Background. The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is an unprecedented traumatic event influencing the healthcare, economic, and social welfare systems worldwide. In order to slow the infection rates, lockdown has been implemented almost everywhere. Italy, one of the countries most severely affected, entered the "lockdown" on March 8, 2020. Methods. The COvid Mental hEalth Trial (COMET) network includes 10 Italian university sites and the National Institute of Health. The whole study has three different phases. The first phase includes an online survey conducted between March and May 2020 in the Italian population. Recruitment took place through email invitation letters, social media, mailing lists of universities, national medical associations, and associations of stakeholders (e.g., associations of users/ carers). In order to evaluate the impact of lockdown on depressive, anxiety and stress symptoms, multivariate linear regression models were performed, weighted for the propensity score. Results. The final sample consisted of 20,720 participants. Among them, 12.4% of respondents (N = 2,555) reported severe or extremely severe levels of depressive symptoms, 17.6% (N = 3,627) of anxiety symptoms and 41.6% (N = 8,619) reported to feel at least moderately stressed by the situation at the DASS-21. According to the multivariate regression models, the depressive, anxiety and stress symptoms significantly worsened from the week April 9-15 to the week April 30 to May 4 (p < 0.0001). Moreover, female respondents and people with pre-existing mental health problems were at higher risk of developing severe depression and anxiety symptoms (p < 0.0001). Conclusions. Although physical isolation and lockdown represent essential public health measures for containing the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, they are a serious threat for mental health and well-being of the general population. As an integral part of COVID-19 response, mental health needs should be addressed.

COVID-19 quarantine group. This group includes the general population which are quarantined but not isolated, i.e., those not directly exposed to contagion nor in contact with COVID-19+ individuals; b) Group 2-COVID-19+ group, which includes isolated people directly/indirectly exposed to the virus; c) Group 3-COVID-19 healthcare staff group, which includes firstand second-line healthcare professionals; d) Group 4-COVID-19 mental health, which includes users of mental health services and all those who had already been diagnosed with a mental disorder. Mental health services worldwide are not prepared yet to manage the short-and long-term consequences of the pandemic. It is necessary to have a clear picture of the impact that this new stressor will have on mental health and well-being in order to develop and disseminate appropriate interventions for the general population and for the other at-risk groups.

BackgroundIn England, during 2009–2014 the ‘Time to Change’ anti-stigma programme has included a social marketing campaign (SMC) using mass media channels, social media and social contact events but the efficacy of such approach has not been evaluated yet.MethodsThe target population included people aged between mid-twenties/mid-forties, from middle-income groups. Participants were recruited through an online market research panel, before and after each burst of the campaign (with a mean number of unique participants per each burst: 956.9 ± 170.2). Participants completed an online questionnaire evaluating knowledge [Mental Health Knowledge Schedule (MAKS)]; attitudes [Community Attitudes toward Mental Illness (CAMI)]; and behaviours [Reported and Intended Behaviour Scale (RIBS)]. Socio-demographic data and level of awareness of the SMC were also collected.ResultsA total of 10,526 people were interviewed. An increasing usage of the SMC-media channels as well as of the level of awareness of SMC was found (P < 0.001). Being aware of the SMC was found to be associated with higher score at MAKS (OR = 0.95, CI = 0.68 to 1.21; P < 0.001), at ‘tolerance and support’ CAMI subscale (OR = 0.12, CI = 0.09 to 0.16; P < 0.001), and at RIBS (OR = 0.71, CI = 0.51 to 0.92; P < 0.001), controlling for confounders.ConclusionThe SMC represents an important way to effectively reduce stigma. Taking into account these positive findings, further population-based campaigns using social media may represent an effective strategy to challenge stigma.

The use of coercive measures varied significantly in the participating countries. Clinical factors, such as high levels of psychotic symptoms and high levels of perceived coercion at admission were associated with the use of coercive measures, when controlling for countries' effect. These factors should be taken into consideration by programs aimed at reducing the use of coercive measures in psychiatric wards.

No abstract