The burden & contributing factors of psychological distress across India during the COVID pandemic.
Sasmita Panigrahi, Sujata Mohapatra, Asha P Shetty and 2 others
PMID 34861964WHAT IT FOUND
53% of people aged 16 years or older surveyed in India during the early pandemic reported no psychological distress, but fear of catching COVID-19, lockdown, stigma, food insecurity, and poor mask or sanitizer supply were linked with distress.
Key findings
01Among 1537 respondents with complete data, 815 (53.0%) had no psychological distress, 385 (25.0%) had mild distress, 194 (12.6%) had moderate distress, and 143 (9.3%) had severe distress; the mean modified K-10 score was 19.79 ± 6.75.
02Psychological distress was linked with lockdown (OR 2.627, 95% CI 2.096-3.292), fear of getting COVID-19 (OR 1.507, 95% CI 1.197-1.897), stigma (OR 1.469, 95% CI 1.154-1.871), food insecurity (OR 1.455, 95% CI 1.147-1.845), inadequate mask or sanitizer supply (OR 1.442, 95% CI 1.123-1.850), and health-care worker status (OR 1.508, 95% CI 1.124-2.023).
03Weekly mean psychological distress scores were 20.35, 19.66, 18.48, 17.73, 21.33, and 20.14, and the paper reports distress decreased until the end of May and increased after lockdown release.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The survey was online and shared through social media, so people without internet or a smartphone could not take part. Psychological distress was self-reported, so responses may be biased. It was cross-sectional with no follow-up, so it cannot show cause or change over time. Responses were uneven across Indian states and union territories, so the sample may not represent all regions.
Declared interests
No financial grant was received, and the authors declared no potential conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not treat these associations as proof that lockdown, stigma, or poor supply caused distress. The study was a cross-sectional online survey of people with digital access, so it measured distress and possible factors at one time and may not represent all Indians.