Background: The current COVID-19 pandemic is associated with a variety of stressors. Preliminary research has demonstrated that general public are experiencing a range of psychological problems, including stress-related disturbances. However, to date, there is not much research on the prevalence of adjustment disorder during the current pandemic. Objectives: This study aimed to assess the prevalence and severity of symptoms of adjustment disorder compared to posttraumatic symptoms, depression and generalized anxiety in a large sample of adult Poles, in the first phase of the current pandemic. Method: Self-report data from a web-based sample (N = 1,742) was collected between March 25 and April 27, just after the introduction of nationwide quarantine measures in Poland. Results: The current COVID-19 pandemic was a highly stressful event for 75% of participants and the strongest predictor of adjustment disorder. Increased symptoms of adjustment disorder were reported by 49%, and they were associated with female gender and not having a full-time job. However, after exclusion of co-occurring symptomatology, 14% of the sample were finally qualified as meeting diagnostic criteria of adjustment disorder. A substantial proportion of the sample screened also positive for generalized anxiety (44%) and depression (26%); the rate for presumptive PTSD diagnosis was 2.4%. Conclusions: High rates of negative mental health outcomes were found in the Polish population in the first weeks into the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown measures. They indicate the intense current stress-related symptoms in the early phase of the pandemic and warrant further monitoring on population’s mental health. • The COVID-19 pandemic is associated with a variety of stressors. • High rates of stress-related adjustment disorder and other emotional disorders were found in the first weeks into the lockdown measures. • Intense stress-related symptoms related to pandemic warrant further monitoring.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic exposes individuals to multiple stressors, such as quarantine, physical distancing, job loss, risk of infection, and loss of loved ones. Such a complex array of stressors potentially lead to symptoms of adjustment disorder. Objective: This cross-sectional exploratory study examined relationships between risk and protective factors, stressors, and symptoms of adjustment disorder during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Data from the first wave of the European Society of Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS) longitudinal ADJUST Study were used. N = 15,563 participants aged 18 years and above were recruited in eleven countries (Austria, Croatia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, and Sweden) from June to November 2020. Associations between risk and protective factors (e.g. gender, diagnosis of a mental health disorder), stressors (e.g. fear of infection, restricted face-to-face contact), and symptoms of adjustment disorder (ADNM-8) were examined using multivariate linear regression. Results: The prevalence of self-reported probable adjustment disorder was 18.2%. Risk factors associated with higher levels of symptoms of adjustment disorder were female gender, older age, being at risk for severe COVID-19 illness, poorer general health status, current or previous trauma exposure, a current or previous mental health disorder, and longer exposure to COVID-19 news. Protective factors related to lower levels of symptoms of adjustment disorder were higher income, being retired, and having more face-to-face contact with loved ones or friends. Pandemic-related stressors associated with higher levels of symptoms of adjustment disorder included fear of infection, governmental crisis management, restricted social contact, work-related problems, restricted activity, and difficult housing conditions. Conclusions: We identified stressors, risk, and protective factors that may help identify individuals at higher risk for adjustment disorder.

The European countries have a long history of exposure to large-scale trauma. In the early 1990s the increasing awareness of the consequences of trauma within the mental health community led to the foundation of local societies for psychotraumatology across Europe and the European Society of Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS), which celebrated its 25th anniversary in 2018. The focus of this article is to describe the current state of care for survivors of trauma in the 15 European countries where ESTSS member societies have been established. Brief descriptions on the historical burden of trauma in each country are followed by an overview of the care system for trauma survivors in the countries, the state-of-the-art of interventions, current challenges in caring for survivors and the topics that need to be most urgently addressed in the future. The reports from the different countries demonstrate how important steps towards a better provision of care for survivors of trauma have been made in Europe. Given the cultural and economic diversity of the continent, there are also differences between the European countries, for instance with regard to the use of evidence-based treatments. Strategies to overcome these differences, like the new ESTSS training curricula for care-providers across Europe, are briefly discussed.

The Cognitive-attentional Syndrome Questionnaire (CAS-1) is a short self-descriptive measure developed to provide information regarding the severity of cognitive-attentional syndrome, a key construct in metacognitive therapy. The three presented studies explore the psychometric properties of the CAS-1. Study 1 was based on a community sample (N = 1225) and explored the factor structure of the CAS-1, its relations with measures of rumination and metacognitive beliefs, and its demographic structure. Study 2, performed on an internet-based sample (N = 602), explored relations of the CAS-1 with measures of rumination, psychopathology, and quality of life. This study also dealt with the validity of the CAS-1. Study 3 was conducted on participants selected from study 1 (n = 98), based on the results of the CAS-1 and other measures. It explored the predictive validity of the questionnaire's diagnosis through ascertaining clinical diagnoses. All three studies confirm the reliability of the CAS-1. Its validity was confirmed by significant associations with measures of rumination, metacognitive beliefs, psychopathology, and quality of life. Two-factor and four-factor structures of the CAS-1 were confirmed, with the two-factor model better fitting the data. The results obtained show that the CAS-1 has good psychometric properties; its current form is deemed most acceptable for clinical use and we advise use of combined measures of CAS or development of a more expanded measure of CAS for research purposes.