METHODS: The study utilized data from the Global Burden of Disease, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2019, concentrating on adolescents aged 10 to 24 years with depression. We conducted an in-depth analysis of depression, including its age-standardized prevalence, incidence, and Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs), across diverse demographics such as regions, ages, genders, and socio-demographic indexes, spanning from 1990 to 2019.
RESULTS: The analysis found decreasing trends in the prevalence, incidence, and DALYs of adolescent depression in the WPR between 1990-2019, although some countries like Australia and Malaysia showed increases. Specifically, the prevalence of adolescent depression in the region decreased from 9,347,861.6 cases in 1990 to 5,551,341.1 cases in 2019. The incidence rate declined from 2,508.6 per 100,000 adolescents in 1990 to 1,947.9 per 100,000 in 2019. DALYs decreased from 371.9 per 100,000 in 1990 to ASR 299.7 per 100,000 in 2019.
CONCLUSION: This study found an overall decreasing trend in adolescent depression burden in the Western Pacific Region between 1990 and 2019, with heterogeneity across countries. For 30 years, the 20-24 age group accounted for the majority of depression among adolescents Widening inequality in depression burden requires policy attention. Further analysis of risk factors contributing to epidemiological trends is warranted to inform prevention strategies targeting adolescent mental health in the region.
METHOD: The sample consisted of 520 first-year undergraduate international students. The experimental group contained students who were diagnosed with depression and homesickness and received seven sessions of brief individual CBT for depression to reduce homesickness. The control group contained students who were diagnosed with depression and homesickness and received one session of advice and suggestions. The comparison group contained students who experienced only homesickness and did not receive any interventions. The study used the comparison group to determine if an interaction effect existed between students experiencing only homesickness and students experiencing both homesickness and depression.
RESULTS: Students who received brief individual CBT displayed a significant reduction in their homesickness and depression scores compared to the scores of students in the control group. Students who experienced only homesickness exhibited a significant reduction in the scores on homesickness in the post-assessment compared to the control group's post-assessment homesickness scores.
LIMITATION: The results of this study cannot be generalized as data were collected from three universities in Malaysia. The follow-up assessment was conducted six months after the post-assessment, which also limits generalizability beyond six months.
CONCLUSION: Overall, homesickness is considered a normal reaction. Brief individual CBT for depression is effective in reducing homesickness and depression among international students.
METHOD: The study included 2322 nationally representative community-dwelling elderly in Malaysia, randomly selected through a multi-stage proportional cluster random sampling from Peninsular Malaysia. The elderly were surveyed on socio-demographic information, cognitive function, depression and intrinsic religiosity. A four-step moderated hierarchical regression analysis was employed to test the moderating effect. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS (version 15.0).
RESULTS: Bivariate analyses showed that both depression and intrinsic religiosity had significant relationships with cognitive function. In addition, four-step moderated hierarchical regression analysis revealed that the intrinsic religiosity moderated the association between depression and cognitive function, after controlling for selected socio-demographic characteristics.
CONCLUSION: Intrinsic religiosity might reduce the negative effect of depression on cognitive function. Professionals who are working with depressed older adults should seek ways to improve their intrinsic religiosity as one of the strategies to prevent cognitive impairment.
METHODS: A comparative cross-sectional study was conducted in two government hospitals managing COVID-19-related cases in Kelantan, Malaysia from May to July 2020 to identify and compared depressive symptoms levels of frontline and non-frontline healthcare providers. Convenient sampling was applied in the selection of eligible participants and those diagnosed as having any psychiatric illnesses were excluded. The self-administered questionnaires for the Malay versions of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale to measure depressive symptoms score and the Medical Outcome Study Social Support Survey to measure social support score as an important confounder. A descriptive analysis, independent t-test and ANCOVA were performed using SPSS version 26.
RESULTS: A total of 306 respondents from healthcare providers were recruited which 160 were frontline healthcare providers and 146 were non-frontline healthcare providers. The level of depressive symptoms (HADS score >8) was 27.5% for the frontline healthcare providers and 37.7% for the non-frontline healthcare providers. The mean depressive symptoms score for the non-frontline healthcare providers was 0.75 points higher than that of the frontline healthcare providers after adjusting for gender, duration of employment and social support.
CONCLUSION: Non-frontline healthcare providers are also experiencing psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic even though they do not have direct contact with COVID-19 patients.