterans Affairs Medical Center, both in New York, are concerned that higher rates of psychiatric symptoms among patients with long-haul COVID raise the risk for suicidal ideation and behavior.
Studies of suicidality in COVID-19 survivors “are urgently needed,” said Dr. Sher in an article published in the Monthly Journal of the Association of Physicians.
“We need to study what factors may increase suicide risk among the COVID-19 survivors during and after the recovery. We also need to investigate whether there is a long-term increased suicide risk among COVID-19 survivors,” Dr. Sher said.
COVID-19 is not unique among viral respiratory diseases in being associated with long-term mental health problems. Research shows that survivors of the 2003 outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome experienced increased psychological distress that persisted for at least a year, as did patients who in 2015 had Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV).
Some experts believe clinicians should screen patients for mental health symptoms after the acute phase of COVID and offer early and prolonged care.
“Early mental health intervention such as psychotherapy and supportive groups could play an important role in preventing incident mental health problems for post-COVID sufferers,” said Dr. Castaldelli-Maia.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
As mounting evidence points to a significant psychiatric component of COVID-19, experts are concerned about an influx of survivors presenting with persistent mental health problems and how best to prepare.
Clinicians should be aware that patients who have had COVID frequently develop psychiatric symptoms, Silvia S. Martins, MD, PhD, associate professor of epidemiology, Columbia University, New York, said in an interview.
“There should be more screening of all patients recovering from a COVID infection for anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder, and depression, as well as referral to services, including psychotherapy, and medication as needed,” said Dr. Martins, who, along with colleagues, uncovered a high rate of these symptoms in patients who had the disease.
The COVID-19 pandemic has taken an enormous social, emotional, and public health toll. It has disrupted lives and caused stress, fear, and uncertainty about loss of health and income, not to mention forced isolation.
In addition, a significant number of patients who contract COVID-19 continue to have symptoms after the acute phase of the illness. This post-COVID, or “long-haul,” syndrome isn’t well defined; experts cite a range of symptoms that persist for weeks or months.
These ongoing symptoms can include cough, fatigue, and chronic pain, as well as psychiatric complaints. As reported by this news organization, an observational study of more than 230,000 U.S. patient health records revealed that one in three COVID-19 survivors received a psychiatric or neurologic diagnosis within 6 months of contracting the virus.
The most common psychiatric diagnoses were anxiety disorders, mood disorders, substance misuse disorders, and insomnia.
Significant symptoms even in mild cases
Another study showed that even those with mild COVID-19 may experience psychiatric symptoms independently of previous psychiatric diagnoses. Results revealed that 26% of the sample of almost 900 patients reported depression, 22% reported anxiety, and 17% reported symptoms of posttraumatic stress 2 months after testing positive for the virus. This finding is important because the majority of individuals who contract COVID-19 have a mild case.
“We saw very high levels of clinically significant depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress symptoms in people who had mild disease,” study investigator João Mauricio Castaldelli-Maia, MD, PhD, postdoctoral fellow, department of epidemiology, Columbia University, said in an interview.
He attributed these symptoms in part to long periods of isolation, even from relatives in the same household, in cramped spaces typical of large cities such as São Paulo.
Social isolation can have a huge impact on persons who depend on social connections and relationships, Vivian Pender, MD, president of the American Psychiatric Association and clinical professor of psychiatry, Weill Cornell Medical Center, New York, said in an interview.
“The fact that we have not been able to see our colleagues, our friends, our family, and in the case of psychiatrists, even our patients has taken a toll on everyone, and that leads to more stress, more anxiety,” she said.
National surveys show that psychiatric symptoms occur after acute COVID. One survey revealed that over 50% of 3,900 respondents who had COVID reported having at least moderate symptoms of major depression.
Unique depression subtype?
Another survey, slated for publication later this year, shows that
lead investigator Roy Perlis, MD, professor of psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, said in an interview.This might suggest a neurobiological element. Researchers are speculating as to whether lingering psychiatric problems that occur after having COVID are linked to the psychosocial impact of the disease or to pathological processes, such as inflammation, that affect the brain.
Although rates of post-COVID psychiatric symptoms vary from study to study, “they seem to be pretty enduring,” noted Faith Gunning, PhD, vice chair of research, department of psychology, Weill Cornell Medicine, who specializes in clinical neuropsychology.
“So they’re not just a brief response” to getting sick, a fact that points to the possible need for treatment, she told this news organization. “In some of the work that’s starting to emerge, it does appear that the symptoms persist, at least for a relatively large subset of individuals.”
Although depression typically affects twice as many women as men, these new surveys show that, after COVID, “that difference is not so distinct,” said Dr. Gunning.
It’s unclear why this is, but it could be cause by financial stresses that may affect men to a greater extent, she added. “There is so much we’re still learning.”
Increased suicide risk?
Other researchers, including Leo Sher, MD, professor of psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, and director of inpatient psychiatry, James J. Peters Veterans Affairs Medical Center, both in New York, are concerned that higher rates of psychiatric symptoms among patients with long-haul COVID raise the risk for suicidal ideation and behavior.
Studies of suicidality in COVID-19 survivors “are urgently needed,” said Dr. Sher in an article published in the Monthly Journal of the Association of Physicians.
“We need to study what factors may increase suicide risk among the COVID-19 survivors during and after the recovery. We also need to investigate whether there is a long-term increased suicide risk among COVID-19 survivors,” Dr. Sher said.
COVID-19 is not unique among viral respiratory diseases in being associated with long-term mental health problems. Research shows that survivors of the 2003 outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome experienced increased psychological distress that persisted for at least a year, as did patients who in 2015 had Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV).
Some experts believe clinicians should screen patients for mental health symptoms after the acute phase of COVID and offer early and prolonged care.
“Early mental health intervention such as psychotherapy and supportive groups could play an important role in preventing incident mental health problems for post-COVID sufferers,” said Dr. Castaldelli-Maia.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
How COVID-19 affects peripartum women’s mental health
The COVID-19 pandemic has had a negative impact on the mental health of people worldwide, and a disproportionate effect on peripartum women. In this article, we discuss the reasons for this disparity, review the limited literature on this topic, and suggest strategies to safeguard the mental health of peripartum women during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Catastrophic events and women’s mental health
During the peripartum period, women have increased psychosocial and physical health needs.1 In addition, women are disproportionately affected by natural disasters and catastrophic events,2 which are predictors of psychiatric symptoms during the peripartum period.3 Mass tragedies previously associated with maternal stress include wildfires, hurricanes, migrations, earthquakes, and tsunamis.4,5 For example, pregnant women who survived severe exposure during Hurricane Katrina (ie, feeling that one’s life was in danger, experiencing illness or injury to self or a family member, walking through floodwaters) in 2005 had a significantly increased risk of developing posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression compared with pregnant women who did not have such exposure.6 After the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami in Japan, the prevalence of psychological distress in pregnant women increased, especially among those living in the area directly affected by the tsunami.5
Epidemics and pandemics also can adversely affect peripartum women’s mental health. Studies conducted before the COVID-19 pandemic found that previous infectious disease outbreaks such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) pandemic, and Zika had negative emotional impacts on pregnant women.7 Our review of the limited literature published to date suggests that COVID-19 is having similar adverse effects.
COVID-19 poses both medical and psychiatric threats
COVID-19 infection is a physical threat to pregnant women who are already vulnerable due to the hormonal and immunological changes inherent to pregnancy. A meta-analysis of 39 studies with a total of 1,316 pregnant women indicated that the most frequently reported symptoms of COVID-19 infection were cough, fever, and myalgias.8 However, COVID-19 infection during pregnancy is also associated with an increase in pregnancy complications and adverse birth outcomes.9 According to the CDC, compared with their nonpregnant counterparts, pregnant women are at greater risk for severe COVID-19 infection and adverse birth outcomes such as preterm birth.10 Pregnant women who are infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2; the virus responsible for COVID-19) risk ICU admission, caesarean section, and perinatal death.8 A Swedish study of 2,682 pregnant women found an increase in preeclampsia among women who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, a finding attributed to COVID-19’s pattern of systemic effects.11 Vertical transmission of the novel coronavirus from mother to fetus appears to be rare but possible.12
In addition to the physical dangers of becoming infected with COVID-19, the perceived threat of infection is an added source of anxiety for some peripartum women. In addition to the concerns involved in any pregnancy, COVID-19–related sources of distress for pregnant women include worrying about harm to the fetus during pregnancy, the possibility of vertical transmission, and exposures during antenatal appointments, during employment, or from a partner.8,13
The death toll from factors associated with COVID-19 adds to the mental health burden. For every person who dies of COVID-19, an estimated 9 others may develop prolonged grief or PTSD due to the loss of someone they loved.14,15 A systematic review found that PTSD in the perinatal period is associated with negative birth and child outcomes, including low birth weight and decreased rates of breastfeeding.16 The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted human interactions, from social distancing rules and lockdowns of businesses and social activities to panic buying of grocery staples and increased economic insecurity.1 These changes have been accompanied by a rise in mental health challenges. For example, according to an August 2020 CDC survey, 40.9% of US adults reported at least 1 adverse mental or behavioral health condition, including symptoms of anxiety or depression (30.9%), symptoms of a trauma- and stressor-related disorder related to the pandemic (26.3%), and having started or increased substance use to cope with stress or emotions related to COVID-19 (13.3%).17
COVID-19–related traumas and stressors appear to affect women more than men. A study from China found that compared with men, women had significantly higher levels of self-reported pandemic-related anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS).18 This trend has been observed in other parts of the world. A study conducted by the UK Office of National Statistics reported anxiety levels were 24% higher in women vs men as reflected by scores on a self-rated anxiety scale.19
Continue to: Many factors influence...
Many factors influence the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on women in general, and peripartum women in particular (Box20-26).
Box
Factors that predispose women to increased stress during COVID-19 include an increase in child care burdens brought about by school closures and subsequent virtual schooling.20 Intimate partner violence has spiked globally during COVID-19 restrictions.24 Women also represent the majority of the health care workforce (76%) and often take on informal caregiving roles; both of these roles have seen increased burdens during the pandemic.25 Already encumbered by prepandemic gender pay inequalities, women are filing unemployment claims at a significantly increased rate compared to men.26
For women of childbearing age, the disruption of routine clinical care during COVID-19 has decreased access to reproductive health care, resulting in increases in unintended pregnancies, unsafe abortions, and deaths.20 Another source of stress for pregnant women during COVID-19 is feeling unprepared for birth because of the pandemic, a phenomenon described as “preparedness stress.”21 Visitor restriction policies and quarantines have also caused women in labor to experience birth without their support partners, which is associated with increased posttraumatic stress symptoms.22 These restrictions also may be associated with an increase in women choosing out-of-hospital births despite the increased risk of adverse outcomes.23
Psychiatric diagnoses in peripartum women
Multiple studies and meta-analyses have begun to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on maternal mental health. One meta-analysis of 8 studies conducted in 5 countries determined that COVID-19 significantly increases the risk of anxiety in women during the peripartum period.27 Results of another meta-analysis of 23 studies with >24,000 participants indicated that the prevalence of anxiety, depression, and insomnia in peripartum women was significantly higher during the pandemic than in pre-pandemic times.28
In an online survey of 4,451 pregnant women in the United States, nearly one-third of respondents reported elevated levels of pandemic-related stress as measured by the newly-developed Pandemic-Related Pregnancy Stress Scale.3 The rates were even higher among women who were already at risk for elevated stress levels, such as those who had survived abuse, those giving birth for the first time, or those experiencing high-risk pregnancies.3 Living in a pandemic “hot spot” also appeared to impact peripartum stress levels.
COVID-19 has adverse effects on women’s mental health specifically during the postpartum period. One study from a center in Italy found a high prevalence of depressive symptoms and PTSS in the postpartum period, with COVID-19–related factors playing an “indirect role” compared with prenatal experiences and other individual factors.2 A British study of mothers of infants age ≤12 months found that traveling for work, the impact of lockdown on food affordability, and having an income of less than £30,000 per year (approximately $41,000) predicted poorer mental health during the pandemic.29 Results of a study from China indicated that more than one-quarter of pregnant and postpartum women experienced depression during the pandemic, and women who worried about infection risk or missing pediatric visits were at increased risk.30
How to mitigate these risks
The increase in pandemic-related mental health concerns in the general population and specifically in peripartum women is a global health care challenge. Investing in mitigation strategies is necessary not only to address the current pandemic, but also to help prepare for the possibility of future traumatic events, such as another global pandemic.
Continue to: For pregnant women...
For pregnant women, ensuring access to outdoor space, increasing participation in healthy activities, and minimizing disruptions to prenatal care can protect against pandemic-related stress.3 Physical activity is an effective treatment for mild to moderate depressive symptoms. Because of the significant decrease in exercise among pregnant women during the pandemic, encouraging safe forms of physical activity such as online fitness classes could improve mental health outcomes for these patients.27 When counseling peripartum women, psychiatrists need to be creative in recommending fitness interventions to target mood symptoms, such as by suggesting virtual or at-home programs.
In an online survey, 118 obstetricians called for increased mental health resources for peripartum women, such as easier access to a helpline, educational videos, and mental health professionals.13 Increased screening for psychiatric disorders throughout the peripartum period can help identify women at greater risk, and advancements in telepsychiatry could help meet the increased need for psychiatric care during COVID-19. Psychiatrists and other mental health clinicians should consider reaching out to their colleagues who specialize in women’s health to establish new partnerships and create teams of multidisciplinary professionals.
Similarly, psychiatrists should familiarize themselves with telehealth services available to peripartum patients who could benefit from such services. Telehealth options can increase women’s access to peripartum care for both medical and psychiatric illnesses. Online options such as women’s support groups, parenting classes, and labor coaching seminars also represent valuable virtual tools to strengthen women’s social supports.
Women who need inpatient treatment for severe peripartum depression or anxiety might be particularly reluctant to receive this care during COVID-19 due to fears of becoming infected and of being separated from their infant and family while hospitalized. Clinicians should remain vigilant in screening peripartum women for mood disorders that might represent a danger to mothers and infants, and not allow concerns about COVID-19 to interfere with recommendations for psychiatric hospitalizations, when necessary. The creation of small, women-only inpatient behavioral units can help address this situation, especially given the possibility of frequent visits with infants and other peripartum support. Investment into such units is critical for supporting peripartum mental health, even in nonpandemic times.
What about vaccination? As of mid-May 2021, no large clinical trials of any COVID-19 vaccine that included pregnant women had been completed. However, 2 small preliminary studies suggested that the mRNA vaccines are safe and effective during pregnancy.31,32 When counseling peripartum patients on the risks and benefits, clinicians need to rely on this evidence, animal trials, and limited data from inadvertent exposures during pregnancy. While every woman will weigh the risks and benefits for her own circumstances, the CDC, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine have all stated that the mRNA vaccines should be offered to pregnant and breastfeeding individuals who are eligible for vaccination.33 Rasmussen et al33 have published a useful resource for clinicians regarding COVID-19 vaccination and pregnant women.
Continue to: Bottom Line
Bottom Line
During the COVID-19 pandemic, peripartum women have experienced increased rates of anxiety, depression, and stress. Psychiatric clinicians can help these patients by remaining vigilant in screening for psychiatric disorders, encouraging them to engage in activities to mitigate COVID-19’s adverse psychological effects, and referring them to care via telehealth and other resources as appropriate.
Related Resources
- Hu YJ, Wake M, Saffery R. Clarifying the sweeping consequences of COVID-19 in pregnant women, newborns, and children with existing cohorts. JAMA Pediatr. 2021; 75(2):117-118. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.2395
- Tomfohr-Madsen LM, Racine N, Giesbrecht GF, et al. Depression and anxiety in pregnancy during COVID-19: a rapid review and meta-analysis. Psychiatry Res. 2021; 300:113912. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2021.113912
1. Chivers BR, Garad RM, Boyle JA, et al. Perinatal distress during COVID-19: thematic analysis of an online parenting forum. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22(9):e22002. doi: 10.2196/22002
2. Ostacoli L, Cosma S, Bevilacqua F, et al. Psychosocial factors associated with postpartum psychological distress during the Covid-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020;20(1):703. doi: 10.1186/s12884-020-03399-5
3. Preis H, Mahaffey B, Heiselman C, etal. Vulnerability and resilience to pandemic-related stress among U.S. women pregnant at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Soc Sci Med. 2020;266:113348. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113348
4. Olson DM, Brémault-Phillips S, King S, et al. Recent Canadian efforts to develop population-level pregnancy intervention studies to mitigate effects of natural disasters and other tragedies. J Dev Orig Health Dis. 2019;10(1):108-114. doi: 10.1017/S2040174418001113
5. Watanabe Z, Iwama N, Nishigori H, et al. Japan Environment & Children’s Study Group. Psychological distress during pregnancy in Miyagi after the Great East Japan Earthquake: the Japan Environment and Children’s Study. J Affect Disord. 2016;190:341-348. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2015.10.024
6. Xiong X, Harville EW, Mattison DR, et al. Hurricane Katrina experience and the risk of post-traumatic stress disorder and depression among pregnant women. Am J Disaster Med. 2010;5(3):181-187. doi: 10.5055/ajdm.2010.0020
7. Brooks SK, Weston D, Greenberg N. Psychological impact of infectious disease outbreaks on pregnant women: rapid evidence review. Public Health. 2020;189:26-36. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2020.09.006
8. Diriba K, Awulachew E, Getu E. The effect of coronavirus infection (SARS-CoV-2, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV) during pregnancy and the possibility of vertical maternal-fetal transmission: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Med Res. 2020;25(1):39. doi: 10.1186/s40001-020-00439-w
9. Qi M, Li X, Liu S, et al. Impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on patterns of pregnant women’s perception of threat and its relationship to mental state: a latent class analysis. PLoS One. 2020;15(10):e0239697. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239697
10. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Investigating the impact of COVID-19 during pregnancy. Updated February 4, 2021. Accessed April 29, 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/special-populations/pregnancy-data-on-covid-19/what-cdc-is-doing.html
11. Ahlberg M, Neovius M, Saltvedt S, et al. Association of SARS-CoV-2 test status and pregnancy outcomes. JAMA. 2020;324(17):1782-1785. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.19124
12. Ashraf MA, Keshavarz P, Hosseinpour P, et al. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a systematic review of pregnancy and the possibility of vertical transmission. J Reprod Infertil. 2020;21(3):157-168.
13. Nanjundaswamy MH, Shiva L, Desai G, et al. COVID-19-related anxiety and concerns expressed by pregnant and postpartum women-a survey among obstetricians. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2020; 23(6):787-790. doi: 10.1007/s00737-020-01060-w
14. Verdery AM, Smith-Greenaway E, Margolis R, et al. Tracking the reach of COVID-19 kin loss with a bereavement multiplier applied to the United States. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020;117(30):17695-17701. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2007476117
15. Simon NM, Saxe GN, Marmar CR. Mental health disorders related to COVID-19-related deaths. JAMA. 2020;324(15):1493-1494. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.19632
16. Cook N, Ayers S, Horsch A. Maternal posttraumatic stress disorder during the perinatal period and child outcomes: a systematic review. J Affect Disord. 2018;225:18-31. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2017.07.045
17. Czeisler MÉ, Lane RI, Petrosky E, et al. Mental health, substance use, and suicidal ideation during the COVID-19 pandemic - United States, June 24-30, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020;69(32):1049-1057. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm6932a1
18. Almeida M, Shrestha AD, Stojanac D, et al. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on women’s mental health. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2020;23(6):741-748. doi:10.1007/s00737-020-01092-2
19. Office for National Statistics. Personal and economic well-being in Great Britain: May 2020. Published May 4, 2020. Accessed April 23, 2021. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/wellbeing/bulletins/personalandeconomicwellbeingintheuk/may2020
20. Kuehn BM. COVID-19 halts reproductive care for millions of women. JAMA. 2020;324(15):1489. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.19025
21. Preis H, Mahaffey B, Lobel M. Psychometric properties of the Pandemic-Related Pregnancy Stress Scale (PREPS). J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2020;41(3):191-197. doi: 10.1080/0167482X.2020.1801625
22. Hermann A, Fitelson EM, Bergink V. Meeting maternal mental health needs during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA Psychiatry. 2020;78(2):123-124. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2020.1947
23. Arora KS, Mauch JT, Gibson KS. Labor and delivery visitor policies during the COVID-19 pandemic: balancing risks and benefits. JAMA. 2020;323(24):2468-2469. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.7563
24. Bradbury-Jones C, Isham L. The pandemic paradox: the consequences of COVID-19 on domestic violence. J Clin Nurs. 2020;29(13-14):2047-2049. doi: 10.1111/jocn.15296
25. Connor J, Madhavan S, Mokashi M, et al. Health risks and outcomes that disproportionately affect women during the Covid-19 pandemic: a review. Soc Sci Med. 2020;266:113364. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113364
26. Scharff X, Ryley S. Breaking: some states show alarming spike in women’s share of unemployment claims. The Fuller Project. Accessed April 23, 2021. https://fullerproject.org/story/some-states-shows-alarming-spike-in-womens-share-of-unemployment-claims/
27. Hessami K, Romanelli C, Chiurazzi M, et al. COVID-19 pandemic and maternal mental health: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2020;1-8. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2020.1843155
28. Yan H, Ding Y, Guo W. Mental health of pregnant and postpartum women during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Psychol. 2020;11:617001. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.617001
29. Dib S, Rougeaux E, Vázquez-Vázquez A, et al. Maternal mental health and coping during the COVID-19 lockdown in the UK: data from the COVID-19 New Mum Study. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2020;151(3):407-414. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.13397
30. Bo HX, Yang Y, Chen J, et al. Prevalence of depressive symptoms among Chinese pregnant and postpartum women during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychosom Med. 2020. doi: 10.1097/PSY.0000000000000904
31. Collier AY, McMahan K, Yu J, et al. Immunogenicity of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in pregnant and lactating women. JAMA. 2021. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.7563
32. Shanes ED, Otero S, Mithal LB, et al. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination in pregnancy: measures of immunity and placental histopathology. Obstet Gynecol. 2021. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004457
33. Rasmussen SA, Kelley CF, Horton JP, et al. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and pregnancy: what obstetricians need to know. Obstet Gynecol. 2021;137(3):408-414. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004290
The COVID-19 pandemic has had a negative impact on the mental health of people worldwide, and a disproportionate effect on peripartum women. In this article, we discuss the reasons for this disparity, review the limited literature on this topic, and suggest strategies to safeguard the mental health of peripartum women during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Catastrophic events and women’s mental health
During the peripartum period, women have increased psychosocial and physical health needs.1 In addition, women are disproportionately affected by natural disasters and catastrophic events,2 which are predictors of psychiatric symptoms during the peripartum period.3 Mass tragedies previously associated with maternal stress include wildfires, hurricanes, migrations, earthquakes, and tsunamis.4,5 For example, pregnant women who survived severe exposure during Hurricane Katrina (ie, feeling that one’s life was in danger, experiencing illness or injury to self or a family member, walking through floodwaters) in 2005 had a significantly increased risk of developing posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression compared with pregnant women who did not have such exposure.6 After the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami in Japan, the prevalence of psychological distress in pregnant women increased, especially among those living in the area directly affected by the tsunami.5
Epidemics and pandemics also can adversely affect peripartum women’s mental health. Studies conducted before the COVID-19 pandemic found that previous infectious disease outbreaks such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) pandemic, and Zika had negative emotional impacts on pregnant women.7 Our review of the limited literature published to date suggests that COVID-19 is having similar adverse effects.
COVID-19 poses both medical and psychiatric threats
COVID-19 infection is a physical threat to pregnant women who are already vulnerable due to the hormonal and immunological changes inherent to pregnancy. A meta-analysis of 39 studies with a total of 1,316 pregnant women indicated that the most frequently reported symptoms of COVID-19 infection were cough, fever, and myalgias.8 However, COVID-19 infection during pregnancy is also associated with an increase in pregnancy complications and adverse birth outcomes.9 According to the CDC, compared with their nonpregnant counterparts, pregnant women are at greater risk for severe COVID-19 infection and adverse birth outcomes such as preterm birth.10 Pregnant women who are infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2; the virus responsible for COVID-19) risk ICU admission, caesarean section, and perinatal death.8 A Swedish study of 2,682 pregnant women found an increase in preeclampsia among women who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, a finding attributed to COVID-19’s pattern of systemic effects.11 Vertical transmission of the novel coronavirus from mother to fetus appears to be rare but possible.12
In addition to the physical dangers of becoming infected with COVID-19, the perceived threat of infection is an added source of anxiety for some peripartum women. In addition to the concerns involved in any pregnancy, COVID-19–related sources of distress for pregnant women include worrying about harm to the fetus during pregnancy, the possibility of vertical transmission, and exposures during antenatal appointments, during employment, or from a partner.8,13
The death toll from factors associated with COVID-19 adds to the mental health burden. For every person who dies of COVID-19, an estimated 9 others may develop prolonged grief or PTSD due to the loss of someone they loved.14,15 A systematic review found that PTSD in the perinatal period is associated with negative birth and child outcomes, including low birth weight and decreased rates of breastfeeding.16 The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted human interactions, from social distancing rules and lockdowns of businesses and social activities to panic buying of grocery staples and increased economic insecurity.1 These changes have been accompanied by a rise in mental health challenges. For example, according to an August 2020 CDC survey, 40.9% of US adults reported at least 1 adverse mental or behavioral health condition, including symptoms of anxiety or depression (30.9%), symptoms of a trauma- and stressor-related disorder related to the pandemic (26.3%), and having started or increased substance use to cope with stress or emotions related to COVID-19 (13.3%).17
COVID-19–related traumas and stressors appear to affect women more than men. A study from China found that compared with men, women had significantly higher levels of self-reported pandemic-related anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS).18 This trend has been observed in other parts of the world. A study conducted by the UK Office of National Statistics reported anxiety levels were 24% higher in women vs men as reflected by scores on a self-rated anxiety scale.19
Continue to: Many factors influence...
Many factors influence the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on women in general, and peripartum women in particular (Box20-26).
Box
Factors that predispose women to increased stress during COVID-19 include an increase in child care burdens brought about by school closures and subsequent virtual schooling.20 Intimate partner violence has spiked globally during COVID-19 restrictions.24 Women also represent the majority of the health care workforce (76%) and often take on informal caregiving roles; both of these roles have seen increased burdens during the pandemic.25 Already encumbered by prepandemic gender pay inequalities, women are filing unemployment claims at a significantly increased rate compared to men.26
For women of childbearing age, the disruption of routine clinical care during COVID-19 has decreased access to reproductive health care, resulting in increases in unintended pregnancies, unsafe abortions, and deaths.20 Another source of stress for pregnant women during COVID-19 is feeling unprepared for birth because of the pandemic, a phenomenon described as “preparedness stress.”21 Visitor restriction policies and quarantines have also caused women in labor to experience birth without their support partners, which is associated with increased posttraumatic stress symptoms.22 These restrictions also may be associated with an increase in women choosing out-of-hospital births despite the increased risk of adverse outcomes.23
Psychiatric diagnoses in peripartum women
Multiple studies and meta-analyses have begun to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on maternal mental health. One meta-analysis of 8 studies conducted in 5 countries determined that COVID-19 significantly increases the risk of anxiety in women during the peripartum period.27 Results of another meta-analysis of 23 studies with >24,000 participants indicated that the prevalence of anxiety, depression, and insomnia in peripartum women was significantly higher during the pandemic than in pre-pandemic times.28
In an online survey of 4,451 pregnant women in the United States, nearly one-third of respondents reported elevated levels of pandemic-related stress as measured by the newly-developed Pandemic-Related Pregnancy Stress Scale.3 The rates were even higher among women who were already at risk for elevated stress levels, such as those who had survived abuse, those giving birth for the first time, or those experiencing high-risk pregnancies.3 Living in a pandemic “hot spot” also appeared to impact peripartum stress levels.
COVID-19 has adverse effects on women’s mental health specifically during the postpartum period. One study from a center in Italy found a high prevalence of depressive symptoms and PTSS in the postpartum period, with COVID-19–related factors playing an “indirect role” compared with prenatal experiences and other individual factors.2 A British study of mothers of infants age ≤12 months found that traveling for work, the impact of lockdown on food affordability, and having an income of less than £30,000 per year (approximately $41,000) predicted poorer mental health during the pandemic.29 Results of a study from China indicated that more than one-quarter of pregnant and postpartum women experienced depression during the pandemic, and women who worried about infection risk or missing pediatric visits were at increased risk.30
How to mitigate these risks
The increase in pandemic-related mental health concerns in the general population and specifically in peripartum women is a global health care challenge. Investing in mitigation strategies is necessary not only to address the current pandemic, but also to help prepare for the possibility of future traumatic events, such as another global pandemic.
Continue to: For pregnant women...
For pregnant women, ensuring access to outdoor space, increasing participation in healthy activities, and minimizing disruptions to prenatal care can protect against pandemic-related stress.3 Physical activity is an effective treatment for mild to moderate depressive symptoms. Because of the significant decrease in exercise among pregnant women during the pandemic, encouraging safe forms of physical activity such as online fitness classes could improve mental health outcomes for these patients.27 When counseling peripartum women, psychiatrists need to be creative in recommending fitness interventions to target mood symptoms, such as by suggesting virtual or at-home programs.
In an online survey, 118 obstetricians called for increased mental health resources for peripartum women, such as easier access to a helpline, educational videos, and mental health professionals.13 Increased screening for psychiatric disorders throughout the peripartum period can help identify women at greater risk, and advancements in telepsychiatry could help meet the increased need for psychiatric care during COVID-19. Psychiatrists and other mental health clinicians should consider reaching out to their colleagues who specialize in women’s health to establish new partnerships and create teams of multidisciplinary professionals.
Similarly, psychiatrists should familiarize themselves with telehealth services available to peripartum patients who could benefit from such services. Telehealth options can increase women’s access to peripartum care for both medical and psychiatric illnesses. Online options such as women’s support groups, parenting classes, and labor coaching seminars also represent valuable virtual tools to strengthen women’s social supports.
Women who need inpatient treatment for severe peripartum depression or anxiety might be particularly reluctant to receive this care during COVID-19 due to fears of becoming infected and of being separated from their infant and family while hospitalized. Clinicians should remain vigilant in screening peripartum women for mood disorders that might represent a danger to mothers and infants, and not allow concerns about COVID-19 to interfere with recommendations for psychiatric hospitalizations, when necessary. The creation of small, women-only inpatient behavioral units can help address this situation, especially given the possibility of frequent visits with infants and other peripartum support. Investment into such units is critical for supporting peripartum mental health, even in nonpandemic times.
What about vaccination? As of mid-May 2021, no large clinical trials of any COVID-19 vaccine that included pregnant women had been completed. However, 2 small preliminary studies suggested that the mRNA vaccines are safe and effective during pregnancy.31,32 When counseling peripartum patients on the risks and benefits, clinicians need to rely on this evidence, animal trials, and limited data from inadvertent exposures during pregnancy. While every woman will weigh the risks and benefits for her own circumstances, the CDC, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine have all stated that the mRNA vaccines should be offered to pregnant and breastfeeding individuals who are eligible for vaccination.33 Rasmussen et al33 have published a useful resource for clinicians regarding COVID-19 vaccination and pregnant women.
Continue to: Bottom Line
Bottom Line
During the COVID-19 pandemic, peripartum women have experienced increased rates of anxiety, depression, and stress. Psychiatric clinicians can help these patients by remaining vigilant in screening for psychiatric disorders, encouraging them to engage in activities to mitigate COVID-19’s adverse psychological effects, and referring them to care via telehealth and other resources as appropriate.
Related Resources
- Hu YJ, Wake M, Saffery R. Clarifying the sweeping consequences of COVID-19 in pregnant women, newborns, and children with existing cohorts. JAMA Pediatr. 2021; 75(2):117-118. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.2395
- Tomfohr-Madsen LM, Racine N, Giesbrecht GF, et al. Depression and anxiety in pregnancy during COVID-19: a rapid review and meta-analysis. Psychiatry Res. 2021; 300:113912. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2021.113912
The COVID-19 pandemic has had a negative impact on the mental health of people worldwide, and a disproportionate effect on peripartum women. In this article, we discuss the reasons for this disparity, review the limited literature on this topic, and suggest strategies to safeguard the mental health of peripartum women during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Catastrophic events and women’s mental health
During the peripartum period, women have increased psychosocial and physical health needs.1 In addition, women are disproportionately affected by natural disasters and catastrophic events,2 which are predictors of psychiatric symptoms during the peripartum period.3 Mass tragedies previously associated with maternal stress include wildfires, hurricanes, migrations, earthquakes, and tsunamis.4,5 For example, pregnant women who survived severe exposure during Hurricane Katrina (ie, feeling that one’s life was in danger, experiencing illness or injury to self or a family member, walking through floodwaters) in 2005 had a significantly increased risk of developing posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression compared with pregnant women who did not have such exposure.6 After the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami in Japan, the prevalence of psychological distress in pregnant women increased, especially among those living in the area directly affected by the tsunami.5
Epidemics and pandemics also can adversely affect peripartum women’s mental health. Studies conducted before the COVID-19 pandemic found that previous infectious disease outbreaks such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) pandemic, and Zika had negative emotional impacts on pregnant women.7 Our review of the limited literature published to date suggests that COVID-19 is having similar adverse effects.
COVID-19 poses both medical and psychiatric threats
COVID-19 infection is a physical threat to pregnant women who are already vulnerable due to the hormonal and immunological changes inherent to pregnancy. A meta-analysis of 39 studies with a total of 1,316 pregnant women indicated that the most frequently reported symptoms of COVID-19 infection were cough, fever, and myalgias.8 However, COVID-19 infection during pregnancy is also associated with an increase in pregnancy complications and adverse birth outcomes.9 According to the CDC, compared with their nonpregnant counterparts, pregnant women are at greater risk for severe COVID-19 infection and adverse birth outcomes such as preterm birth.10 Pregnant women who are infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2; the virus responsible for COVID-19) risk ICU admission, caesarean section, and perinatal death.8 A Swedish study of 2,682 pregnant women found an increase in preeclampsia among women who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, a finding attributed to COVID-19’s pattern of systemic effects.11 Vertical transmission of the novel coronavirus from mother to fetus appears to be rare but possible.12
In addition to the physical dangers of becoming infected with COVID-19, the perceived threat of infection is an added source of anxiety for some peripartum women. In addition to the concerns involved in any pregnancy, COVID-19–related sources of distress for pregnant women include worrying about harm to the fetus during pregnancy, the possibility of vertical transmission, and exposures during antenatal appointments, during employment, or from a partner.8,13
The death toll from factors associated with COVID-19 adds to the mental health burden. For every person who dies of COVID-19, an estimated 9 others may develop prolonged grief or PTSD due to the loss of someone they loved.14,15 A systematic review found that PTSD in the perinatal period is associated with negative birth and child outcomes, including low birth weight and decreased rates of breastfeeding.16 The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted human interactions, from social distancing rules and lockdowns of businesses and social activities to panic buying of grocery staples and increased economic insecurity.1 These changes have been accompanied by a rise in mental health challenges. For example, according to an August 2020 CDC survey, 40.9% of US adults reported at least 1 adverse mental or behavioral health condition, including symptoms of anxiety or depression (30.9%), symptoms of a trauma- and stressor-related disorder related to the pandemic (26.3%), and having started or increased substance use to cope with stress or emotions related to COVID-19 (13.3%).17
COVID-19–related traumas and stressors appear to affect women more than men. A study from China found that compared with men, women had significantly higher levels of self-reported pandemic-related anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS).18 This trend has been observed in other parts of the world. A study conducted by the UK Office of National Statistics reported anxiety levels were 24% higher in women vs men as reflected by scores on a self-rated anxiety scale.19
Continue to: Many factors influence...
Many factors influence the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on women in general, and peripartum women in particular (Box20-26).
Box
Factors that predispose women to increased stress during COVID-19 include an increase in child care burdens brought about by school closures and subsequent virtual schooling.20 Intimate partner violence has spiked globally during COVID-19 restrictions.24 Women also represent the majority of the health care workforce (76%) and often take on informal caregiving roles; both of these roles have seen increased burdens during the pandemic.25 Already encumbered by prepandemic gender pay inequalities, women are filing unemployment claims at a significantly increased rate compared to men.26
For women of childbearing age, the disruption of routine clinical care during COVID-19 has decreased access to reproductive health care, resulting in increases in unintended pregnancies, unsafe abortions, and deaths.20 Another source of stress for pregnant women during COVID-19 is feeling unprepared for birth because of the pandemic, a phenomenon described as “preparedness stress.”21 Visitor restriction policies and quarantines have also caused women in labor to experience birth without their support partners, which is associated with increased posttraumatic stress symptoms.22 These restrictions also may be associated with an increase in women choosing out-of-hospital births despite the increased risk of adverse outcomes.23
Psychiatric diagnoses in peripartum women
Multiple studies and meta-analyses have begun to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on maternal mental health. One meta-analysis of 8 studies conducted in 5 countries determined that COVID-19 significantly increases the risk of anxiety in women during the peripartum period.27 Results of another meta-analysis of 23 studies with >24,000 participants indicated that the prevalence of anxiety, depression, and insomnia in peripartum women was significantly higher during the pandemic than in pre-pandemic times.28
In an online survey of 4,451 pregnant women in the United States, nearly one-third of respondents reported elevated levels of pandemic-related stress as measured by the newly-developed Pandemic-Related Pregnancy Stress Scale.3 The rates were even higher among women who were already at risk for elevated stress levels, such as those who had survived abuse, those giving birth for the first time, or those experiencing high-risk pregnancies.3 Living in a pandemic “hot spot” also appeared to impact peripartum stress levels.
COVID-19 has adverse effects on women’s mental health specifically during the postpartum period. One study from a center in Italy found a high prevalence of depressive symptoms and PTSS in the postpartum period, with COVID-19–related factors playing an “indirect role” compared with prenatal experiences and other individual factors.2 A British study of mothers of infants age ≤12 months found that traveling for work, the impact of lockdown on food affordability, and having an income of less than £30,000 per year (approximately $41,000) predicted poorer mental health during the pandemic.29 Results of a study from China indicated that more than one-quarter of pregnant and postpartum women experienced depression during the pandemic, and women who worried about infection risk or missing pediatric visits were at increased risk.30
How to mitigate these risks
The increase in pandemic-related mental health concerns in the general population and specifically in peripartum women is a global health care challenge. Investing in mitigation strategies is necessary not only to address the current pandemic, but also to help prepare for the possibility of future traumatic events, such as another global pandemic.
Continue to: For pregnant women...
For pregnant women, ensuring access to outdoor space, increasing participation in healthy activities, and minimizing disruptions to prenatal care can protect against pandemic-related stress.3 Physical activity is an effective treatment for mild to moderate depressive symptoms. Because of the significant decrease in exercise among pregnant women during the pandemic, encouraging safe forms of physical activity such as online fitness classes could improve mental health outcomes for these patients.27 When counseling peripartum women, psychiatrists need to be creative in recommending fitness interventions to target mood symptoms, such as by suggesting virtual or at-home programs.
In an online survey, 118 obstetricians called for increased mental health resources for peripartum women, such as easier access to a helpline, educational videos, and mental health professionals.13 Increased screening for psychiatric disorders throughout the peripartum period can help identify women at greater risk, and advancements in telepsychiatry could help meet the increased need for psychiatric care during COVID-19. Psychiatrists and other mental health clinicians should consider reaching out to their colleagues who specialize in women’s health to establish new partnerships and create teams of multidisciplinary professionals.
Similarly, psychiatrists should familiarize themselves with telehealth services available to peripartum patients who could benefit from such services. Telehealth options can increase women’s access to peripartum care for both medical and psychiatric illnesses. Online options such as women’s support groups, parenting classes, and labor coaching seminars also represent valuable virtual tools to strengthen women’s social supports.
Women who need inpatient treatment for severe peripartum depression or anxiety might be particularly reluctant to receive this care during COVID-19 due to fears of becoming infected and of being separated from their infant and family while hospitalized. Clinicians should remain vigilant in screening peripartum women for mood disorders that might represent a danger to mothers and infants, and not allow concerns about COVID-19 to interfere with recommendations for psychiatric hospitalizations, when necessary. The creation of small, women-only inpatient behavioral units can help address this situation, especially given the possibility of frequent visits with infants and other peripartum support. Investment into such units is critical for supporting peripartum mental health, even in nonpandemic times.
What about vaccination? As of mid-May 2021, no large clinical trials of any COVID-19 vaccine that included pregnant women had been completed. However, 2 small preliminary studies suggested that the mRNA vaccines are safe and effective during pregnancy.31,32 When counseling peripartum patients on the risks and benefits, clinicians need to rely on this evidence, animal trials, and limited data from inadvertent exposures during pregnancy. While every woman will weigh the risks and benefits for her own circumstances, the CDC, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine have all stated that the mRNA vaccines should be offered to pregnant and breastfeeding individuals who are eligible for vaccination.33 Rasmussen et al33 have published a useful resource for clinicians regarding COVID-19 vaccination and pregnant women.
Continue to: Bottom Line
Bottom Line
During the COVID-19 pandemic, peripartum women have experienced increased rates of anxiety, depression, and stress. Psychiatric clinicians can help these patients by remaining vigilant in screening for psychiatric disorders, encouraging them to engage in activities to mitigate COVID-19’s adverse psychological effects, and referring them to care via telehealth and other resources as appropriate.
Related Resources
- Hu YJ, Wake M, Saffery R. Clarifying the sweeping consequences of COVID-19 in pregnant women, newborns, and children with existing cohorts. JAMA Pediatr. 2021; 75(2):117-118. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.2395
- Tomfohr-Madsen LM, Racine N, Giesbrecht GF, et al. Depression and anxiety in pregnancy during COVID-19: a rapid review and meta-analysis. Psychiatry Res. 2021; 300:113912. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2021.113912
1. Chivers BR, Garad RM, Boyle JA, et al. Perinatal distress during COVID-19: thematic analysis of an online parenting forum. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22(9):e22002. doi: 10.2196/22002
2. Ostacoli L, Cosma S, Bevilacqua F, et al. Psychosocial factors associated with postpartum psychological distress during the Covid-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020;20(1):703. doi: 10.1186/s12884-020-03399-5
3. Preis H, Mahaffey B, Heiselman C, etal. Vulnerability and resilience to pandemic-related stress among U.S. women pregnant at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Soc Sci Med. 2020;266:113348. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113348
4. Olson DM, Brémault-Phillips S, King S, et al. Recent Canadian efforts to develop population-level pregnancy intervention studies to mitigate effects of natural disasters and other tragedies. J Dev Orig Health Dis. 2019;10(1):108-114. doi: 10.1017/S2040174418001113
5. Watanabe Z, Iwama N, Nishigori H, et al. Japan Environment & Children’s Study Group. Psychological distress during pregnancy in Miyagi after the Great East Japan Earthquake: the Japan Environment and Children’s Study. J Affect Disord. 2016;190:341-348. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2015.10.024
6. Xiong X, Harville EW, Mattison DR, et al. Hurricane Katrina experience and the risk of post-traumatic stress disorder and depression among pregnant women. Am J Disaster Med. 2010;5(3):181-187. doi: 10.5055/ajdm.2010.0020
7. Brooks SK, Weston D, Greenberg N. Psychological impact of infectious disease outbreaks on pregnant women: rapid evidence review. Public Health. 2020;189:26-36. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2020.09.006
8. Diriba K, Awulachew E, Getu E. The effect of coronavirus infection (SARS-CoV-2, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV) during pregnancy and the possibility of vertical maternal-fetal transmission: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Med Res. 2020;25(1):39. doi: 10.1186/s40001-020-00439-w
9. Qi M, Li X, Liu S, et al. Impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on patterns of pregnant women’s perception of threat and its relationship to mental state: a latent class analysis. PLoS One. 2020;15(10):e0239697. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239697
10. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Investigating the impact of COVID-19 during pregnancy. Updated February 4, 2021. Accessed April 29, 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/special-populations/pregnancy-data-on-covid-19/what-cdc-is-doing.html
11. Ahlberg M, Neovius M, Saltvedt S, et al. Association of SARS-CoV-2 test status and pregnancy outcomes. JAMA. 2020;324(17):1782-1785. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.19124
12. Ashraf MA, Keshavarz P, Hosseinpour P, et al. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a systematic review of pregnancy and the possibility of vertical transmission. J Reprod Infertil. 2020;21(3):157-168.
13. Nanjundaswamy MH, Shiva L, Desai G, et al. COVID-19-related anxiety and concerns expressed by pregnant and postpartum women-a survey among obstetricians. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2020; 23(6):787-790. doi: 10.1007/s00737-020-01060-w
14. Verdery AM, Smith-Greenaway E, Margolis R, et al. Tracking the reach of COVID-19 kin loss with a bereavement multiplier applied to the United States. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020;117(30):17695-17701. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2007476117
15. Simon NM, Saxe GN, Marmar CR. Mental health disorders related to COVID-19-related deaths. JAMA. 2020;324(15):1493-1494. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.19632
16. Cook N, Ayers S, Horsch A. Maternal posttraumatic stress disorder during the perinatal period and child outcomes: a systematic review. J Affect Disord. 2018;225:18-31. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2017.07.045
17. Czeisler MÉ, Lane RI, Petrosky E, et al. Mental health, substance use, and suicidal ideation during the COVID-19 pandemic - United States, June 24-30, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020;69(32):1049-1057. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm6932a1
18. Almeida M, Shrestha AD, Stojanac D, et al. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on women’s mental health. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2020;23(6):741-748. doi:10.1007/s00737-020-01092-2
19. Office for National Statistics. Personal and economic well-being in Great Britain: May 2020. Published May 4, 2020. Accessed April 23, 2021. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/wellbeing/bulletins/personalandeconomicwellbeingintheuk/may2020
20. Kuehn BM. COVID-19 halts reproductive care for millions of women. JAMA. 2020;324(15):1489. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.19025
21. Preis H, Mahaffey B, Lobel M. Psychometric properties of the Pandemic-Related Pregnancy Stress Scale (PREPS). J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2020;41(3):191-197. doi: 10.1080/0167482X.2020.1801625
22. Hermann A, Fitelson EM, Bergink V. Meeting maternal mental health needs during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA Psychiatry. 2020;78(2):123-124. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2020.1947
23. Arora KS, Mauch JT, Gibson KS. Labor and delivery visitor policies during the COVID-19 pandemic: balancing risks and benefits. JAMA. 2020;323(24):2468-2469. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.7563
24. Bradbury-Jones C, Isham L. The pandemic paradox: the consequences of COVID-19 on domestic violence. J Clin Nurs. 2020;29(13-14):2047-2049. doi: 10.1111/jocn.15296
25. Connor J, Madhavan S, Mokashi M, et al. Health risks and outcomes that disproportionately affect women during the Covid-19 pandemic: a review. Soc Sci Med. 2020;266:113364. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113364
26. Scharff X, Ryley S. Breaking: some states show alarming spike in women’s share of unemployment claims. The Fuller Project. Accessed April 23, 2021. https://fullerproject.org/story/some-states-shows-alarming-spike-in-womens-share-of-unemployment-claims/
27. Hessami K, Romanelli C, Chiurazzi M, et al. COVID-19 pandemic and maternal mental health: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2020;1-8. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2020.1843155
28. Yan H, Ding Y, Guo W. Mental health of pregnant and postpartum women during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Psychol. 2020;11:617001. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.617001
29. Dib S, Rougeaux E, Vázquez-Vázquez A, et al. Maternal mental health and coping during the COVID-19 lockdown in the UK: data from the COVID-19 New Mum Study. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2020;151(3):407-414. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.13397
30. Bo HX, Yang Y, Chen J, et al. Prevalence of depressive symptoms among Chinese pregnant and postpartum women during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychosom Med. 2020. doi: 10.1097/PSY.0000000000000904
31. Collier AY, McMahan K, Yu J, et al. Immunogenicity of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in pregnant and lactating women. JAMA. 2021. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.7563
32. Shanes ED, Otero S, Mithal LB, et al. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination in pregnancy: measures of immunity and placental histopathology. Obstet Gynecol. 2021. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004457
33. Rasmussen SA, Kelley CF, Horton JP, et al. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and pregnancy: what obstetricians need to know. Obstet Gynecol. 2021;137(3):408-414. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004290
1. Chivers BR, Garad RM, Boyle JA, et al. Perinatal distress during COVID-19: thematic analysis of an online parenting forum. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22(9):e22002. doi: 10.2196/22002
2. Ostacoli L, Cosma S, Bevilacqua F, et al. Psychosocial factors associated with postpartum psychological distress during the Covid-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020;20(1):703. doi: 10.1186/s12884-020-03399-5
3. Preis H, Mahaffey B, Heiselman C, etal. Vulnerability and resilience to pandemic-related stress among U.S. women pregnant at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Soc Sci Med. 2020;266:113348. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113348
4. Olson DM, Brémault-Phillips S, King S, et al. Recent Canadian efforts to develop population-level pregnancy intervention studies to mitigate effects of natural disasters and other tragedies. J Dev Orig Health Dis. 2019;10(1):108-114. doi: 10.1017/S2040174418001113
5. Watanabe Z, Iwama N, Nishigori H, et al. Japan Environment & Children’s Study Group. Psychological distress during pregnancy in Miyagi after the Great East Japan Earthquake: the Japan Environment and Children’s Study. J Affect Disord. 2016;190:341-348. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2015.10.024
6. Xiong X, Harville EW, Mattison DR, et al. Hurricane Katrina experience and the risk of post-traumatic stress disorder and depression among pregnant women. Am J Disaster Med. 2010;5(3):181-187. doi: 10.5055/ajdm.2010.0020
7. Brooks SK, Weston D, Greenberg N. Psychological impact of infectious disease outbreaks on pregnant women: rapid evidence review. Public Health. 2020;189:26-36. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2020.09.006
8. Diriba K, Awulachew E, Getu E. The effect of coronavirus infection (SARS-CoV-2, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV) during pregnancy and the possibility of vertical maternal-fetal transmission: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Med Res. 2020;25(1):39. doi: 10.1186/s40001-020-00439-w
9. Qi M, Li X, Liu S, et al. Impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on patterns of pregnant women’s perception of threat and its relationship to mental state: a latent class analysis. PLoS One. 2020;15(10):e0239697. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239697
10. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Investigating the impact of COVID-19 during pregnancy. Updated February 4, 2021. Accessed April 29, 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/special-populations/pregnancy-data-on-covid-19/what-cdc-is-doing.html
11. Ahlberg M, Neovius M, Saltvedt S, et al. Association of SARS-CoV-2 test status and pregnancy outcomes. JAMA. 2020;324(17):1782-1785. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.19124
12. Ashraf MA, Keshavarz P, Hosseinpour P, et al. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a systematic review of pregnancy and the possibility of vertical transmission. J Reprod Infertil. 2020;21(3):157-168.
13. Nanjundaswamy MH, Shiva L, Desai G, et al. COVID-19-related anxiety and concerns expressed by pregnant and postpartum women-a survey among obstetricians. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2020; 23(6):787-790. doi: 10.1007/s00737-020-01060-w
14. Verdery AM, Smith-Greenaway E, Margolis R, et al. Tracking the reach of COVID-19 kin loss with a bereavement multiplier applied to the United States. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020;117(30):17695-17701. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2007476117
15. Simon NM, Saxe GN, Marmar CR. Mental health disorders related to COVID-19-related deaths. JAMA. 2020;324(15):1493-1494. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.19632
16. Cook N, Ayers S, Horsch A. Maternal posttraumatic stress disorder during the perinatal period and child outcomes: a systematic review. J Affect Disord. 2018;225:18-31. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2017.07.045
17. Czeisler MÉ, Lane RI, Petrosky E, et al. Mental health, substance use, and suicidal ideation during the COVID-19 pandemic - United States, June 24-30, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020;69(32):1049-1057. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm6932a1
18. Almeida M, Shrestha AD, Stojanac D, et al. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on women’s mental health. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2020;23(6):741-748. doi:10.1007/s00737-020-01092-2
19. Office for National Statistics. Personal and economic well-being in Great Britain: May 2020. Published May 4, 2020. Accessed April 23, 2021. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/wellbeing/bulletins/personalandeconomicwellbeingintheuk/may2020
20. Kuehn BM. COVID-19 halts reproductive care for millions of women. JAMA. 2020;324(15):1489. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.19025
21. Preis H, Mahaffey B, Lobel M. Psychometric properties of the Pandemic-Related Pregnancy Stress Scale (PREPS). J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2020;41(3):191-197. doi: 10.1080/0167482X.2020.1801625
22. Hermann A, Fitelson EM, Bergink V. Meeting maternal mental health needs during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA Psychiatry. 2020;78(2):123-124. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2020.1947
23. Arora KS, Mauch JT, Gibson KS. Labor and delivery visitor policies during the COVID-19 pandemic: balancing risks and benefits. JAMA. 2020;323(24):2468-2469. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.7563
24. Bradbury-Jones C, Isham L. The pandemic paradox: the consequences of COVID-19 on domestic violence. J Clin Nurs. 2020;29(13-14):2047-2049. doi: 10.1111/jocn.15296
25. Connor J, Madhavan S, Mokashi M, et al. Health risks and outcomes that disproportionately affect women during the Covid-19 pandemic: a review. Soc Sci Med. 2020;266:113364. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113364
26. Scharff X, Ryley S. Breaking: some states show alarming spike in women’s share of unemployment claims. The Fuller Project. Accessed April 23, 2021. https://fullerproject.org/story/some-states-shows-alarming-spike-in-womens-share-of-unemployment-claims/
27. Hessami K, Romanelli C, Chiurazzi M, et al. COVID-19 pandemic and maternal mental health: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2020;1-8. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2020.1843155
28. Yan H, Ding Y, Guo W. Mental health of pregnant and postpartum women during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Psychol. 2020;11:617001. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.617001
29. Dib S, Rougeaux E, Vázquez-Vázquez A, et al. Maternal mental health and coping during the COVID-19 lockdown in the UK: data from the COVID-19 New Mum Study. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2020;151(3):407-414. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.13397
30. Bo HX, Yang Y, Chen J, et al. Prevalence of depressive symptoms among Chinese pregnant and postpartum women during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychosom Med. 2020. doi: 10.1097/PSY.0000000000000904
31. Collier AY, McMahan K, Yu J, et al. Immunogenicity of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in pregnant and lactating women. JAMA. 2021. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.7563
32. Shanes ED, Otero S, Mithal LB, et al. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination in pregnancy: measures of immunity and placental histopathology. Obstet Gynecol. 2021. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004457
33. Rasmussen SA, Kelley CF, Horton JP, et al. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and pregnancy: what obstetricians need to know. Obstet Gynecol. 2021;137(3):408-414. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004290
What brought me back from the brink of suicide: A physician’s story
William Lynes, MD, had a flourishing medical practice and a fulfilling family life with three children when he first attempted suicide in 1999 at age 45. By 2003, depression and two more suicide attempts led to his early retirement.
In a session at the recent virtual American Psychiatric Association (APA) 2021 annual meeting, Dr. Lynes talked about the challenges of dealing with depression while managing the stresses of a career in medicine. The session in which he spoke was called, “The Suicidal Physician: Narratives From a Physician Who Survived and the Physician Widow of One Who Did Not.”
By writing and speaking about his experiences, he says, he has been able to retain his identity as a physician and avoid obsessive thoughts about suicide. He hopes conversations like these help other physicians feel less alone and enable them to push past stigmas to get the help they need. He suspects they do. More than 600 people joined the APA session, and Dr. Lynes received dozens of thankful messages afterward.
“I love medicine, but intrinsically, the practice of medicine is stressful, and you can’t get away,” said Dr. Lynes, a retired urologist in Temecula, Calif. “As far as feedback, it made me feel like it’s something I should continue to do.”
A way to heal
For Dr. Lynes, his “downward spiral into darkness” began with a series of catastrophic medical events starting in 1998, when he came home from a family vacation in Mexico feeling unwell. He didn’t bother to do anything about it – typical of a physician, he says. Then one night he woke up shaking with chills and fever. Soon he was in the hospital with respiratory failure from septic shock.
Dr. Lynes spent 6 weeks in the intensive care unit, including 4 weeks on a ventilator. He underwent a tracheostomy. He lost 40 pounds and experienced ICU-related delirium. It was a terrifying time, he said. When he tried to return to work 10 months later, he didn’t feel as though he could function normally.
Having once been a driven doctor who worked long hours, he now doubted himself and dreaded giving patients bad news. Spontaneously, he tried to take his own life.
Afterward, he concealed what had happened from everyone except his wife and managed to resume his practice. However, he was unable to regain the enthusiasm he had once had for his work. Although he had experienced depression before, this time it was unrelenting.
He sought help from a psychiatrist, received a diagnosis of bipolar disorder, and began taking medication. Still, he struggled to fulfill his responsibilities. Then in April 2002, he had a snowboarding accident that caused multiple facial fractures and required five operations. When he returned to work this time, he felt like a failure but resisted asking colleagues for help.
A few months later, Dr. Lynes again attempted suicide, which led to another stay in the ICU and more time on a ventilator. Doctors told his family they didn’t think he would survive. When he recovered, he spent time as an inpatient in a psychiatric ward, where he received the first of a series of electroconvulsive therapy sessions. Compounding his anxiety and depression was the inability to come to terms with his life if he were not able to practice medicine.
The next fall, in September 2003, his third suicide attempt took place in his office on a weekend when no one was around. After locking the door, he looked at his reflection in the frame of his medical school diploma. The glass was cracked. “It was dark, it was black, it was cold,” he said. “I can remember seeing my reflection and thinking how disgusted I was.”
For years after that, Dr. Lynes struggled with his sense of self-worth. He hid from the medical system and dreaded doctors’ appointments. Finally in 2016, he found new meaning at a writing conference, where he met a fellow physician whose story was similar to his. She encouraged him to write about his experience. His essay was published in Annals of Internal Medicine that year. “Then I started speaking, and I feel like I’m a physician again,” he said. “That has really healed me quite a bit.”
Why physicians die by suicide
Working in health care can be extremely stressful, even in the best of times, said Michael Myers, MD, a psychiatrist at State University of New York, Brooklyn, and author of the book, “Why Physicians Die By Suicide: Lessons Learned From Their Families and Others Who Cared.”
Years of school and training culminate in a career in which demands are relentless. Societal expectations are high. Many doctors are perfectionists by nature, and physicians tend to feel intense pressure to compete for coveted positions.
Stress starts early in a medical career. A 2016 systematic review and meta-analysis of 183 studies from 43 countries showed that nearly 30% of medical students experienced symptoms of depression and that 11% reported suicidal thoughts, but only 15% sought help.
A 2015 review of 31 studies that involved residents showed that rates of depression remained close to 30% and that about three-quarters of trainees meet criteria for burnout, a type of emotional exhaustion and sense of inadequacy that can result from chronic stress at work.
The stress of medical training appears to be a direct cause of mental health struggles. Rates of depression are higher among those working to become physicians than among their peers of the same age, research shows. In addition, symptoms become more prevalent as people progress through their training.
The COVID-19 pandemic has added stress to an already stressful job. Of more than 2,300 physicians surveyed in August 2020 by the Physicians Foundation, a physicians advocacy organization, 50% indicated that they experienced excessive anger, tearfulness, or anxiety because of the way the pandemic affected their work; 30% felt hopeless or lacking purpose; and 8% had thoughts of self-harm related to the pandemic. Rates of burnout had risen from 40% in 2018 to 58%.
Those problems might be even more acute in places experiencing other types of crises. A 2020 study of 154 emergency department (ED) physicians in Libya, which is in the midst of a civil war, found that 65% were experiencing anxiety, 73% were showing signs of depression, and 68% felt emotionally exhausted.
Every story is different
It is unclear how common suicide is among physicians. One often-repeated estimate is that 300-400 physicians die by suicide each year, but no one is certain how that number was determined, said Dr. Myers, who organized the APA panel.
Studies on suicide are inconsistent, and trends are hard to pinpoint. Anecdotally, he has received just as many calls about physician suicides in the past year as he did before the pandemic started.
Every person is different, and so is every death. Sometimes, career problems have nothing to do with a physician’s suicide, Dr. Myers said. When job stress does play a role, factors are often varied and complex.
After a 35-year career as a double board certified ED physician, Matthew Seaman, MD, retired in January 2017. The same month, a patient filed a complaint against him with the Washington State medical board, which led to an investigation and a lawsuit.
The case was hard on Dr. Seaman, who had continued to work night shifts throughout his career and had won a Hero Award from the American Board of Emergency Medicine, said his wife, Linda Seaman, MD, a family practitioner in Yakima, Wash., who also spoke on the APA panel.
Dr. Seaman said that 2 years after the investigation started, her husband was growing increasingly depressed. In 2019, he testified in a deposition. She said the plaintiff’s attorney “tried every way he could to shame Matt, humiliate Matt, make him believe he was a very bad doctor.” Three days later, he died by suicide at age 62.
Looking back at the year leading up to her husband’s death, Dr. Seaman recognizes multiple obstacles that interfered with her husband’s ability to get help, including frustrating interactions with psychiatrists and the couple’s insurance company.
His identity and experience as a physician also played a role. A couple of months before he died, she tried unsuccessfully to reach his psychiatrist, whose office suggested he go to the ED. However, because he worked as an ED doctor in their small town, he wouldn’t go. Dr. Seaman suspects he was wary of the stigma.
Burnout likely set him up to cave in after decades of work on the front lines, she added. Working in the ED exposes providers to horrific, traumatic cases every day, she said. Physicians learn to suppress their own emotions to deal with what they encounter. Stuffing their feelings can lead to posttraumatic stress. “You just perform,” she said. “You learn to do that.”
A real gift
Whenever Dr. Myers hears stories about doctors who died by suicide or who have written about their mental health struggles to help others, he contacts them. One goal of his own writing and of the conference sessions he organizes is to make it easier for others to share their own stories.
“I tell them, first of all, their courage and honesty is a real gift, and they’re saving lives,” he said. “There are so many suffering doctors out there who think that they’re the only one.”
Public conversations such as those that occurred in the APA session also offer opportunities to share advice, including Dr. Myers’ recommendation that doctors be sure they have a primary care physician of their own.
Many don’t, he says, because they say they are too busy, they can treat their own symptoms, or they can self-refer to specialists when needed. But physicians don’t always recognize symptoms of depression in themselves, and when mental health problems arise, they may not seek help or treat themselves appropriately.
A primary care physician can be the first person to recognize a mental health problem and refer a patient for mental health care, said Dr. Myers, whose latest book, “Becoming a Doctors’ Doctor: A Memoir,” explores his experiences treating doctors with burnout and other mental health problems.
Whether they have a primary care doctor or not, he suggests that physicians talk to anyone they trust – a social worker, a religious leader, or a family member who can then help them find the right sort of care.
In the United States, around-the-clock help is available through the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 800-273-8255. A psychiatrist-run hotline specifically for physicians is available at 888-409-0141. “Reach out and get some help,” Dr. Myers said. “Just don’t do it alone.”
Dr. Lynes advocates setting boundaries between life and work. He has also benefited from writing about his experiences. A blog or a diary can help physicians process their feelings, he said. His 2016 essay marked a major turning point in his life, giving his life meaning in helping others.
“Since I wrote that article, I can’t tell you how much better I am,” he said. “Now, I’m not embarrassed to be around physicians. I actually consider myself a physician. I didn’t for many, many years. So, I’m doing pretty well.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
William Lynes, MD, had a flourishing medical practice and a fulfilling family life with three children when he first attempted suicide in 1999 at age 45. By 2003, depression and two more suicide attempts led to his early retirement.
In a session at the recent virtual American Psychiatric Association (APA) 2021 annual meeting, Dr. Lynes talked about the challenges of dealing with depression while managing the stresses of a career in medicine. The session in which he spoke was called, “The Suicidal Physician: Narratives From a Physician Who Survived and the Physician Widow of One Who Did Not.”
By writing and speaking about his experiences, he says, he has been able to retain his identity as a physician and avoid obsessive thoughts about suicide. He hopes conversations like these help other physicians feel less alone and enable them to push past stigmas to get the help they need. He suspects they do. More than 600 people joined the APA session, and Dr. Lynes received dozens of thankful messages afterward.
“I love medicine, but intrinsically, the practice of medicine is stressful, and you can’t get away,” said Dr. Lynes, a retired urologist in Temecula, Calif. “As far as feedback, it made me feel like it’s something I should continue to do.”
A way to heal
For Dr. Lynes, his “downward spiral into darkness” began with a series of catastrophic medical events starting in 1998, when he came home from a family vacation in Mexico feeling unwell. He didn’t bother to do anything about it – typical of a physician, he says. Then one night he woke up shaking with chills and fever. Soon he was in the hospital with respiratory failure from septic shock.
Dr. Lynes spent 6 weeks in the intensive care unit, including 4 weeks on a ventilator. He underwent a tracheostomy. He lost 40 pounds and experienced ICU-related delirium. It was a terrifying time, he said. When he tried to return to work 10 months later, he didn’t feel as though he could function normally.
Having once been a driven doctor who worked long hours, he now doubted himself and dreaded giving patients bad news. Spontaneously, he tried to take his own life.
Afterward, he concealed what had happened from everyone except his wife and managed to resume his practice. However, he was unable to regain the enthusiasm he had once had for his work. Although he had experienced depression before, this time it was unrelenting.
He sought help from a psychiatrist, received a diagnosis of bipolar disorder, and began taking medication. Still, he struggled to fulfill his responsibilities. Then in April 2002, he had a snowboarding accident that caused multiple facial fractures and required five operations. When he returned to work this time, he felt like a failure but resisted asking colleagues for help.
A few months later, Dr. Lynes again attempted suicide, which led to another stay in the ICU and more time on a ventilator. Doctors told his family they didn’t think he would survive. When he recovered, he spent time as an inpatient in a psychiatric ward, where he received the first of a series of electroconvulsive therapy sessions. Compounding his anxiety and depression was the inability to come to terms with his life if he were not able to practice medicine.
The next fall, in September 2003, his third suicide attempt took place in his office on a weekend when no one was around. After locking the door, he looked at his reflection in the frame of his medical school diploma. The glass was cracked. “It was dark, it was black, it was cold,” he said. “I can remember seeing my reflection and thinking how disgusted I was.”
For years after that, Dr. Lynes struggled with his sense of self-worth. He hid from the medical system and dreaded doctors’ appointments. Finally in 2016, he found new meaning at a writing conference, where he met a fellow physician whose story was similar to his. She encouraged him to write about his experience. His essay was published in Annals of Internal Medicine that year. “Then I started speaking, and I feel like I’m a physician again,” he said. “That has really healed me quite a bit.”
Why physicians die by suicide
Working in health care can be extremely stressful, even in the best of times, said Michael Myers, MD, a psychiatrist at State University of New York, Brooklyn, and author of the book, “Why Physicians Die By Suicide: Lessons Learned From Their Families and Others Who Cared.”
Years of school and training culminate in a career in which demands are relentless. Societal expectations are high. Many doctors are perfectionists by nature, and physicians tend to feel intense pressure to compete for coveted positions.
Stress starts early in a medical career. A 2016 systematic review and meta-analysis of 183 studies from 43 countries showed that nearly 30% of medical students experienced symptoms of depression and that 11% reported suicidal thoughts, but only 15% sought help.
A 2015 review of 31 studies that involved residents showed that rates of depression remained close to 30% and that about three-quarters of trainees meet criteria for burnout, a type of emotional exhaustion and sense of inadequacy that can result from chronic stress at work.
The stress of medical training appears to be a direct cause of mental health struggles. Rates of depression are higher among those working to become physicians than among their peers of the same age, research shows. In addition, symptoms become more prevalent as people progress through their training.
The COVID-19 pandemic has added stress to an already stressful job. Of more than 2,300 physicians surveyed in August 2020 by the Physicians Foundation, a physicians advocacy organization, 50% indicated that they experienced excessive anger, tearfulness, or anxiety because of the way the pandemic affected their work; 30% felt hopeless or lacking purpose; and 8% had thoughts of self-harm related to the pandemic. Rates of burnout had risen from 40% in 2018 to 58%.
Those problems might be even more acute in places experiencing other types of crises. A 2020 study of 154 emergency department (ED) physicians in Libya, which is in the midst of a civil war, found that 65% were experiencing anxiety, 73% were showing signs of depression, and 68% felt emotionally exhausted.
Every story is different
It is unclear how common suicide is among physicians. One often-repeated estimate is that 300-400 physicians die by suicide each year, but no one is certain how that number was determined, said Dr. Myers, who organized the APA panel.
Studies on suicide are inconsistent, and trends are hard to pinpoint. Anecdotally, he has received just as many calls about physician suicides in the past year as he did before the pandemic started.
Every person is different, and so is every death. Sometimes, career problems have nothing to do with a physician’s suicide, Dr. Myers said. When job stress does play a role, factors are often varied and complex.
After a 35-year career as a double board certified ED physician, Matthew Seaman, MD, retired in January 2017. The same month, a patient filed a complaint against him with the Washington State medical board, which led to an investigation and a lawsuit.
The case was hard on Dr. Seaman, who had continued to work night shifts throughout his career and had won a Hero Award from the American Board of Emergency Medicine, said his wife, Linda Seaman, MD, a family practitioner in Yakima, Wash., who also spoke on the APA panel.
Dr. Seaman said that 2 years after the investigation started, her husband was growing increasingly depressed. In 2019, he testified in a deposition. She said the plaintiff’s attorney “tried every way he could to shame Matt, humiliate Matt, make him believe he was a very bad doctor.” Three days later, he died by suicide at age 62.
Looking back at the year leading up to her husband’s death, Dr. Seaman recognizes multiple obstacles that interfered with her husband’s ability to get help, including frustrating interactions with psychiatrists and the couple’s insurance company.
His identity and experience as a physician also played a role. A couple of months before he died, she tried unsuccessfully to reach his psychiatrist, whose office suggested he go to the ED. However, because he worked as an ED doctor in their small town, he wouldn’t go. Dr. Seaman suspects he was wary of the stigma.
Burnout likely set him up to cave in after decades of work on the front lines, she added. Working in the ED exposes providers to horrific, traumatic cases every day, she said. Physicians learn to suppress their own emotions to deal with what they encounter. Stuffing their feelings can lead to posttraumatic stress. “You just perform,” she said. “You learn to do that.”
A real gift
Whenever Dr. Myers hears stories about doctors who died by suicide or who have written about their mental health struggles to help others, he contacts them. One goal of his own writing and of the conference sessions he organizes is to make it easier for others to share their own stories.
“I tell them, first of all, their courage and honesty is a real gift, and they’re saving lives,” he said. “There are so many suffering doctors out there who think that they’re the only one.”
Public conversations such as those that occurred in the APA session also offer opportunities to share advice, including Dr. Myers’ recommendation that doctors be sure they have a primary care physician of their own.
Many don’t, he says, because they say they are too busy, they can treat their own symptoms, or they can self-refer to specialists when needed. But physicians don’t always recognize symptoms of depression in themselves, and when mental health problems arise, they may not seek help or treat themselves appropriately.
A primary care physician can be the first person to recognize a mental health problem and refer a patient for mental health care, said Dr. Myers, whose latest book, “Becoming a Doctors’ Doctor: A Memoir,” explores his experiences treating doctors with burnout and other mental health problems.
Whether they have a primary care doctor or not, he suggests that physicians talk to anyone they trust – a social worker, a religious leader, or a family member who can then help them find the right sort of care.
In the United States, around-the-clock help is available through the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 800-273-8255. A psychiatrist-run hotline specifically for physicians is available at 888-409-0141. “Reach out and get some help,” Dr. Myers said. “Just don’t do it alone.”
Dr. Lynes advocates setting boundaries between life and work. He has also benefited from writing about his experiences. A blog or a diary can help physicians process their feelings, he said. His 2016 essay marked a major turning point in his life, giving his life meaning in helping others.
“Since I wrote that article, I can’t tell you how much better I am,” he said. “Now, I’m not embarrassed to be around physicians. I actually consider myself a physician. I didn’t for many, many years. So, I’m doing pretty well.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
William Lynes, MD, had a flourishing medical practice and a fulfilling family life with three children when he first attempted suicide in 1999 at age 45. By 2003, depression and two more suicide attempts led to his early retirement.
In a session at the recent virtual American Psychiatric Association (APA) 2021 annual meeting, Dr. Lynes talked about the challenges of dealing with depression while managing the stresses of a career in medicine. The session in which he spoke was called, “The Suicidal Physician: Narratives From a Physician Who Survived and the Physician Widow of One Who Did Not.”
By writing and speaking about his experiences, he says, he has been able to retain his identity as a physician and avoid obsessive thoughts about suicide. He hopes conversations like these help other physicians feel less alone and enable them to push past stigmas to get the help they need. He suspects they do. More than 600 people joined the APA session, and Dr. Lynes received dozens of thankful messages afterward.
“I love medicine, but intrinsically, the practice of medicine is stressful, and you can’t get away,” said Dr. Lynes, a retired urologist in Temecula, Calif. “As far as feedback, it made me feel like it’s something I should continue to do.”
A way to heal
For Dr. Lynes, his “downward spiral into darkness” began with a series of catastrophic medical events starting in 1998, when he came home from a family vacation in Mexico feeling unwell. He didn’t bother to do anything about it – typical of a physician, he says. Then one night he woke up shaking with chills and fever. Soon he was in the hospital with respiratory failure from septic shock.
Dr. Lynes spent 6 weeks in the intensive care unit, including 4 weeks on a ventilator. He underwent a tracheostomy. He lost 40 pounds and experienced ICU-related delirium. It was a terrifying time, he said. When he tried to return to work 10 months later, he didn’t feel as though he could function normally.
Having once been a driven doctor who worked long hours, he now doubted himself and dreaded giving patients bad news. Spontaneously, he tried to take his own life.
Afterward, he concealed what had happened from everyone except his wife and managed to resume his practice. However, he was unable to regain the enthusiasm he had once had for his work. Although he had experienced depression before, this time it was unrelenting.
He sought help from a psychiatrist, received a diagnosis of bipolar disorder, and began taking medication. Still, he struggled to fulfill his responsibilities. Then in April 2002, he had a snowboarding accident that caused multiple facial fractures and required five operations. When he returned to work this time, he felt like a failure but resisted asking colleagues for help.
A few months later, Dr. Lynes again attempted suicide, which led to another stay in the ICU and more time on a ventilator. Doctors told his family they didn’t think he would survive. When he recovered, he spent time as an inpatient in a psychiatric ward, where he received the first of a series of electroconvulsive therapy sessions. Compounding his anxiety and depression was the inability to come to terms with his life if he were not able to practice medicine.
The next fall, in September 2003, his third suicide attempt took place in his office on a weekend when no one was around. After locking the door, he looked at his reflection in the frame of his medical school diploma. The glass was cracked. “It was dark, it was black, it was cold,” he said. “I can remember seeing my reflection and thinking how disgusted I was.”
For years after that, Dr. Lynes struggled with his sense of self-worth. He hid from the medical system and dreaded doctors’ appointments. Finally in 2016, he found new meaning at a writing conference, where he met a fellow physician whose story was similar to his. She encouraged him to write about his experience. His essay was published in Annals of Internal Medicine that year. “Then I started speaking, and I feel like I’m a physician again,” he said. “That has really healed me quite a bit.”
Why physicians die by suicide
Working in health care can be extremely stressful, even in the best of times, said Michael Myers, MD, a psychiatrist at State University of New York, Brooklyn, and author of the book, “Why Physicians Die By Suicide: Lessons Learned From Their Families and Others Who Cared.”
Years of school and training culminate in a career in which demands are relentless. Societal expectations are high. Many doctors are perfectionists by nature, and physicians tend to feel intense pressure to compete for coveted positions.
Stress starts early in a medical career. A 2016 systematic review and meta-analysis of 183 studies from 43 countries showed that nearly 30% of medical students experienced symptoms of depression and that 11% reported suicidal thoughts, but only 15% sought help.
A 2015 review of 31 studies that involved residents showed that rates of depression remained close to 30% and that about three-quarters of trainees meet criteria for burnout, a type of emotional exhaustion and sense of inadequacy that can result from chronic stress at work.
The stress of medical training appears to be a direct cause of mental health struggles. Rates of depression are higher among those working to become physicians than among their peers of the same age, research shows. In addition, symptoms become more prevalent as people progress through their training.
The COVID-19 pandemic has added stress to an already stressful job. Of more than 2,300 physicians surveyed in August 2020 by the Physicians Foundation, a physicians advocacy organization, 50% indicated that they experienced excessive anger, tearfulness, or anxiety because of the way the pandemic affected their work; 30% felt hopeless or lacking purpose; and 8% had thoughts of self-harm related to the pandemic. Rates of burnout had risen from 40% in 2018 to 58%.
Those problems might be even more acute in places experiencing other types of crises. A 2020 study of 154 emergency department (ED) physicians in Libya, which is in the midst of a civil war, found that 65% were experiencing anxiety, 73% were showing signs of depression, and 68% felt emotionally exhausted.
Every story is different
It is unclear how common suicide is among physicians. One often-repeated estimate is that 300-400 physicians die by suicide each year, but no one is certain how that number was determined, said Dr. Myers, who organized the APA panel.
Studies on suicide are inconsistent, and trends are hard to pinpoint. Anecdotally, he has received just as many calls about physician suicides in the past year as he did before the pandemic started.
Every person is different, and so is every death. Sometimes, career problems have nothing to do with a physician’s suicide, Dr. Myers said. When job stress does play a role, factors are often varied and complex.
After a 35-year career as a double board certified ED physician, Matthew Seaman, MD, retired in January 2017. The same month, a patient filed a complaint against him with the Washington State medical board, which led to an investigation and a lawsuit.
The case was hard on Dr. Seaman, who had continued to work night shifts throughout his career and had won a Hero Award from the American Board of Emergency Medicine, said his wife, Linda Seaman, MD, a family practitioner in Yakima, Wash., who also spoke on the APA panel.
Dr. Seaman said that 2 years after the investigation started, her husband was growing increasingly depressed. In 2019, he testified in a deposition. She said the plaintiff’s attorney “tried every way he could to shame Matt, humiliate Matt, make him believe he was a very bad doctor.” Three days later, he died by suicide at age 62.
Looking back at the year leading up to her husband’s death, Dr. Seaman recognizes multiple obstacles that interfered with her husband’s ability to get help, including frustrating interactions with psychiatrists and the couple’s insurance company.
His identity and experience as a physician also played a role. A couple of months before he died, she tried unsuccessfully to reach his psychiatrist, whose office suggested he go to the ED. However, because he worked as an ED doctor in their small town, he wouldn’t go. Dr. Seaman suspects he was wary of the stigma.
Burnout likely set him up to cave in after decades of work on the front lines, she added. Working in the ED exposes providers to horrific, traumatic cases every day, she said. Physicians learn to suppress their own emotions to deal with what they encounter. Stuffing their feelings can lead to posttraumatic stress. “You just perform,” she said. “You learn to do that.”
A real gift
Whenever Dr. Myers hears stories about doctors who died by suicide or who have written about their mental health struggles to help others, he contacts them. One goal of his own writing and of the conference sessions he organizes is to make it easier for others to share their own stories.
“I tell them, first of all, their courage and honesty is a real gift, and they’re saving lives,” he said. “There are so many suffering doctors out there who think that they’re the only one.”
Public conversations such as those that occurred in the APA session also offer opportunities to share advice, including Dr. Myers’ recommendation that doctors be sure they have a primary care physician of their own.
Many don’t, he says, because they say they are too busy, they can treat their own symptoms, or they can self-refer to specialists when needed. But physicians don’t always recognize symptoms of depression in themselves, and when mental health problems arise, they may not seek help or treat themselves appropriately.
A primary care physician can be the first person to recognize a mental health problem and refer a patient for mental health care, said Dr. Myers, whose latest book, “Becoming a Doctors’ Doctor: A Memoir,” explores his experiences treating doctors with burnout and other mental health problems.
Whether they have a primary care doctor or not, he suggests that physicians talk to anyone they trust – a social worker, a religious leader, or a family member who can then help them find the right sort of care.
In the United States, around-the-clock help is available through the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 800-273-8255. A psychiatrist-run hotline specifically for physicians is available at 888-409-0141. “Reach out and get some help,” Dr. Myers said. “Just don’t do it alone.”
Dr. Lynes advocates setting boundaries between life and work. He has also benefited from writing about his experiences. A blog or a diary can help physicians process their feelings, he said. His 2016 essay marked a major turning point in his life, giving his life meaning in helping others.
“Since I wrote that article, I can’t tell you how much better I am,” he said. “Now, I’m not embarrassed to be around physicians. I actually consider myself a physician. I didn’t for many, many years. So, I’m doing pretty well.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
APA, AMA, others move to stop insurer from overturning mental health claims ruling
The American Psychiatric Association has joined with the American Medical Association and other medical societies to oppose United Behavioral Health’s (UBH) request that a court throw out a ruling that found the insurer unfairly denied tens of thousands of claims for mental health and substance use disorder services.
Wit v. United Behavioral Health, in litigation since 2014, is being closely watched by clinicians, patients, providers, and attorneys.
Reena Kapoor, MD, chair of the APA’s Committee on Judicial Action, said in an interview that the APA is hopeful that “whatever the court says about UBH should be applicable to all insurance companies that are providing employer-sponsored health benefits.”
In a friend of the court (amicus curiae) brief, the APA, AMA, the California Medical Association, Southern California Psychiatric Society, Northern California Psychiatric Society, Orange County Psychiatric Society, Central California Psychiatric Society, and San Diego Psychiatric Society argue that “despite the availability of professionally developed, evidence-based guidelines embodying generally accepted standards of care for mental health and substance use disorders, managed care organizations commonly base coverage decisions on internally developed ‘level of care guidelines’ that are inappropriately restrictive.”
The guidelines “may lead to denial of coverage for treatment that is recommended by a patient’s physician and even cut off coverage when treatment is already being delivered,” said the groups.
The U.S. Department of Labor also filed a brief in support of the plaintiffs who are suing UBH. Those individuals suffered injury when they were denied coverage, said the federal agency, which regulates employer-sponsored insurance plans.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta also made an amicus filing supporting the plaintiffs.
“When insurers limit access to this critical care, they leave Californians who need it feeling as if they have no other option than to try to cope alone,” said Mr. Bonta in a statement.
‘Discrimination must end’
Mr. Bonta said he agreed with a 2019 ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California that UBH had violated its fiduciary duties by wrongfully using its internally developed coverage determination guidelines and level of care guidelines to deny care.
The court also found that UBH’s medically necessary criteria meant that only “acute” episodes would be covered. Instead, said the court last November, chronic and comorbid conditions should always be treated, according to Maureen Gammon and Kathleen Rosenow of Willis Towers Watson, a risk advisor.
In November, the same Northern California District Court ruled on the remedies it would require of United, including that the insurer reprocess more than 67,000 claims. UBH was also barred indefinitely from using any of its guidelines to make coverage determinations. Instead, it was ordered to make determinations “consistent with generally accepted standards of care,” and consistent with state laws.
The District Court denied a request by UBH to put a hold on the claims reprocessing until it appealed the overall case. But the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in February granted that request.
Then, in March, United appealed the District Court’s overall ruling, claiming that the plaintiffs had not proven harm.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has filed a brief in support of United, agreeing with its arguments.
However, the APA and other clinician groups said there is no question of harm.
“Failure to provide appropriate levels of care for treatment of mental illness and substance use disorders leads to relapse, overdose, transmission of infectious diseases, and death,” said APA CEO and Medical Director Saul Levin, MD, MPA, in a statement.
APA President Vivian Pender, MD, said guidelines that “are overly focused on stabilizing acute symptoms of mental health and substance use disorders” are not treating the underlying disease. “When the injury is physical, insurers treat the underlying disease and not just the symptoms. Discrimination against patients with mental illness must end,” she said.
No court has ever recognized the type of claims reprocessing ordered by the District Court judge, said attorneys Nathaniel Cohen and Joseph Laska of Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, in an analysis of the case.
Mr. Cohen and Mr. Laska write. “Practitioners, health plans, and health insurers would be wise to track UBH’s long-awaited appeal to the Ninth Circuit.”
This article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The American Psychiatric Association has joined with the American Medical Association and other medical societies to oppose United Behavioral Health’s (UBH) request that a court throw out a ruling that found the insurer unfairly denied tens of thousands of claims for mental health and substance use disorder services.
Wit v. United Behavioral Health, in litigation since 2014, is being closely watched by clinicians, patients, providers, and attorneys.
Reena Kapoor, MD, chair of the APA’s Committee on Judicial Action, said in an interview that the APA is hopeful that “whatever the court says about UBH should be applicable to all insurance companies that are providing employer-sponsored health benefits.”
In a friend of the court (amicus curiae) brief, the APA, AMA, the California Medical Association, Southern California Psychiatric Society, Northern California Psychiatric Society, Orange County Psychiatric Society, Central California Psychiatric Society, and San Diego Psychiatric Society argue that “despite the availability of professionally developed, evidence-based guidelines embodying generally accepted standards of care for mental health and substance use disorders, managed care organizations commonly base coverage decisions on internally developed ‘level of care guidelines’ that are inappropriately restrictive.”
The guidelines “may lead to denial of coverage for treatment that is recommended by a patient’s physician and even cut off coverage when treatment is already being delivered,” said the groups.
The U.S. Department of Labor also filed a brief in support of the plaintiffs who are suing UBH. Those individuals suffered injury when they were denied coverage, said the federal agency, which regulates employer-sponsored insurance plans.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta also made an amicus filing supporting the plaintiffs.
“When insurers limit access to this critical care, they leave Californians who need it feeling as if they have no other option than to try to cope alone,” said Mr. Bonta in a statement.
‘Discrimination must end’
Mr. Bonta said he agreed with a 2019 ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California that UBH had violated its fiduciary duties by wrongfully using its internally developed coverage determination guidelines and level of care guidelines to deny care.
The court also found that UBH’s medically necessary criteria meant that only “acute” episodes would be covered. Instead, said the court last November, chronic and comorbid conditions should always be treated, according to Maureen Gammon and Kathleen Rosenow of Willis Towers Watson, a risk advisor.
In November, the same Northern California District Court ruled on the remedies it would require of United, including that the insurer reprocess more than 67,000 claims. UBH was also barred indefinitely from using any of its guidelines to make coverage determinations. Instead, it was ordered to make determinations “consistent with generally accepted standards of care,” and consistent with state laws.
The District Court denied a request by UBH to put a hold on the claims reprocessing until it appealed the overall case. But the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in February granted that request.
Then, in March, United appealed the District Court’s overall ruling, claiming that the plaintiffs had not proven harm.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has filed a brief in support of United, agreeing with its arguments.
However, the APA and other clinician groups said there is no question of harm.
“Failure to provide appropriate levels of care for treatment of mental illness and substance use disorders leads to relapse, overdose, transmission of infectious diseases, and death,” said APA CEO and Medical Director Saul Levin, MD, MPA, in a statement.
APA President Vivian Pender, MD, said guidelines that “are overly focused on stabilizing acute symptoms of mental health and substance use disorders” are not treating the underlying disease. “When the injury is physical, insurers treat the underlying disease and not just the symptoms. Discrimination against patients with mental illness must end,” she said.
No court has ever recognized the type of claims reprocessing ordered by the District Court judge, said attorneys Nathaniel Cohen and Joseph Laska of Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, in an analysis of the case.
Mr. Cohen and Mr. Laska write. “Practitioners, health plans, and health insurers would be wise to track UBH’s long-awaited appeal to the Ninth Circuit.”
This article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The American Psychiatric Association has joined with the American Medical Association and other medical societies to oppose United Behavioral Health’s (UBH) request that a court throw out a ruling that found the insurer unfairly denied tens of thousands of claims for mental health and substance use disorder services.
Wit v. United Behavioral Health, in litigation since 2014, is being closely watched by clinicians, patients, providers, and attorneys.
Reena Kapoor, MD, chair of the APA’s Committee on Judicial Action, said in an interview that the APA is hopeful that “whatever the court says about UBH should be applicable to all insurance companies that are providing employer-sponsored health benefits.”
In a friend of the court (amicus curiae) brief, the APA, AMA, the California Medical Association, Southern California Psychiatric Society, Northern California Psychiatric Society, Orange County Psychiatric Society, Central California Psychiatric Society, and San Diego Psychiatric Society argue that “despite the availability of professionally developed, evidence-based guidelines embodying generally accepted standards of care for mental health and substance use disorders, managed care organizations commonly base coverage decisions on internally developed ‘level of care guidelines’ that are inappropriately restrictive.”
The guidelines “may lead to denial of coverage for treatment that is recommended by a patient’s physician and even cut off coverage when treatment is already being delivered,” said the groups.
The U.S. Department of Labor also filed a brief in support of the plaintiffs who are suing UBH. Those individuals suffered injury when they were denied coverage, said the federal agency, which regulates employer-sponsored insurance plans.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta also made an amicus filing supporting the plaintiffs.
“When insurers limit access to this critical care, they leave Californians who need it feeling as if they have no other option than to try to cope alone,” said Mr. Bonta in a statement.
‘Discrimination must end’
Mr. Bonta said he agreed with a 2019 ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California that UBH had violated its fiduciary duties by wrongfully using its internally developed coverage determination guidelines and level of care guidelines to deny care.
The court also found that UBH’s medically necessary criteria meant that only “acute” episodes would be covered. Instead, said the court last November, chronic and comorbid conditions should always be treated, according to Maureen Gammon and Kathleen Rosenow of Willis Towers Watson, a risk advisor.
In November, the same Northern California District Court ruled on the remedies it would require of United, including that the insurer reprocess more than 67,000 claims. UBH was also barred indefinitely from using any of its guidelines to make coverage determinations. Instead, it was ordered to make determinations “consistent with generally accepted standards of care,” and consistent with state laws.
The District Court denied a request by UBH to put a hold on the claims reprocessing until it appealed the overall case. But the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in February granted that request.
Then, in March, United appealed the District Court’s overall ruling, claiming that the plaintiffs had not proven harm.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has filed a brief in support of United, agreeing with its arguments.
However, the APA and other clinician groups said there is no question of harm.
“Failure to provide appropriate levels of care for treatment of mental illness and substance use disorders leads to relapse, overdose, transmission of infectious diseases, and death,” said APA CEO and Medical Director Saul Levin, MD, MPA, in a statement.
APA President Vivian Pender, MD, said guidelines that “are overly focused on stabilizing acute symptoms of mental health and substance use disorders” are not treating the underlying disease. “When the injury is physical, insurers treat the underlying disease and not just the symptoms. Discrimination against patients with mental illness must end,” she said.
No court has ever recognized the type of claims reprocessing ordered by the District Court judge, said attorneys Nathaniel Cohen and Joseph Laska of Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, in an analysis of the case.
Mr. Cohen and Mr. Laska write. “Practitioners, health plans, and health insurers would be wise to track UBH’s long-awaited appeal to the Ninth Circuit.”
This article first appeared on Medscape.com.
No-cancel culture: How telehealth is making it easier to keep that therapy session
When the COVID-19 pandemic forced behavioral health providers to stop seeing patients in person and instead hold therapy sessions remotely, the switch produced an unintended, positive consequence: Fewer patients skipped appointments.
That had long been a problem in mental health care. Some outpatient programs previously had no-show rates as high as 60%, according to several studies.
Only 9% of psychiatrists reported that all patients kept their appointments before the pandemic, according to an American Psychiatric Association report. Once providers switched to telepsychiatry, that number increased to 32%.
Not only that, but providers and patients say teletherapy has largely been an effective lifeline for people struggling with anxiety, depression, and other psychological issues during an extraordinarily difficult time, even though it created a new set of challenges.
Many providers say they plan to continue offering teletherapy after the pandemic. Some states are making permanent the temporary pandemic rules that allow providers to be reimbursed at the same rates as for in-person visits, which is welcome news to practitioners who take patients’ insurance.
“We are in a mental health crisis right now, so more people are struggling and may be more open to accessing services,” said psychologist Allison Dempsey, PhD, associate professor at University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora. “It’s much easier to connect from your living room.”
The problem for patients who didn’t show up was often as simple as a canceled ride, said Jody Long, a clinical social worker who studied the 60% rate of no-shows or late cancellations at the University of Tennessee Health Science Center psychiatric clinic in Memphis.
But sometimes it was the health problem itself. Mr. Long remembers seeing a first-time patient drive around the parking lot and then exit. The patient later called and told Mr. Long, “I just could not get out of the car; please forgive me and reschedule me.”
Mr. Long, now an assistant professor at Jacksonville (Ala.) State University, said that incident changed his perspective. “I realized when you’re having panic attacks or anxiety attacks or suffering from major depressive disorder, it’s hard,” he said. “It’s like you have built up these walls for protection and then all of a sudden you’re having to let these walls down.”
Absences strain providers whose bosses set billing and productivity expectations and those in private practice who lose billable hours, said Dr. Dempsey, who directs a program to provide mental health care for families of babies with serious medical complications. Psychotherapists often overbooked patients with the expectation that some would not show up.
Now Dr. Dempsey and colleagues no longer need to overbook. When patients don’t show up, staffers can sometimes contact a patient right away and hold the session. Other times, they can reschedule them for later that day or a different day.
And telepsychiatry performs as well as, if not better than, face-to-face delivery of mental health services, according to a World Journal of Psychiatry review of 452 studies.
Virtual visits can also save patients money, because they might not need to travel, take time off work, or pay for child care, said Jay Shore, MD, MPH, chairperson of the American Psychiatric Association’s telepsychiatry committee and a psychiatrist at the University of Colorado.
Dr. Shore started examining the potential of video conferencing to reach rural patients in the late ’90s and concluded that patients and providers can virtually build rapport, which he said is fundamental for effective therapy and medicine management.
But before the pandemic, almost 64% of psychiatrists had never used telehealth, according to the psychiatric association. Amid widespread skepticism, providers then had to do “10 years of implementations in 10 days,” said Dr. Shore, who has consulted with Dr. Dempsey and other providers.
Dr. Dempsey and colleagues faced a steep learning curve. She said she recently held a video therapy session with a mother who “seemed very out of it” before disappearing from the screen while her baby was crying.
She wondered if the patient’s exit was related to the stress of new motherhood or “something more concerning,” like addiction. She thinks she might have better understood the woman’s condition had they been in the same room. The patient called Dr. Dempsey’s team that night and told them she had relapsed into drug use and been taken to the emergency room. The mental health providers directed her to a treatment program, Dr. Dempsey said.
“We spent a lot of time reviewing what happened with that case and thinking about what we need to do differently,” Dr. Dempsey said.
Providers now routinely ask for the name of someone to call if they lose a connection and can no longer reach the patient.
In another session, Dr. Dempsey noticed that a patient seemed guarded and saw her partner hovering in the background. She said she worried about the possibility of domestic violence or “some other form of controlling behavior.”
In such cases, Dr. Dempsey called after the appointments or sent the patients secure messages to their online health portal. She asked if they felt safe and suggested they talk in person.
Such inability to maintain privacy remains a concern.
In a Walmart parking lot recently, psychologist Kristy Keefe, PsyD, of Western Illinois University, Macomb, heard a patient talking with her therapist from her car. Dr. Keefe said she wondered if the patient “had no other safe place to go to.”
To avoid that scenario, Dr. Keefe does 30-minute consultations with patients before their first telehealth appointment. She asks if they have space to talk where no one can overhear them and makes sure they have sufficient internet access and know how to use video conferencing.
To ensure that she, too, was prepared, Dr. Keefe upgraded her WiFi router, purchased two white-noise machines to drown out her conversations, and placed a stop sign on her door during appointments so her 5-year-old son knew she was seeing patients.
Dr. Keefe concluded that audio alone sometimes works better than video, which often lags. Over the phone, she and her psychology students “got really sensitive to tone fluctuations” in a patient’s voice and were better able to “pick up the emotion” than with video conferencing.
With those telehealth visits, her 20% no-show rate evaporated.
Kate Barnes, a 29-year-old middle school teacher in Fayetteville, Ark., who struggles with anxiety and depression, also has found visits easier by phone than by Zoom, because she doesn’t feel like a spotlight is on her.
“I can focus more on what I want to say,” she said.
In one of Dr. Keefe’s video sessions, though, a patient reached out, touched the camera and started to cry as she said how appreciative she was that someone was there, Dr. Keefe recalled.
“I am so very thankful that they had something in this terrible time of loss and trauma and isolation,” said Dr. Keefe.
Demand for mental health services will likely continue even after the lifting of all COVID restrictions. according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the National Health Interview Survey.
“That is not going to go away with snapping our fingers,” Dr. Dempsey said.
After the pandemic, Dr. Shore said, providers should review data from the past year and determine when virtual care or in-person care is more effective. He also said the health care industry needs to work to bridge the digital divide that exists because of lack of access to devices and broadband internet.
Even though Ms. Barnes said she did not see teletherapy as less effective than in-person therapy, she would like to return to seeing her therapist in person.
“When you are in person with someone, you can pick up on their body language better,” she said. “It’s a lot harder over a video call to do that.”
KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.
When the COVID-19 pandemic forced behavioral health providers to stop seeing patients in person and instead hold therapy sessions remotely, the switch produced an unintended, positive consequence: Fewer patients skipped appointments.
That had long been a problem in mental health care. Some outpatient programs previously had no-show rates as high as 60%, according to several studies.
Only 9% of psychiatrists reported that all patients kept their appointments before the pandemic, according to an American Psychiatric Association report. Once providers switched to telepsychiatry, that number increased to 32%.
Not only that, but providers and patients say teletherapy has largely been an effective lifeline for people struggling with anxiety, depression, and other psychological issues during an extraordinarily difficult time, even though it created a new set of challenges.
Many providers say they plan to continue offering teletherapy after the pandemic. Some states are making permanent the temporary pandemic rules that allow providers to be reimbursed at the same rates as for in-person visits, which is welcome news to practitioners who take patients’ insurance.
“We are in a mental health crisis right now, so more people are struggling and may be more open to accessing services,” said psychologist Allison Dempsey, PhD, associate professor at University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora. “It’s much easier to connect from your living room.”
The problem for patients who didn’t show up was often as simple as a canceled ride, said Jody Long, a clinical social worker who studied the 60% rate of no-shows or late cancellations at the University of Tennessee Health Science Center psychiatric clinic in Memphis.
But sometimes it was the health problem itself. Mr. Long remembers seeing a first-time patient drive around the parking lot and then exit. The patient later called and told Mr. Long, “I just could not get out of the car; please forgive me and reschedule me.”
Mr. Long, now an assistant professor at Jacksonville (Ala.) State University, said that incident changed his perspective. “I realized when you’re having panic attacks or anxiety attacks or suffering from major depressive disorder, it’s hard,” he said. “It’s like you have built up these walls for protection and then all of a sudden you’re having to let these walls down.”
Absences strain providers whose bosses set billing and productivity expectations and those in private practice who lose billable hours, said Dr. Dempsey, who directs a program to provide mental health care for families of babies with serious medical complications. Psychotherapists often overbooked patients with the expectation that some would not show up.
Now Dr. Dempsey and colleagues no longer need to overbook. When patients don’t show up, staffers can sometimes contact a patient right away and hold the session. Other times, they can reschedule them for later that day or a different day.
And telepsychiatry performs as well as, if not better than, face-to-face delivery of mental health services, according to a World Journal of Psychiatry review of 452 studies.
Virtual visits can also save patients money, because they might not need to travel, take time off work, or pay for child care, said Jay Shore, MD, MPH, chairperson of the American Psychiatric Association’s telepsychiatry committee and a psychiatrist at the University of Colorado.
Dr. Shore started examining the potential of video conferencing to reach rural patients in the late ’90s and concluded that patients and providers can virtually build rapport, which he said is fundamental for effective therapy and medicine management.
But before the pandemic, almost 64% of psychiatrists had never used telehealth, according to the psychiatric association. Amid widespread skepticism, providers then had to do “10 years of implementations in 10 days,” said Dr. Shore, who has consulted with Dr. Dempsey and other providers.
Dr. Dempsey and colleagues faced a steep learning curve. She said she recently held a video therapy session with a mother who “seemed very out of it” before disappearing from the screen while her baby was crying.
She wondered if the patient’s exit was related to the stress of new motherhood or “something more concerning,” like addiction. She thinks she might have better understood the woman’s condition had they been in the same room. The patient called Dr. Dempsey’s team that night and told them she had relapsed into drug use and been taken to the emergency room. The mental health providers directed her to a treatment program, Dr. Dempsey said.
“We spent a lot of time reviewing what happened with that case and thinking about what we need to do differently,” Dr. Dempsey said.
Providers now routinely ask for the name of someone to call if they lose a connection and can no longer reach the patient.
In another session, Dr. Dempsey noticed that a patient seemed guarded and saw her partner hovering in the background. She said she worried about the possibility of domestic violence or “some other form of controlling behavior.”
In such cases, Dr. Dempsey called after the appointments or sent the patients secure messages to their online health portal. She asked if they felt safe and suggested they talk in person.
Such inability to maintain privacy remains a concern.
In a Walmart parking lot recently, psychologist Kristy Keefe, PsyD, of Western Illinois University, Macomb, heard a patient talking with her therapist from her car. Dr. Keefe said she wondered if the patient “had no other safe place to go to.”
To avoid that scenario, Dr. Keefe does 30-minute consultations with patients before their first telehealth appointment. She asks if they have space to talk where no one can overhear them and makes sure they have sufficient internet access and know how to use video conferencing.
To ensure that she, too, was prepared, Dr. Keefe upgraded her WiFi router, purchased two white-noise machines to drown out her conversations, and placed a stop sign on her door during appointments so her 5-year-old son knew she was seeing patients.
Dr. Keefe concluded that audio alone sometimes works better than video, which often lags. Over the phone, she and her psychology students “got really sensitive to tone fluctuations” in a patient’s voice and were better able to “pick up the emotion” than with video conferencing.
With those telehealth visits, her 20% no-show rate evaporated.
Kate Barnes, a 29-year-old middle school teacher in Fayetteville, Ark., who struggles with anxiety and depression, also has found visits easier by phone than by Zoom, because she doesn’t feel like a spotlight is on her.
“I can focus more on what I want to say,” she said.
In one of Dr. Keefe’s video sessions, though, a patient reached out, touched the camera and started to cry as she said how appreciative she was that someone was there, Dr. Keefe recalled.
“I am so very thankful that they had something in this terrible time of loss and trauma and isolation,” said Dr. Keefe.
Demand for mental health services will likely continue even after the lifting of all COVID restrictions. according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the National Health Interview Survey.
“That is not going to go away with snapping our fingers,” Dr. Dempsey said.
After the pandemic, Dr. Shore said, providers should review data from the past year and determine when virtual care or in-person care is more effective. He also said the health care industry needs to work to bridge the digital divide that exists because of lack of access to devices and broadband internet.
Even though Ms. Barnes said she did not see teletherapy as less effective than in-person therapy, she would like to return to seeing her therapist in person.
“When you are in person with someone, you can pick up on their body language better,” she said. “It’s a lot harder over a video call to do that.”
KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.
When the COVID-19 pandemic forced behavioral health providers to stop seeing patients in person and instead hold therapy sessions remotely, the switch produced an unintended, positive consequence: Fewer patients skipped appointments.
That had long been a problem in mental health care. Some outpatient programs previously had no-show rates as high as 60%, according to several studies.
Only 9% of psychiatrists reported that all patients kept their appointments before the pandemic, according to an American Psychiatric Association report. Once providers switched to telepsychiatry, that number increased to 32%.
Not only that, but providers and patients say teletherapy has largely been an effective lifeline for people struggling with anxiety, depression, and other psychological issues during an extraordinarily difficult time, even though it created a new set of challenges.
Many providers say they plan to continue offering teletherapy after the pandemic. Some states are making permanent the temporary pandemic rules that allow providers to be reimbursed at the same rates as for in-person visits, which is welcome news to practitioners who take patients’ insurance.
“We are in a mental health crisis right now, so more people are struggling and may be more open to accessing services,” said psychologist Allison Dempsey, PhD, associate professor at University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora. “It’s much easier to connect from your living room.”
The problem for patients who didn’t show up was often as simple as a canceled ride, said Jody Long, a clinical social worker who studied the 60% rate of no-shows or late cancellations at the University of Tennessee Health Science Center psychiatric clinic in Memphis.
But sometimes it was the health problem itself. Mr. Long remembers seeing a first-time patient drive around the parking lot and then exit. The patient later called and told Mr. Long, “I just could not get out of the car; please forgive me and reschedule me.”
Mr. Long, now an assistant professor at Jacksonville (Ala.) State University, said that incident changed his perspective. “I realized when you’re having panic attacks or anxiety attacks or suffering from major depressive disorder, it’s hard,” he said. “It’s like you have built up these walls for protection and then all of a sudden you’re having to let these walls down.”
Absences strain providers whose bosses set billing and productivity expectations and those in private practice who lose billable hours, said Dr. Dempsey, who directs a program to provide mental health care for families of babies with serious medical complications. Psychotherapists often overbooked patients with the expectation that some would not show up.
Now Dr. Dempsey and colleagues no longer need to overbook. When patients don’t show up, staffers can sometimes contact a patient right away and hold the session. Other times, they can reschedule them for later that day or a different day.
And telepsychiatry performs as well as, if not better than, face-to-face delivery of mental health services, according to a World Journal of Psychiatry review of 452 studies.
Virtual visits can also save patients money, because they might not need to travel, take time off work, or pay for child care, said Jay Shore, MD, MPH, chairperson of the American Psychiatric Association’s telepsychiatry committee and a psychiatrist at the University of Colorado.
Dr. Shore started examining the potential of video conferencing to reach rural patients in the late ’90s and concluded that patients and providers can virtually build rapport, which he said is fundamental for effective therapy and medicine management.
But before the pandemic, almost 64% of psychiatrists had never used telehealth, according to the psychiatric association. Amid widespread skepticism, providers then had to do “10 years of implementations in 10 days,” said Dr. Shore, who has consulted with Dr. Dempsey and other providers.
Dr. Dempsey and colleagues faced a steep learning curve. She said she recently held a video therapy session with a mother who “seemed very out of it” before disappearing from the screen while her baby was crying.
She wondered if the patient’s exit was related to the stress of new motherhood or “something more concerning,” like addiction. She thinks she might have better understood the woman’s condition had they been in the same room. The patient called Dr. Dempsey’s team that night and told them she had relapsed into drug use and been taken to the emergency room. The mental health providers directed her to a treatment program, Dr. Dempsey said.
“We spent a lot of time reviewing what happened with that case and thinking about what we need to do differently,” Dr. Dempsey said.
Providers now routinely ask for the name of someone to call if they lose a connection and can no longer reach the patient.
In another session, Dr. Dempsey noticed that a patient seemed guarded and saw her partner hovering in the background. She said she worried about the possibility of domestic violence or “some other form of controlling behavior.”
In such cases, Dr. Dempsey called after the appointments or sent the patients secure messages to their online health portal. She asked if they felt safe and suggested they talk in person.
Such inability to maintain privacy remains a concern.
In a Walmart parking lot recently, psychologist Kristy Keefe, PsyD, of Western Illinois University, Macomb, heard a patient talking with her therapist from her car. Dr. Keefe said she wondered if the patient “had no other safe place to go to.”
To avoid that scenario, Dr. Keefe does 30-minute consultations with patients before their first telehealth appointment. She asks if they have space to talk where no one can overhear them and makes sure they have sufficient internet access and know how to use video conferencing.
To ensure that she, too, was prepared, Dr. Keefe upgraded her WiFi router, purchased two white-noise machines to drown out her conversations, and placed a stop sign on her door during appointments so her 5-year-old son knew she was seeing patients.
Dr. Keefe concluded that audio alone sometimes works better than video, which often lags. Over the phone, she and her psychology students “got really sensitive to tone fluctuations” in a patient’s voice and were better able to “pick up the emotion” than with video conferencing.
With those telehealth visits, her 20% no-show rate evaporated.
Kate Barnes, a 29-year-old middle school teacher in Fayetteville, Ark., who struggles with anxiety and depression, also has found visits easier by phone than by Zoom, because she doesn’t feel like a spotlight is on her.
“I can focus more on what I want to say,” she said.
In one of Dr. Keefe’s video sessions, though, a patient reached out, touched the camera and started to cry as she said how appreciative she was that someone was there, Dr. Keefe recalled.
“I am so very thankful that they had something in this terrible time of loss and trauma and isolation,” said Dr. Keefe.
Demand for mental health services will likely continue even after the lifting of all COVID restrictions. according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the National Health Interview Survey.
“That is not going to go away with snapping our fingers,” Dr. Dempsey said.
After the pandemic, Dr. Shore said, providers should review data from the past year and determine when virtual care or in-person care is more effective. He also said the health care industry needs to work to bridge the digital divide that exists because of lack of access to devices and broadband internet.
Even though Ms. Barnes said she did not see teletherapy as less effective than in-person therapy, she would like to return to seeing her therapist in person.
“When you are in person with someone, you can pick up on their body language better,” she said. “It’s a lot harder over a video call to do that.”
KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.
How to help vaccinated patients navigate FOGO (fear of going out)
Remember FOMO (fear of missing out)? The pandemic cured most of us of that! In its place, many are suffering from a new syndrome that has been coined “FOGO” (fear of going out). As the COVID-19 vaccines roll out, restrictions lessen, and cases decline, we face new challenges. The pandemic showed us that “we are all in it together.” Now our patients, family, friends – and even we, ourselves – may face similar anxieties as we transition back.
Our brains love routines. They save energy as we transverse the same pathway with ease. We created new patterns in the first 30 days of quarantine, and we spent more than a year engraining them.
Since the virus is still among us, we need to maintain caution, so some degree of FOGO is wise. But when we limit our activities too much, we create a whole new host of issues. The pandemic gave us all a taste of the agoraphobic lifestyle. It is difficult to know where exactly to draw the line right now between healthy anxiety and anxiety that becomes the disease for ourselves, our families and friends – and our patients.
Recommendations for FOGO
- Talk to your families, friends, and patients about what activities you recommend, which they might resume and which they should continue to avoid. People should make plans to optimize their physical and mental health while continuing to protect themselves from COVID-19. If anxiety is becoming the main problem, psychotherapy or medication may be necessary to treat their symptoms.
- Continue to encourage those with FOGO to practice techniques to be calm. Suggest that they take deep breaths with long exhales. This breathing pattern activates the parasympathetic nervous system and will help them feel calmer. We have all been under chronic stress, and our sympathetic nervous system has been in overdrive. We need to be calm to make the best decisions so our frontal lobe can be in charge rather than our primitive, fear-based brain that has been running the show for more a year. Encourage calming activities, such as yoga, meditation, warm baths, spending time in nature, hugging a pet, and more.
- Advise sufferers to start slowly. They should resume activities where they feel the safest. Walking outside with a friend is a good way to start. We now know that transmission is remarkably low or nonexistent if both parties are vaccinated. Exercise is a great way to combat many psychological issues, including FOGO.
- FOGO sufferers should build confidence gradually. Recommend taking one day at a time and trying to find ways to enjoy new ventures out. Soon, our brains will adapt to the new routines and the days of COVID-19 will recede from our thoughts.
- Respect whatever feelings emerge. The closer we and our patients were to trauma, the more challenging it may be to recover. If you or your patients suffered from COVID-19 or had a close family member or friend who did, be prepared to reemerge more slowly. Don’t feel pressured by what others are doing. Go at your own pace. Only you can decide what is the right way to move forward in these times.
- Look for signs of substance overuse or misuse. FOGO sufferers may turn to drugs or alcohol to mask their anxiety. This is a common pothole and should be avoided. Be alert for this problem and discuss it with patients, friends, or family members who may be making unhealthy choices.
Time is a great healer, and remind others that “this too shall pass.” FOGO will give rise to another yet-to-be named syndrome. We seem to be moving in a very positive direction at a remarkable pace. As Alexander Pope so wisely wrote, “Hope springs eternal.” Better times are ahead.
Dr. Ritvo, who has almost 30 years’ experience in psychiatry, practices in Miami Beach, Fla. She is the author of “Bekindr – The Transformative Power of Kindness” (Hellertown, Pa. Momosa Publishing, 2018). Dr. Ritvo has no disclosures.
Remember FOMO (fear of missing out)? The pandemic cured most of us of that! In its place, many are suffering from a new syndrome that has been coined “FOGO” (fear of going out). As the COVID-19 vaccines roll out, restrictions lessen, and cases decline, we face new challenges. The pandemic showed us that “we are all in it together.” Now our patients, family, friends – and even we, ourselves – may face similar anxieties as we transition back.
Our brains love routines. They save energy as we transverse the same pathway with ease. We created new patterns in the first 30 days of quarantine, and we spent more than a year engraining them.
Since the virus is still among us, we need to maintain caution, so some degree of FOGO is wise. But when we limit our activities too much, we create a whole new host of issues. The pandemic gave us all a taste of the agoraphobic lifestyle. It is difficult to know where exactly to draw the line right now between healthy anxiety and anxiety that becomes the disease for ourselves, our families and friends – and our patients.
Recommendations for FOGO
- Talk to your families, friends, and patients about what activities you recommend, which they might resume and which they should continue to avoid. People should make plans to optimize their physical and mental health while continuing to protect themselves from COVID-19. If anxiety is becoming the main problem, psychotherapy or medication may be necessary to treat their symptoms.
- Continue to encourage those with FOGO to practice techniques to be calm. Suggest that they take deep breaths with long exhales. This breathing pattern activates the parasympathetic nervous system and will help them feel calmer. We have all been under chronic stress, and our sympathetic nervous system has been in overdrive. We need to be calm to make the best decisions so our frontal lobe can be in charge rather than our primitive, fear-based brain that has been running the show for more a year. Encourage calming activities, such as yoga, meditation, warm baths, spending time in nature, hugging a pet, and more.
- Advise sufferers to start slowly. They should resume activities where they feel the safest. Walking outside with a friend is a good way to start. We now know that transmission is remarkably low or nonexistent if both parties are vaccinated. Exercise is a great way to combat many psychological issues, including FOGO.
- FOGO sufferers should build confidence gradually. Recommend taking one day at a time and trying to find ways to enjoy new ventures out. Soon, our brains will adapt to the new routines and the days of COVID-19 will recede from our thoughts.
- Respect whatever feelings emerge. The closer we and our patients were to trauma, the more challenging it may be to recover. If you or your patients suffered from COVID-19 or had a close family member or friend who did, be prepared to reemerge more slowly. Don’t feel pressured by what others are doing. Go at your own pace. Only you can decide what is the right way to move forward in these times.
- Look for signs of substance overuse or misuse. FOGO sufferers may turn to drugs or alcohol to mask their anxiety. This is a common pothole and should be avoided. Be alert for this problem and discuss it with patients, friends, or family members who may be making unhealthy choices.
Time is a great healer, and remind others that “this too shall pass.” FOGO will give rise to another yet-to-be named syndrome. We seem to be moving in a very positive direction at a remarkable pace. As Alexander Pope so wisely wrote, “Hope springs eternal.” Better times are ahead.
Dr. Ritvo, who has almost 30 years’ experience in psychiatry, practices in Miami Beach, Fla. She is the author of “Bekindr – The Transformative Power of Kindness” (Hellertown, Pa. Momosa Publishing, 2018). Dr. Ritvo has no disclosures.
Remember FOMO (fear of missing out)? The pandemic cured most of us of that! In its place, many are suffering from a new syndrome that has been coined “FOGO” (fear of going out). As the COVID-19 vaccines roll out, restrictions lessen, and cases decline, we face new challenges. The pandemic showed us that “we are all in it together.” Now our patients, family, friends – and even we, ourselves – may face similar anxieties as we transition back.
Our brains love routines. They save energy as we transverse the same pathway with ease. We created new patterns in the first 30 days of quarantine, and we spent more than a year engraining them.
Since the virus is still among us, we need to maintain caution, so some degree of FOGO is wise. But when we limit our activities too much, we create a whole new host of issues. The pandemic gave us all a taste of the agoraphobic lifestyle. It is difficult to know where exactly to draw the line right now between healthy anxiety and anxiety that becomes the disease for ourselves, our families and friends – and our patients.
Recommendations for FOGO
- Talk to your families, friends, and patients about what activities you recommend, which they might resume and which they should continue to avoid. People should make plans to optimize their physical and mental health while continuing to protect themselves from COVID-19. If anxiety is becoming the main problem, psychotherapy or medication may be necessary to treat their symptoms.
- Continue to encourage those with FOGO to practice techniques to be calm. Suggest that they take deep breaths with long exhales. This breathing pattern activates the parasympathetic nervous system and will help them feel calmer. We have all been under chronic stress, and our sympathetic nervous system has been in overdrive. We need to be calm to make the best decisions so our frontal lobe can be in charge rather than our primitive, fear-based brain that has been running the show for more a year. Encourage calming activities, such as yoga, meditation, warm baths, spending time in nature, hugging a pet, and more.
- Advise sufferers to start slowly. They should resume activities where they feel the safest. Walking outside with a friend is a good way to start. We now know that transmission is remarkably low or nonexistent if both parties are vaccinated. Exercise is a great way to combat many psychological issues, including FOGO.
- FOGO sufferers should build confidence gradually. Recommend taking one day at a time and trying to find ways to enjoy new ventures out. Soon, our brains will adapt to the new routines and the days of COVID-19 will recede from our thoughts.
- Respect whatever feelings emerge. The closer we and our patients were to trauma, the more challenging it may be to recover. If you or your patients suffered from COVID-19 or had a close family member or friend who did, be prepared to reemerge more slowly. Don’t feel pressured by what others are doing. Go at your own pace. Only you can decide what is the right way to move forward in these times.
- Look for signs of substance overuse or misuse. FOGO sufferers may turn to drugs or alcohol to mask their anxiety. This is a common pothole and should be avoided. Be alert for this problem and discuss it with patients, friends, or family members who may be making unhealthy choices.
Time is a great healer, and remind others that “this too shall pass.” FOGO will give rise to another yet-to-be named syndrome. We seem to be moving in a very positive direction at a remarkable pace. As Alexander Pope so wisely wrote, “Hope springs eternal.” Better times are ahead.
Dr. Ritvo, who has almost 30 years’ experience in psychiatry, practices in Miami Beach, Fla. She is the author of “Bekindr – The Transformative Power of Kindness” (Hellertown, Pa. Momosa Publishing, 2018). Dr. Ritvo has no disclosures.