Develop a PowerPoint presentation summarizing your Public Health Analysis paper (attached). The presentation should analyze the public health issue in terms o

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health

Elizabeth Hernandez

South University

NSG7005

Dr. Deborah Terry

9/22/2024

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health

The COVID-19 pandemic has become one of the biggest global health crises of the 21st century, with profound effects not only on people’s physical well-being. Some of its arguably most profound and possibly most enduring influences are on the Mental health of people from different demographic, ethnic, and national backgrounds. This paper not only emphasizes the significance of the role of the COVID-19 pandemic in causing mental health issues but also explains the complexities in the outcomes of the same on the American population and global community.

The emergence and the relatively short time it took for SARS-CoV-2 to spread across the global population in the initial part of 2020 led to a range of social interventions, such as lockdowns, social distancing, and closure of businesses. However, these interventions were critical in containing the spread of the virus; they also paved the way for another problem –mental health (Tausch et al., 2021). Loneliness, fear of contagion, financial insecurity, and the displacements of customary lives have some responsibility for mental health problems such as anxiety, depression, stress, and other allied ailments. This increase has been very alarming and has reached a level where most healthcare providers and scholars describe it as the second pandemic of mental health disorders.

The severity of this mental health crisis is big enough in CDC’s data collected during June of 2020, 40. About 9% of the U. S. adults claimed to have adverse mental or behavioral health at least once, such as symptoms of anxiety or depressive disorders (30. 9%), a TSRD connected with COVID-19 (26. 3%), or they initiated or increased substance use to manage stress or pandemic-driven emotions (13. 3%). Such numbers are higher than in the period before the pandemic, which shows the scale of the impact of the crisis on mental health.

This topic is chosen because of its relevance and the ability to observe its adverse effects on society in the long run. Mental health can be defined as the medical aspect of a person’s well-being that directly impacts work productivity, interpersonal relationships, and general quality of life. The mental health impacts of this pandemic are not only restricted to people who got infected with this disease but also include healthcare professionals, the youth, older adults, and those who have mental health disorders. Due to this wide-ranging impact on people’s sexual behaviors, it is a significant issue of public health importance that should be thoroughly researched and addressed.

More importantly, this issue is central to population health and social justice. The COVID-19 pandemic appears to have had a negative influence on mental health and has illuminated how marginalized populations are also more greatly affected by disparities in health. For instance, socioeconomic status, race, and ethnicity, as well as access and availability of health care services, have impacted the vulnerability to getting infected with COVID-19 and the potential to develop mental health issues. Such an association between mental health and SDH creates complexity in the attuned problem and solution-oriented policies.

The pandemic has also exposed gaps in mental health services and called for creativity in systems to respond to mental health issues. The new reliance on telehealth services, which became essential during COVID-19, has unveiled the possibilities and complexities of supporting mental health in a digitally connected but physically disconnected world. Naturally, this situation made it possible to reconsider and, if necessary, redesign mental health care services aimed at providing appropriate services to more attendees in crises and beyond.

Knowing and coping with the pandemic's consequences on the populace's mental well-being will be essential as society moves through and beyond the worst of it. This strategic review will, therefore, endeavor to provide a broad view of COVID-19’s Association with MH to discover the prevalence and risk factors of MH conditions, understand the present response utilizing systematic reviews and meta-analysis, and describe measures for more robust MH systems that can respond to future events such as COVID-19. In so doing, we confront one crisis and simultaneously position ourselves for a more robust response to mental health globally as we brace for more tests in the future.

Comprehensive Literature Review

The coronavirus pandemic has caused a massive impact on people’s mental health globally, and the full effects and consequences remain uncertain. This literature review will review current works relating the pandemic to mental health, focusing on susceptible groups, vulnerable factors, protective measures, and possible treatments.

Identification of At-Risk Populations

That is why different scholars presented numerous analyses recognizing populations most at risk of developing mental health problems during the pandemic. Another study that was a systematic review by Xiong et al. (2020) also revealed that women, younger people, and people with a history of mental illness were at higher risk of psychological problems. Employing people, especially in the health sector, has continually been highlighted as high-risk. Lai et al. (2020) also showed that among 1257 healthcare workers in China, 50. 4% got symptoms of depression, 44. Anxiety 6%; Insomnia 34%; and Severe anxiety/flashing lights trigger 71%—5% distress.

Older people who are at a higher risk of severe COVID-19 have presented different mental health performances. For instance, in the Longitudinal Study of Mental Health conducted in the UK by Pierce et al. (2020), the authors discovered that young adults aged between 18 and 34 had contracted the highest level of mental distress as opposed to several older adults. This claim goes against the prevailing assumption that older people constitute the most vulnerable demography and would benefit from social isolation to decrease their chances of contracting COVID-19.

Yet another weak link in the population is children and adolescents as part of the population. They have noticed that the closure of schools and the disruption of their daily schedules have affected their health in one way or another. According to Moreno et al. (2020), school closures and the general lockdown disrupt children, especially those from low SES, and elevate their vulnerability to abuse, neglect, and poor mental health.

Risk Factors and Causes

The literature highlights some of the risk factors that resulted in worsened mental health during the pandemic. In line with these, Vindegaard and Benros (2020) have divided the push factors into virus-related ones, such as the fear of getting infected and worrying about the health of their loved ones, and lockdown factors, which include social isolation, changes in finances, and daily practices.

Several cross-sectional studies reveal that social isolation and loneliness appear as high-risk factors. As specified in the meta-analysis of Salari et al. (2020), it was revealed that the relationship between social isolation and the symptoms of anxiety and depression was highly significant. Besides, changes in family size, economic instability, and insecurity at the workplace, such as job loss, have also been considered significant sources of stress. In the cross-sectional survey of US adults by Ettman et al. (2020), it was found that the rate of depressed symptoms increased threefold during the pandemic compared to the period before the pandemic, and lower income and less savings were of higher risk. Some of the risk factors pointed out include exposure to media and information overload. Among the perceived factors, Wang et al. (2020) pointed out that the general population in China generally, who was frequently exposed to social media and news about COVID-19, had high levels of anxiety and depression.

Known Prevention Measures

The literature reports recommendations that emphasize both Individual and System levels of prevention. Homles et al. (2020) support the need for well-coordinated communication regarding public health instructions to clarify uncertainties and fears. Their recommendations also include how mental health must be considered in responding to disasters such as the current pandemic.

At the CMC level, the need to stay connected even when physically disconnected has been recognized as necessary. Galea et al. (2020) posit that the integration of technology-based communications has the benefit of reducing the effects of loneliness. They also stress the need to keep to some schedule and at the same time do healthy things that are recommended, such as exercises and sleeping, among others. Fiorillo and Gorwood (2020) also show how the strategies used in building resilience contribute to the avoidance of mental health deterioration. There is also an indication that enhancing the use of adaptive coping strategies and advancing awareness of stress management can be some of the ways to prevent the occurrence of the disorder.

Evidence-Based Diagnosis and Treatment Options

There have been shifts in the diagnosis and management of mental health disorders due to changes brought about by the pandemic. Telehealth has, therefore, shifted to being a vital solution in such a setting. Telemental services are examined by Moreno et al. (2020) when considering the increase of telemental health services use, as well as its positive and negative aspects in continuing patient care and its limitations for specific patients and populations.

Regarding diagnosis, symptoms are best evaluated within the context of the pandemic, as pointed out by the current study by Talevi et al. (2020). They observe or must admit that specific reactions, such as increased levels of anxiety or changes in mood, might be just reactions to abnormal situations, not signs of the disorder.

Concerning the treatment, selected groups of psychological interventions, such as CBT and its versions delivered through the Internet, are effective in managing pandemic-related mental health concerns. Rajkumar (2020) self-accounts several articles showing the feasibility of online CBT for reducing symptoms of anxiety and depression during the pandemic.

Drugs continue to form part of the treatment, though more so in primary care cases. However, there are controversies on the effects of COVID-19 on medicines, especially psychotropic ones. Thus, Vindegaard and Benros (2020) weigh in by noting the possible drug interactions of COVID-19 treatments and psychotropic drugs, hence the need to manage medications properly.

Access to Treatment for High-Risk Groups

Due to the pandemic, the accessibility and prescriptions of mental health treatments were affected. Czeisler et al. (2020) found out that despite having increased rates of mental disorders, many people have been unable to access services owing to lockdowns and inundated health systems.

Telehealth has gone a long way toward filling this void; however, there are still discrepancies with its application. To that end, Moreno et al. (2020) underscore that although telemedicine has been beneficial in increasing access for some consumers, it has made access more difficult for others, such as older people, people residing in rural areas, and individuals with minimal technological competence or technological devices.

On the same note, particular and specialized interventions have been designed for healthcare workers. Another study by Lai et al. (2020) outlines the application of psychological support services, such as providing online platforms and helplines targeting medical workers in China.

Existing Inequities

The COVID-19 crisis has made existing disparities in mental health care worse. According to Panchal et al. (2021), the analysis of the ongoing pandemic revealed that such communities are affected in the U.S. both physically and mentally due to COVID-19. Others blame this on aspects such as higher tendencies of layoff, elevated risk of exposure given the essential nature of their work, and primary inequalities in the use of health facilities.

Another novel pattern that has been identified during the COVID-19 pandemic is the role of socioeconomic status in mental health. Since limited health literacy has already been associated with lower socioeconomic status, Ettman et al. (2020) concluded that people with lower income and less savings were at a higher risk of developing depression symptoms, indicating that in the COVID-19 crisis, economic and mental health stresses are intertwined. Self-rated measures of psychological distress also varied by gender, with females tending to score higher than males. Xiong et al. (2020) have noted this is due to issues such as caregiving duties and job loss, majoring in fields dominated by the female gender.

Barriers to Eradication or Decrease of the Health Issue

Multiple challenges to mitigation of the mental health impact of the pandemic have been described in the literature. Discrimination and prejudice, or in other words, stigma, still pose a significant challenge, as Torales et al. (2020) have said that this is a significant reason why people will not seek support for a mental health concern.

Another is the health system capacity, which is hard to overcome. Moreno et al. (2020) have noted that one of the significant issues that can hinder access and utilization of mental health services for a growing population is the capacity to expand and scale up mental health services in response to demographic pressures at the distal end of healthcare settings in LMICs. They also observe that due to COVID-19, several psychiatric care providers shifted towards this pandemic response, hence reducing available usable resources.

The constantly changing pandemic has made working on and implementing contextualized efforts challenging. Holmes et al. (2020) stress the urgent need to track population-level mental health change in real-time so that we can adequately respond to it with policies and interventions. Financial constraints at the individual and systemic levels present significant barriers. Panchal et al. (2021) note that economic downturns and job losses have made it difficult for many to afford mental health care, while health systems face budget constraints in expanding services.

Community Supports Facilitating Prevention or Reduction of the Problem

However, several community supports exist to cater to mental health challenges during the pandemic. Pfefferbaum and North (2020) highlighted how the extended community can support vulnerable community members by offering social support and mental health support. Social networking sites, social media support groups, and related applications have become familiar places for people to share their experiences. It is recommended not to rely on these purely web applications and services as a primary solution. Nevertheless, such services may help people cope with emotional experiences and prevent loneliness.

Efforts at the workplace have also helped to address mental health. Writing about the practices of employee assistance programs and mental health support services, Moreno et al. (2020) note that many organizations have addressed the problem of work-related stressors experienced by employees. Finally, schools have implemented several support systems for students and staff. These include counseling services, psychoeducation activities, and measures to sustain social relations in e-learning settings.

Literature Review Summary

This analysis of the available literature reveals that the COVID-19 pandemic is nuanced and affects people's mental health in various not-so-obvious ways. The pandemic has magnified mental health difficulties and brought about new ones. Still, it has also fostered changes in how and approaches provide mental health care and increased focus on mental health.

The studies clearly show how the pandemic affects specific groups more. Among those badly affected are the healthcare staff, young adults, women, and those who have a history of mental health issues or those with poor SES. Here, it is necessary to underscore the need for focused initiatives and measures to prevent discriminative tendencies.

The modern evolution of telehealth and other digital mental health interventions can be considered a positive development and a threat. Although these approaches have opened the doors for some people, they have also drawn attention to the fact that not everyone has the ‘digital readiness’ to access mental health care and that other powerful strategies need to be employed.

Further, primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention are important parts of mental health responses to the pandemic. However, the concept that the problem requires more radical solutions based on school improvements to address social factors that define health is also essential. Thinking about this constantly as the pandemic increasingly becomes a part of our lives, it is equally essential that we remain dynamic in our view of and in dealing with its impact on mental health. They will continue to be important in tracking the effects of mental health interventions in the long run and coming up with long-lasting, equitable programs and policies.

This literature review provides a future analysis of the significance of public health, policy issues, and APN solutions to address mental health problems caused by COVID-19. However, this points to the importance of a broadly focused prevention strategy that draws from various fields and locates short-term resources within long-term protective factors in global health threats.

Understanding of the Public Health Problem

The COVID-19 global outbreak, while threatening the lives of millions of people, individuals, and communities, has burdened and stressed public health techniques unlike ever before, with the thematic focus of their cardinal mental health problem. As shown below, the analysis discusses justice, legal, regulatory, data, and advanced practice issues concerning overall public health aims and goals.

From the justice perspective, the pandemic has magnified already existing asymmetries in mental health quite vividly. For example, communities of color in the United States have suffered disproportionately from both the physical and mental health effects of COVID-19. As Panchal et al. previously pointed out, it is due to social inequities, including more people losing employment, being at higher risk as essential workers, and having a higher risk of accessing adequate medical care. Therefore, it has compounded these social injustices and efficiently shifted mental health to a fundamental social justice concern.

The availability of mental health services has also come to the fore as a justice issue. Although the sudden switch to telehealth was a great idea and a necessity in many aspects, it came with new challenges for some vulnerable groups. In their study, Moreno et al. (2020) agree with their opinion on the benefits of telehealth to the percentage of increasing access to care for specific groups while posing challenges to others, such as older adults, rural dwellers, and people with low-tech literacy or access. This digital divide in mental health care is one of the biggest justice concerns that require attention as a way of providing equal care to all.

Also, they noted that COVID-19 has highlighted the issue of disparities when it comes to mental health. Low-income groups and rural areas, which previously lacked adequate mental health care provisions, would now lose even the little they had during this crisis. Yachting these disparities is essential from the justice perspective mainly because people of different social statuses and living in different geographical areas should have the same rights to access mental health promoting and curing services.

For instance, the legal and regulatory systems that deal with mental health care have been changing rapidly due to Covid-19. In the same setup, one of the most outstanding changes has been observed in telehealth provisions. According to McBain et al. (2023), the U. S. states developed policies to increase telehealth use for mental health. Some changes included the liberalization of physiologic practice on teleconference as out-of-state providers, insurance coverage for telehealth services, and others. However, new legal issues have been elicited due to these recent regulatory initiatives. Legal concerns that arise when practicing across different states, patient privacy in virtual space, and the question of what is reasonable and necessary in telehealth practice are challenging questions that remain unanswered. It is essential to have harmonized policies to offer broad access while providing quality health services to patients.

Mental health parity laws have also faced some criticism during the pandemic. Just like actuality, it has anchored attention on mental health care by posing questions about the adequacy of the existing parity laws that aim to provide equal insurance coverage of mental and physical afflictions. This may require more forceful legislation to guarantee that insurance policies offer sufficient coverage for such services as those offered by mental health facilities since the demand is expected to rise following the pandemic outcomes.

Another legal and regulatory issue that has also grown to be important is mental health in workplaces. With the Working from Home culture in place due to the impact of COVID-19, it is pertinent to ask about the role of employers in ensuring employee’s well-being. These are issues concerning mental health provision, including employee mental health, sexual and mental health, and the privacy rights of employees. These concerns could call for developing new contractual and legal tools in the light of new work conditions generated by the pandemic.

Informed analysis of the available data is essential for understanding the effects of a pandemic on mental health. Czeisler et al. (2020), who revealed a study on people in the United States conducted through a poll conducted in June 2020, stated that 40% of the respondents. 9% of U. S. adults are considered as having at least one adverse mental or behavioral health condition. This includes having advised or experienced symptoms of an anxiety disorder or depressive disorder (30. 9%), having advised or experienced a trauma- and stressor-related disorder tailored to the COVID-19 pandemic up to the time of the survey (26. 3%), or having started using or increased substance use to manage stress or other feelings related to COVID-19 (13. 3%). The above incidences are even higher than what was recorded before the outbreak of COVID-19, hence showing the extensiveness of the mental health effects.

Pierce et al. (2020) conducted a study in the UK based on longitudinal data and revealed a considerable rise in mental distress as compared to the pre-pandemic levels. It was higher among young adults, women, and parents of young children. From this data, it can be inferred that the pandemic has not tremendously affected the mental health of all citizens, but the effect is more pronounced in some groups. The consequences of this data are manifold. It calls for specialized approaches to addressing issues among high-risk populations, shows that the mental health effects of the pandemic may be long-term and might need continuous efforts after the period of the crisis, and underlines the necessity of amping up mental health care availability to meet the demand.

The pandemic affected advanced practice nurses' (APNs) performance positively and negatively regarding mental health care. One problem is APNs' reactive adaptation to telehealth practices. This encompasses the principles of effective virtual care and the skills of establishing rapport and providing assessments in the virtual setting. The integration of telehealth has also taken a very short time to develop, forcing the APNs to adapt to the care delivery model.

Another critical concern is the increasing responsibilities of the APNs in primary care mental health. Psychiatric disorders are on the rise, and coupled with the possibility of having inadequate specialists in the future, APNs practicing in primary care facilities may be required to assume extra responsibilities involving the detection and treatment of mental illnesses. This entails constant training and capacity building to enable the APNs to stand in a position to address different mental health complications, inclusive of the simple ones, such as anxiety and depression, as well as the complicated ones.

The pandemic has also expanded the recognition of APNs' role in health promotion and disease prevention. COVID-19 has presented a greater necessity for mental health promotion endeavors, which include stress management strategies, resilience-based interventions, and psychoeducation on COVID-19-related mental health risks as part of actions that need to be integrated by the APNs. This preventive focus is significant for caring for the long-term consequences of the crisis on people's mental health.

Many of the studied mental health consequences are well related to the Healthy People 2020 objectives focused on the MHMD topic area. On this account, the higher rates of depression during the pandemic emphasize the relevance of MHMD-4, which concentrates on decreasing the share of persons who meet the criteria for MDD. It has all been difficult to achieve this aim due to the effects of the global pandemic, but it is as vital as ever.

The crisis is also relevant to MHMD-9, which means the proportion of adults with mental health disorders to access treatment. This particular shift in telehealth, along with the revelation of various mental health issues that transpired during the said pandemic, may help achieve this objective. However, problems related to access must still be considered. In addition, the existing pandemic mental health issues interact with the Healthy People 2020 priorities, including social determinants of health, substance use, and health services. This highlights that most health problems are interrelated and require holistic, integrated strategies.

Different measures and interventions to deal with the effects of the pandemic on mental health have, however, been put in place. According to Tausch et al. (2021), it is worth noting that most of the countries in America have escalated their mental health countermeasures to COVID-19. Some approaches include increasing remote delivery of care, linking efforts to address mental health to the rest of the COVID-19 interventions, developing and executing community awareness initiatives, putting support measures for health workers in place, and reviewing policies for enhancing access to mental health.

The performances of these strategies have not been the same. It can be deduced that telehealth has been mostly successful in managing healthcare access for many people due to the increased adoption of these services (McBain et al., 2023). However, as mentioned above, telehealth has also brought about fresh access hurdles for some groups. Education campaigns have focused on decreasing prejudice and promoting seeking assistance, with various successes in population mental health. Support programs targeting HCWs have also been established, and research such as that conducted by Lai et al. (2020) reveals they are helpful.

The studies indicate that policy changes have had both positive and negative effects. As has been observed, there have been changes in the accessibility of services for some individuals. Still, due to issues related to the implementation and context, they have not produced the full impact as expected within some systems. Good strategies are generally inclusive, adequately funded, and sensitive to local conditions. For instance, when mental health was incorporated into the general coronavirus management, the countries could easily build on existing systems and structures. Sometimes, the problems might be attributed to a problem or weakness that existed before the outbreak of COVID-19. For example, some nations that have always lacked enough mental health workers have not been able to cater to higher demand as policies change.

Some improvements can be proposed based on the analysis of current strategies and their effectiveness. Further building the use of telehealth alongside in-person care might address the strengths of telehealth with the conversational social needs, which principally require face-to-face contact, especially for complicated cases. Enhancing the substantive community’s mental health services could reduce barriers to access and present culturally sensitive treatment. Expanding mental health assessment and brief intervention in primary care makes it easier to target mental disorders.

Change at the individual level is possible and essential, but only if social determinants of mental health are managed. The determinants of poor mental health, which are social and economic deficiencies like insecurity in employment and homelessness, need to be addressed to support mental health. Given this learning, efforts aimed at raising the consciousness of computer technology in equally older people and populations who have been left behind by example may assist in eradicating barriers to the availability of telehealth. Education and training of more mental health workers, alongside advanced practice nurses focusing on mental health, can be other ways of rectifying workforce deficits. Introducing programs aimed at improving the population’s psychological readiness for crises may be effective on a large scale.

Several of these may need legislative reforms to address the consequences of the pandemic on mental health adequately. Some of the adjustments to telehealth guidelines permanently may include teletherapy, licensing for practicing across state borders, and adequate reimbursement for services. Moreover, stronger continuing mental health parity laws might be required to guarantee sufficient care for mental health services, especially given the upward trend. There may be a need to add laws that would determine the specifics of employers’ actions toward the mental health of employees, especially those who work remotely. New changes to the legislation governing the privacy of patient information may be required to cover the need to offer mental health services remotely. It may also be necessary to review legislation