Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Globalization and Health 1/2020

Open Access 01.12.2020 | COVID-19 | Research

The influence of concern about COVID-19 on mental health in the Republic of Georgia: a cross-sectional study

verfasst von: Nino Makhashvili, Jana Darejan Javakhishvili, Lela Sturua, Ketevan Pilauri, Daniela C. Fuhr, Bayard Roberts

Erschienen in: Globalization and Health | Ausgabe 1/2020

Abstract

Background

Early evidence indicates increased mental health burden arising from COVID-19 and related control measures. The study aim was to examine concern about COVID-19 and its association with symptoms of mental disorders in the Republic of Georgia.
A cross-sectional internet-based survey of adults in Georgia using non-probabilistic sampling was used. Questionnaire topics were: (i) demographic and socio-economic characteristics; (ii) level of burden caused by common causes of COVID-19 related concerns; (iii) strategies used in response to concerns about COVID-19; and (iv) symptoms of mental disorders of anxiety (GAD-7), depression (PHQ-9), PTSD (ITQ) and adjustment disorder (ADNM8). Descriptive and multivariate analyses were conducted.

Results

There were 2088 respondents. High levels of symptoms for mental disorders were observed for anxiety (23.9% women, 21.0% men), depression (30.3% women, 25.27% men), PTSD (11.8% women, and 12.5% men), and adjustment disorder (40.7% women, 31.0% men). Factors significantly associated with increased COVID-19 concern included bad/very bad household economic situation, larger household size, current NCD, symptoms of anxiety, adjustment disorder and PTSD. Response strategies significantly associated with reduced mental disorder symptoms included meditation and relaxation exercises, physical exercise, positive thinking, planning for the future, TV/radio, housework/DIY, and working. Drinking alcohol was associated with a greater probability of increased mental disorder symptoms.

Conclusions

High levels of mental disorders were recorded, and they were strongly associated with increased concern about COVID-19. A number of response strategies were identified which may help protect against worse mental health and these could be supported by innovations in mental health care in Georgia.

Introduction

Rapid public health responses to pandemics such as COVID-19 involving physical distancing and other infection prevention and control measures are effective in reducing risk of exposure or infection and thereby avoiding deaths and disability [1]. However, early reports from China on COVID-19 also indicate that they may increase the mental health burden in the location where lockdown is enforced [2, 3]. A recent meta-analysis on mental health and COVID-19 among the general population in China estimates the prevalence of anxiety to be around 31.9%, and depression to be around 33.7% respectively [3]. It is assumed that those symptoms of mental disorders are partly caused by the imposed physical distancing measures leading to social isolation and a break-down of social networks [4, 5]. These findings confirm those of earlier infectious disease outbreaks such as for Ebola, Swine flu and SARS in which increased psychological distress including symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorders (PTSD), depression and anxiety were reported as well [68]. The economic downturn and reduced earnings following lockdown might further exacerbate psychological distress, and increase vulnerability of populations with lower socio-economic status; and similarly for those with pre-existing physical illnesses [4, 5, 911]. A disproportionate mental health effect from COVID-19 may also be seen in people who already have a mental disorder, and this may lead to relapse and worsening of prognosis if disruptions in their mental health care are experienced [11, 12]. Other outcomes such as symptoms of PTSD and adjustment disorders might also be occurring in people who have traumatic experiences related to COVID-19 including the deaths of family or friends, or the inability to care for sick family members [12]. More direct neuropsychiatric sequalae of COVID-19 on mental health are expected as well [13]. Recent evidence shows that coronaviruses may also affect the central nervous system leading to a significant psychiatric and neuro-psychiatric burden among infected individuals in the acute or post-illness stage [7, 13]. This may include neuro-psychiatric conditions such as confusion, impaired memory, or insomnia in addition to heightened PTSD, depression and anxiety in individuals who have survived severe illness [7, 8]. It is important to better understand the how COVID-19 and related control measures are influencing mental health and what coping strategies individuals utilise in response [5].
Georgia, a country located at the intersection of Europe and Asia, took early public health measures to limit the spread of the virus (details are provided in Additional file 1: Online Annex 1) [14]. This included suspension of flights from major hotspots such as China and Iran in the early months of 2020, and a declaration of a public health emergency in March 2020 which triggered the closure of schools and universities, cancellation of cultural and sport events, and the shutdown of non-essential businesses including restaurants and bars [15]. Gatherings of more than three people were prohibited, and movement restrictions were enforced by erecting checkpoints in Tbilisi and other larger cities in the country [14]. This led to suppression of the virus when case numbers were still manageable; at the end of our survey, Georgia reported around 1000 cases of COVID-19, and 15 deaths [16]. Due to high demand from the population, a national mental health hotline was introduced. However, the impact of COVID-19 on population’s mental health may still be profound [17, 18]. Georgia has a high burden of neuropsychiatric disorders, amounting to 22.8% of the burden of disease pre-COVID-19 [19]. The mental health system of Georgia is under reform but the treatment gap is still wide [20, 21]. The burden of mental disorders and treatment gap may further worsen in the context of COVID-19. The wider research community and the Inter-Agency Standing Committee of the United Nations have called for immediate monitoring to assess the mental health pandemic across countries and more vulnerable populations groups [9, 11, 22]. This may aid understanding of mechanisms of impact and support detecting factors which may be modifiable, in order to help enable secondary prevention and recovery [9].
The aim of this study is to examine concern about COVID-19 and its association with symptoms of mental disorders in the Republic of Georgia. The specific objectives are to examine: (i) the frequency and perceived burden of COVID-19 related concerns; (ii) how concerns about COVID-19 may influence levels of mental disorder symptoms; (iii) what factors are associated with these concerns; and (iv) what individual coping strategies are used to respond to these concerns and how they may influence levels of mental disorder symptoms.

Methods

A cross-sectional internet-based survey design was used. The population of interest was the general population in Georgia aged 18 years and above. A non-probabilistic sampling design was used. While random sampling would clearly have been preferable, it was not possible to obtain mobile phone records or other types of data required for the sampling frame during the lockdown period in Georgia. The use of a non-probabilistic sample means the data are not nationally representative and do not provide reliable prevalence data. However, basic descriptive analyses and explorations of potential associations can be appropriate in such surveys [23] and were used in the majority of previous surveys on mental health and COVID-19 which were conducted so far [24]. For the recruitment, survey weblinks were shared through social and traditional media, key health agencies in Georgia, and investigator networks (see Additional file 2: Online Annex 2 for further details on the recruitment strategy).
The study questionnaire consisted of questions on: (i) background demographic and socio-economic characteristics (e.g. age, sex, education, employment, income-level, socio-economic status); (ii) 19 questions on the level of burden caused by common causes of COVID-19 related concerns over the previous 1 month (developed through consultation and piloting - see results section for items); (iii) individual coping strategies used in response to concerns about COVID-19 (adapted from COPE and through piloting – see results section for items) with a recall period of since the beginning of the COVID-19 crisis in Georgia (February 2020); and (iv) symptoms of mental disorders of anxiety, depression, PTSD and adjustment disorder. Anxiety was measured using the Generalised Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) instrument which consists of 7 questions on anxiety symptoms over the last 2 weeks, with the same response options and scoring as the PHQ-9 which produces a total score range of 0–21, with the GAD-7’s suggested cut-off of ≥10 used to indicate symptoms of at least moderate anxiety [25]. Depression was measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) which consists of 9 questions on depression symptoms over the last 2 weeks, with responses of ‘not at all’ (=0), ‘several days’ (=1), ‘more than half the days’ (=2), and ‘nearly every day’ (=3), with item scores summed to produce a total score range of 0–27, with the PHQ-9’s suggested cut-off of ≥10 used to indicate symptoms of at least moderate depression [26]. PTSD was measured using an adapted version of the International Trauma Questionnaire (ITQ) with respondents asked 8 questions about emotional reactions to COVID-19, covering symptom clusters of re- experiencing in the here and now, avoidance, sense of current threat; and functional impairment associated with these symptoms. Response options ranged from ‘not at all’ to ‘extremely’; and overall symptoms of PTSD required endorsement of one of two symptoms from the three symptom clusters plus endorsement of at least one indicator of functional impairment [27]. Adjustment disorder was measured using an adapted version of the Adjustment Disorder – New Module 8 (ADNM 8), with 8 questions asked about emotional reactions to COVID-19, with response options of 1 to 4 for each questions and a total score of 8 to 32 covering two main clusters of preoccupation related to the stressor and failure to adapt to the stressor, with a cut-off used of 18.5 as recommended elsewhere [28, 29]. The mental health outcome measures were selected as they have been widely used in a number of settings, including in Georgia [30, 31]. They also showed good internal reliability, with Cronbach alpha scores ranging from 0.89 to 0.91 for the four measures. Results on tests on construct validity were also good. For example, tests on factor analysis showed single factors for each of GAD-7, PHQ-9 and ITQ; while ADNM-8 showed two factors corresponding with the two dimensions around pre-occupation with stressor and failure to adapt.
The questionnaire was first developed in English between the co-investigators and shared with other mental health experts in Georgia for review. It was then translated into Georgian language using standard questionnaire translation methods [32], and piloted with 19 participants to examine feasibility, clarity, errors, and ethical issues. It was hosted on the Jisc online survey platform (https://​www.​jisc.​ac.​uk) and launched on 25 May 2020 and closed on 25 June 2020.
Data analysis was conducted using Stata 16 (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA). It included descriptive analysis of the study sample, levels of symptoms of mental disorders, the frequency and burden of concern about COVID-19, and strategies used by respondents in response to COVID-19 related concerns.
Multivariate regression analysis was conducted for two main purposes. First, to examine the factors associated with an outcome of greater burden of concern about COVID-19. The dependent variable of greater burden of concern about COVID-19 was developed by totalling the scores from the 19 questions on the level of burden from individual COVID-19 concern items which each had 4 response options ranging from ‘no concern at all’ (=1) to ‘strongly burdened’ (=4), resulting in a score range from 19 to 76. The independent variables were selected by initial testing through univariate analysis and those showing a significant association with the dependent variable (P < 0.05) were entered into the full model and backward stepwise regression analysis was then used to select the final significant variables (P < 0.05). The second use of regression analysis was to examine associations between response strategies to concern about COVID-19 (independent variables) with symptoms of mental disorders (‘dependent variable). Separate multivariate models were run for each response strategy and the different mental disorders using the cut-offs noted above, adjusting for gender, age, education, household economic status, household size, and having an existing mental disorder.
Ethics approval was provided by the National Centre for Disease Control and Public Health in Georgia.

Results

There were 2088 respondents and the sample characteristics are provided in Table 1. Women comprised 1807 (86.5%) of the study sample. 23.4% of women and 19.2% of men were aged over 50 years. Over two-thirds of the study sample lived in Tbilisi and one-fifth considered their household situation was bad or very bad (with no significant difference between women and men). High levels of symptoms for mental disorders were observed for anxiety (23.9% women, 21.0% men), depression (30.3% women, 25.27% men), PTSD (11.8% women, and 12.5% men), and adjustment disorder (40.7% women, 31.0% men). 14.8% of women and 15.6% of men in the study sample had previously been diagnosed with a mental disorder. Of note, of the 953 respondents who had symptoms of any mental disorder in our study, 23.2% had previously been diagnosed with a mental disorder. Further data on mental disorder symptom scores are provided in Additional file 3: Online Annex 3, and Additional file 4: Online Annex 4 provides data separated out by previous mental health diagnosis status.
Table 1
Sample Characteristics, by gender (N = 2088)
 
Women
Men
N
%
N
%
Total
1807
86.54
281
13.46
Age groups:
 18–39
996
55.12
182
64.77
 40–49
388
21.47
45
16.01
 50–59
300
16.60
27
9.61
 60–69
111
6.14
22
7.83
 70 and over
12
0.66
5
1.78
Education:
 Incomplete secondary
27
1.49
8
2.85
 Completed secondary
98
5.42
18
6.41
 Incomplete higher education
300
16.6
46
16.37
 Completed higher education
1382
76.48
209
74.38
Living location:
 Tbilisi
1255
69.45
193
68.68
 Regional Centre
398
22.03
66
23.49
 Village
154
8.52
22
7.83
Household economic situation:
 Very good
26
1.45
12
4.27
 Good
319
17.81
50
17.79
 Average
1115
62.26
160
56.94
 Bad
263
14.68
50
17.79
 Very bad
68
3.80
9
3.20
Symptoms of mental disorders:a
 Anxiety
432
23.91
59
21.00
 Depression
548
30.33
71
25.27
 PTSD
213
11.79
35
12.46
 Adjustment Disorder
736
40.73
87
30.96b
 Previously diagnosed with a mental disorder
260
14.81
42
15.61
Current NCDs:
 Diagnosed diabetes
42
2.32
10
3.56
 Diagnosed hypertension
146
8.08
23
8.19
 Diagnosed cardiovascular disease
53
2.93
12
4.27
 Diagnosed cancer
20
1.11
2
0.71
 Respiratory illness
66
4.00
12
4.27
aGAD-7 anxiety score > 9; PHQ-9 depression score > 9; ADNM 8 adjustment disorder score > 18.4; see methods section for PTSD (ITQ) scoring and further details
bStatistically significant difference between women and men at P < 0.05 (Chi2)
Respondents were also asked about changes in their smoking and alcohol use since COVID-19 lockdown measures were introduced (data not shown in tables). For smoking, 34.6% of women and 19.9% men reported increased rates of smoking, whereas 18.8% women and 18.4% men reported decreased rates (with the remaining respondents reporting about the same levels of use). In contrast, 13.5% women and 12.2% men reported more alcohol use since lock-down measures were introduced, while 35.6% women and 38.6% men reported reduced use of alcohol (with the remaining respondents reporting about the same levels of use).
The findings on the major causes of concern related to COVID-19 are provided in Table 2. The most frequent major causes of concern were related to infecting loved ones and others with COVID-19, uncertainty about duration and risks of COVID-19, income loss, restricted contract with family and friends, being socially isolated, being at home, and restrictions on daily activities.
Table 2
Number of respondents feeling ‘strongly burdened’ by individual concerns related to COVID-19 (N = 2088)
 
Women (N = 1807)
Men
(N = 281)
N
%
N
%
Loved ones get infected with C19
1116
62.17
149
53.41a
Infecting others with C19
833
48.86
117
44.15
Uncertainty about duration and risks of C19 pandemic
835
46.41
99
35.61a
Income loss
663
44.26
96
39.67
Restricted contact with family, friends etc
779
43.45
119
44.40
Being socially isolated
628
35.42
87
32.10
Being at home
616
35.59
87
34.12
Restricted everyday activities
505
28.32
81
29.67
No place of retreat
430
27.78
60
24.79
Insufficient capacity of intensive care
355
26.49
51
22.37
Becoming infected
457
25.33
42
15.00a
Restricted home space
359
22.52
51
20.65
Childcare
194
18.87
20
12.27a
Poor information from authorities
303
17.23
45
16.61
Home working
202
16.96
24
12.57
Restricted access to food and essential goods
239
13.73
34
12.55
Conflict at home
159
12.10
22
11.06
Access to routine healthcare
204
11.99
28
10.73
Violence at home
34
3.66
8
5.30
Denominator reduced in some responses as question may not be applicable to all (e.g. childcare)
aStatistically significant difference between women and men at P < 0.05 (Chi2)
The mean COVID concern score was 43.15 [95% CI 42.69 to 43.60] out of a potential range of 19 to 76. For women the mean score was 43.37 [95% CI 42.88 to 43.86] and for men it was 41.71 [95% CI 40.45 to 42.97). The factors associated with increased concern about COVID-19 identified through the multivariate regression analysis are shown in Table 3. A bad or very bad household economic situation showed a significant association with greater COVID-19 concern (Coef. 2.66 [95% CI 1.36 to 3.96) (i.e. it was associated with a 2.66 change in the mean score of concern about COVID-19), as did living in a larger household size (rising to Coef. 4.58 [95% 2.99 to 6.16]). Having a current non-communicable disease (NCD) was associated with greater concern (Coef. 1.28 [95% 0.08 to 2.49]). Having symptoms of mental disorders was strongly associated with greater concern about COVID-19, with anxiety the strongest (Coef. 5.62 [95% 4.45 to 6.79]), then adjustment disorder (Coef. 4.57 [95% 3.60 to 5.55]), and then PTSD (Coef. 2.78 [95% 1.40 to 4.16]). Neither depression nor prior diagnosis with a mental disorder showed a statistically significant association in the multivariate model. The factors associated with less concern about COVID-19 were increasing age (but not for those aged 70 and above) and being in a higher-risk occupation (Coef. -1.65 [95% -2.69 to − 0.60]) such as a health worker, social worker, transport driver, or essential shop worker.
Table 3
Factors associated with concern about COVID-19 (N = 2058)
 
Coef.
P
[95% Conf. Interval]
Age:
 18–39
Ref
   
 40–49
−0.50
0.33
[−1.51;
0.50]
 50–59
−2.80
< 0.01
[−3.97;
−1.62]
 60–69
−4.14
< 0.01
[−5.87;
−2.42]
 70 and over
−1.23
0.59
[−5.70;
3.25]
Household economic situation:
 Very good or good
Ref
   
 Average
0.07
0.89
[−0.94;
1.08]
 Bad or very bad
2.66
< 0.01
[1.36;
3.96]
Household size:
 1 person
Ref
   
 2 persons
1.12
0.22
[−0.66;
2.90]
 3 persons
3.67
< 0.01
[2.02;
5.31]
 4 persons
3.16
< 0.01
[1.54;
4.79]
 5 or more persons
4.58
< 0.01
[2.99;
6.16]
General health status:
 Very good
Ref
   
 Good
2.59
< 0.01
[1.29;
3.88]
 Average
3.61
< 0.01
[2.21;
5.00]
 Bad
1.64
0.15
[−0.57;
3.86]
 Very bad
3.17
0.28
[−2.59;
8.93]
Higher risk occupation:
 No
Ref
   
 Yes
−1.65
< 0.01
[− 2.69;
−0.60]
Current NCDs:
 No NCD
Ref
   
 Any NCDa
1.28
0.04
[0.08;
2.49]
Symptoms of mental disorders: b
 Anxiety
5.62
< 0.01
[4.45;
6.79]
 Adjustment disorder
4.57
< 0.01
[3.60;
5.55]
 PTSD
2.78
< 0.01
[1.40;
4.16]
Results are adjusted for other variables in table using backward stepwise multivariate regression (R-Squared = 0.30)
aOne or more of diabetes, hypertension, CVD, or cancer
bGAD-7 anxiety score > 9; PHQ-9 depression score > 9; ADNM 8 adjustment disorder score > 18.4; see methods section for PTSD (ITQ) scoring. Reference category is no mental disorders
The individual coping strategies used by respondents to help address their concerns about COVID-19 are shown in Table 4. The most common strategies were: seeking emotional support by speaking with family and friends (55.6% women, 43.42% men); reading, watching TV or listening to the radio (54.4% women, 60.1% men); doing housework or DIY (46.2% women, 36.6% men); working (36.9% women, 43.4% men); using social media (36.6% women, 45.9% men); and taking exercise (35.4% women, and 39.2% men).
Table 4
Frequencies of response strategies used to address concern about COVID-19 (by gender), and their association with mental health disorder symptoms
Response strategy
Frequencies (N = 2088)
Association with mental health disorder symptoms (N = 2011) b
Women
Men
Anxiety c
Depressionc
PTSDc
Adjustment disorderc
N
%
N
%
OR
P
OR
P
OR
P
OR
P
Emotional support and expression:
 Emotional support by speaking with family/friends
1005
55.62
122
43.42a
0.71
< 0.01
0.88
0.25
0.80
0.13
1.06
0.55
 Going to church/praying
244
13.50
26
9.25a
0.77
0.16
0.77
0.12
0.99
0.96
0.73
0.04
 Expressing my negative feelings /crying/arguing/being aggressive
236
13.06
20
7.12a
4.42
< 0.01
4.45
< 0.01
4.42
< 0.01
4.14
< 0.01
Positive thinking and helping others:
 Looking for something good in what is happening
591
32.71
85
30.25
0.41
< 0.01
0.60
< 0.01
0.63
0.01
0.63
< 0.01
 Planning for the future, considering facts of changed reality
576
31.88
109
38.79a
0.63
< 0.01
0.73
0.01
0.59
0.00
0.84
0.08
 Helping others
530
29.33
81
28.83
0.79
0.07
0.81
0.07
0.96
0.79
0.79
0.03
Exercise and relaxation techniques:
 Taking exercise
640
35.42
110
39.15
0.53
< 0.01
0.55
< 0.01
0.66
0.01
0.66
< 0.01
 Meditation/relaxation exercises
200
11.07
26
9.25
0.39
< 0.01
0.47
< 0.01
0.39
< 0.01
0.46
< 0.01
Professional help & medications:
 Self-medication on prescribed drugs
94
5.20
10
3.56
2.71
< 0.01
3.35
< 0.01
3.60
< 0.01
3.21
< 0.01
 Getting psychological support (e.g. online counselling/therapy)
90
4.98
12
4.27
1.92
0.01
2.33
< 0.01
3.29
< 0.01
1.84
0.01
 Calling NCDC hotline or family doctor
19
1.05
5
1.78
2.60
0.04
1.48
0.41
1.35
0.64
1.25
0.62
Distraction:
 Reading, TV, radio
983
54.40
169
60.14
0.52
< 0.01
0.67
< 0.01
0.55
0.00
0.85
0.10
 Doing housework or DIY
835
46.21
103
36.65a
0.63
< 0.01
0.73
< 0.01
0.68
0.01
0.73
< 0.01
 Working
666
36.86
122
43.42
0.74
0.02
0.62
< 0.01
0.80
0.20
0.87
0.18
 Using social media
661
36.58
129
45.91a
0.91
0.42
1.21
0.08
1.01
0.93
1.14
0.20
 Daydreaming/sleeping
542
29.99
86
30.60
1.62
< 0.01
2.33
< 0.01
1.68
< 0.01
2.14
< 0.01
 Playing a lot of video games
49
2.71
48
17.08a
1.28
0.34
1.41
1.97
1.31
0.38
1.25
0.35
Substance use or gambling:
 Drinking alcohol
149
8.25
55
19.57a
1.50
0.03
1.97
< 0.01
1.81
0.01
1.72
< 0.01
 Gambling
13
0.72
11
3.91a
1.84
0.22
1.55
0.37
2.07
0.19
1.45
0.42
 Taking illegal drugs
12
0.66
14
4.98a
1.15
0.78
0.94
0.91
0.81
0.63
aFrequencies: statistically significant difference between women and men at P < 0.05 (Chi2 test)
bSeparate multivariate regression models run for association between individual mental disorder and individual response strategy, adjusting for gender, age, education, household economic status, household size, and existing mental health disorder (for brevity, only data for response strategy are shown). Statistically significant (P < 0.05) results shown in bold
cGAD-7 anxiety score > 9; PHQ-9 depression score > 9; ADNM 8 adjustment disorder score > 18.4; see methods section for PTSD (ITQ) scoring
The results from the multivariate analysis on the associations between the COVID-19 individual coping response strategies used by respondents and symptoms of mental disorders are shown in Table 4 (for brevity, only data for response strategies are shown rather than the other independent variables included in the models), and significant (P < 0.05) results are as follows. Meditating and using relaxation exercises were associated with lower symptoms of anxiety (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.39 (i.e. representing a 61% decrease in the probability of having symptoms of anxiety after adjustment for other variables in the model]), depression (OR 0.47), PTSD (OR 0.39), and adjustment disorder (OR 0.46). Similarly, use of exercise was associated with lower symptoms of anxiety (OR 0.53), depression (OR 0.55), PTSD (OR 0.66), and adjustment disorder (OR 0.66). Positive thinking was also associated with lower symptoms of anxiety (OR 0.41), depression (OR 0.60), PTSD (OR 0.63), and adjustment disorder (OR 0.63). Trying to plan for the future was associated with lower symptoms of anxiety (OR 0.63), depression (OR 0.73), and PTSD (OR 0.59), but not with adjustment disorder. Distraction techniques of reading/TV/radio, doing housework or DIY, and working were associated with lower symptoms of anxiety (with ORs ranging from 0.52 to 0.74), depression (ORs ranging from 0.62 to 0.73), PTSD (ORs 0.55 to 0.68), and adjustment disorder (ORs 0.73 for doing housework/DIY). Seeking emotional support was associated with lower symptoms of anxiety (OR 0.71) only.
Drinking alcohol was associated with higher symptoms of anxiety (OR 1.50); depression (OR 1.97), PTSD (OR 1.81), and adjustment disorder (OR 1.72). Other factors showing associations with higher symptoms of mental disorders, included expressing negative feelings such as crying, arguing, being aggressive (ORs ranging from 4.14 to 4.45), daydreaming/sleeping (ORs ranging from 1.62 to 2.33), self-medication on prescribed drugs (ORs from 2.71 to 3.60), and getting psychological support such as online counselling or therapy (ORs 1.84 to 3.29).

Discussion

This is the first study in Georgia which reports on the mental health influence of COVID-19. We found high levels of symptoms of anxiety, depression, PTSD and adjustment disorder. Respondents living in poorer economic circumstances, in multiple households and those with pre-existing physical health (NCDs) and mental health conditions had greater concern about COVID-19. Respondents employed different strategies to cope with COVID-19 concerns which included adaptative and maladaptive approaches. Coping strategies such as meditation, exercise, staying positive and keeping busy/distracting themselves were associated with reduced probability of symptoms of mental disorders, while alcohol use increased the probability of mental disorders.
Research on the mental health influence of COVID-19 and the social and physical restrictions is still in its infancy [2, 13]; however, a pattern of elevated risk of mental health problems and psychological distress emerges [22]. A cross-sectional online survey with the general population in China on mental health in the context of COVID-19 reports the prevalence of anxiety and depression to be around 32% and 34% respectively [3]. Some studies report women to be at greater risk of worse mental health outcomes in the pandemic [24, 33], a finding which we could not confirm in our study with the exception of Adjustment Disorder. Vulnerable groups in our survey such as persons living in poorer economic circumstances and those with pre-existing physical and mental health problems showed greater concern about COVID-19, and it is likely that those population groups may also suffer from heightened psychological distress during the pandemic [5, 34]. Our findings did not show an association with older age and concern about COVID-19 which contrasts with studies from elsewhere [35], but this may be attributable to the low numbers of respondents aged over 70 in our sample. Social isolation and loneliness are strongly associated with excess mortality and mental disorders across the lifespan suggesting that the older population should not be left out from targeted mental health advice.
Respondents in our survey used different individual coping mechanisms to deal with the stress of COVID-19. Positive coping mechanisms such as exercising body and mind, talking to close friends and family, seeking social support, but also diverting thoughts from the current situation seemed to buffer against negative mental health outcomes, and are reported as an effective tool to reduce psychological distress in other studies [36, 37]. Cognitive and behavioural coping strategies which are adaptive should be further promoted at the national level as simple primary prevention advice. A clear message should be provided that alcohol consumption may be maladaptive, and may worsen mental health, as also supported by our findings. Similarly, tobacco consumption should also be strongly discouraged. It is noteworthy that most respondents reported drinking the same or less amount of alcohol since COVID-19 lockdown measures were introduced. This contrasts with what is being reported in other countries [38, 39], and we think may be attributable to the Georgian cultural habits of drinking in groups from different households and the lock-down measures in Georgia meant opportunities for this pattern of drinking were reduced. However, this does require further examination.
Our results also showed that key workers seem to be less worried about COVID-19 and this finding is rather surprising. While it may be attributable to selection bias, another explanation could be that some key workers who choose to play an active role in pandemic situation are more resilient and have more dynamic ability to adapt successfully in the face of adversity, trauma, or significant threat [40]. However, while such resilience may buffer against stressors, it could cause burn out if adverse working conditions go on for a longer time and this requires further investigation [41]. A recent systematic review evidenced that responding to COVID-19 has the potential to significantly affect the mental health of healthcare workers [42], but health workers may be reluctant to disclose mental health difficulties or seek help for them [43].

Limitations

The primary limitation is the use of non-probabilistic sampling due to the online survey methodology used. This risks sample selection bias, for example by excluding those without internet access who may have greater needs (such as those with severe mental disorders). Therefore, the findings cannot be interpreted to be prevalence data or nationally representative. However, basic descriptive analyses and explorations of potential associations can be appropriate in such surveys [23], and have been used in the majority of COVID-19 mental health surveys which have been done to date [44]. The key effect of the non-probabilistic sampling was the substantial over-representation of women in the study sample (with 87% of the study sample being women, compared to 53% in census data from Georgia) [45], and this is common with other such online surveys [23]. We have responded to this through presenting the descriptive results separately for women and men, and adjusting for gender in the regression analysis. Other demographic data such as age distribution are more in line with Georgian census data, with the exception of an under-representation of those aged 60–69 (6% difference) and aged 70 and over (11% difference) [45], which is perhaps predictable given the online nature of the survey and likely lower use of the internet use among older people in Georgia. There was also significant over-representation of respondents from Tbilisi compared with census data (39% difference) [45]. We are unable to compare our findings on levels of mental disorders against nationally representative data as no such data exist in Georgia and so a key recommendation is the need to conduct nationally representative random sampling surveys on mental disorders and their drivers in Georgia. A second limitation is the cross-sectional design which means temporal causal relationships cannot be observed, most notably between mental disorder symptoms and concern about COVID-19 and related social distancing measures. Third, the self-reported mental health instruments are used for screening mental health symptoms only, rather than diagnosis. They have also not been formally validated in Georgia but they did show good internal reliability and construct validity with the study populations which are also confirmed in previous studies which we have conducted in Georgia [30, 31]. Finally, due to the online convenience sampling approach, we used a relatively brief questionnaire which precluded more in-depth data collection.

Conclusions

Our survey in Georgia provides a first snapshot on the mental health situation during COVID-19. Further research on this is recommended to substantiate our findings, most notably by conducting a nationally representative random sampling survey. In the meantime, mental health infrastructure should be boosted in anticipation of higher need for mental health services in the near future. This could be accompanied by innovations such as increased use of online services to help reduce the mental health treatment gap in Georgia. Public health researchers and clinicians also need to be mindful of COVID-19 and related responses exacerbating mental health disparities, and so vulnerable groups should be prioritised. Actions taken now may help prevent and mitigate the negative impact of COVID-19 on mental health in Georgia.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary information accompanies this paper at https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s12992-020-00641-9.

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge Dr. Daniel Chisholm (Programme Manager for mental health, WHO Regional Office for Europe) for his advisory role, especially in developing a protocol of the survey. We are grateful to all the respondents who contributed to the data collection for this study.
Ethics approval was provided by the National Centre for Disease Control and Public Health in Georgia. All participants provided informed consent to participate.
Not applicable.

Competing interests

None declared.
Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://​creativecommons.​org/​licenses/​by/​4.​0/​. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://​creativecommons.​org/​publicdomain/​zero/​1.​0/​) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat WHO. Managning pandemics. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2018. WHO. Managning pandemics. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2018.
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Rajkumar RP. COVID-19 and mental health: a review of the existing literature. Asian J Psychiatr. 2020;52:102066.CrossRef Rajkumar RP. COVID-19 and mental health: a review of the existing literature. Asian J Psychiatr. 2020;52:102066.CrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Wang C, Pan R, Wan X, Tan Y, Xu L, Ho CS, et al. Immediate Psychological 554 Responses and Associated Factors during the Initial Stage of the 2019 555 Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Epidemic among the General Population in China. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(5):1729. Wang C, Pan R, Wan X, Tan Y, Xu L, Ho CS, et al. Immediate Psychological 554 Responses and Associated Factors during the Initial Stage of the 2019 555 Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Epidemic among the General Population in China. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(5):1729.
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Brooks SK, Webster RK, Smith LE, Woodland L, Wessely S, Greenberg N, et al. The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence. Lancet (London, England). 2020;395(10227):912–20.CrossRef Brooks SK, Webster RK, Smith LE, Woodland L, Wessely S, Greenberg N, et al. The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence. Lancet (London, England). 2020;395(10227):912–20.CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Campion J, Javed A, Sartorius N, Marmot M. Addressing the public mental health challenge of COVID-19. Lancet Psychiatry. 2020;7(8):657–59. Campion J, Javed A, Sartorius N, Marmot M. Addressing the public mental health challenge of COVID-19. Lancet Psychiatry. 2020;7(8):657–59.
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Jalloh MF, Li W, Bunnell RE, Ethier KA, O'Leary A, Hageman KM, et al. Impact of Ebola experiences and risk perceptions on mental health in Sierra Leone, July 2015. BMJ Glob Health. 2018;3(2):e000471.CrossRef Jalloh MF, Li W, Bunnell RE, Ethier KA, O'Leary A, Hageman KM, et al. Impact of Ebola experiences and risk perceptions on mental health in Sierra Leone, July 2015. BMJ Glob Health. 2018;3(2):e000471.CrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Rogers JP, Chesney E, Oliver D, Pollak TA, McGuire P, Fusar-Poli P, et al. Psychiatric and neuropsychiatric presentations associated with severe coronavirus infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis with comparison to the COVID-19 pandemic. Lancet Psychiatry. 2020;7(7):611–27.CrossRef Rogers JP, Chesney E, Oliver D, Pollak TA, McGuire P, Fusar-Poli P, et al. Psychiatric and neuropsychiatric presentations associated with severe coronavirus infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis with comparison to the COVID-19 pandemic. Lancet Psychiatry. 2020;7(7):611–27.CrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Tucci V, Moukaddam N, Meadows J, Shah S, Galwankar SC, Kapur GB. The forgotten plague: psychiatric manifestations of Ebola, Zika, and emerging infectious diseases. J Global Infect Dis. 2017;9(4):151–6.CrossRef Tucci V, Moukaddam N, Meadows J, Shah S, Galwankar SC, Kapur GB. The forgotten plague: psychiatric manifestations of Ebola, Zika, and emerging infectious diseases. J Global Infect Dis. 2017;9(4):151–6.CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Holmes EA, O'Connor RC, Perry VH, Tracey I, Wessely S, Arseneault L, 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.CrossRef Holmes EA, O'Connor RC, Perry VH, Tracey I, Wessely S, Arseneault L, 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.CrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Alonzi S, La Torre A, Silverstein MW. The psychological impact of preexisting mental and physical health conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychological Trauma. 2020;12(S1):S236–38. Alonzi S, La Torre A, Silverstein MW. The psychological impact of preexisting mental and physical health conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychological Trauma. 2020;12(S1):S236–38.
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Vigo D, Patten S, Pajer K, Krausz M, Taylor S, Rush B, et al. Mental health of communities during the COVID-19 pandemic. Can J Psychiatry. 2020;706743720926676. Vigo D, Patten S, Pajer K, Krausz M, Taylor S, Rush B, et al. Mental health of communities during the COVID-19 pandemic. Can J Psychiatry. 2020;706743720926676.
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Vindegaard N, Benros ME. COVID-19 pandemic and mental health consequences: Systematic review of the current evidence. Brain Behavior Immunity. 2020;89:531–42. Vindegaard N, Benros ME. COVID-19 pandemic and mental health consequences: Systematic review of the current evidence. Brain Behavior Immunity. 2020;89:531–42.
14.
Zurück zum Zitat National Center for Disease Control and Public Health. Novel coronavirus situation in Georgia: analysis of the National Center for disease control and public health (second report). Tbilisi: NCDCPH; 2020. National Center for Disease Control and Public Health. Novel coronavirus situation in Georgia: analysis of the National Center for disease control and public health (second report). Tbilisi: NCDCPH; 2020.
17.
Zurück zum Zitat The Lancet P. Mental health and COVID-19: change the conversation. Lancet Psychiatry. 2020;7(6):463.CrossRef The Lancet P. Mental health and COVID-19: change the conversation. Lancet Psychiatry. 2020;7(6):463.CrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Vigo D, Thornicroft G, Gureje O. The differential outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 in low- and middle-income countries vs high-income countries. JAMA psychiatry. 2020. Vigo D, Thornicroft G, Gureje O. The differential outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 in low- and middle-income countries vs high-income countries. JAMA psychiatry. 2020.
19.
Zurück zum Zitat WHO. Mental Health ATLAS 2011. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2011. WHO. Mental Health ATLAS 2011. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2011.
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Makhashvili N, van Voren R. Balancing community and hospital care: a case study of reforming mental health services in Georgia. PLoS Med. 2013;10(1):e1001366.CrossRef Makhashvili N, van Voren R. Balancing community and hospital care: a case study of reforming mental health services in Georgia. PLoS Med. 2013;10(1):e1001366.CrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Winkler P, Krupchanka D, Roberts T, Kondratova L, Machu V, Hoschl C, et al. A blind spot on the global mental health map: a scoping review of 25 years' development of mental health care for people with severe mental illnesses in central and eastern Europe. Lancet Psychiatry. 2017;4(8):634–42.CrossRef Winkler P, Krupchanka D, Roberts T, Kondratova L, Machu V, Hoschl C, et al. A blind spot on the global mental health map: a scoping review of 25 years' development of mental health care for people with severe mental illnesses in central and eastern Europe. Lancet Psychiatry. 2017;4(8):634–42.CrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat United Nations. Policy brief: COVID-19 and the need for action on mental health. Geneva: WHO; 2020. United Nations. Policy brief: COVID-19 and the need for action on mental health. Geneva: WHO; 2020.
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Pierce M, McManus S, Jessop C, John A, Hotopf M, Ford T, et al. Says who? The significance of sampling in mental health surveys during COVID-19. Lancet Psychiatry. 2020;7(7):567–8.CrossRef Pierce M, McManus S, Jessop C, John A, Hotopf M, Ford T, et al. Says who? The significance of sampling in mental health surveys during COVID-19. Lancet Psychiatry. 2020;7(7):567–8.CrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Salari N, Hosseinian-Far A, Jalali R, Vaisi-Raygani A, Rasoulpoor S, Mohammadi M, et al. Prevalence of stress, anxiety, depression among the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Glob Health. 2020;16(1):57.CrossRef Salari N, Hosseinian-Far A, Jalali R, Vaisi-Raygani A, Rasoulpoor S, Mohammadi M, et al. Prevalence of stress, anxiety, depression among the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Glob Health. 2020;16(1):57.CrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JB, Lowe B. A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166(10):1092–7.CrossRef Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JB, Lowe B. A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166(10):1092–7.CrossRef
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16(9):606–13.CrossRef Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16(9):606–13.CrossRef
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Cloitre M, Shevlin M, Brewin CR, Bisson JI, Roberts NP, Maercker A, et al. The international trauma questionnaire: development of a self-report measure of ICD-11 PTSD and complex PTSD. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2018;138(6):536–46.CrossRef Cloitre M, Shevlin M, Brewin CR, Bisson JI, Roberts NP, Maercker A, et al. The international trauma questionnaire: development of a self-report measure of ICD-11 PTSD and complex PTSD. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2018;138(6):536–46.CrossRef
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Kazlauskas E, Gegieckaite G, Eimontas J, Zelviene P, Maercker A. A brief measure of the international classification of Diseases-11 adjustment disorder: investigation of psychometric properties in an adult help-seeking sample. Psychopathology. 2018;51(1):10–5.CrossRef Kazlauskas E, Gegieckaite G, Eimontas J, Zelviene P, Maercker A. A brief measure of the international classification of Diseases-11 adjustment disorder: investigation of psychometric properties in an adult help-seeking sample. Psychopathology. 2018;51(1):10–5.CrossRef
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Ben-Ezra M, Mahat-Shamir M, Lorenz L, Lavenda O, Maercker A. Screening of adjustment disorder: scale based on the ICD-11 and the adjustment disorder new module. J Psychiatr Res. 2018;103:91–6.CrossRef Ben-Ezra M, Mahat-Shamir M, Lorenz L, Lavenda O, Maercker A. Screening of adjustment disorder: scale based on the ICD-11 and the adjustment disorder new module. J Psychiatr Res. 2018;103:91–6.CrossRef
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Chikovani I, Makhashvili N, Gotsadze G, Patel V, McKee M, Uchaneishvili M, et al. Health service utilization for mental, behavioural and emotional problems among conflict-affected population in Georgia: a cross-sectional study. PLoS One. 2015;10(4):e0122673.CrossRef Chikovani I, Makhashvili N, Gotsadze G, Patel V, McKee M, Uchaneishvili M, et al. Health service utilization for mental, behavioural and emotional problems among conflict-affected population in Georgia: a cross-sectional study. PLoS One. 2015;10(4):e0122673.CrossRef
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Makhashvili N, Chikovani I, McKee M, Bisson J, Patel V, Roberts B. Mental disorders and their association with disability among internally displaced persons and returnees in Georgia. J Trauma Stress. 2014;27(5):509–18.CrossRef Makhashvili N, Chikovani I, McKee M, Bisson J, Patel V, Roberts B. Mental disorders and their association with disability among internally displaced persons and returnees in Georgia. J Trauma Stress. 2014;27(5):509–18.CrossRef
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Van Ommeren M, Sharma B, Thapa S, Makaju R, Prasain D, Bhattarai R, et al. Preparing instruments for transcultural research: use of the translation monitoring form with Nepali-speaking Bhutanese refugees. Transcultural Psychiatry. 1999;36(3):285–301.CrossRef Van Ommeren M, Sharma B, Thapa S, Makaju R, Prasain D, Bhattarai R, et al. Preparing instruments for transcultural research: use of the translation monitoring form with Nepali-speaking Bhutanese refugees. Transcultural Psychiatry. 1999;36(3):285–301.CrossRef
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Liu N, Zhang F, Wei C, Jia Y, Shang Z, Sun L, et al. Prevalence and predictors of PTSS during COVID-19 outbreak in China hardest-hit areas: gender differences matter. Psychiatry Res. 2020;287:112921.CrossRef Liu N, Zhang F, Wei C, Jia Y, Shang Z, Sun L, et al. Prevalence and predictors of PTSS during COVID-19 outbreak in China hardest-hit areas: gender differences matter. Psychiatry Res. 2020;287:112921.CrossRef
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Sederer LI. The Social Determinants of Mental Health. Psychiatric Services (Washington, DC). 2016;67(2):234–5.CrossRef Sederer LI. The Social Determinants of Mental Health. Psychiatric Services (Washington, DC). 2016;67(2):234–5.CrossRef
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Armitage R, Nellums LB. COVID-19 and the consequences of isolating the elderly. Lancet Public Health. 2020;5(5):e256.CrossRef Armitage R, Nellums LB. COVID-19 and the consequences of isolating the elderly. Lancet Public Health. 2020;5(5):e256.CrossRef
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Meng X, D'Arcy C. Coping strategies and distress reduction in psychological well-being? A structural equation modelling analysis using a national population sample. Epidemiol Psychiatric Sci. 2016;25(4):370–83.CrossRef Meng X, D'Arcy C. Coping strategies and distress reduction in psychological well-being? A structural equation modelling analysis using a national population sample. Epidemiol Psychiatric Sci. 2016;25(4):370–83.CrossRef
37.
Zurück zum Zitat Carver CS, Scheier MF, Weintraub JK. Assessing coping strategies: a theoretically based approach. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1989;56(2):267–83.CrossRef Carver CS, Scheier MF, Weintraub JK. Assessing coping strategies: a theoretically based approach. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1989;56(2):267–83.CrossRef
38.
Zurück zum Zitat Pollard MS, Tucker JS, Green HD Jr. Changes in adult alcohol use and consequences during the COVID-19 pandemic in the US. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(9):e2022942.CrossRef Pollard MS, Tucker JS, Green HD Jr. Changes in adult alcohol use and consequences during the COVID-19 pandemic in the US. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(9):e2022942.CrossRef
39.
Zurück zum Zitat Vanderbruggen N, Matthys F, Van Laere S, Zeeuws D, Santermans L, Van den Ameele S, et al. Self-reported alcohol, tobacco, and Cannabis use during COVID-19 lockdown measures: results from a web-based survey. Eur Addict Res. 2020;26(6):309–15. Vanderbruggen N, Matthys F, Van Laere S, Zeeuws D, Santermans L, Van den Ameele S, et al. Self-reported alcohol, tobacco, and Cannabis use during COVID-19 lockdown measures: results from a web-based survey. Eur Addict Res. 2020;26(6):309–15.
40.
Zurück zum Zitat Tedeschi RG, Calhoun LG. TARGET ARTICLE: "posttraumatic growth: conceptual foundations and empirical evidence". Psychol Inq. 2004;15(1):1–18.CrossRef Tedeschi RG, Calhoun LG. TARGET ARTICLE: "posttraumatic growth: conceptual foundations and empirical evidence". Psychol Inq. 2004;15(1):1–18.CrossRef
41.
Zurück zum Zitat Hu D, Kong Y, Li W, Han Q, Zhang X, Zhu LX, et al. Frontline nurses’ burnout, anxiety, depression, and fear statuses and their associated factors during the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan, China: A large-scale cross-sectional study. EClinicalMedicine. 2020;24:100424.CrossRef Hu D, Kong Y, Li W, Han Q, Zhang X, Zhu LX, et al. Frontline nurses’ burnout, anxiety, depression, and fear statuses and their associated factors during the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan, China: A large-scale cross-sectional study. EClinicalMedicine. 2020;24:100424.CrossRef
42.
Zurück zum Zitat Pappa S, Ntella V, Giannakas T, Giannakoulis VG, Papoutsi E, Katsaounou P. Prevalence of depression, anxiety, and insomnia among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Brain Behav Immun. 2020;88:901–7.CrossRef Pappa S, Ntella V, Giannakas T, Giannakoulis VG, Papoutsi E, Katsaounou P. Prevalence of depression, anxiety, and insomnia among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Brain Behav Immun. 2020;88:901–7.CrossRef
43.
Zurück zum Zitat Galbraith N, Boyda D, McFeeters D, Hassan T. The mental health of doctors during the COVID-19 pandemic. BJPsych Bull. 2020:1–4. Galbraith N, Boyda D, McFeeters D, Hassan T. The mental health of doctors during the COVID-19 pandemic. BJPsych Bull. 2020:1–4.
44.
Zurück zum Zitat Steel Z, Marnane C, Iranpour C, Chey T, Jackson JW, Patel V, et al. The global prevalence of common mental disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis 1980-2013. Int J Epidemiol. 2014;43(2):476–93.CrossRef Steel Z, Marnane C, Iranpour C, Chey T, Jackson JW, Patel V, et al. The global prevalence of common mental disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis 1980-2013. Int J Epidemiol. 2014;43(2):476–93.CrossRef
45.
Zurück zum Zitat (GEOSTAT) NSOoG. General population census Main results. Tbilisi: GEOSTAT; 2014. p. 2016. (GEOSTAT) NSOoG. General population census Main results. Tbilisi: GEOSTAT; 2014. p. 2016.
Metadaten
Titel
The influence of concern about COVID-19 on mental health in the Republic of Georgia: a cross-sectional study
verfasst von
Nino Makhashvili
Jana Darejan Javakhishvili
Lela Sturua
Ketevan Pilauri
Daniela C. Fuhr
Bayard Roberts
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2020
Verlag
BioMed Central
Schlagwort
COVID-19
Erschienen in
Globalization and Health / Ausgabe 1/2020
Elektronische ISSN: 1744-8603
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-020-00641-9

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2020

Globalization and Health 1/2020 Zur Ausgabe