Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is influencing all segments of society, including youth. Although the physical complaints in the time of COVID-19 are broadly-studied, a paucity of research targeted psychological ones on the precious youth population. This study aimed to describe the real-time state of Egyptian youth’s psychiatric morbidity, dietary changes, and coping methods during this pandemic and explore probable factors influencing them. A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted using an online survey among 447 Egyptian participants aged 14–24 years. Sociodemographic data, dietary habits, and coping methods during COVID-19 were collected. The Arabic versions of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7), and the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) were used to assess depression, anxiety and insomnia, respectively.Results: Overall, 80.5%, 74.0%, and 73.8% of the participants had different grades of depression, anxiety, and insomnia symptoms. 37.4% gained weight. Emotional and night eating emerged as new habits during the pandemic among 17.9% and 29.3% of the participants, respectively. Each of depression, anxiety, and insomnia was significantly associated with each other, female gender and having a COVID-19 infected relative. Adolescents had significantly higher scores of depression and anxiety. Those with a history of physical illness had significantly higher scores of anxiety and insomnia. Bodyweight and dietary changes were significantly associated with depression, anxiety, and insomnia. Participants reported various positive and negative coping methods.Conclusion: Psychiatric morbidity and dietary changes are evident in young people during COVID-19 pandemic. Psychological well-being and dietary habits are important but often overlooked components of youth well-being especially in challenging times. Depression, anxiety, and insomnia were almost always present and dietary changes were significantly associated with the presence of them.

Background: The COVID-19 outbreak has infected people all over the world where many clinics are being constructed to diagnose and treat lingering symptoms or long COVID. Neurological and long-term cognitive consequences are very worrisome. Many of COVID-19’s neurological symptoms are likely the result of the body’s extensive immunological response to infection rather than the virus attacking the brain or nervous system directly. At the same time, the extent and type of COVID-19’s cognitive consequences are unknown. The goal of this study was to assess the cognitive functions of healthcare workers 2 weeks to 3 months after COVID-19 infection. Ninety-two healthcare workers participated in the study; 32 were post-COVID-19 cases, and 60 were healthy people (the comparison group). The cognitive functions of the participants were assessed using the Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination (ACE-III) test, which evaluated attention, memory, language, and visuospatial skills, as well as the Arabic version of the Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety GAD-7 and Depression Assessments PHQ-9. Results: The study revealed that there was a highly significant direct correlation between post-infection with COVID-19 and scores of both anxiety and depression and an inverse correlation in the case of attention and memory. On the other hand, there is no statistical effect of post-COVID-19 on verbal fluency, language scores, and visio-spatial abilities. Using multiple linear regression, there was a powerful significant decrease effect of post-COVID-19 on memory scores controlling both anxiety and depression degrees (Beta = − 0.745, P < 0.001). Also, there was a strong negative correlation post-COVID-19 on attention scores controlling both anxiety and depression degrees (Beta = − 0.745, P < 0.001). Conclusions: The study showed a strong negative effect of post-COVID-19 on the attention and memory of patients. Furthermore, both anxiety and depression scores increased significantly among the post-COVID-19 patients.

Background: In medical practice, it is common to see patients who present with physical symptoms for which no disease pathology can be found. The presence of neurological symptoms that are shown to be incompatible with neurological pathophysiology is classically known as “conversion disorder” or “Functional Neurological Symptom Disorder” (FND). While FND is common in Egypt as in the rest of the world, few scientific studies systematically evaluate the degree of knowledge, attitude, and care provided by health care professionals to FND patients. We aimed to assess Egyptian physicians’ perspectives on FND.Results: A cross-sectional study has been conducted on 152 physicians dealing with FND practicing in Egypt from specialties of psychiatry, neurology, and other specialties. We found that for 45% of the participants, disordered functioning of the nervous system plus psychogenesis was the accepted etiology behind FND. Most participants were significantly not satisfied with their education about FND (p-value 0.01). Psychiatrists and neurologists significantly preferred to use the term “conversion disorder” while other specialties mainly used “psychic” and “Somatization/Somatoform Disorder” (p-value 0.001). Forty-four percent of the participants think they have a good knowledge of functional neurological disorders (FND), while the majority (86.8%) were worried about missing an organic disorder. Psychiatrists were the most confident in diagnosing FND and the most comfortable discussing it with patients (p-values 0.055 and 0.007, respectively).Conclusion: Here we highlight the common theme of worry about FND patients prevailing among healthcare professionals who are mostly perplexed about the mechanisms behind FND, and how to communicate these symptoms to other professionals and patients themselves. Future directions need to be devoted to minimizing the gap between the research finding and the currently applied care. Better education and teaching about FND may improve patient care.

Background: Medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) are highly prevalent, frequently co-occurring with psychiatric symptoms such as depression, alexithymia, and anxiety. Objective: To evaluate the relation between depression, anxiety, and alexithymia and severity of somatic symptoms in patients with MUPS. Method: This is a cross-sectional study conducted on 196 patients suffering from MUPS. The patients were recruited from tertiary care internal medicine and neuropsychiatry clinics during the first quarter of 2019. The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-15), (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7), Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders Clinician Version (SCID-I-CV), and Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) were employed to assess somatic severity, depression, anxiety, major mental disorders, and alexithymia in the sample of patients. Results: The results of the study indicate that GAD-7 and PHQ-9 scores had a positive correlation with PHQ-15 (p < 0.05) in multivariate regression. In contrast, TAS-20 was not independently correlated with PHQ-15. Adding TAS-20 to GAD-7 and PHQ-9 in the equation of the regression model enhances the predictive capacity of the model (p < 001). Conclusion: The results of the study indicate that only anxiety and depressive symptoms, but not alexithymia, were associated independently with MUPS severity.

Background: Telepsychiatry has gained considerable attention, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although various factors influence the choice between online and offline modalities, differences among populations remain underexplored. Objective: This study aims to compare adults seeking mental health support online and offline in private clinics. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, we assessed differences in sociodemographic factors, internet accessibility and usability, previous help-seeking history, personality traits assessed using the Arabic Big Five Personality Inventory, and levels of self-stigma measured using the Self-Stigma of Seeking Help Scale. Results: In total, 259 participants were included (136 online and 123 offline). The online group had a higher proportion of university graduates (P=.02), employed individuals (P<.001), and those with better internet access (P=.03) and higher internet usability (P=.001). The offline group showed higher levels of conscientiousness (P=.003). The primary reasons for choosing online therapy were ease of access and time-saving. Logistic regression identified previous use of online psychiatry as the strongest factor associated with choosing online services (odds ratio [OR] 28.90, 95% CI 11.739-71.165; P<.001). Employment (OR 5.01, 95% CI 1.781-14.080; P=.002), better internet usability (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.069-2.664; P=.03), and agreeableness (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.001-1.351; P=.05) were also significant factors. In contrast, previous in-person visits (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.048-0.269; P<.001), openness (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.748-0.975; P=.02), and conscientiousness (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.758-0.971; P=.02) were negatively associated with online preference. Conclusions: This study highlights key differences between online and offline mental health help seekers, enhances our understanding of treatment modality preferences, and paves the way for future research.