Mental health services during infectious disease outbreaks
Citation: Yue JL, Yan W, Sun YK, et al. Mental health services for infectious disease outbreaks including COVID-19: a rapid systematic review. Psychological Medicine. 2020;50(15):2498-513.
Language: Abstract and full text in EN.
Free to view: Yes.
Funding sources for the review: National Natural Science Foundation of China, Special Research Fund of PKUHSC for Prevention and Control of COVID-19 and the National Key Research and Development Programme of China.
What is this? Health emergencies, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, can lead to mental health problems.
In this rapid systematic review, the authors searched for research focusing on mental health interventions or services applied during infectious disease outbreaks. They restricted their searches to articles published in English and did the most recent search on 5 May 2020. They included 1 randomized trial, 7 controlled clinical trials, 8 other reports, 14 commentaries and 2 reviews. 23 articles described mental health practices and services for COVID-19 in Australia (1), Canada (1), China (9), Germany (1), Iran (1), Italy (2), Malaysia (1), Singapore (2), South Korea (2), Spain (1), UK (1) and USA (1). 7 articles described mental health practices and services for Ebola virus disease in Liberia (1), Sierra Leonne (5) and USA (1). 1 article described mental health practices and services for severe acute respiratory symptom in China and 1 article described mental health practices and services in South Korea. Out of the 32 studies included, 2 reported on digital mental healthcare.
What works: At the time of this review, the included studies showed that group-based cognitive behavioral therapy, psychological first aid, community-based psychosocial arts program and other culturally adapted interventions are effective against the mental health impacts of COVID-19, Ebola virus and SARS.
At the time of this review, the included studies showed that culturally adapted, cost-effective and accessible evidence-based strategies integrated into public health emergency response and established medical systems at national and global levels are likely to enhance mental health response capacity during infectious disease outbreaks.
What doesn’t work: Nothing noted.
What is uncertain: At the time of this review, the effectiveness of alternative digital interventions in mitigating the impact of mental health problems on health services and patients was uncertain.
At the time of this review, the appropriateness of telehealth for certain vulnerable populations and those with poor digital literacy was uncertain.
Implications: The authors of the review stated that tele-mental health strategies and global co-operations are good approaches to help mental health systems cope with the COVID-19 pandemic and to improve mental health response capacity for comparable infectious disease outbreaks in the future.
They noted that disparities in access to technology by poorer populations and cultural and linguistically diverse communities in low- and middle-income countries may impact on the implementation of digital therapy programs.
Other considerations: The authors of the review discuss their findings in relation to socioeconomic status and age, noting that more specific age-appropriate interventions need to be developed for older adults for effective intervention as the COVID-19 pandemic progresses.
This summary was prepared by Geraldine O’Callaghan, edited by Jiewon Lim, Firas Khalid and Luis Gabriel Cuervo and finalized by Mike Clarke.
We’ve already reached tens of thousands of people with plain language summaries of systematic reviews. If you’d like to help us to continue our work, please consider a donation.
Donate with PayPal
You can also donate through the Charities Aid Foundation (CAF) here. If you are based in the USA and want to make a tax-deductable donation, please donate to Evidence Aid via the British Schools and Universities Foundation.