European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience最新文献

Cognitive complaints are common signs of the Post COVID-19 (PC) condition, but the extent and type of cognitive impairment may be heterogeneous. Little is known about neuropsychological treatment options. Preliminary evidence suggests cognitive symptoms may improve with cognitive training and naturally over time. In this clinical trial, we examined whether participation in a weekly group consisting of cognitive training and group psychotherapy is feasible and would exert beneficial effects on cognitive performance in PC and whether improvements were associated with intervention group participation or represented a temporal improvement effect during syndrome progression. 15 PC patients underwent an 8-week intervention. Cognitive performance was assessed before and after each intervention group participation. A control group of 15 PC patients with subjective neurocognitive or psychiatric complaints underwent two cognitive assessments with comparable time intervals without group participation. To attribute changes to the intervention group participation, interaction effects of group participation and time were checked for significance. This is an exploratory, non-randomized, non-blinded controlled clinical trial. Within the intervention group, significant improvements were found for most cognitive measures. However, significant time x group interactions were only detected in some dimensions of verbal memory and visuo-spatial construction skills. Significant time effects were observed for attention, concentration, memory, executive functions, and processing speed. The intervention setting was feasible and rated as helpful and relevant by the patients. Our results suggest that cognitive symptoms of PC patients may improve over time. Patients affected by both neurocognitive impairments and mental disorders benefit from group psychotherapy and neurocognitive training. The present study provides evidence for a better understanding of the dynamic symptomatology of PC and might help to develop further studies addressing possible therapy designs. The main limitations of this exploratory feasibility trial are the small sample size as well as the non-randomized design due to the clinical setting.

Post COVID-19 conditions (PCC) present with a wide range of symptoms. Headache is one of the most frequently reported neurological symptoms by patients with PCC. We aimed to assess the prevalence of headache in patients with PCC who attended the Post-COVID^LMU outpatient department at LMU University Hospital in Munich. We hypothesized that headaches occur more frequently in patients with PCC than in the control group. Patients answered a questionnaire containing sociodemographic characteristics, their current symptoms, and prior psychiatric and somatic diagnoses, the WHO Quality of Life assessment (WHOQOL-BREF), 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), and the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS). 188 PCC patients were included in this study and compared to a control group of patients with a history of COVID-19 or a different infectious disease - but no consecutive post-infectious condition (n_c=27). 115 (61%) of our PCC patients were female. The median age was 41 years. 60 (32%, p = 0.001) had a pre-existing psychiatric diagnosis. PCC was associated with worse outcomes in all four domains of the WHOQOL-BREF (p < 0.001), high levels of fatigue (FSS; p < 0.001), and a higher likeliness for symptoms of depression (PHQ-9; p < 0.001). We were able to confirm that psychiatric disorders are more frequently associated with headaches in PCC patients. Headache should be assessed and treated in the context of PCC not only by neurologists but by multi-professional teams and regarding all PCC symptoms.

Patients suffering from post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) have a higher prevalence of anxiety and depression than the general population. The long-term trajectory of these sequelae is still unfolding. To assess the burden of anxiety and depression among patients presenting to the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics (UIHC) post-COVID-19 clinic, we analyzed how patient factors influenced Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) scores. In this retrospective cohort study, the GAD-7 and PHQ-9 questionnaire scores of patients presenting to the UIHC post-COVID clinic between March 2021-February 2022 (N = 455) were compared to the scores of a sample of patients presenting to the general internal medicine (GIM) clinic during the same period (N = 94). Our analysis showed that patients with an absent history of depression on their electronic medical record (EMR) problem list scored significantly higher on the GAD-7 (mean difference -1.62, 95% CI -3.12 to -0.12, p = 0.034) and PHQ-9 (mean difference -4.45, 95% CI -5.53 to -3.37, p < 0.001) questionnaires compared to their similar counterparts in the GIM clinic. On the other hand, patients with an absent history of anxiety on their EMR problem list scored significantly higher on the GAD-7 (mean difference -2.90, 95% CI -4.0 to -1.80, p < 0.001) but not on the PHQ-9 questionnaire (p = 0.196). Overall, patients with PASC may have experienced a heavier burden of newly manifest anxiety and depression symptoms compared to patients seen in the GIM clinic. This suggests that the mental health impacts of PASC may be more pronounced in patients with no prior history of anxiety or depression.

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has not only caused millions of deaths but left also millions of people with persistent symptoms behind. These long-term COVID-19 sequelae cause a considerable burden on individuals´ health, healthcare systems, and economies worldwide given the high rate of SARS-CoV-2 infections. Therefore, rehabilitative interventions and strategies are needed to counteract the post COVID-19 sequelae. The importance of rehabilitation for patients with persistent COVID-19 symptoms has been recently also highlighted in a Call for Action by the World Health Organisation. Based on previously published research, but also in line with clinical experience, COVID-19 is not one specific disease but rather presents in different phenotypes that vary in their pathophysiological mechanisms, symptomatic manifestations, and potential interventional approaches. This review provides a proposal for differentiating post COVID-19 patients in non-organ-specific phenotypes that may help clinicians to evaluate patients and to plan therapeutic options. Furthermore, we present current unmet needs and suggest a potential pathway for a specific rehabilitation approach in people with persistent post-COVID symptoms.

Background: As only a few studies have examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health outpatient system so far, the aim of the COVID Ψ Outpatient Survey was to gain insight from outpatient providers in Germany regarding changes in utilization; associated problems and challenges; telemedicine services; interactions with inpatient and nursing home services; and experiences with post-COVID syndromes.

Methods: Between July and September 2021, we invited 351 randomly selected outpatient mental health specialists to take part in the online survey via e-mail. Additionally, we extended an invitation to professional associations to encourage their members to participate. N = 105 physicians of most regions of Germany took part in the survey.

Results: Survey participants reported changes in utilization during the high incidence phases (HIP) of the pandemic using pre-formulated categories: For the first HIP in spring 2020, 31% of the survey participants reported a decrease > 20% and 5% an increase > 20% of patient contacts. For the third HIP in spring 2021, 4% reported a decrease > 20% of contacts, while 30% an increase > 20%. Participants chose "patient's fears of infection" and "providers protection measures" as reasons for decreases, and "pandemic related anxieties", "economic stressors", and "capacity reductions of the inpatient system" as reasons for increases of patient contact. Many providers introduced telemedicine services. A majority reported consultations for post-COVID syndromes already in spring 2021.

Conclusions: The survey hinted at changes in utilization, multiple problems but as well good-practice-solutions in the mental health outpatient system during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 can present as multi-organ pathology, with neuropsychiatric symptoms being the most common symptom complex, characterizing long COVID as a syndrome with a significant disease burden for affected individuals. Several typical symptoms of long COVID, such as fatigue, depressive symptoms and cognitive impairment, are also key features of other psychiatric disorders such as myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) and major depressive disorder (MDD). However, clinically successful treatment strategies are still lacking and are often inspired by treatment options for diseases with similar clinical presentations, such as ME/CFS. Acetylcarnitine, the shortest metabolite of a class of fatty acid metabolites called acylcarnitines and one of the most abundant blood metabolites in humans can be used as a dietary/nutritional supplement with proven clinical efficacy in the treatment of MDD, ME/CFS and other neuropsychiatric disorders. Basic research in recent decades has established acylcarnitines in general, and acetylcarnitine in particular, as important regulators and indicators of mitochondrial function and other physiological processes such as neuroinflammation and energy production pathways. In this review, we will compare the clinical basis of neuropsychiatric long COVID with other fatigue-associated diseases. We will also review common molecular disease mechanisms associated with altered acetylcarnitine metabolism and the potential of acetylcarnitine to interfere with these as a therapeutic agent. Finally, we will review the current evidence for acetylcarnitine as a supplement in the treatment of fatigue-associated diseases and propose future research strategies to investigate the potential of acetylcarnitine as a treatment option for long COVID.

The COVID-19 pandemic presents an unprecedented challenge to community wellbeing and mental health. However, quantifiable information on the extent of mental health problems and associated factors due to the pandemic is still lacking in low-income countries. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the levels of depression, anxiety, and stress and their association with risk and resilience factors among residents of Jimma town in Southwestern Ethiopia. A community-based cross-sectional study was conducted between October 2021 and November 2021. Data were collected from 1196 adult Jimma town residents selected through multi-stage sampling. The following scales were used for the cross-sectional assessment of depressions, anxiety and stress and their associations: depression, anxiety, and stress-21(DASS-21), World Health Organization (WHO) wellbeing, University of California, Los Angeles Loneliness Scale (UCLA), Childhood trauma questionnaire, and brief resilience scales. A pre-tested, interviewer-completed questionnaire was used for data collection. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify factors associated with depression, anxiety, and stress. Odds ratios consistent with 95% CI were used to report the presence of an association between risk and resilience factors and the outcome variable at a P-value < 0.05. Overall, 963 (80.53%) respondents had divergent DASS-21 score findings. Specifically, 27.68%, 31.52% and 21.32% experienced depression, anxiety, and stress respectively. Higher DASS-21 scores were associated with the presence of one or more COVID-19 risk factors for anyone close to the participants (AOR = 1.53, 95% CI 1.03-2.27), feelings of stress/burden (β = 1.09, 95% CI 1.07-1.12), positive coping (β = 1.044, 95% CI 1.01-1.07), loneliness (β = 1.063, 95% CI 1.04-1.08), and childhood trauma (β = 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.04). In contrast, lower DASS-21 scores were associated with beliefs about the necessity of solidarity-based behavior (β = 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.98), resilience (β = 0.92, 95% CI 0.87-0.97) and wellbeing (β = 0.90, 95% CI 0.87-0.94). In the course of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2021, symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress in the study community were prevalent, and associated with numerous risk and resilience factors. Although causality cannot be inferred, these findings underscore the importance of strengthening mental health services and may guide COVID-19 prevention and treatment strategies.

Cognitive symptoms (CS) belong to the most common manifestations of the Post COVID-19 (PC) condition. We sought to objectify CS in PC patients using routine diagnostic assessments: neurocognitive testing (NCT) and brain imaging (BI). Further, we investigated possible associations of CS with patient reported outcomes (PROs), and risk factors for developing CS. Clinical data and PROs of 315 PC patients were assessed at a mean of 6 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. 231 (73.3%) patients reported any sort of CS. Among them, 78 underwent NCT and 55 received BI. In NCT, the cognitive domains most affected were the working memory, attention, and concentration. Nonetheless, pathological thresholds were exceeded only in few cases. Neurocognitive performance did not differ significantly between patients complaining of severe (n = 26) versus non-severe (n = 52) CS. BI findings were abnormal in 8 (14.5%) cases with CS but were most likely not related to PC. Patients reporting high severity of CS scored worse in the PHQ-9, FSS, WHOQOL-BREF, were more likely to report impaired sleep, and had a higher prevalence of psychiatric diagnoses. Overall, NCT could confirm mild impairment in some but not all PC patients with CS, while BI studies were abnormal in only few cases. CS severity did not affect NCT results, but severe CS were associated with symptoms of depression (PHQ-9), fatigue (FSS), reduced quality of life (WHOQOL-BREF) and higher prevalence of psychiatric illnesses. These findings support the importance of NCT, BI, and neuro-psychological assessment in the work-up of PC patients reporting CS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration number and date of registration: DRKS00030974, 22 Dec 2022, retrospectively registered.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) such as the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) or Likert scales addressing various domains of health are important tools to assess disease severity in Post COVID-19 (PC) patients. By design, they are subjective in nature and prone to bias. Our findings reveal substantial differences in the perception of disease severity between patients (PAT), their attending internists (INT) and psychiatrists/psychologists (PSY). Patients rated almost all aspects of their health worse than INT or PSY. Most of the differences were statistically highly significant. The presence of fatigue and mood disorders correlated negatively with health perception. The physical health section of the WHO Quality of Life Assessment (WHOQoL-BREF) and Karnofsky index correlated positively with overall and mental health ratings by PAT and INT. Health ratings by neither PAT, PSY nor INT were associated with the number of abnormal findings in diagnostic procedures. This study highlights how strongly perceptions of disease severity diverge between PC patients and attending medical staff. Imprecise communication, different experiences regarding health and disease, and confounding psychological factors may explain these observations. Discrepancies in disease perception threaten patient-physician relationships and pose strong confounders in clinical studies. Established scores (e.g., WHOQoL-BREF, Karnofsky index) may represent an approach to overcome these discrepancies. Physicians and psychologists noting harsh differences between a patient's and their own perception of the patient's health should apply screening tools for mood disorders (i.e., PHQ-9, WHOQoL-BREF), psychosomatic symptom burden (SSD-12, FCV-19) and consider further psychological evaluation. An interdisciplinary approach to PC patients remains imperative. Trial Registration Number & Date of Registration: DRKS00030974, 22 Dec 2022, retrospectively registered.

Background: It remains unclear whether subjective and objective measures of cognitive function in Post COVID-19 Condition (PCC) are correlated. The extent of correlation has mechanistic and clinical implications.

Methods: This post-hoc analysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial contains baseline data of subjective and objective measures of cognition in a rigorously characterized cohort living with PCC. Herein, we evaluated the association between subjective and objective condition function, as measured by the Perceived Deficits Questionnaire, 20-item (PDQ-20) and the Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST) and Trails Making Test (TMT)-A/B, respectively.

Results: A total of 152 participants comprised the baseline sample. Due to missing data, our statistical analyses included 150 for self-reported PDQ-20, 147 individuals for combined DSST-measured cognitive function (composite z-score of the Pen/Paper plus Online CogState Version, N_combinedDSST), 71 for in-person DSST-measured cognitive function (Pen/Paper Version), 70 for TMT-A-measured cognitive function, and 70 for TMT-B-measured cognitive function. After adjusting for age, sex, and education, PDQ-20 was significantly correlated with pen-and-paper DSST (β = -0.003, p = 0.002) and TMT-B (β = 0.003, p = 0.008) scores, but not with TMT-A scores (β = -0.001, p = 0.751).

Conclusions: Overall, a statistically significant correlation was observed between subjective and objective cognitive functions. Clinicians providing care for individuals with PCC who have subjective cognitive function complaints may consider taking a measurement-based approach to cognition at the point of care that focuses exclusively on patient-reported measures.