Psychosocial impact among the public of the severe acute respiratory syndrome epidemic in Taiwan

Abstract

During the 2003 outbreak, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) spread to more than 30 countries. Not only did it cause severe health problems but it also imposed a great psychological impact on the public. SARS emerged in Taiwan during April 2003. This study investigates the psychosocial impact and the associated factors of depression of the SARS epidemic in Taiwan when the epidemic had just been controlled. A total of 1552 respondents were recruited in the study by random selection from the telephone book. Demographic data, SARS experience, self-perceived health state, neighborhood relationships, and depression were surveyed by telephone interviewing.Respondents were grouped as 'impacted group' and 'non-impacted group' according to whether they or their friends and family had been quarantined, or suspected of being infected. The psychosocial impact and associated factors were compared between the two groups. The 'impacted group' had higher depressive levels, poorer neighborhood relationships, poorer self-perceived health, and a higher economic impact than the 'non-impacted group'. The poorer self-perceived health and economic impact factors were associated with depression. The neighborhood relationship factor was negatively associated with depression for the 'impacted group', but not for the 'nonimpacted group'. The 'impacted group' had experienced greater psychosocial impact possibly due to the SARS impact, the economic downturn, poor self-perceived health conditions, and decreased social support systems. An appropriate mental health intervention to improve the self-perceived health condition, to provide instrumental and psychological support for the 'impacted group', and to decrease the stigmatization and discrimination from the public could have buffered the psychological impact from this epidemic disaster.

Prevalence and predictors of PTSS during COVID-19 outbreak in China hardest-hit areas: Gender differences matter

“…This study firstly found that the prevalence of PTSS a month after the COVID-19 epidemic for hardest-hit areas in China was 7%. Compared with a previous study (Ko et al, 2006), which reported a prevalence of 3.7% of depression symptoms during the post-SARS epidemic for an extrapolated target population in Taiwan. This psychiatrically outbreak seems to have an even greater impact on the public.…”

“…Several studies have explored the psychological effect during such epidemics, such as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and H1N1. One study reported that 3.7% of public cases, including 9.6% of "impacted group" (they or their friends and family had been quarantined, or suspected of being infected), had experienced depression symptoms since the SARS outbreak (Ko, Yen, Yen, & Yang, 2006). Another study showed 17.3% significant mental symptoms among health care workers during SARS epidemic (Lu, Shu, Chang, & Lung, 2006).…”

Comparison of psychological distress and demand induced by COVID-19 during the lockdown period in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis: a cross-section study in a tertiary hospital

“…After the health emergencies, such as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) epidemic in 2003, the Ebola outbreak in 2014, the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) period in 2015 and so on, psychological problems were reported, such as fear, boredom, anxiety and depression [8][9][10][11]. And several studies reported that taking effective psychological intervention was essential to improve the mental health of the population after the epidemic [12,13]. Research observed that for dialysis patients, 38.1% of them had symptoms including anxiety and depression and 57.1% presented stress [14] even under normal circumstances.…”

Anticipated Negative Responses by Students to Possible Ebola Virus Outbreak, Guangzhou, China

“…Such negative community responses might cause individual and societal harm, as witnessed during the epidemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome ( 6 ). Misconceptions concerning transmission modes were prevalent and significantly correlated with both dependent variables.…”