University of Duisburg-Essen, Clinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR Hospital Essen, 45147 Essen, Germany.
J Public Health (Oxf). 2021 Dec 10;43(4):710-713. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdab037.
Governmental restrictions of daily life are key elements in reducing the transmission of COVID-19, but they have also put a strain on people's mental health. Preventive policies differ all over the world as well as over different periods of time, and depend mostly on current infection rates. In Germany, there were two periods of restraint of varying severity, during which the government used different combinations of containment and mitigation measures to protect risk groups and to lower the number of hospitalizations.
In two online studies, we aimed to determine differences and similarities in COVID-19-related fear, generalized anxiety, depression and distress levels, as well as in the adherence to safety behaviour between the first lockdown in March and April and the second lockdown in November.
This study showed continued high psychological burden and even increased levels of depression symptoms, as well as less safety behaviour in the second phase of restrictions.
The results hint at a prolonged negative impact on people's mental health and their safety behaviour despite lesser restrictions in the second lockdown, which may be interpreted as pandemic fatigue and hence strengthens the argument for a low-threshold access to psychological care.
政府对日常生活的限制是减少 COVID-19 传播的关键因素，但这也给人们的心理健康带来了压力。预防政策在世界各地以及不同时期都有所不同，主要取决于当前的感染率。在德国，有两个不同严重程度的限制期，在此期间，政府使用不同的组合来控制和缓解措施来保护风险群体并降低住院人数。
在两项在线研究中，我们旨在确定在第一次封锁（3 月和 4 月）和第二次封锁（11 月）期间，与 COVID-19 相关的恐惧、广泛性焦虑、抑郁和困扰水平以及安全行为的差异和相似之处。
本研究表明，在限制的第二阶段，人们的心理负担持续沉重，甚至抑郁症状加剧，安全行为减少。
尽管第二次封锁的限制较小，但结果暗示着对人们心理健康和安全行为的负面影响可能会持续下去，这可能被解释为大流行疲劳，因此加强了对低门槛获得心理保健的论点。
