Background: The 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic is a public health emergency of international concern and poses a challenge to psychological resilience. Research data are needed to develop evidence-driven strategies to reduce adverse psychological impacts and psychiatric symptoms during the epidemic. The aim of this study was to survey the general public in China to better understand their levels of psychological impact, anxiety, depression, and stress during the initial stage of the COVID-19 outbreak. The data will be used for future reference. Methods: From 31 January to 2 February 2020, we conducted an online survey using snowball sampling techniques. The online survey collected information on demographic data, physical symptoms in the past 14 days, contact history with COVID-19, knowledge and concerns about COVID-19, precautionary measures against COVID-19, and additional information required with respect to COVID-19. Psychological impact was assessed by the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), and mental health status was assessed by the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21). Results: This study included 1210 respondents from 194 cities in China. In total, 53.8% of respondents rated the psychological impact of the outbreak as moderate or severe; 16.5% reported moderate to severe depressive symptoms; 28.8% reported moderate to severe anxiety symptoms; and 8.1% reported moderate to severe stress levels. Most respondents spent 20–24 h per day at home (84.7%); were worried about their family members contracting COVID-19 (75.2%); and were satisfied with the amount of health information available (75.1%). Female gender, student status, specific physical symptoms (e.g., myalgia, dizziness, coryza), and poor self-rated health status were significantly associated with a greater psychological impact of the outbreak and higher levels of stress, anxiety, and depression (p < 0.05). Specific up-to-date and accurate health information (e.g., treatment, local outbreak situation) and particular precautionary measures (e.g., hand hygiene, wearing a mask) were associated with a lower psychological impact of the outbreak and lower levels of stress, anxiety, and depression (p < 0.05). Conclusions: During the initial phase of the COVID-19 outbreak in China, more than half of the respondents rated the psychological impact as moderate-to-severe, and about one-third reported moderate-to-severe anxiety. Our findings identify factors associated with a lower level of psychological impact and better mental health status that can be used to formulate psychological interventions to improve the mental health of vulnerable groups during the COVID-19 epidemic.

Background: Differences in physical and mental health impact across continents during the COVID-19 pandemic are unknown. Objective: This study compared the levels of impact of COVID-19 on mental health among people from Spain and China and correlated mental health parameters with variables relating to symptoms similar to COVID-19, COVID-19 knowledge, and precautionary measures. Methods: We collected information on demographic data, physical symptoms, contact history with persons with a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis, COVID-19 knowledge, and precautionary measures. Participants completed the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) and the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale–21 Items (DASS-21). To analyze the differences in the mental health parameters, the mean scores between Chinese and Spanish respondents were compared using the independent samples t test. The differences in categorical variables between the two samples were analyzed by the chi-square test. Linear regression was used to calculate the univariate associations between the independent variables and mental health parameters for both groups separately, with adjustments made for age, gender, and education. Results: A total of 1528 participants (Spain: n=687; China: n=841) were recruited. The mean age of the Chinese respondents was 24.73 years (SD 7.60; range 18-65 years), and the mean age of the Spanish respondents was 43.06 years (SD 11.95; range 18-76 years). Spanish participants reported significantly more symptoms similar to COVID-19 infection (eg, fever, sore throat, and breathing difficulties), contact history with COVID-19, higher perceived risk of contracting COVID-19, frequent use of medical services, and less confidence in medical services compared with their Chinese counterparts (P<.001). Spanish participants reported significantly higher DASS-21 stress and depression scores, while Chinese participants reported significantly higher IES-R scores (P<.001). Chinese participants encountered more discrimination from other countries (P<.001). Significantly more Chinese participants reported using face masks than Spanish ones (P<.001). More exposure to health information was associated with adverse mental health in Spain (depression: P=.02; anxiety: P=.02; stress: P=.001). Conclusions: Our study found that Spanish respondents reported higher levels of stress and depression as well as more symptoms and use of medical services. In preparation for the next pandemic, Spain needs to establish a prompt policy to implement rapid response and enhance medical services to safeguard physical and mental health.

Objective: The differences between the physical and mental health of people living in a lower-middle-income country (LMIC) and upper-middle-income country (UMIC) during the COVID-19 pandemic was unknown. This study aimed to compare the levels of psychological impact and mental health between people from the Philippines (LMIC) and China (UMIC) and correlate mental health parameters with variables relating to physical symptoms and knowledge about COVID-19.Methods: The survey collected information on demographic data, physical symptoms, contact history, and knowledge about COVID-19. The psychological impact was assessed using the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), and mental health status was assessed by the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21).Findings: The study population included 849 participants from 71 cities in the Philippines and 861 participants from 159 cities in China. Filipino (LMIC) respondents reported significantly higher levels of depression, anxiety, and stress than Chinese (UMIC) during the COVID-19 (p < 0.01) while only Chinese respondents' IES-R scores were above the cut-off for PTSD symptoms. Filipino respondents were more likely to report physical symptoms resembling COVID-19 infection (p < 0.05), recent use of but with lower confidence on medical services (p < 0.01), recent direct and indirect contact with COVID (p < 0.01), concerns about family members contracting COVID-19 (p < 0.001), dissatisfaction with health information (p < 0.001). In contrast, Chinese respondents requested more health information about COVID-19. For the Philippines, student status, low confidence in doctors, dissatisfaction with health information, long daily duration spent on health information, worries about family members contracting COVID-19, ostracization, and unnecessary worries about COVID-19 were associated with adverse mental health. Physical symptoms and poor self-rated health were associated with adverse mental health in both countries (p < 0.05).Conclusion: The findings of this study suggest the need for widely available COVID-19 testing in MIC to alleviate the adverse mental health in people who present with symptoms. A health education and literacy campaign is required in the Philippines to enhance the satisfaction of health information.

Background: This study aimed to compare the severity of psychological impact, anxiety and depression between people from two developing countries, Iran and China, and to correlate mental health parameters with variables relating to the COVID-19 pandemic. Although China and Iran are developing countries based on the World Bank’s criteria, these two countries are different in access to resources and health care systems. We hypothesized that Iranians would show higher levels of depression, anxiety and stress as compared to Chinese. Methods: This study collected information related to the COVID-19 pandemic including physical health, precautionary measures and knowledge about the pandemic. We also used validated questionnaires such as the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) and the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21) to assess the mental health status. Results: There were a total of 1411 respondents (550 from Iran; 861 from China). The mean IES-R scores of respondents from both countries were above the cut-off for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms. Iranians had significantly higher levels of anxiety and depression (p < 0.01). Significantly more Iranians believed COVID-19 was transmitted via contact, practised hand hygiene, were unsatisfied with health information and expressed less confidence in their doctors, but were less likely to wear a facemask (p < 0.001). Significantly more Iranians received health information related to COVID-19 via television while Chinese preferred the Internet (p < 0.001). Conclusions: This cross-country study found that Iranians had significantly higher levels of anxiety and depression as compared to Chinese. The difference in reported measures between respondents from Iran and China were due to differences in access to healthcare services and governments’ responses to the pandemic.

Objective To investigate the clinical features and the diagnostic and follow-up value of acute fulminant myocarditis (AFM) in children. Methods 20 children diagnosed with AFM admitted to our department were reviewed, and the clinical manifestations; pathogenic examination results; myocardial injury biomarkers; and electrocardiography, echocardiogram and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) results were analyzed. Results The initial symptoms were abdominal pain, vomiting, fatigue, syncope, and convulsions. All children had significantly increased hs-cTnT and NT-pro BNP. In addition to nonspecific ST-T changes, there were 10 cases of complete atrioventricular block, 2 cases of advanced atrioventricular block, and 1 case of ventricular tachycardia. Echocardiography showed an increase in the cardiac chamber sizes in 15 patients and a decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in 17 patients. There were 16 patients with abnormal CMR findings, including 13 cases of high T2-weighted image (T2WI) signal and 14 cases of late gadolinium enhancement (LGE). In the patients who underwent CMR within 14 days of onset, the sensitivity of T2WI and LGE and the positive diagnosis rate were higher than in those who underwent CMR after 14 days, but the difference was not statistically significant. CMR was followed up in 10 patients: 7 patients returned to normal, 2 patients still had mild LGE, and 1 patient developed inflammatory dilated cardiomyopathy. All patients were treated with high-dose immunoglobulin, 11 of whom received high-dose immunoglobulin combined with glucocorticoids. Eight patients received temporary pacemakers, and 1 patient received ECMO. None of the patients died. The peak of hs-cTnT was significantly higher in the glucocorticoid group than in the unused glucocorticoid group (2853.4±2217.2 pg/ml and 1124.7±527.3 pg/ml, respectively). Conclusion Children with AFM have unique clinical features. Early identification and effective treatment can reduce the mortality rate and improve the prognosis. CMR is highly sensitive in the diagnosis of ARM, especially within 14 days of onset, and is a useful noninvasive imaging technique for the early identification of AFM in children. The dynamic observation and follow-up of children with AFM through CMR can guide clinical decision-making and prognosis assessment.

Despite the vaccine against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) being reported to be safe and effective, the unwillingness to vaccinate and doubts are still common. The aim of this international study was to assess the major reasons for the unwillingness to vaccinate in a group of students from Poland (n = 1202), Bangladesh (n = 1586), India (n = 484), Mexico (n = 234), Egypt (n = 566), Philippines (n = 2076), Pakistan (n = 506), Vietnam (n = 98) and China (n = 503). We conducted an online cross-sectional study that aimed to assess (1) the percentage of vaccinated and unvaccinated students and (2) the reasons associated with willingness/unwillingness to the vaccine. The study included 7255 respondents from 9 countries with a mean age of 21.85 ± 3.66 years. Only 22.11% (n = 1604) of students were vaccinated. However, the majority (69.25%, n = 5025) expressed a willingness to be vaccinated. More willing to vaccinate were students in informal relationships who worked mentally, used psychological/psychiatric services before the pandemic, and studied medicine. There are cultural differences regarding the reasons associated with the unwillingness to vaccinate, but some ‘universal’ might be distinguished that apply to the whole group.