Dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe: five lessons from the European Society for Traumatic Stress Studies

Abstract

The paper provides insights into the mental health consequences of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic from the Central, Eastern, Nordic, Southern, and Western subregions of Europe, represented by five member countries of the European Society for Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS). On the basis of the existing national research and experiences in these countries, we propose five lessons learned. (1) There is no evidence of a mental health pandemic so far in the countries in focus. No increase in severe mental disorders but some increase in the symptoms of common mental health disorders are observable. More high-quality longitudinal studies are needed to understand the mental health burden of the pandemic. (2) The pandemic affects countries (including the mental health situation) differently, depending on the level of the exposure, management policies, pre-pandemic structural characteristics, and healthcare resources. (3) The pandemic affects people differently: the exposure severity to pandemic-related stressors differs between individuals, as well as individual resources to cope with these stressors. There are winners and losers as well as identifiable at-risk groups that need particular attention. (4) Besides the negative consequences, the pandemic has had a positive impact. The rapidly applied innovations within the system of healthcare responses provide a window of opportunity for positive changes in mental healthcare policies, strategies, and practices. The increased focus on mental health during the pandemic may contribute to the prioritization of mental health issues at policy-making and organizational levels and may reduce stigma. (5) A stress- and trauma-informed response to COVID-19 is required. The European community of psychotraumatologists under the leadership of ESTSS plays an important role in promoting stress- and trauma-informed healthcare and policies of pandemic management. Based on the lessons learned, we propose a stepped-care public mental health model for the prevention of adverse mental health outcomes during pandemics. HIGHLIGHTS Population mental health is affected differently in the COVID-19 pandemic: there are winners and losers, as well as identifiable at-risk groups that need particular attention. A stress- and trauma-informed public mental health stepped-care model can address pandemic-related mental health burden in a systematic way.

COVID-19-related distress is associated with analogue PTSD symptoms after exposure to an analogue stressor

“…Moreover, in some areas, the pandemic had positive side effects on mental health (e.g. digital health care, flexible and remote working options; Javakhishvili et al, 2022 ). Thus, early warnings of a ‘second pandemic’ of mental illness (Choi et al, 2020 ) are, fortunately, not supported by the current data.…”

“…Our findings might, therefore, reflect a temporary increase of psychosocial stress in the general population elicited by the COVID-19 outbreak in early 2020. Nevertheless, a subgroup of individuals may be at risk for a further increase in mental health problems (Javakhishvili et al, 2022 ). The current findings, hence, may suggest that chronically heighted distress during the early phase of the COVID-19 outbreak resulted in pathological processing of aversive events in a subgroup of the general population.…”

“…The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak was associated with an immediate increase in mental health problems in the general population (Lotzin et al, 2021 ; Robinson et al, 2022 ; Schäfer et al, 2020 ) such as heightened distress, anxiety, and depression (Javakhishvili et al, 2022 ). These findings underline that the COVID-19 outbreak constituted a large-scale psychosocial stressor 1 , involving – amongst other things – social isolation, societal uncertainty, and financial insecurity.…”

Psychotherapie in der Pandemie: Notwendigkeiten und Interventionsstrategien

“… 2020 ; Javakhishvili et al. 2022 ). Idealerweise sollten psychotherapeutische Angebote niederschwellig vorgehalten werden, und zusätzlich sollte für Risikogruppen eine notfalltherapeutische Versorgung verfügbar sein (Strauß et al.…”

“…Diese Beobachtung spricht eher für gezielte Maßnahmen als für Masseninterventionen. Da der Bedarf an psychotherapeutischer Behandlung jedoch bereits vor der Pandemie hoch war Schutzfaktoren Risikofaktoren (Brakemeier et al 2020;Galea et al 2020;Javakhishvili et al 2022). Idealerweise sollten psychotherapeutische Angebote niederschwellig vorgehalten werden, und zusätzlich sollte für Risikogruppen eine notfalltherapeutische Versorgung verfügbar sein (Strauß et al 2021).…”