Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684899dbb8-ndjvl Total loading time: 0.623 Render date: 2022-05-28T11:53:27.780Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

Changes in depression and suicidal ideation under severe lockdown restrictions during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain: a longitudinal study in the general population

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 June 2021

J. L. Ayuso-Mateos
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa (IIS-Princesa), Madrid, Spain Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental, CIBERSAM, Madrid, Spain Department of Psychiatry, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
D. Morillo
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa (IIS-Princesa), Madrid, Spain Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental, CIBERSAM, Madrid, Spain Department of Psychiatry, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
J. M. Haro
Affiliation:
Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental, CIBERSAM, Madrid, Spain Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu, Universitat de Barcelona, Sant Boi de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
B. Olaya
Affiliation:
Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental, CIBERSAM, Madrid, Spain Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu, Universitat de Barcelona, Sant Boi de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
E. Lara*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa (IIS-Princesa), Madrid, Spain Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental, CIBERSAM, Madrid, Spain Department of Psychiatry, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
M. Miret
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa (IIS-Princesa), Madrid, Spain Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental, CIBERSAM, Madrid, Spain Department of Psychiatry, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
*
Author for correspondence: Elvira Lara, E-mail: elvira.lara@uam.es
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Aims

To assess whether there is a change in the prevalence of depression and suicidal ideation after the strict lockdown measures due to the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain; and to assess which are the factors associated with the incidence of a depressive episode or suicidal ideation during the lockdown.

Methods

Data from a longitudinal adult population-based cohort from the provinces of Madrid and Barcelona were analysed (n = 1103). Structured face-to-face home-based interviews (pre-pandemic) and telephone interviews were performed. Both depression and suicidal ideation were assessed through an adaptation of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI 3.0). A variety of validated instruments and sociodemographic variables including age, sex, educational level, occupational status, home quietness, screen time, resilience, loneliness, social support, physical activity, disability, economic situation and COVID-19-related information were also considered. Population prevalence estimates and multivariable logistic regressions were computed.

Results

Overall, prevalence rates of depression and suicidal ideation did not change significantly from before to after the COVID-19 outbreak. However, the rates of depression among individuals aged 50+ years showed a significant decrease compared to before the pandemic (from 8.48 to 6.41%; p = 0.01). Younger individuals (odds ratio (OR) = 0.97 per year older; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.95–0.99) and those feeling loneliness (OR = 1.96; 95% CI = 1.42–2.70) during the lockdown were at an increased risk of developing depression during the confinement. Resilience showed a protective effect against the risk of depression (OR = 0.46; 95% CI = 0.32–0.66) and suicidal ideation (OR = 0.33; 95% CI = 0.16–0.68), whereas individuals perceiving social support were at a lower risk of developing suicidal thoughts (OR = 0.35; 95% CI = 0.18–0.69).

Conclusions

Continuous reinforcement of mental health preventive and intervening measures during and in the aftermath of the crisis is of global importance, particularly among vulnerable groups who are experiencing the most distress. Future research should strive to evaluate the long-term effects of the COVID-19 crisis on mental health.

Type
Original Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Introduction

The COVID-19 outbreak and the policies to prevent its spread have disrupted the daily living of the population. The evidence regarding the mental health consequences of the confinement due to the COVID-19 pandemic in the general population is inconclusive (O'Connor et al., Reference O'Connor, Wetherall, Cleare, McClelland, Melson, Niedzwiedz, O'Carroll, O'Connor, Platt, Scowcroft, Watson, Zortea, Ferguson and Robb2020; Bueno-Notivol et al., Reference Bueno-Notivol, Gracia-Garcia, Olaya, Lasheras, Lopez-Anton and Santabarbara2021; Faust et al., Reference Faust, Shah, Du, Li, Lin and Krumholz2021; Prati and Mancini, Reference Prati and Mancini2021; Tanaka and Okamoto, Reference Tanaka and Okamoto2021; van der Velden et al., Reference van der Velden, Hyland, Contino, von Gaudecker, Muffels and Das2021).

The lockdown in Spain was one of the most restrictive in Europe (García-Esquinas et al., Reference García-Esquinas, Ortolá, Gine-Vázquez, Carnicero, Mañas, Lara, Alvarez-Bustos, Vicente-Rodriguez, Sotos-Prieto, Olaya, José Garcia-Garcia, Gusi, Banegas, Rodríguez-Gómez, Struijk, Martínez-Gómez, Lana, María Haro, Ayuso-Mateos, Rodríguez-Mañas, Ara, Miret and Rodríguez-Artalejo2021). The Government imposed a State of Alarm starting on 15th March that established a national lockdown that included the imposition of distancing measures such as the closure of non-essential customer-facing businesses and educational institutions (Real Decreto, 463/2020). In order to avoid the saturation of the intensive care units, theses initial measures were strengthened with another decree from the Government on 29th March (Real Decreto, 10/2020). A period of 5 weeks started in which citizens were only allowed to leave their homes for essential work, to buy food and other staple products or for emergencies. On 4th May, citizens were first authorised to leave their homes to exercise or walk, for a maximum of 1 h a day, under strict conditions. From 10th May to 21st June, a progressive de-escalation of confinement measures led to the so-called ‘new normality’ in which Spaniards were allowed to attend their jobs, gather in small groups, and move between provinces as long as they complied with safe distancing and face-covering requirements.

During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, several studies have investigated its mental health consequences in the Spanish adult population (Balanzá-Martínez et al., Reference Balanzá-Martínez, Kapczinski, de Azevedo Cardoso, Atienza-Carbonell, Rosa, Mota, Jurema, Motak and De Boni2020; Garcia-Fernandez et al., Reference Garcia-Fernandez, Romero-Ferreiro, Lopez-Roldan, Padilla and Rodriguez-Jimenez2020; Gonzalez-Sanguino et al., Reference Gonzalez-Sanguino, Ausin, Castellanos, Saiz and Munoz2020; Justo-Alonso et al., Reference Justo-Alonso, García-Dantas, González-Vázquez, Sánchez-Martín and Del Río-Casanova2020; Pérez et al., Reference Pérez, Masegoso and Hernández-Espeso2020; Planchuelo-Gomez et al., Reference Planchuelo-Gomez, Odriozola-Gonzalez, Irurtia and de Luis-Garcia2020; Cecchini et al., Reference Cecchini, Carriedo, Fernandez-Rio, Mendez-Gimenez, Gonzalez, Sanchez-Martinez and Rodriguez-Gonzalez2021; Losada-Baltar et al., Reference Losada-Baltar, Martinez-Huertas, Jimenez-Gonzalo, Pedroso-Chaparro, Gallego-Alberto, Fernandes-Pires and Marquez-Gonzalez2021; Mortier et al., Reference Mortier, Vilagut, Ferrer, Alayo, Bruffaerts, Cristóbal-Narváez, del Cura-González, Domènech-Abella, Felez-Nobrega, Olaya, Pijoan, Vieta, Pérez-Solà, Kessler, Haro and Alonso2021; Valiente et al., Reference Valiente, Contreras, Peinado, Trucharte, Martínez and Vázquez2021). Overall, these studies have shown a general worsening in mental health throughout the confinement, with prevalence estimates ranging from 9 to 46% among those reporting data on depressive symptoms. Younger age, being female, being a healthcare worker, low income, prior mental disorders, loneliness, and substance use appeared as the strongest factors associated with mental health problems. However, the validity of these findings may be somewhat hindered by at least one of the following drawbacks: (i) non-probabilistic sampling approaches or convenience samples evaluated through online surveys, which increases the risk of selection bias; (ii) cross-sectional design or lack of information on the pre-pandemic period, which does not allow for a proper assessment of the determinants of the observed changes in mental health indicators and (iii) assessment of dimensional measures of psychological distress only.

The study aims to assess whether there is a change in the prevalence of depression and suicidal ideation after the strict lockdown measures during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain; and to assess which are the factors associated with the incidence of a depressive episode or suicidal ideation during the lockdown. Our analysis is based on an adult population-based cohort from the provinces of Madrid and Barcelona, which was evaluated before the pandemic and once again after the COVID-19 lockdown.

Method

Sample and recruitment

Non-institutionalised adults (i.e. 18+ years old) from the regions of Madrid and Barcelona participated in this study. These constitute the refreshment sample of the Edad con Salud project (ageingandhealth.com) (Miret et al., Reference Miret, Caballero, Chatterji, Olaya, Tobiasz-Adamczyk, Koskinen, Leonardi, Haro and Ayuso-Mateos2014). They were recruited following a multistage stratified design consisting of: (i) a random sample of municipalities (sampling probability proportional to population size); (ii) a random sample of census units from each municipality; (iii) a random sample of households within each census track, and assigned to one of two age groups: 18–49 or 50+ (the second one oversampled). For each household, individuals in the assigned age group were invited to participate; the response rate was 68.0%. Sampling weights were generated for the sample to be representative of the target population, according to the population distribution obtained from the National Institute of Statistics.

Participants were interviewed at their homes between 17 June 2019 and 14 March 2020 (pre-COVID measure). They were reached out again between 21 May 2020 and 30 June 2020 to respond to a telephone interview (post-COVID measure). Trained interviewers conducted the pre- and post-measure interviews, using a Computer-Assisted Personal and Telephonic Interviewing system, respectively. Protocols were approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Review Committees of Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu (Barcelona) and Hospital Universitario La Princesa (Madrid). All participants provided informed consent.

Some participants were unable to respond first-hand due to physical and/or mental limitations, and thus a relative or co-habitant answered in their name. Only first-hand respondents to both interviews were included in these analyses; therefore, out of a sample of 1935 participants, 54 proxy respondents were discarded, making a sample of 1881 participants in the pre-measure. A total of 778 were excluded from the post-measure (81 participants did not provide recontact information, 110 participants could not be contacted, 9 were deceased, 39 were responded by a proxy respondent, 329 either rejected to respond to the post-measure telephone interview or aborted it before finishing and 210 had unspecified incidents), so the final post-measure sample comprised of 1103 participants.

Measures

Depression was assessed with an adapted version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI; Kessler and Ustün, Reference Kessler and Ustün2004). An algorithm following the ICD-10 criteria was used to diagnose depression in the previous 12 months (World Health Organization, 1993). For the post-measure interview, an abbreviated version was used, and the items were adapted to ask for a 30-day time span in order to account for an onset while the lockdown measures were in effect. The assessment algorithm in the pre-measure was adapted to use the same item set as in the post-measure. Suicidal ideation comprised a single item asking whether the participant had had suicidal thoughts in the previous 12 months/30 days, for the pre- and post-measure periods, respectively.

The following covariates were also measured: age, sex, education level, whether the participant lived alone (both before and during the lockdown), whether the participant had co-habited/was co-habiting with a relative isolated by COVID-19, whether the participant had been/was concerned about a relative/friend infected by COVID-19, whether the participant had been infected with COVID-19 and its severity, whether the participant had enough quietness at home to get proper rest, whether the household economic situation had worsened due to the COVID-19 emergency, whether the participant had been unemployed due to the COVID-19 emergency, time a day spent in front of screens during the lockdown (working and non-working), pre- and post-measure levels of physical activity according to an abbreviated version of the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire version 2 (GPAQ-2) (Armstrong and Bull, Reference Armstrong and Bull2006), and the following scales: post-measure score in the Brief Resilience scale (Rodríguez-Rey et al., Reference Rodríguez-Rey, Alonso-Tapia and Hernansaiz-Garrido2016), pre- and post-measures of social support measured with the OSLO3 Social Support scale (Dalgard et al., Reference Dalgard, Dowrick, Lehtinen, Vazquez-Barquero, Casey, Wilkinson, Ayuso-Mateos, Page and Dunn2006), pre- and post-measures of loneliness measured with the UCLA loneliness scale (Hughes et al., Reference Hughes, Waite, Hawkley and Cacioppo2004), and post-measure of disability assessed with the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) (Luciano et al., Reference Luciano, Ayuso-Mateos, Aguado, Fernandez, Serrano-Blanco, Roca and Haro2010). The Brief Resilience Scale was taken from the validated version by Rodríguez-Rey et al. (Reference Rodríguez-Rey, Alonso-Tapia and Hernansaiz-Garrido2016), whereas the rest of them have been validated in the original in English (as referenced) and were adapted for their use in the Edad con Salud cohort study. All of them had internal consistency indices (i.e. Cronbach's α) above 0.70, except for the OSLO3 Social Support scale, which reliability was moderate (α = 0.653) and low (α = 0.386) in the pre- and post-measures, respectively.

Data analysis

Sample descriptive statistics were computed for depression, suicidal ideation and all the covariates. Attrition in the pre-measure sample was analysed for differences in sociodemographics and the two outcome variables: sex, depression and suicidal ideation were tested with the χ 2-test; bias-corrected Cramér's V (ϕ c) was computed as a measure of effect size. For age, a two-sample T-test was performed, with Hedges' g as a measure of effect size.

Prevalence estimates – population-wise and disaggregated by sex and age (grouped in 18–29, 30–49 and 50+ year-olds) – were computed for depression and suicidal ideation in both measures. The differences between both measures were tested with a weighted McNemar's test of symmetry, using the complete data. Bonferroni correction was applied variable-wise to the disaggregated estimates.

To model the risk of incidence after the lockdown, the cases with depression or suicidal ideation in the pre-measure periods were filtered out from the dataset for its corresponding analysis. Then, we performed a weighted logistic regression model on the post-measure. All covariates stated in section ‘Measures’ were initially considered. In the case of suicidal ideation, the pre- and post-measures of depression were also considered as covariates. The following procedures were applied for fitting the models: first, in order to archive better numerical convergence, all interval-level variables were standardised, and categorical covariates that yielded complete separation (Albert and Anderson, Reference Albert and Anderson1984) were discarded. Covariates were tested individually with univariate weighted logistic regression models and the Rao and Scott (Reference Rao and Scott1984) likelihood-ratio test (without Bonferroni correction, in order to decrease type-II error risk). Among the significant covariates, the ordinal ones were tested for non-linearity with the Wald test, comparing the general model with a model with the linear term only. Whenever the test was non-significant, only the linear term was included. Afterwards, a multivariate weighted logistic model was fit with all the significant covariates. A backward-step procedure was then run, dropping covariates according to the Akaike information criterion statistic. Demographic variables sex and age were fixed, excluding them from dropping. In the model of suicidal ideation, the measures of depression were also fixed. Finally, the resulting model was refit to the subset of complete cases in the covariates selected by the backward-step procedure. As the procedure may select a different subset of covariates for each model, the number of complete cases may also differ.

A significance level of α = 0.05 was used throughout. All significance tests were performed applying Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons (unless stated otherwise). All the analyses were conducted in R v. 4.0.3 (R Core Team, 2019). Package survey v. 4.0 (Lumley, Reference Lumley2004) was used to fit the models.

Results

Sample descriptives

Participants with data in both measures differed from the ones excluded in the post-measure in sex ($\chi _1^2$ = 15.80, p value <0.001) and age (t 1467.34 = 5.59, p value <0.001): the proportion of men excluded (48.8%) was relatively higher than the ones included (39.6%), and the participants excluded were older (mean = 59.6, s.d. = 19.8) than the ones included (mean = 54.8, s.d. = 16.4). However, the effect size was negligible for sex (ϕ c = 0.089), and small for age (g = 0.270). No significant differences were found in depression between the included and the excluded samples ($\chi _1^2$ = 0.03, p value = 0.860, ϕ c = 0.000). Regarding suicidal ideation, the excluded sample differed significantly from the included one (0.64 v. 2.18%, respectively; $\chi _1^2$ = 7.07, p value = 0.008); the effect size was also negligible though (ϕ c = 0.052). The descriptive statistics for both outcome variables and the covariates for the sample included in the analysis are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Sociodemographic and health characteristics before and after the confinement

n, number of participants; s.d., standard deviation.

* p values correspond to a paired-sample T-test for the quantitative variables, and a McNemar's test of symmetry for the categorical ones.

a These variables are measured in a 0–100 scale.

b Co-habited/ing with relative isolated by COVID-19.

c Concerned about relative/friend infected by COVID-19.

d Severity of COVID-19 infection.

Prevalence rates

Estimated prevalence rates are given in Table 2. For depression, it increased from 7.78% in the pre- to 9.82% in the post-measure. According to the McNemar's test, the difference was not significant ($\chi _1^2$ = 1.53, p value = 0.216). When considering the differentiated age groups, the difference was more prominent for the 18–29 (increasing from 5.32 to 14.17%) and the 30–49 (increasing from 7.96 to 11.99%) groups, but none of them was significant. However, a significant decrease from 8.48 to 6.41% was observed in the 50+ group ($\chi _1^2$ = 6.46, p value = 0.011). For suicidal ideation, the prevalence rate estimate increased from 1.56% in the pre- to 2.78% in the post-measure, but this difference was not significant ($\chi _1^2$ = 1.39, p value = 0.239). After Bonferroni correction, none of the disaggregated estimates was significant either.

Table 2. Prevalence rate estimates in the pre- and post-measures of depression and suicidal ideation, for the population and disaggregated by sex and group age

s.d., standard deviation.

Risk of depression after the lockdown

The final regression model for depression was fit with a sample size of 940. Its covariates are given in Table 3, along with their odds ratios (ORs). The coefficient for age was found to be significant, along with the post-measures of Loneliness and Resilience.

Table 3. Logistic regression model of depression after the confinement in participants without depression before the confinement

OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; Resilience, Brief Resilience Scale; Social support, OSLO3 Social Support Scale; Loneliness, UCLA Loneliness Scale; Disability, 12-item WHO Disability Assessment Schedule Physical activity (GPAQ-2 abbreviated).

a Included as linear covariate.

The OR for age was 0.971 (z = −3.17, p value = 0.002); for each year, the risk of developing depression was expected to decrease by 2.9%. For Loneliness (Post), the OR was 1.957 (z = 4.08, p value <0.001), which means that an increase of 1 standard deviation (s.d.) in the post-measure of the UCLA Loneliness Scale was associated with an increase of 95.7% in the OR of receiving a positive diagnosis of depression in the post-measure. In the case of Resilience (Post), the OR was 0.460 (z = −4.22, p value <0.001), meaning that an increase of 1 s.d. in the post-measure of the Brief Resilience Scale was associated with a decrease of 54.0% in the OR of receiving a positive diagnosis of depression in the post-measure.

Risk of suicidal ideation after the lockdown

This model was fit with a sample size of 951; its covariates and their coefficients (as ORs) are shown in Table 4. After Bonferroni correction, the significant covariates were the post-measures of Social support and Resilience. The OR of Social support was 0.352 (z = −3.04, p value = 0.002). This implies that an increase of 1 s.d. in the post-measure of the Oslo-3 Social Support Scale was associated with a decrease of 64.8% in the OR of reporting having suicidal ideation in the post-measure. The OR for Resilience was 0.334 (z = −3.01, p value = 0.003), implying a decrease of 66.6% for an increase of 1 s.d. in the post-measure of the Brief Resilience Scale.

Table 4. Logistic regression model of suicidal ideation after the confinement in participants without suicidal ideation before the confinement

OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; Resilience, Brief Resilience Scale; Social support, OSLO3 Social Support Scale; Disability, 12-item WHO Disability Assessment Schedule Physical activity (GPAQ-2 abbreviated).

Discussion

The current study is the first to assess changes in mental health during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain by using a population-based cohort. Overall, our results did not show significant differences in the prevalence of depression or suicidal ideation from before to after the COVID-19 outbreak. Indeed, the prevalence rate of depression in our study was similar to those reported in other Spanish and European studies in non-epidemic circumstances (Paykel et al., Reference Paykel, Brugha and Fryers2005; Gutiérrez-Rojas et al., Reference Gutiérrez-Rojas, Porras-Segovia, Dunne, Andrade-González and Cervilla2020). Interestingly, the rates of depression among individuals aged 50+ years showed a significant decrease compared to pre-pandemic. The study findings also found that younger individuals and those feeling loneliness exhibited a significant increase in the risk of developing depression. Resilience showed a protective effect against the risk of depression and suicidal ideation, while individuals perceiving social support were at a lower risk of developing suicidal thoughts.

Among the studies tracking longitudinal changes in mental health from before to during the pandemic, some of them have showed increases in the prevalence rate of depression and suicidal ideation (Daly et al., Reference Daly, Sutin and Robinson2020; Niedzwiedz et al., Reference Niedzwiedz, Green, Benzeval, Campbell, Craig, Demou, Leyland, Pearce, Thomson, Whitley and Katikireddi2021; Novotny et al., Reference Novotny, Gonzalez-Rivas, Kunzova, Skladana, Pospisilova, Polcrova, Medina-Inojosa, Lopez-Jimenez, Geda and Stokin2020; Pierce et al., Reference Pierce, Hope, Ford, Hatch, Hotopf, John, Kontopantelis, Webb, Wessely, McManus and Abel2020; Planchuelo-Gomez et al., Reference Planchuelo-Gomez, Odriozola-Gonzalez, Irurtia and de Luis-Garcia2020; Winkler et al., Reference Winkler, Formanek, Mlada, Kagstrom, Mohrova, Mohr and Csemy2020; McGinty et al., Reference McGinty, Presskreischer, Han and Barry2020b) whereas others did not report differences above pre-pandemic levels (Kwong et al., Reference Kwong, Pearson, Adams, Northstone, Tilling, Smith, Fawns-Ritchie, Bould, Warne, Zammit, Gunnell, Moran, Micali, Reichenberg, Hickman, Rai, Haworth, Campbell, Altschul, Flaig, McIntosh, Lawlor, Porteous and Timpson2020; van der Velden et al., Reference van der Velden, Contino, Das, van Loon and Bosmans2020) or even decreased estimates (van der Velden et al., Reference van der Velden, Hyland, Contino, von Gaudecker, Muffels and Das2021). It is worth noting that all but one of the previous studies measured psychological distress or depressive symptoms. In addition, according to a meta-analysis of longitudinal studies investigating the psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, the initial effect of lockdowns on mental health is relatively small, with no evidence of significant increase in suicide risk (Prati and Mancini, Reference Prati and Mancini2021).

The first emotional reactions may represent feelings of fear, anger or sadness in response to an unprecedented situation rather than a mental disorder. More fine-grained analyses have showed that mental health problems remained stable or declined throughout the initial lockdown period (Bryan et al., Reference Bryan, Bryan and Baker2020; Chandola et al., Reference Chandola, Kumari, Booker and Benzeval2020; Daly et al., Reference Daly, Sutin and Robinson2020; Gonzalez-Sanguino et al., Reference Gonzalez-Sanguino, Ausin, Castellanos, Saiz and Munoz2020; Hyland et al., Reference Hyland, Shevlin, McBride, Murphy, Karatzias, Bentall, Martinez and Vallieres2020; Somma et al., Reference Somma, Krueger, Markon, Gialdi, Colanino, Ferlito, Liotta, Frau and Fossati2020; Wang et al., Reference Wang, Pan, Wan, Tan, Xu, McIntyre, Choo, Tran, Ho, Sharma and Ho2020; McGinty et al., Reference McGinty, Presskreischer, Anderson, Han and Barry2020a; van der Velden et al., Reference van der Velden, Hyland, Contino, von Gaudecker, Muffels and Das2021), which would be consistent with the notion of a progressive adjustment for managing and overcoming stressful events. Nevertheless, it should be noted that these are findings at a very early stage of the COVID-19 outbreak and different conclusions may hold for the comparisons among rate estimates of mental health conditions in the mid- and long-terms. In this regard, Tanaka and Okamoto (Reference Tanaka and Okamoto2021) examined whether suicide mortality changed during the pandemic using high-frequency data covering the entire Japanese population. The authors found that there was an initial drop in suicide deaths from February to June 2020, then followed by an increase during the second wave (July to October 2020). Similarly, the Spanish Statistical Office revealed that suicide remained the leading cause of external death during the first months of 2020. However, there was a drop of 8.8% as compared with the same period in 2019 (Spanish Statistical Office, 2021). Initial declines in suicidal behaviours are not unexpected and may be explained by reduced stress derived from workplaces and social interactions, government financial support and limited access to lethal means (Tanaka and Okamoto, Reference Tanaka and Okamoto2021).

Specific groups appear to be disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. That is the case of young individuals, who may encounter more difficulties coping with certain unexpected life-changing events, consistent with the view of resilience as a life-span process (Portella Fontes and Liberalesso Neri, Reference Portella Fontes and Liberalesso Neri2015). In addition, the adverse economic and social consequences of the pandemic might have a greater impact on them (e.g. unemployment, changes in daily routines and social dynamics). Unsurprisingly, the scientific literature has provided broad evidence suggesting a high proportion of individuals with or at higher risk of depressive symptoms or psychological distress during the COVID-19 outbreak within this group (Daly et al., Reference Daly, Sutin and Robinson2020; Gonzalez-Sanguino et al., Reference Gonzalez-Sanguino, Ausin, Castellanos, Saiz and Munoz2020; Hyland et al., Reference Hyland, Shevlin, McBride, Murphy, Karatzias, Bentall, Martinez and Vallieres2020; Kwong et al., Reference Kwong, Pearson, Adams, Northstone, Tilling, Smith, Fawns-Ritchie, Bould, Warne, Zammit, Gunnell, Moran, Micali, Reichenberg, Hickman, Rai, Haworth, Campbell, Altschul, Flaig, McIntosh, Lawlor, Porteous and Timpson2020; Niedzwiedz et al., Reference Niedzwiedz, Green, Benzeval, Campbell, Craig, Demou, Leyland, Pearce, Thomson, Whitley and Katikireddi2021; O'Connor et al., Reference O'Connor, Wetherall, Cleare, McClelland, Melson, Niedzwiedz, O'Carroll, O'Connor, Platt, Scowcroft, Watson, Zortea, Ferguson and Robb2020; McGinty et al., Reference McGinty, Presskreischer, Anderson, Han and Barry2020a; Valiente et al., Reference Valiente, Contreras, Peinado, Trucharte, Martínez and Vázquez2021). Prior studies have repeatedly documented the intimate link between loneliness and depression (van den Brink et al., Reference van den Brink, Schutter, Hanssen, Elzinga, Rabeling-Keus, Stek, Comijs, Penninx and Oude Voshaar2018; de la Torre-Luque et al., Reference de la Torre-Luque, de la Fuente, Prina, Sanchez-Niubo, Haro and Ayuso-Mateos2019; Lee et al., Reference Lee, Pearce, Ajnakina, Johnson, Lewis, Mann, Pitman, Solmi, Sommerlad, Steptoe, Tymoszuk and Lewis2021). The consistency of results among other COVID-19-related research is also noteworthy (Chandola et al., Reference Chandola, Kumari, Booker and Benzeval2020; Creese et al., Reference Creese, Khan, Henley, O'Dwyer, Corbett, Vasconcelos Da Silva, Mills, Wright, Testad, Aarsland and Ballard2020; Gonzalez-Sanguino et al., Reference Gonzalez-Sanguino, Ausin, Castellanos, Saiz and Munoz2020; Kantor and Kantor, Reference Kantor and Kantor2020; Novotny et al., Reference Novotny, Gonzalez-Rivas, Kunzova, Skladana, Pospisilova, Polcrova, Medina-Inojosa, Lopez-Jimenez, Geda and Stokin2020; Palgi et al., Reference Palgi, Shrira, Ring, Bodner, Avidor, Bergman, Cohen-Fridel, Keisari and Hoffman2020; van der Velden et al., Reference van der Velden, Hyland, Contino, von Gaudecker, Muffels and Das2021). Even though little is known yet about the mechanisms underlying this association, there is evidence that loneliness may compromise emotion processing and regulation, can lead to decreased cognitive function, and alter metabolic, endocrine and immune responses (Hawkley and Cacioppo, Reference Hawkley and Cacioppo2010; Lara et al., Reference Lara, Caballero, Rico-Uribe, Olaya, Haro, Ayuso-Mateos and Miret2019; de la Torre-Luque et al., Reference de la Torre-Luque, Lara, de la Fuente, Rico-Uribe, Caballero, Lopez-Garcia, Sanchez-Niubo, Bobak, Koskinen, Haro and Ayuso-Mateos2021), all of which have been associated with depression. In our current situation, the risk of loneliness over depression is expected to be heightened. In the opposite corner, the identification of the protective effect of resilience on depression and suicidal ideation accords with recent reports (Killgore et al., Reference Killgore, Taylor, Cloonan and Dailey2020; Lenzo et al., Reference Lenzo, Quattropani, Musetti, Zenesini, Freda, Lemmo, Vegni, Borghi, Plazzi, Castelnuovo, Cattivelli, Saita and Franceschini2020; Novotny et al., Reference Novotny, Gonzalez-Rivas, Kunzova, Skladana, Pospisilova, Polcrova, Medina-Inojosa, Lopez-Jimenez, Geda and Stokin2020; Ran et al., Reference Ran, Wang, Ai, Kong, Chen and Kuang2020; Cenat et al., Reference Cenat, Noorishad, Kokou-Kpolou, Dalexis, Hajizadeh, Guerrier, Clormeus, Bukaka, Birangui, Adansikou, Ndengeyingoma, Sezibera, Derivois and Rousseau2021). Resilience is the process of effectively coping with uncertainty and hardship. Although this finding may be well-suited for designing interventions to mitigate the risk of depression and suicidal thinking, it remains to be further investigated who are these resilient people and what factors characterise resilience (Huisman et al., Reference Huisman, Klokgieters and Beekman2017). Furthermore, social support is among the best well-documented variables to influence suicidal behaviour (Calati et al., Reference Calati, Ferrari, Brittner, Oasi, Olie, Carvalho and Courtet2019; Hegerl and Heinz, Reference Hegerl and Heinz2019). Early research has also proposed a similar association between social support and suicidal ideation in the context of COVID-19 (Bryan et al., Reference Bryan, Bryan and Baker2020; Fitzpatrick et al., Reference Fitzpatrick, Harris and Drawve2020; Gratz et al., Reference Gratz, Tull, Richmond, Edmonds, Scamaldo and Rose2020; Papadopoulou et al., Reference Papadopoulou, Efstathiou, Yotsidi, Pomini, Michopoulos, Markopoulou, Papadopoulou, Tsigkaropoulou, Kalemi, Tournikioti, Douzenis and Gournellis2021). For instance, Gratz and colleagues (Reference Gratz, Tull, Richmond, Edmonds, Scamaldo and Rose2020), having analysed data from a nationwide community sample of 500 adults from 45 states, claimed that it is not loneliness but an absence of belongingness and significant connections that accounts for the association of the lockdown to a greater suicide risk. In this sense, Joiner's Interpersonal Theory of Suicide (Joiner et al., Reference Joiner, Brown and Wingate2005) proposed that the lack of social connectedness may lead to a potentially lethal suicidal attempt. More recently, Klonsky and May (Reference Klonsky and May2015) suggested that there is a three-step process towards suicidal attempts where connectedness protects against the escalation of ideation among individuals suffering both psychological pain and hopelessness.

It will take time to know what the ultimate impact of the COVID-19 outbreak is on mental health. The psychological toll of the pandemic is unquestionable, but the reality is complex. As the pandemic persists, its consequences are predicted to gradually appear, including rising unemployment, financial loss, reduced participation, or inadequate supplies derived from significant cuts in spending on social and health care. The effects on mental conditions are expected to stay and peak later, with variations across populations and nations (Brooks et al., Reference Brooks, Webster, Smith, Woodland, Wessely, Greenberg and Rubin2020; John et al., Reference John, Pirkis, Gunnell, Appleby and Morrissey2020; Ayuso-Mateos et al., Reference Ayuso-Mateos, Mediavilla, Rodriguez and Bravo2021). Continuous reinforcement of preventive and intervening mental health measures during and in the aftermath of the crisis is thus of global importance. In this regard, a position paper detailed several mental health research priorities in response to the demands of COVID-19 (Holmes et al., Reference Holmes, O'Connor, Perry, Tracey, Wessely, Arseneault, Ballard, Christensen, Cohen Silver, Everall, Ford, John, Kabir, King, Madan, Michie, Przybylski, Shafran, Sweeney, Worthman, Yardley, Cowan, Cope, Hotopf and Bullmore2020). These include the collection of high-quality data on the mental health effects of the pandemic across the whole population and vulnerable groups, together with the development, assessment and refinement of driven strategies to address its psychological, social and neuroscientific aspects.

Strengths and limitations

This research has an important number of strengths. First, the use of an adult population-based cohort following a probabilistic sampling approach. Moreover, this sample comprises subjects of all educational levels and age ranges, as compared to recent published studies that tend to over-represent highly educated people and under-represent the oldest population. Second, this study is one of the few including a baseline evaluation of the participants some months before the pandemic outbreak. Third, data from our study were collected through structured face-to-face home-based interviews and telephone interviews, unlike most prior studies, relying on web-based surveys instead. Fourth, we used a standardised assessment tool providing a clinical diagnosis of major depression, whereas the majority of previous research assessed depressive symptoms through screening tests or non-validated instruments. Finally, we used a large variety of validated instruments and sociodemographic variables to cover a broad-ranging research of potentially vulnerable groups. Our findings need to be also interpreted in the context of its shortcomings. As with all COVID-19-related research, the current study is limited by a short follow-up period, which reduced the power to evaluate the effects of the confinement on depression and suicidal behaviour. However, ours is an ongoing project that will provide information to a more comprehensive understanding of the changes in mental health in the mid- and long-terms. We also acknowledge that some measures were collected retrospectively through self-report, which may be affected by recall or reporting bias, especially for the longer recall period. Finally, as this survey did not intend to generate clinical diagnoses for all mental disorders, some individuals presenting for example bipolar disorder or schizophrenia may have been included in our analytical sample.

Conclusions

This pandemic has put at the forefront the imperative of taking care for others, particularly among vulnerable groups who are experiencing the most distress. Altogether, our results point to the value of the social factors as strongly associated with mental health conditions, with loneliness and social support maybe representing different risk pathways. Promoting sense of connectedness, experiences of companionship, and meaningful relationships show promise in mental health prevention, especially in times of physical distancing and lockdowns. Future research should strive to evaluate the long-lasting effects of the COVID-19 crisis on mental health.

Availability of data and materials

Data supporting the findings of this study are available upon a reasonable request.

Acknowledgements

E. L.'s work is supported by the Sara Borrell postdoctoral programme (CD18/00099) from the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (Spain) and co-funded by European Union (ERDF/ESF, ‘Investing in your future’). The authors sincerely appreciate the generous contribution of all the participants, which made this work possible.

Financial support

This work was funded by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (J. L. A. M., grant numbers PI16/00218 and PI19/00150), (J. M. H., grant number PI16/01073 and PI19/00088), (M. M., grant number PI19/00235), (B. O., gran number PI19/00103), the Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental (CIBERSAM), and by the European Union's Horizon 2020 under Grant Agreement No 101016127.

Conflict of interest

None.

Ethical standards

The protocols were approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Review Committees of both Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu (Barcelona), and Hospital Universitario La Princesa (Madrid). All participants provided written informed consent for their participation and the treatment of their personal data. The ones that participated in the post-measures period gave further verbal consent before the telephonic interview.

References

Albert, A and Anderson, JA (1984) On the existence of maximum likelihood estimates in logistic regression models. Biometrika 71, 10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, T and Bull, F (2006) Development of the World Health Organization global physical activity questionnaire (GPAQ). Journal of Public Health 14, 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayuso-Mateos, JL, Mediavilla, R, Rodriguez, KR and Bravo, MF (2021) Informing the response to COVID-19 in Spain: priorities for mental health research. Revista de Psiquiatria y Salud Mental 14, 4.Google ScholarPubMed
Balanzá-Martínez, V, Kapczinski, F, de Azevedo Cardoso, T, Atienza-Carbonell, B, Rosa, AR, Mota, JC, Jurema, C, Motak, L and De Boni, R (2020) The assessment of lifestyle changes during the COVID-19 pandemic using a multidimensional scale. Revista de Psiquiatría y Salud Mental 20, 11.Google Scholar
Brooks, SK, Webster, RK, Smith, LE, Woodland, L, Wessely, S, Greenberg, N and Rubin, GJ (2020) The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence. The Lancet 395, 912920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryan, CJ, Bryan, AO and Baker, JC (2020) Associations among state-level physical distancing measures and suicidal thoughts and behaviors among U.S. adults during the early COVID-19 pandemic. Suicide and Life Threatening Behavior 50, 12231229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bueno-Notivol, J, Gracia-Garcia, P, Olaya, B, Lasheras, I, Lopez-Anton, R and Santabarbara, J (2021) Prevalence of depression during the COVID-19 outbreak: a meta-analysis of community-based studies. International Journal of Clinical Health Psychology 21, 100196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Calati, R, Ferrari, C, Brittner, M, Oasi, O, Olie, E, Carvalho, AF and Courtet, P (2019) Suicidal thoughts and behaviors and social isolation: a narrative review of the literature. Journal of Affective Disorders 245, 653667.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cecchini, JA, Carriedo, A, Fernandez-Rio, J, Mendez-Gimenez, A, Gonzalez, C, Sanchez-Martinez, B and Rodriguez-Gonzalez, P (2021) A longitudinal study on depressive symptoms and physical activity during the Spanish lockdown. International Journal of Clinical Health Psychology 21, 100200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cenat, JM, Noorishad, PG, Kokou-Kpolou, CK, Dalexis, RD, Hajizadeh, S, Guerrier, M, Clormeus, LA, Bukaka, J, Birangui, JP, Adansikou, K, Ndengeyingoma, A, Sezibera, V, Derivois, D and Rousseau, C (2021) Prevalence and correlates of depression during the COVID-19 pandemic and the major role of stigmatization in low- and middle-income countries: a multinational cross-sectional study. Psychiatry Research 297, 113714.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chandola, T, Kumari, M, Booker, CL and Benzeval, M (2020) The mental health impact of COVID-19 and lockdown-related stressors among adults in the UK. Psychological Medicine, 110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Creese, B, Khan, Z, Henley, W, O'Dwyer, S, Corbett, A, Vasconcelos Da Silva, M, Mills, K, Wright, N, Testad, I, Aarsland, D and Ballard, C (2020) Loneliness, physical activity and mental health during COVID-19: a longitudinal analysis of depression and anxiety in adults over 50 between 2015 and 2020. International Psychogeriatrics, 121.Google ScholarPubMed
Dalgard, OS, Dowrick, C, Lehtinen, V, Vazquez-Barquero, JL, Casey, P, Wilkinson, G, Ayuso-Mateos, JL, Page, H and Dunn, G and The ODIN Group (2006) Negative life events, social support and gender difference in depression. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology 41, 8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Daly, M, Sutin, AR and Robinson, E (2020) Longitudinal changes in mental health and the COVID-19 pandemic: evidence from the UK household longitudinal study. Psychological Medicine, 110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
de la Torre-Luque, A, de la Fuente, J, Prina, M, Sanchez-Niubo, A, Haro, JM and Ayuso-Mateos, JL (2019) Long-term trajectories of depressive symptoms in old age: relationships with sociodemographic and health-related factors. Journal of Affective Disorders 246, 329337.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
de la Torre-Luque, A, Lara, E, de la Fuente, J, Rico-Uribe, LA, Caballero, FF, Lopez-Garcia, P, Sanchez-Niubo, A, Bobak, M, Koskinen, S, Haro, JM and Ayuso-Mateos, JL (2021) Metabolic dysregulation in older adults with depression and loneliness: the ATHLOS study. Psychoneuroendocrinology 123, 104918.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Faust, JS, Shah, SB, Du, C, Li, SX, Lin, Z and Krumholz, HM (2021) Suicide deaths during the COVID-19 stay-at-home advisory in Massachusetts, March to May 2020. JAMA Network Open 4, e2034273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitzpatrick, KM, Harris, C and Drawve, G (2020) How bad is it? Suicidality in the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic. Suicide and Life Threatening Behavior 50, 12411249.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
García-Esquinas, E, Ortolá, R, Gine-Vázquez, I, Carnicero, JA, Mañas, A, Lara, E, Alvarez-Bustos, A, Vicente-Rodriguez, G, Sotos-Prieto, M, Olaya, B, José Garcia-Garcia, F, Gusi, N, Banegas, JR, Rodríguez-Gómez, I, Struijk, EA, Martínez-Gómez, D, Lana, A, María Haro, J, Ayuso-Mateos, JL, Rodríguez-Mañas, L, Ara, I, Miret, M and Rodríguez-Artalejo, F (2021) Changes in health behaviors, mental and physical health among older adults under severe lockdown restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain. medRxiv: 2021.2002.2015.21251738.Google Scholar
Garcia-Fernandez, L, Romero-Ferreiro, V, Lopez-Roldan, PD, Padilla, S and Rodriguez-Jimenez, R (2020) Mental health in elderly Spanish people in times of COVID-19 outbreak. American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 28, 10401045.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gonzalez-Sanguino, C, Ausin, B, Castellanos, MA, Saiz, J and Munoz, M (2020) Mental health consequences of the COVID-19 outbreak in Spain. A longitudinal study of the alarm situation and return to the new normality. Progress in Neuropsychopharmacology & Biological Psychiatry, 110219.Google Scholar
Gratz, KL, Tull, MT, Richmond, JR, Edmonds, KA, Scamaldo, KM and Rose, JP (2020) Thwarted belongingness and perceived burdensomeness explain the associations of COVID-19 social and economic consequences to suicide risk. Suicide and Life Threatening Behavior 50, 11401148.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gutiérrez-Rojas, L, Porras-Segovia, A, Dunne, H, Andrade-González, N and Cervilla, JA (2020) Prevalence and correlates of major depressive disorder: a systematic review. Brazilian Journal of Psychiatry 42, 657672.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hawkley, LC and Cacioppo, JT (2010) Loneliness matters: a theoretical and empirical review of consequences and mechanisms. Annals of Behavioral Medicine 40, 218227.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hegerl, U and Heinz, I (2019) Reflections on causes of suicidal behaviour. Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences 28, 469472.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holmes, EA, O'Connor, RC, Perry, VH, Tracey, I, Wessely, S, Arseneault, L, Ballard, C, Christensen, H, Cohen Silver, R, Everall, I, Ford, T, John, A, Kabir, T, King, K, Madan, I, Michie, S, Przybylski, AK, Shafran, R, Sweeney, A, Worthman, CM, Yardley, L, Cowan, K, Cope, C, Hotopf, M and Bullmore, E (2020) Multidisciplinary research priorities for the COVID-19 pandemic: a call for action for mental health science. The Lancet Psychiatry 7, 547560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, ME, Waite, LJ, Hawkley, LC and Cacioppo, JT (2004) A short scale for measuring loneliness in large surveys: results from two population-based studies. Research on Aging 26, 8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huisman, M, Klokgieters, SS and Beekman, ATF (2017) Successful ageing, depression and resilience research; a call for a priori approaches to investigations of resilience. Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences 26, 574578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyland, P, Shevlin, M, McBride, O, Murphy, J, Karatzias, T, Bentall, RP, Martinez, A and Vallieres, F (2020) Anxiety and depression in the republic of Ireland during the COVID-19 pandemic. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 142, 249256.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
John, A, Pirkis, J, Gunnell, D, Appleby, L and Morrissey, J (2020) Trends in suicide during the COVID-19 pandemic. British Medical Journal 371, m4352.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Joiner, TE Jr., Brown, JS and Wingate, LR. (2005) The psychology and neurobiology of suicidal behavior. Annual Review of Psychology 56: 287314.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Justo-Alonso, A, García-Dantas, A, González-Vázquez, A, Sánchez-Martín, M and Del Río-Casanova, L (2020) How did different generations cope with the COVID-19 pandemic? Early stages of the pandemic in Spain. Psicothema 32, 11.Google ScholarPubMed
Kantor, BN and Kantor, J (2020) Mental health outcomes and associations during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional population-based study in the United States. Frontiers in Psychiatry 11, 569083.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kessler, RC and Ustün, TB (2004) The World Mental Health (WMH) survey initiative version of the world health organization (WHO) Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research 13, 9.Google Scholar
Killgore, WDS, Taylor, EC, Cloonan, SA and Dailey, NS (2020) Psychological resilience during the COVID-19 lockdown. Psychiatry Research 291, 113216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klonsky, ED and May, AM (2015) The three-step theory (3ST): a new theory of suicide rooted in the ‘ideation-to-action’ framework. International Journal of Cognitive Therapy 8, 16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kwong, ASF, Pearson, RM, Adams, MJ, Northstone, K, Tilling, K, Smith, D, Fawns-Ritchie, C, Bould, H, Warne, N, Zammit, S, Gunnell, DJ, Moran, PA, Micali, N, Reichenberg, A, Hickman, M, Rai, D, Haworth, S, Campbell, A, Altschul, D, Flaig, R, McIntosh, AM, Lawlor, DA, Porteous, D and Timpson, NJ (2020) Mental health before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in two longitudinal UK population cohorts. British Journal of Psychiatry, 110.Google ScholarPubMed
Lara, E, Caballero, FF, Rico-Uribe, LA, Olaya, B, Haro, JM, Ayuso-Mateos, JL and Miret, M (2019) Are loneliness and social isolation associated with cognitive decline? International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 34, 16131622.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, SL, Pearce, E, Ajnakina, O, Johnson, S, Lewis, G, Mann, F, Pitman, A, Solmi, F, Sommerlad, A, Steptoe, A, Tymoszuk, U and Lewis, G (2021) The association between loneliness and depressive symptoms among adults aged 50 years and older: a 12-year population-based cohort study. The Lancet Psychiatry 8, 4857.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lenzo, V, Quattropani, MC, Musetti, A, Zenesini, C, Freda, MF, Lemmo, D, Vegni, E, Borghi, L, Plazzi, G, Castelnuovo, G, Cattivelli, R, Saita, E and Franceschini, C (2020) Resilience contributes to Low emotional impact of the COVID-19 outbreak Among the general population in Italy. Frontiers in Psychology 11, 576485.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Losada-Baltar, A, Martinez-Huertas, JA, Jimenez-Gonzalo, L, Pedroso-Chaparro, MDS, Gallego-Alberto, L, Fernandes-Pires, J and Marquez-Gonzalez, M (2021) Longitudinal correlates of loneliness and psychological distress during the lockdown situation due to COVID-19. Effects of age and self-perceptions of aging. Journal of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luciano, JV, Ayuso-Mateos, JL, Aguado, J, Fernandez, A, Serrano-Blanco, A, Roca, M and Haro, JM (2010) The 12-item world health organization disability assessment schedule II (WHO-DAS II): a nonparametric item response analysis. BMC Medical Research Methodology 10, 45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lumley, T (2004) Analysis of complex survey samples. Journal of Statistical Software 9, 19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGinty, EE, Presskreischer, R, Anderson, KE, Han, H and Barry, CL (2020a) Psychological distress and COVID-19-related stressors reported in a longitudinal cohort of US adults in April and July 2020. JAMA 324, 25552557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGinty, EE, Presskreischer, R, Han, H and Barry, CL (2020b) Psychological distress and loneliness reported by US adults in 2018 and April 2020. JAMA 324, 9394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miret, M, Caballero, FF, Chatterji, S, Olaya, B, Tobiasz-Adamczyk, B, Koskinen, S, Leonardi, M, Haro, JM and Ayuso-Mateos, JL (2014) Health and happiness: cross-sectional household surveys in Finland, Poland and Spain. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 92, 10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mortier, P, Vilagut, G, Ferrer, M, Alayo, I, Bruffaerts, R, Cristóbal-Narváez, P, del Cura-González, I, Domènech-Abella, J, Felez-Nobrega, M, Olaya, B, Pijoan, JI, Vieta, E, Pérez-Solà, V, Kessler, RC, Haro, JM and Alonso, J (2021) Thirty-day suicidal thoughts and behaviours in the Spanish adult general population during the first wave of the Spain COVID-19 pandemic. Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences 30, e19.Google Scholar
Niedzwiedz, CL, Green, MJ, Benzeval, M, Campbell, D, Craig, P, Demou, E, Leyland, A, Pearce, A, Thomson, R, Whitley, E and Katikireddi, SV (2021) Mental health and health behaviours before and during the initial phase of the COVID-19 lockdown: longitudinal analyses of the UK household longitudinal study. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 75(3), 224231.Google ScholarPubMed
Novotny, JS, Gonzalez-Rivas, JP, Kunzova, S, Skladana, M, Pospisilova, A, Polcrova, A, Medina-Inojosa, JR, Lopez-Jimenez, F, Geda, YE and Stokin, GB (2020) Risk factors underlying COVID-19 lockdown-induced mental distress. Frontiers in Psychiatry 11, 603014.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'Connor, RC, Wetherall, K, Cleare, S, McClelland, H, Melson, AJ, Niedzwiedz, CL, O'Carroll, RE, O'Connor, DB, Platt, S, Scowcroft, E, Watson, B, Zortea, T, Ferguson, E and Robb, KA (2020) Mental health and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic: longitudinal analyses of adults in the UK COVID-19 mental health & wellbeing study. British Journal of Psychiatry, 18.Google ScholarPubMed
Palgi, Y, Shrira, A, Ring, L, Bodner, E, Avidor, S, Bergman, Y, Cohen-Fridel, S, Keisari, S and Hoffman, Y (2020) The loneliness pandemic: loneliness and other concomitants of depression, anxiety and their comorbidity during the COVID-19 outbreak. Journal of Affective Disorders 275, 109111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Papadopoulou, A, Efstathiou, V, Yotsidi, V, Pomini, V, Michopoulos, I, Markopoulou, E, Papadopoulou, M, Tsigkaropoulou, E, Kalemi, G, Tournikioti, K, Douzenis, A and Gournellis, R (2021) Suicidal ideation during COVID-19 lockdown in Greece: prevalence in the community, risk and protective factors. Psychiatry Research 297, 113713.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paykel, ES, Brugha, T and Fryers, T (2005) Size and burden of depressive disorders in Europe. European Neuropsychopharmacology 15, 411423.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pérez, S, Masegoso, A and Hernández-Espeso, N (2020) Levels and variables associated with psychological distress during confinement due to the coronavirus pandemic in a community sample of Spanish adults. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierce, M, Hope, H, Ford, T, Hatch, S, Hotopf, M, John, A, Kontopantelis, E, Webb, R, Wessely, S, McManus, S and Abel, KM (2020) Mental health before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal probability sample survey of the UK population. The Lancet Psychiatry 7, 883892.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Planchuelo-Gomez, A, Odriozola-Gonzalez, P, Irurtia, MJ and de Luis-Garcia, R (2020) Longitudinal evaluation of the psychological impact of the COVID-19 crisis in Spain. Journal of Affective Disorders 277, 842849.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Portella Fontes, A and Liberalesso Neri, A (2015) Resilience in aging: literature review. Ciência Saúde Coletiva 20, 20.Google Scholar
Prati, G and Mancini, AD (2021) The psychological impact of COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns: a review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies and natural experiments. Psychological Medicine 51(2), 201211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ran, L, Wang, W, Ai, M, Kong, Y, Chen, J and Kuang, L (2020) Psychological resilience, depression, anxiety, and somatization symptoms in response to COVID-19: a study of the general population in China at the peak of its epidemic. Social Science & Medicine 262, 113261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rao, JNK and Scott, AJ (1984) On chi-squared tests for multiway contingency tables with cell proportions estimated from survey data. The Annals of Statistics 12, 15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R Core Team (2019) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Available at: https://www.R-project.org/.Google Scholar
Real Decreto (10/2020) Real Decreto 10/2020, de 29 de marzo, por el que se regula un permiso retribuido recuperable para las personas trabajadoras por cuenta ajena que no presten servicios esenciales, con el fin de reducir la movilidad de la población en el contexto de la lucha contra el COVID-19.Google Scholar
Real Decreto (463/2020) Real Decreto 463/2020, de 14 de marzo, por el que se declara el estado de alarma para la gestión de la situación de crisis sanitaria ocasionada por el COVID-19.Google Scholar
Rodríguez-Rey, R, Alonso-Tapia, J and Hernansaiz-Garrido, H (2016) Reliability and validity of the brief resilience scale (BRS) Spanish version. Psychological Assessment 28, 10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Somma, A, Krueger, RF, Markon, KE, Gialdi, G, Colanino, M, Ferlito, D, Liotta, C, Frau, C and Fossati, A (2020) A longitudinal study on clinically relevant self-reported depression, anxiety and acute stress features among Italian community-dwelling adults during the COVID-19 related lockdown: evidence of a predictive role for baseline dysfunctional personality dimensions. Journal of Affective Disorders 282, 364371.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spanish Statistical Office (2021) Deaths according to cause of death – Advance January–May 2019 and 2020. Retrieved from: https://www.ine.es/en/prensa/edcm_ene_may_19_20_en.pdf.Google Scholar
Tanaka, T and Okamoto, S (2021) Increase in suicide following an initial decline during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan. Nature Human Behavior 5(2), 229238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Valiente, C, Contreras, A, Peinado, V, Trucharte, A, Martínez, AP and Vázquez, C (2021) Psychological adjustment in Spain during the COVID-19 pandemic: positive and negative mental health outcomes in the general population. The Spanish Journal of Psychology 24, e8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van den Brink, RHS, Schutter, N, Hanssen, DJC, Elzinga, BM, Rabeling-Keus, IM, Stek, ML, Comijs, HC, Penninx, B and Oude Voshaar, RC (2018) Prognostic significance of social network, social support and loneliness for course of major depressive disorder in adulthood and old age. Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences 27, 266277.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van der Velden, PG, Contino, C, Das, M, van Loon, P and Bosmans, MWG (2020) Anxiety and depression symptoms, and lack of emotional support among the general population before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. A prospective national study on prevalence and risk factors. Journal of Affective Disorders 277, 540548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van der Velden, PG, Hyland, P, Contino, C, von Gaudecker, HM, Muffels, R and Das, M (2021) Anxiety and depression symptoms, the recovery from symptoms, and loneliness before and after the COVID-19 outbreak among the general population: findings from a Dutch population-based longitudinal study. PLoS One 16, e0245057.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, C, Pan, R, Wan, X, Tan, Y, Xu, L, McIntyre, RS, Choo, FN, Tran, B, Ho, R, Sharma, VK and Ho, C (2020) A longitudinal study on the mental health of general population during the COVID-19 epidemic in China. Brain Behavior and Immunity 87, 4048.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Winkler, P, Formanek, T, Mlada, K, Kagstrom, A, Mohrova, Z, Mohr, P and Csemy, L (2020) Increase in prevalence of current mental disorders in the context of COVID-19: analysis of repeated nationwide cross-sectional surveys. Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences 29, e173.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
World Health Organization (1993) The ICD-10 Classification of Mental and Behavioural Disorders. Diagnostic Criteria for Research. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1. Sociodemographic and health characteristics before and after the confinement

Figure 1

Table 2. Prevalence rate estimates in the pre- and post-measures of depression and suicidal ideation, for the population and disaggregated by sex and group age

Figure 2

Table 3. Logistic regression model of depression after the confinement in participants without depression before the confinement

Figure 3

Table 4. Logistic regression model of suicidal ideation after the confinement in participants without suicidal ideation before the confinement

You have Access
Open access
10
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Changes in depression and suicidal ideation under severe lockdown restrictions during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain: a longitudinal study in the general population
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Changes in depression and suicidal ideation under severe lockdown restrictions during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain: a longitudinal study in the general population
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Changes in depression and suicidal ideation under severe lockdown restrictions during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain: a longitudinal study in the general population
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *