METHODS: A descriptive and correlational survey was conducted in a private hospital in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. A convenience sample of 118 Malaysian breast cancer patients voluntarily participated in the study and responded to a set of questionnaires including: socio-demographic questionnaire, the short form of Locus of Control Scale, the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and the Short-Form Mishel Uncertainty in Illness Scale (SF-MUIS).
RESULTS: The results revealed that breast cancer patients with higher internal locus of control and lower external locus of control experience a higher quality of life, lower anxiety, and lower depression. Also, uncertainty mediated the relationship between locus of control with quality of life and depression (quasi-significant).
CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicated the need for early, targeted psychological interventions seeking to gradually shift cancer patients' locus of control from external to internal in order to improve their quality of life and reduce their depression and anxiety. Moreover, health care providers by providing relevant information to cancer patients, especially for externally oriented patients, can reduce their uncertainty which in turn would improve their quality of life.
METHOD: This research was carried out on a sample of 263 participants (age range 12-24 years old), from Klang Valley, Selangor. The survey package comprises demographic information, a measure of reasons for living, social support, depression, anxiety and stress. To analyse the data, correlation analysis and a series of linear multiple regression analysis were carried out.
RESULTS: Findings showed that there were low negative relationships between all subdomains and the total score of reasons for living and depression. There were also low negative relationships between domain-specific of social support (family and friends) and total social support and depression. In terms of the family alliance, self-acceptance and total score of reasons for living, they were negatively associated with anxiety, whereas family social support was negatively associated with stress. The linear regression analysis showed that only future optimism and family social support found to be the significant predictors for depression. Family alliance and total reasons for living were significant in predicting anxiety, whereas family social support was significant in predicting stress.
CONCLUSION: These findings have the potential to promote awareness related to depression, anxiety, and stress among youth in Malaysia.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the mean prevalence and associated sociodemographic and clinical factors of anxiety symptoms in women newly diagnosed with breast cancer. It also aims to determine independent predictors of anxiety risk.
METHODS: An analysis of 162 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients at the oncology institute in Almaty was performed. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire on social, demographic, and clinical information, as well as the Beck Anxiety Inventory. In addition, multiple regression analysis was used to model the relationship between anxiety risk and independent predictors.
RESULTS: The average age of the patients was 54.41 years (SD=8.1; min.-max: 32-75). The majority of the patients were married (52%), employed or self-employed (51%), had children (91%), had a bachelor's or a graduate degree (50%), lived in an urban area (54%), did not drink (41%), did not smoke (67%), did not engage in physical activity (54%), and had social support (91%). A total of 48% of patients had symptoms of moderate anxiety, and 33% had symptoms of severe anxiety. Based on the multivariate analysis, factors associated with a lower risk of anxiety symptoms included higher household income (OR -2.21 (95 CI: -1.35, -3.07)) and having reliable social support (OR -2.93 (95% CI: -2.25, -3.61)).
CONCLUSION: The prevalence of anxiety symptoms is very high among newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. Anxiety is more likely to develop in patients from low-income households and those without reliable social support.
METHODS: We collected data from 1583 citizens from four countries via an online survey between October 14 and November 2, 2020. We gathered demographic data and measured mental distress (depression, anxiety, and stress) and fear of COVID-19. Data on sense of control, ego-resilience, grit, self-compassion, and resilience indicators were also collected.
RESULTS: Sense of control was negatively associated with mental distress in all four countries. Self-compassion was negatively associated with mental distress in the samples from Japan, China, and the U.S. We also found an interaction effect for sense of control: the lower the sense of control, the stronger the deterioration of mental distress when the fear of COVID-19 was high.
LIMITATIONS: This study's cross-sectional design precludes causal inferences. Further, lack of data from people who were actually infected with the virus limits comparisons of people who were and were not infected. Finally, as this study only compared data from four countries, comparisons with more countries are needed.
CONCLUSIONS: A sense of control and self-compassion may help buffer against mental health deterioration during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sense of control was consistently associated with mental health across cultures.
METHODS: This web-based, cross-sectional study was conducted among HCWs (N = 398) from Punjab Province of Pakistan. The generalized anxiety scale (GAD-7), patient health questionnaire (PHQ-9), and Brief-COPE were used to assess anxiety, depression, and coping strategies, respectively.
RESULTS: The average age of respondents was 28.67 years (SD = 4.15), with the majority being medical doctors (52%). Prevalences of anxiety and depression were 21.4% and 21.9%, respectively. There was no significant difference in anxiety and depression scores among doctors, nurses, and pharmacists. Females had significantly higher anxiety (P = 0.003) and depression (P = 0.001) scores than males. Moreover, frontline HCWs had significantly higher depression scores (P = 0.010) than others. The depression, not anxiety, score was significantly higher among those who did not receive the infection prevention training (P = 0.004). The most frequently adopted coping strategies were religious coping (M = 5.98, SD = 1.73), acceptance (M = 5.59, SD = 1.55), and coping planning (M = 4.91, SD = 1.85).
CONCLUSION: A considerable proportion of HCWs are having generalized anxiety and depression during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings call for interventions to mitigate mental health risks in HCWs.
METHODOLOGY: An online cross-sectional study was conducted via non-probabilistic convenience sampling. Data were collected on sociodemographic characteristics, lifestyle, COVID-19 related influences. Mental health status was assessed with depression, anxiety, and stress scale (DASS-21).
RESULTS: 388 students participated this study (72.4% female; 81.7% Bachelor's student). The prevalence of moderate to severe depression, anxiety and stress among university students are 53.9%, 66.2% and 44.6%, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression analysis found that the odds of depression were lower among students who exercise at least 3 times per week (OR: 0.380, 95% CI: 0.203-0.711). The odd ratio of student who had no personal history of depression to had depression, anxiety and stress during this pandemic was also lower in comparison (OR: 0.489, 95% CI: 0.249-0.962; OR: 0.482, 95% CI: 0.241-0.963; OR: 0.252, 95% CI: 0.111-0.576). Surprisingly, students whose are currently pursuing Master study was associated with lower stress levels (OR: 0.188, 95% CI: 0.053-0.663). However, student who had poorer satisfaction of current learning experience were more likely to experience stress (OR: 1.644, 95% CI: 1.010-2.675).
LIMITATIONS: It is impossible to establish causal relationships between variables on mental health outcomes, and there is a risk of information bias.
CONCLUSION: The prevalence of mental health issues among university students is high. These findings present essential pieces of predictive information when promoting related awareness among them.
METHODS: This was an observational, cross-sectional study with a sample size of 417 students. An online survey utilizing International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form (IPAQ-SF), General Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) was distributed to Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman students via Google forms.
RESULTS: During lockdown, family income [χ2 (1, n = 124) = 5.155, p = 0.023], and physical activity (PA) [χ2 (1, n = 134) = 6.366, p = 0.012] were associated with anxiety, while depression was associated with gender [χ2 (1, n = 75) = 4.655, p = 0.031]. After lockdown, family income was associated with both anxiety [χ2 (1, n = 111) = 8.089, p = 0.004], and depression [χ2 (1, n = 115) = 9.305, p = 0.002]. During lockdown, family income (OR = 1.60, p = 0.018), and PA (OR = 0.59, p = 0.011) were predictors for anxiety, while gender (OR = 0.65, p = 0.046) was a predictor for depression. After lockdown, family income was a predictor for both anxiety (OR = 1.67, p = 0.011), and depression (OR = 1.70, p = 0.009).
CONCLUSION: Significant negative effects attributed to the COVID-19 lockdown, and certain factors predisposed to the worsening of mental health status in university students. Low family income, PA, and female gender were the major determinants and predictors linked to anxiety and depression.
METHODS: The study adopted a cross-sectional design with purposive sampling. Participants who consented and met the criteria for bloating based on the Rome IV classification completed designated questionnaires. Independent variables comprised health beliefs, intentions, health-promoting behaviors, social support, depression, and anxiety, while dependent variables included bloating severity (general and within 24 h) and QoL. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was conducted utilizing Mplus 8.0 to analyze the relationships between these factors.
RESULTS: A total of 323 participants, with a mean age of 27.69 years (SD = 11.50), predominantly females (64.7%), volunteered to participate in the study. The final SEM model exhibited good fit based on various indices (CFI = 0.922, SRMR = 0.064, RMSEA (95% CI) = 0.048 (0.041-0.054), p-value = 0.714), with 15 significant path relationships identified. The model explained 12.0% of the variance in severity within 24 h, 6% in general severity, and 53.8% in QoL.
CONCLUSION: The findings underscore the significant influence of health beliefs, intentions, behaviors, social support, depression, and anxiety on symptom severity and QoL in individuals experiencing abdominal bloating.