The second year of the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease) pandemic has seen the need to identify and assess the long-term consequences of a SARS-CoV-2 infection on an individual’s overall wellbeing, including adequate cognitive functioning. ‘Cognitive COVID’ is an informal term coined to interchangeably refer to acute changes in cognition during COVID-19 and/or cognitive sequelae with various deficits following the infection. These may manifest as altered levels of consciousness, encephalopathy-like symptoms, delirium, and loss of various memory domains. Dysexecutive syndrome is a peculiar manifestation of ‘Cognitive COVID’ as well. In the previous major outbreaks of viruses like SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and Influenza. There have been attempts to understand the underlying mechanisms describing the causality of similar symptoms following SARS-CoV-2 infection. This review, therefore, is attempting to highlight the current understanding of the various direct and indirect mechanisms, focusing on the role of neurotropism of SARS-CoV-2, the general pro-inflammatory state, and the pandemic-associated psychosocial stressors in the causality of ‘Cognitive COVID.’ Neurotropism is associated with various mechanisms including retrograde neuronal transmission via olfactory pathway, a general hematogenous spread, and the virus using immune cells as vectors. The high amounts of inflammation caused by COVID-19, compounded with potential intubation, are associated with a deleterious effect on the cognition as well. Finally, the pandemic’s unique psychosocial impact has raised alarm due to its possible effect on cognition. Furthermore, with surfacing reports of post-COVID-vaccination cognitive impairments after vaccines containing mRNA encoding for spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2, we hypothesize their causality and ways to mitigate the risk. The potential impact on the quality of life of an individual and the fact that even a minor proportion of COVID-19 cases developing cognitive impairment could be a significant burden on already overwhelmed healthcare systems across the world make it vital to gather further evidence regarding the prevalence, presentation, correlations, and causality of these events and reevaluate our approach to accommodate early identification, management, and rehabilitation of patients exhibiting cognitive symptoms.

Schizophrenia is a major psychotic disorder affecting nearly 23.6 million people globally and greatly impacting the cognitive and social functioning of individuals. Multiple risk factors, including genetic, environmental, and epigenetic factors have been identified. However, the exact mechanism by which some factors aid in the development of schizophrenia is still uncertain. Acute and/or long-standing inflammation has been implicated as both a cause and effect of schizophrenia. Heightened immune responses have been documented in large cohorts of individuals with schizophrenia. While not completely known, multiple hypotheses, such as disruption of the blood–brain barrier, alterations in the kynurenine/tryptophan pathway, and increased microglial activation, have been presented to correlate inflammation with schizophrenic symptoms. Measurement of C-reactive protein (CRP) is a commonly performed and inexpensive test on patients’ serum to determine levels of systemic inflammation in the body. Multiple studies have reported an elevated CRP level in different stages of schizophrenia, indicating its potential to be used as a viable biomarker in the diagnosis and monitoring of schizophrenia along with assessing treatment response to conventional and non-conventional treatment regimens. This review aims to evaluate the role of inflammation, in general, and CRP, in particular, in the pathogenesis of schizophrenia and its potential significance in diagnostic, therapeutic, and preventative approaches towards schizophrenia and psychosis.

The SARS‐CoV‐2 outbreak is an unprecedented event in modern history worldwide. To facilitate speedy and smooth recovery during this time period, an added responsibility is placed upon rehabilitation center counselors, staff and management. In this paper we expose the role that psychiatric rehabilitation plays during the COVID-19 crisis. Since COVID-19 pandemic has remarkably raised mental health concerns, one of the high risks and possibly neglected groups includes individuals undergoing mental health rehabilitation, the impact on which can be significant as compared to the rest of the population. In order to ensure that individuals on the road to recovery are not alone and forgotten during the times of coronavirus crisis they should be provided with adequate resources, such as online meetings and group therapy sessions, assessment, treatment and support by telephone and video consultation and getting the medications they need to recover. This article highlights how the coronavirus pandemic, that has hit hard the health care and all categories of patients affected by mental disorders, is likely to be particularly dramatic for mental health rehabilitation centers. Indeed, the COVID-19 crisis has severely tested the health systems worldwide, reducing sometimes the quality and quantity of care offered to psychiatric patients both hospitalized and not in rehabilitation centers. The main goal of this paper is to raise awareness of the importance, often underestimated, of mental health rehabilitation centers, on which one should invest for the both future of psychological and psychiatric rehabilitation and the current crisis as well.

Encephalitis, a well-known complication of measles, is inflammation of the brain parenchyma which is mostly due to the viral invasion of neurons. It presents with a variety of symptoms ranging from mild to severe depending on the extent of the damaged neurons. The diagnosis is based on clinical symptoms such as fever, headache, altered level of consciousness, focal neurological deficits, etc. A detailed history and physical examination facilitate the diagnosis. Investigations include blood tests for measles-specific antibodies, CT, MRI, and analysis of the CSF. The management of measles-induced encephalitis mainly revolves around prevention against contracting the disease and providing supportive care if acquired. The administration of the measles vaccine is the major means of preventing this disease in childhood. Two doses are required to achieve sufficient immunity against measles, the first at the age of 12–15 months and the second at 4–6 years of age. Supportive care includes administering acetaminophen for fever, oral rehydrating salt (ORS) for diarrhea and vomiting, antibiotics for otitis media and pneumonia, and using anti-epileptics such as sodium valproate for seizures. Vitamin A can be given to prevent severe effects in children. The specific treatment would depend on the type of encephalitis the patient has developed.

Postpartum depression (PPD) is defined as the onset of major depressive disorder in mothers, occurring during pregnancy or within 4 weeks post-delivery. With 7% of pregnancy-related death in the United States owing to mental health conditions, including PPD, and a global prevalence of 12%, PPD is a growing public health concern. In 2019, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved brexanolone, an exogenous analog of allopregnanolone, as the first ever drug to be specifically indicated for treating patients with PPD. This approval was preceded by an open-label study and three randomized placebo-controlled trials, each assessing the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of brexanolone, using mean Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) score reduction as the primary outcome. In each randomized controlled trial, the drug was administered as an intravenous infusion given over 60 h. Enrolled participants were followed up on days 7 and 30 to evaluate the sustained effect. A statistically significant reduction in mean HAM-D score compared to placebo was observed in all three studies, supporting brexanolone’s use in treating moderate-to-severe PPD. Therefore, this article attempts to briefly review the pharmacology of brexanolone, evaluate the latest available clinical data and outcomes concerning its use, reevaluate its position as a ‘breakthrough’ in managing PPD, and review the cost-related barriers to its worldwide standardized use.