No abstract

Objective: This article reports findings from a qualitative study that sought to identify and describe psychosocial and mental health consequences of conflict among internally displaced persons (IDPs) and military veterans in Ukraine. The study was the first phase of a clinical intervention trial and was designed to understand local experiences of mental health problems and function, inform the selection and adaptation of local measures, and guide the modification, and implementation of a psychotherapy intervention that could support conflict-affected persons. Method: Free-list interviews (FLs), key informant interviews (KIIs), and focus group discussions (FDGs) were conducted with IDPs, military veterans, and providers working with these two groups. A total of 227 respondents were interviewed from two study regions in eastern Ukraine—Zaporizhia and Kharkiv—including 136 IDPs and 91 military veterans. Results: Both IDPs and veterans were described as experiencing high levels of psychological stress symptoms, including depression, isolation, anxiety, and intrusive memories. Although IDPs and veterans were exposed to different traumas, they both identified struggles with social adaptation, including feeling isolated and misunderstood by their communities. Both groups also described relational conflict within and outside the family. Social support mechanisms were considered essential for recovery, and positive social interaction was described as a key example of healthy functioning. Conclusion: Findings suggest a need for community-based programming that facilitates social adaptation, supports social network building, and helps engage conflict-affected people into mental health services. Programs that promote greater awareness, interaction, and understanding among the general public, military veterans, and IDPs are also warranted.

Background Individuals with severe and persistent mental illness (SPMI) have a higher risk of contracting COVID‐19 than individuals without SPMI. In combination with physical distancing, hygiene protocols, and vaccines, quarantine and self‐isolation are primary means of viral containment. However, individuals with SPMI may experience more difficulties with mandated quarantine or self‐isolation because of their illness(es), stigma, and marginalization. To date, there is a lack of consensus on strategies that could aid such individuals in completing isolation. Aim This review aimed to synthesize evidence for interventions to support self‐isolation and mandated quarantine for COVID‐19 among individuals with SPMIs. Methods We followed the PRISMA guidelines, searching 19 electronic databases (9 published literature registries and 10 gray literature sources). We looked for relevant randomized controlled trials, quasi‐experimental studies, and program evaluations of the effectiveness of relevant psychosocial, pharmacological, harm reduction, and addiction management strategies to support isolation settings or quarantine requirements for individuals with any SPMI (e.g., any mental disorder, substance use disorder, or their combination). Findings Of 10,298 total records that were located, 5582 were duplicate citations. Upon screening the remaining 4716 unique records by title and abstract, we excluded a further 3562 records. Only one original article met our inclusion criteria after reviewing the full texts of the remaining 1154 citations. To support individuals experiencing homelessness during the COVID‐19 pandemic, San Francisco developed an isolation hotel that reduced COVID‐19 hospital strain for 1009 participants (25% had a mental health disorder and 26% had a substance use disorder). While 81% completed their hotel stay, 48 patients had behavioral health needs that exceeded the hotel's capabilities. No other studies met our review's eligibility criteria. Most articles located by the search simply proposed solutions or discussed the challenges brought by COVID‐19 for people with SPMIs. While some documents went a step further (e.g., shelter guidance documents to support individuals experiencing homelessness), these rarely addressed individuals with SPMIs directly. Conclusions This systematic review evaluated evidence from published and gray literature on interventions to support self‐isolation and mandated COVID‐19 quarantine for individuals with SPMIs. Only one study met our inclusion criteria. This study found a beneficial effect of a dedicated isolation hotel for individuals experiencing homelessness and COVID‐19—where approximately 25%–50% of the study sample had a mental or substance use disorder. While there has been an abundance of COVID‐19 protocols in general, information for SPMIs is lacking. As the pandemic continues and we better prepare for future pandemics, developing prot...