Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Apr:34:100806.
doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.100806. Epub 2021 Apr 6.

An evaluation of the mental health impact of SARS-CoV-2 on patients, general public and healthcare professionals: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Peter Phiri  1   2 , Rema Ramakrishnan  3 , Shanaya Rathod  1 , Kathryn Elliot  1 , Tony Thayanandan  4 , Natasha Sandle  4 , Nyla Haque  4 , Steven Wh Chau  5 , Oscar Wh Wong  5 , Sandra Sm Chan  5 , Evelyn Ky Wong  6 , Vanessa Raymont  4 , Sheena K Au-Yeung  4 , David Kingdon  7 , Gayathri Delanerolle  4
Affiliations

An evaluation of the mental health impact of SARS-CoV-2 on patients, general public and healthcare professionals: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Peter Phiri et al. EClinicalMedicine. 2021 Apr.

Abstract

Background: The global impact of COVID-19 pandemic continues to affect the lives of billions of people with recurrent waves. Healthcare systems are struggling to manage pre-existing patient care and recurring covid-19 demands. As a result, we evaluated the mental health impact using systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods: A comprehensive search was undertaken from April 2020 to 22nd January 2021 using multiple electronic databases. A systematic review protocol was developed and published on PROSPERO registration; CRD42020181481. A random-effects model was used to compute pooled estimates of anxiety, depression, PTSD, insomnia and suicidal thoughts.

Findings: Our search yielded 11,295 studies and of those 287 met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis of 206 studies revealed minimal differences in prevalence of anxiety, depression, and PTSD among HCPs compared with the public during the pandemic but higher prevalence of suicidal thoughts/ideation or self-harm (11% vs 5.8%) and lower prevalence of wellbeing (28.2% vs 52.6%) among the public compared to HCPs.

Interpretation: The pandemic has led to a high mental health burden especially amongst HCPs and higher suicidal ideation and lower wellbeing in general public which warrants further investigation and management globally. These findings highlight an emerging critical public health issue that requires urgent solutions.

Keywords: COVID-19; Health; Healthcare professionals; Mental health and physical wellbeing; Sars-CoV-2.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

PP has received research grant from Novo Nordisk, and other, educational from Queen Mary University of London, other from John Wiley & Sons, other from Otsuka, outside the submitted work. SR reports other from Janssen, Lundbeck and Otsuka outside the submitted work. All other authors report no conflict of interest. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the National Institute for Health Research, the Department of Health and Social Care or the Academic institutions.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA Chart.
Fig 2
Fig. 2
Forest plot of prevalence of anxiety among healthcare professionals. Note: aPrevalence calculated from mean and standard deviation using Monte Carlo simulation.
Fig 3
Fig. 3
Forest plot of prevalence of anxiety among the public. Note: aPrevalence calculated from mean and standard deviation using Monte Carlo simulation.
Fig 4
Fig. 4
Forest plot of prevalence of depression among healthcare professionals. Note: aPrevalence calculated from mean and standard deviation using Monte Carlo simulation.
Fig 5
Fig. 5
Forest plot of prevalence of depression among the public. Note: aPrevalence calculated from mean and standard deviation using Monte Carlo simulation.
Fig 6
Fig. 6
Forest plot of prevalence of post-traumatic disorder among (A) healthcare professionals and (B) the public. Note: aPrevalence calculated from mean and standard deviation using Monte Carlo simulation.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Cenat J.M., Blais-Rochette C., Kokou-Kpolou K., Noorishad P.G., Mukunzi J.N., McIntee S.E., Dalexis R.D., Goulet M.A., Labell P.R. Prevalence of symptoms of depression, anxiety, insomnia, posttraumatic stress disorder, and psychological distress among populations affected by the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychiatry Res. 2021;295(113599) doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113599. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rathod S., Pallikadavath S., Young A.H., Graves L., Rahman M.M., Brooks A., Soomro M., Rathod P., Phiri P. Psychological impact of COVID-19 pandemic: protocol and results of first three weeks from an international cross-section survey – focus on health professionals. J Affect Disord Rep. 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.jadr.2020.100005. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. National Health Service . NHS Survey Coordination Centre; Oxford: 2019. NHS staff survey results.
    1. British Medical Association. (2020) COVID-19: analyzing the impact of coronavirus on doctors. https://www.bma.org.uk/advice-and-support/covid-19/what-the-bma-is-doing...
    1. Wu P., Fang Y., Guan Z. The psychological impact of the SARS epidemic on hospital employees in China: exposure, risk perception, and altruistic acceptance of risk. Can J Psychiatry. 2013;54(5):302–311. - PMC - PubMed