Sănătatea mintală în contextul pandemiei

 Mental health in the pandemic context

First published: 25 iunie 2020

Editorial Group: MEDICHUB MEDIA

DOI: 10.26416/Psih.61.2.2020.3585


The spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has generated a pandemic that caused governments around the world to take unprecedented measures to limit it. In this context, we conducted a review of the literature to establish the mental health consequences of this situation. Our findings show that this situation is a social crisis that has led to an important increase in the prevalence of clinically significant depressive, anxiety and stress-related symptoms, which can thus generate and increase the prevalence of related mental and behavioral disorders. Furthermore, various social groups – i.e., young adults, patients, medical staff, domestic violence victims, the elderly – are at an even higher risk for developing such conditions or for the relapse or worsening of the preexisting conditions. Therefore, authorities should also be concerned with limiting the psychological impact of this situation.

SARS-CoV-2, pandemic, social crisis,depression, anxiety, stress-related symptoms


Răspândirea severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) a generat o pandemie care a făcut ca guvernele din întreaga lume să ia măsuri dure pentru a o limita. În acest context, am realizat o recenzie a literaturii de specialitate cu scopul de a pune în evidenţă eventualele consecinţe asupra sănătăţii mintale. Datele publicate până în prezent arată că această situaţie reprezintă o veritabilă criză socială care a dus la creşterea prevalenţei sindroamelor depresive, anxioase şi legate de stres, ceea ce va duce, cel mai probabil, la o creştere a prevalenţei tulburărilor mintale şi de comportament înrudite. În plus, datele arată că o serie de grupuri sociale (adulţii tineri, pacienţii, personalul medical, victimele violenţei domestice şi vârstnicii) au un risc chiar mai mare de a dezvolta asemenea tulburări sau de a suferi o recădere în cadrul unor afecţiuni preexistente. În acest context, autorităţile ar trebui să acorde atenţie şi limitării impactului psihologic al acestei situaţii.


The spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has generated a pandemic that forced governments around the world to take unprecedented measures to limit it. On April 8th, 2020, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) stated that 188 countries had their schools suspended nationwide, an unprecedented measure that left at least 1.5 million young people out of formal education(1). Furthermore, many businesses suspended or drastically reduced their activities, causing an economic contraction that is estimated to reach around 12% in the Eurozone alone, and characterized as “unprecedented in peacetime” by representatives of the European Central Bank(2). Apart from probable economic (i.e., unemployment) and financial implications, the measures taken generated drastic changes in lifestyle for many individuals that are now under pressure to fulfill their job roles from home while also caring for their children. In addition, instrumental social support has become very difficult to provide because of the imposed travel restrictions. Thus, we can state that this situation generated major changes in the lifestyle of most individuals and that many of them will find it impossible to adapt by using their familiar coping strategies. It is therefore reasonable to consider this situation a social crisis, as it will cause numerous individuals to go through “a period of psychological disequilibrium, experienced as a result of a hazardous event or situation that constitutes a significant problem that cannot be remedied by using familiar coping strategies” – the very definition of a crisis, as Roberts formulated it in 2000(3).

A social crisis can lead to increased symptoms and prevalence of major depressive disorder, anxiety disorders, stress-related disorders (i.e., including posttraumatic stress disorder), and mental and behavioral disorders due to psychoactive substance use. Furthermore, stress is a factor that increases the risk of relapse in other mental and behavioral disorders as well. The resolution of any crisis and the efficient management of stressful situations are dependent upon factors related to the event (e.g., severity, localization) and factors related to the individual (e.g., the perception of the traumatic event, social support and coping and defense mechanisms)‌(4). However, promoting adaptation is dependent upon knowledge about the stressor, its direct consequences and ­putative mitigating factors (e.g., demographic, socioeconomical, cultural etc.). Thus, this study aimed at reviewing the currently available empirical results on mental health in the context of COVID-19 pandemic. For this, a PubMed search was conducted using the terms “COVID-19” and “mental health”. All abstracts were reviewed and all papers that contained empirical evidence were further processed. Opinion papers were excluded. Full-text versions were obtained for all included studies.

Epidemiological data on general population

All papers identified started from the assumption that an increase in the frequency and severity of symptoms related to stress, anxiety and depression is expected(5,6), but the magnitude of this increase is unknown and nearly impossible to predict. Furthermore, the extent to which these symptoms will add up to cause an increase in the prevalence of stress-related disorders, anxiety disorders, major depressive disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and other mental and behavioral disorders and problems (e.g., psychoactive substance use disorders, self-harm or suicide attempts) is yet unknown and needs to be researched(5). Studies that include diagnosis are however more elaborate and difficult to implement during the crisis. Thus, all published papers used screening tools and reported prevalence rates based on these.

Both Asian and European studies report higher rates for clinically significant depressive symptoms in the general population, varying between 16.5% and 48.3%(7-10), values that are significantly higher than the 12-month prevalence of 7% reported in the United States for major depressive disorder(11).

The prevalence of clinically significant anxiety symptoms in the general population varied between 21.6% and 35.1%(7-10), again higher than the 12-month prevalence of 17.7% reported in general(12).

The prevalence of PTSD symptoms was found to be 15.8%(8).

Risk and protective factors for the general population

The risk for developing a mental and behavioral disorder or worsening of a preexisting one relies in the intensity and nature of the stress reaction, which is influenced by the objective nature of the stressor, the perception of the event, the available social support and the coping strategies(4).

The COVID-19 pandemic is objectively a particular type of stressor in the sense that it is poorly localized and yet generalized, giving individuals little chance for avoidance or control. 

The perception of a stressful situation is based on the appraisals individuals perform when faced with it. In general, persons will perform two types of appraisals when faced with a stressor, and these appraisals then determine how they will cope with that stressor. The primary appraisal evaluates the nature of the stressor per se in terms of severity, certainty, predictability etc. The secondary appraisal is focused on their own ability to deal with the situation (e.g., controllability, agency)(13).

In the case of COVID-19 pandemic, several factors concurred to create an image of severity. First, the nature of the stressor is still somewhat unclear in respect to the severity of the illness, speed of spread, prognosis etc. Conflicting messages from the authorities made the situation even worse, in many cases, by creating even more uncertainty. Secondly, looming shortages of resources, both for basic needs and for prevention and treatment, high financial losses and impaired ability to get social support due to self-isolation and travel restrictions created an image of poor controllability of the situation for many people(14).

In the general population, the most important risk factors associated with psychopathology were: inadequate information, loneliness, duration of quarantine, female gender, younger age, previous diagnosis of mental and behavioral disorders, fear of infection, having symptoms associated with COVID-19, having a close relative with COVID-19, frustration and boredom, inadequate supplies, financial problems and  stigma(8,10,15).

On the other hand, the most important protective factors were: the belief that information has been provided, perceived survival likelihood and low risk of contracting SARS‑CoV‑2, older age, economic stability, personal precautionary measures, spirituality and  high level of confidence in doctors(7,8,10).

Data on special population groups

The COVID-19 pandemic per se and the measures taken to limit it affect vulnerable populations even more(16).

Youth has been impacted more severely by the pandemic, causing significant disruption in routine, peer contact, skills acquisition and putting significant strain on their relationship with adults/caretakers. Students were further impacted by the suspension of classes, examinations, with little remedy put in place by the authorities in many cases. Graduating students faced even more uncertainty regarding graduation and entering the work market(17). In a cross-sectional study from China, nearly 40.4% of young adults were found at risk for psychological problems, with lower educational attainment and using negative coping styles among the most important risk factors(18).

The measures taken by authorities worldwide have had a major impact on the elderly due to their bio­psychosocial vulnerabilities(19,20). Older persons are especially vulnerable to loneliness, an independent risk factor for depression, anxiety disorders and suicide(20), especially through worsening their perception of risk of death or disease(19). Furthermore, because most of them are not familiar with modern communication technologies, they have a poorer access to quality information and even limits their ability to secure proper healthcare(20). Also, cognitive impairment and other mental disorders due to brain damage and dysfunction can make it difficult for these patients to follow proper preventive measures(20).

The patients with mental and behavioral disorders are another high-risk population since stress can precipitate a relapse of their preexisting condition and because isolation measures limit the availability of resources for them(21).

Medical staff is also considered a high-risk population, and available data show very high rates of clinically significant depressive symptoms (50-51%) and of anxiety symptoms (45%)(22,23). Furthermore, the medical staff seems to be the professional category most affected by poor sleep quality(10), with insomnia rates affecting more than one in three individuals in this group(22).

Moreover, the isolation and quarantine measures imposed by authorities have led to a grim situation for the victims of domestic violence – a phenomenon that is thought to have increased during the pandemic – because they can no longer escape their abusers(24).

An increase in complicated grief prevalence is also expected because of the limitations imposed on normal familial care for terminally ill patients and on burial customs(25).


The situation created by the COVID-19 pandemic is a social crisis that has led to a notable increase in the prevalence of clinically significant depressive, anxiety and stress-related symptoms, which can thus generate and increase the prevalence of related mental and behavioral disorders. Furthermore, various social groups – i.e., young adults, patients, medical staff, domestic violence victims, the elderly – are at an even higher risk for developing such conditions or for the relapse or worsening of their preexisting conditions.

Therefore, authorities should also be concerned with limiting the psychological impact of this situation by providing adequate, noncontradictory information, facilitating social support and spirituality, and limiting the economic impact on individuals, as these are currently considered the most efficient protective factors against developing a mental or behavioral disorder in the pandemic context. 


  1. Lee J. Mental health effects of school closures during COVID-19. Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2020; S2352-4642(20), 30109-7.
  2. Ewing J, Stevis-Gridneff M. European slump is worst since World War II, reports show. The New York Times [Internet] 2020 April 30 [cited 2020 May 28]. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/30/business/europe-economy-coronavirus-recession.html.
  3. Roberts AR (editor). Crisis intervention handbook: Assessment, treatment and research. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.
  4. Cozman D. Suicidology. Beau Bassin: Lambert, 2019.
  5. Holmes EA, O’Connor RC, Perry VH, et al. Multidisciplinary research priorities for the COVID-19 pandemic: a call for action for mental health science. Lancet Psychiatry. 2020; 7(6), 547-60.
  6. Cullen W, Gulati G, Kelly BD. Mental health in the COVID-19 pandemic. QJM. 2020; 113(5), 311-2.
  7. Wang C, Pan R, Wan X, et al. A longitudinal study on the mental health of general population during the COVID-19 epidemic in China. Brain Behav Immun. 2020; S0889-1591(20), 30511-0.
  8. González-Sanguino C, Ausín B, Castellanos MÁ, et al. Mental health consequences during the initial stage of the 2020 Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) in Spain. Brain Behav Immun. 2020; S0889-1591(20), 30812-6.
  9. Gao J, Zheng P, Jia Y, et al. Mental health problems and social media exposure during COVID-19 outbreak. PLoS One. 2020; 15(4), e0231924.
  10. Huang Y, Zhao N. Chinese mental health burden during the COVID-19 pandemic. Asian J Psychiatr. 2020; 51, 102052.
  11. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 5th ed. Washington, DC: The Association, 2013.
  12. Sadock BJ, Sadock VA, Ruiz P. Kaplan & Sadock’s synopsis of psychiatry, 11th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer, 2015.
  13. Folkman S (editor). The oxford handbook of stress, health, and coping. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.
  14. Pfefferbaum B, North CS. Mental Health and the Covid-19 Pandemic. N Engl J Med. 2020; 10.1056/NEJMp2008017.
  15. Brooks SK, Webster RK, Smith LE, et al. The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence. Lancet. 2020; 395(10227), 912-20.
  16. Kapilashrami A, Bhui K. Mental Health & COVID-19: is the virus racist? Br J Psychiatry. 2020; 1-6.
  17. Fegert JM, Vitiello B, Plener PL, Clemens V. Challenges and burden of the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic for child and adolescent mental health: a narrative review to highlight clinical and research needs in the acute phase and the long return to normality. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health. 2020; 14-20.
  18. Liang L, Ren H, Cao R, et al. The Effect of COVID-19 on Youth Mental Health. Psychiatr Q. 2020; 1-12.
  19. Webb L. Covid-19 lockdown: a perfect storm for older people’s mental. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2020; 10.1111/jpm.12644.
  20. Banerjee D. The Impact of Covid-19 Pandemic on Elderly Mental Health. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2020; 10.1002/gps.5320.
  21. Minihan E, Gavin B, Kelly BD, McNicholas F. Covid-19, Mental Health and Psychological First Aid. Ir J Psychol Med. 2020; 1-12.
  22. Liu S, Yang L, Zhang C, et al. Online mental health services in China during the COVID-19 outbreak. Lancet Psychiatry. 2020; 7(4), e17-e18.
  23. Gold JA. COVID-19: adverse mental health outcomes for healthcare workers. BMJ. 2020; 369, m1815.
  24. Kumar A, Nayar KR. COVID 19 and its mental health consequences. J Ment Health. 2020, 1-2.
  25. Sun Y, Bao Y, Lu L. Addressing mental health care for the bereaved during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2020; 10.1111/pcn.13008.

Articole din ediţiile anterioare

SINTEZE TERAPEUTICE | Ediţia 2 53 / 2018

Intervenţii nefarmacologice în abordarea depresiei

Mariana Răducu, Ana Giurgiuca

Depresia unipolară reprezintă o afecţiune psihiatrică cu impact major la nivel mondial, care poate crea disfuncţionalitate marcată celor afectaţi, ...

18 iunie 2018
CERCETARE | Ediţia 4 51 / 2017

Model de cuantificare a riscului suicidar

Melinda Hambrich

Depresia și comportamentul suicidar reprezintă probleme majore de sănătate publică. Deși sunt intens cercetate, puține lucrări din literatură se co...

08 ianuarie 2018
DIAGNOSTIC CLINIC | Ediţia 4 59 / 2019

Noi perspective în ICD-11 pentru tulburările anxioase, tulburările obsesiv-compulsive şi tulburările asociate stresului

Conf. dr. Maria Ladea, Mihaela Ruxandra Dumitrescu

The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) reprezintă sistemul de codare standard al tuturor bolilor. Noua versiune, ICD-11, a fost publica...

15 noiembrie 2019
MANAGEMENT TERAPEUTIC | Ediţia 2 57 / 2019

Tratamentul farmacologic al depresiei post-stroke

Octavian Vasiliu, Ileana Marinescu, Daniel Vasile

Depresia post-AVC reprezintă o provocare pentru clinician, din cauza terenului biologic şi psihologic vulnerabil pe care trebuie să-l evalueze, a r...

24 iunie 2019