National governments took action to delay the transmission of the coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) by implementing different containment measures. We developed an online survey that included 44 different containment measures. We aimed to assess how effective citizens perceive these measures, which measures are perceived as violation of citizens’ personal freedoms, which opinions and demographic factors have an effect on compliance with the measures, and what governments can do to most effectively improve citizens’ compliance. The survey was disseminated in 11 countries: UK, Belgium, Netherlands, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Finland, India, Latvia, Poland, Romania, and Sweden. We acquired 9543 unique responses. Our findings show significant differences across countries in perceived effectiveness, restrictiveness, and compliance. Governments that suffer low levels of trust should put more effort into persuading citizens, especially men, in the effectiveness of the proposed measures. They should provide financial compensation to citizens who have lost their job or income due to the containment measures to improve measure compliance. Policymakers should implement the least restrictive and most effective public health measures first during pandemic emergencies instead of implementing a combination of many restrictive measures, which has the opposite effect on citizens’ adherence and undermines human rights.

We aimed to evaluate the prevalence and incidence of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, anxiety, and panic disorder (PD) among citizens in 11 countries during the Covid-19 pandemic. We explored risks and protective factors most associated with the development of these mental health disorders and their course at 68 days follow up. We acquired 9543 unique responses via an online survey that was disseminated in UK, Belgium, Netherlands, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Finland, India, Latvia, Poland, Romania, and Sweden. The prevalence and new incidence during the pandemic for at least one disorder was 48.6% and 17.6%, with the new incidence of PTSD, anxiety, depression, and panic disorder being 11.4%, 8.4%, 9.3%, and 3%, respectively. Higher resilience was associated with lower mental health burden for all disorders. Ten to thirteen associated factors explained 79% of the variance in PTSD, 80% in anxiety, 78% in depression, and 89% in PD. To reduce the mental health burden, governments should refrain from implementing many highly restrictive and lasting containment measures. Public health campaigns should focus their effort on alleviating stress and fear, promoting resilience, building public trust in government and medical care, and persuading the population of the measures’ effectiveness. Psychosocial services and resources should be allocated to facilitate individual and community-level recovery from the pandemic.

Psihiatrijas attīstība Krievijas impērijas Vidzemes, Kurzemes un Igaunijas guberņās 19. gadsimta beigās: Emīla Krēpelīna darbība (1886-1891) 1 Anotācija Rakstā ir aplūkota situācija psihiatrijā Krievijas impērijas Vidzemes, Kurzemes un Igaunijas guberņās laikā, kad slavenais psihiatrs Emīls Krēpelīns (Emil Kraepelin, 1856-1926) strādāja par Vidzemes guberņas ārstu, vadot Dorpatas (Jurjevas, mūsdienu Tartu) Universitātes Nervu un psihisko slimību klīniku. Lai ilustrētu E. Krēpelīna ieguldījumu reģiona noza res attīstībā, rakstā ir ietverts arī viņa parakstīts nosūtījums slimniekam uz Aleksandra Augstumu slimnīcu Rīgā un no Dorpatas Nervu un psihisko slimību klīnikas pārvestas pacientes dokumentācija.

Today, the concept of public health may be viewed much more broadly, considering both the meaning of the word “health,” which includes not only the physical state of a person, but also the emotional and psychological state. Public health is often understood only as health promotion, but it also includes occupational safety, occupational health, improvement of the health care system and other subfields. The public’s emotional health is also mentioned more often in the context of public health, which is based on considerations of aesthetics, i.e., aesthetic medicine manipulations changing person’s appearance. Advances in modern medicine are not only associated with disease prevention, diagnostics, treatment, rehabilitation, or patient care. That is, they are not solely related to human physical well-being and overcoming diseases. Medicine has gone beyond the boundaries of necessity and the opportunities that it provides are related to such categories as aesthetics, as the improvement of the body given by nature through medical procedures. Aesthetic medicine has brought to the forefront the subject that is relevant both at the national and international level and that is based on the question “What is beauty?” Considering the multifaceted nature of the word beauty, at the global level, there are certain obstacle to an agreement on a unified approach in the context of the legal framework for aesthetic medicine. The above can be explained by the diversity of relationships, opinions, and services.