YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH AND WELL-BEING DURING COVID-19 ...

Jharkhand Journal of Development and Management StudiesXISS, Ranchi, Vol. 19, No. 1, January-March 2021, pp. 8675-8683

YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH AND WELL-BEING DURINGCOVID-19 PANDEMIC

Mohd Ajam1 and A. Shahin Sultana2

Mental health is a state of wellbeing, which affects individuals,families, and communities. Mental health is a significant healthconcern worldwide. It causes a substantial burden to an individualand society across the globe. Mental illnesses are responsible fornearly 13 per cent of the global burden of disease. In addition,theCOVID-19 pandemic is having a profound impact on all aspects ofsociety, including mental health and physical health. It is a fact thatCOVID-19 is transmissible from human to human and also foundto be associated with high morbidity and fatality; howsoever, it hasmutually intensified the concept of “personal danger.” According toWHO,’Youth’is categorized in the age group of 15-24 years. This isa unique and formative time. Multiple physical, emotional and socialchanges, including exposure to poverty, abuse, or violence, canmake youth vulnerable to mental health problems. This studyattempts to gauge the mental health and wellbeing challenges theyface in this crisis and suggest appropriate interventions to phaseover the situation.

Keywords : Mental Health; Well-being; COVID -19 pandemic; Youth

Introduction

The response of governments worldwide to the unprecedented andrapid spread of COVID-19 has resulted in a global economic slowdownand college and university shutdown. The impact on people, jobs andbusinesses are likely to be long-term and hit hard the most vulnerablepopulations including Youth (Gonzalez et al., 2020). This global situationmay have a negative impact on the psychological wellbeing of individualswhich in turn affects individuals’ performance (Naser, et al., 2020) andyouth mental health.In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic is having aprofound impact on all aspects of society including mental health andphysical health. It is a fact that COVID-19 is transmissible from humanto human and also found to be associated with high morbidity andlower fatality.It means the lower fatality rate of COVID-19 affects many.Therefore, more people are likely to survive their illness and facepsychological consequences (Nearchou, Flinn, Niland, Subramaniam& Hennessy, 2020).

8675

1 Ph.D. Scholar, Dept. of Social Work, School of Social Sciences and International Studies,Pondicherry University, Puducherry - 605 014. E-mail: [email protected]

2 Professor, Dept. of Social Work, School of Social Sciences and International Studies,Pondicherry University, Puducherry - 605 014. E-mail: [email protected]

8676 Ajam and Sultana

Mental health and Well-being

Mental health is a state of wellbeing, which affects individuals,families, and communities. Mental health is a significant health concernworldwide.It causes a substantial burden to an individual and societyacross the globe. Mental illnesses are responsible for nearly 13 per centof the global burden of disease (Thyloth, Singh & Subramanian, 2016)while, wellbeing is a subjective feeling of containment, happiness,satisfaction with life experiences, one’s role in the world of work, senseof achievement, utility, belongingness and no distress, or worry, etc.(Shek, 1997; Sastre & Ferriere, 2000; Van Wel, Linssen & Abma, 2000).Psychological wellbeing is usually conceptualized as some combinationof positive affective states such as happiness (the hedonic perspective)and functioning with optimal effectiveness in individual and social life(Deci & Ryan 2008).

On the 23rd March 2020, a nationwide lockdown was announcedby the Indian government with the public instructed to stay at home,socially distancing and self-isolating with strict guidance about movementoutside of one’s household. In India, the pandemic’s first and foremostresponses have been fear and a sense of clear and imminent danger.Fears have ranged from those based on facts to unfounded fears basedon information/misinformation circulating in the media, particularlysocial media (Pukale, Sharma, Bhakuni & Krishnia, 2020). Lockdownand the social and economic consequences of COVID-19 are likely to beassociated with loneliness, social isolation and entrapment (Holmes, etal., 2020). The study reports the survey findings among youth in Januarybetween the age of 15-24 because young people were around three timesmore likely to be unemployed than those aged 25 and over (ILO, 2020).

Method & Materials

A cross-sectional study usingan online survey was conductedamong Youth between 5th January and 2nd February 2021 to explorethe Mental health status of the Youth during the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic.

MeasureSocio-demographic Data Sheet

A socio-demographic data sheet was designed for the present studyand to record demographic variables such as age, sex, educationqualification, type of family and rural or urban area, etc. a social-demographic data sheet was designed for the present study to recordthe demographic variables.

Youth Mental Health and Well-being During Covid-19 Pandemic 8677

General Health Questionnaire (Goldberg and William, 1978)

Goldberg and William developed the GHQ-12 in 1988.The GHQis a self-administered screening test that is sensitive to the presence ofpsychiatric disorders in individuals presenting in primary care settingsand non-psychiatric clinical settings. The GHQ is not designed to detectsymptoms that occur with specific psychiatric diagnoses such as psychoticdisorders, rather, provide a measure of overall psychological health orwellness. In order to assess this, the GHQ focuses on two major classesof phenomena: (i) inability to continue to carry out normal “healthy”functions, and (ii) symptoms of a distressing nature.Score range 0 to 36.

Scores about 11-12 typical. Score >15 evidence of distress. Score >20 suggests severe problems and psychological distress.

WHO-5 Well-being Index

The 5-item World Health Organization Well-Being Index (WHO-5) is among a widely used questionnaire assessing subjectivepsychological wellbeing in research and clinical settings. Its firstpublication in 1998 and it is explained by the fact that the WHO-5 wasdeveloped in a Pan-European study of patients with diabetes. Somestudies have showed it to have a sensitivity of 93 per cent and aspecificity of 83 per cent in identifying depression.WHO-5 is focused onsubjective quality of life based on positive mood (good spirits, relaxation),vitality (being active and waking up fresh and rested), and generalinterest (being interested in things). Since its design doesn’t incorporateall the diagnostic criteria for a DSM V diagnosis, it alone is insufficientas a diagnostic tool. The raw score ranges from 0 to 25, Score 0representing worst possible and 25 representing best possible quality oflife.A score below 12.5 can indicate poor wellbeing which may besecondary to a depressive disorder or other etiology and is an indicationfor further evaluation (Bech, 2004).

Analysis

Table No.-1. Socio-Demographic Characteristics of the SelectedParticipants (N=65)

Variables Sub-classification Participant(N=65)(In %)

Sex Male 34 52.3Female 31 47.7

Maritalstatus Single 56 86.2Married 9 13.8

Domicile Rural 30 46.2Urban 35 53.8

Education Graduate 20 30.8Post Graduate 33 50.8Other 12 18.5

Occupation Unemployed 9 13.8Employed 15 23.1Students 41 63.1

Religion Hindu 33 50.8Muslim 22 33.8Christian 10 15.4

Category General 27 41.5OBC 24 36.9SC/ST 14 21.5

History of Mental Illness Yes 3 4.6No 62 95.4

Family History of Mental Illness Yes 6 9.2No 59 90.8

Source: Primary data, 2021

Table 1 shows participants’ socio-demographic variables betweenmales and females. Gender: 52.30 per cent male and 47.70 per centfemale. Marital status: 86.20 per cent single while 13.80 per centmarried.Regarding occupation students, 63.10 per cent and theremaining 39.90 per cent employed or unemployed.Participants’socioeconomic status: most of them belonged to middle socioeconomicstatus 63.3 per cent and 26.7 per cent as well as low and uppersocioeconomic status.Most of the participants belonged to joint family66.7 per cent and 23.3 per cent in the nuclear family on the familytype. Also, in the domicile, most of them belonged to urban areas 53.80per cent and 46.20 per cent were found in rural areas. It means urbanis easily accessible for all facilities and having a good position ineducation. On the history of mental health: 4.6 per cent accepted thatthey suffered mental health problems in the past while 9.2 per cent ofparticipants accept some mental issues in the family.Table-2. Level of Youth Mental Health and Well-being during

the COVID-19 PandemicVariable GHQ WB

Score Below 10 11-12 >15 >20 0-8 9-16 17 - 25

Male Male Male Male Male Male Male(7.6%) (18.4%) (16.9%) (10.7%) (12.3%) (27.6%) (9.2%)

Gender Female Female Female Female Female Female Female(7.6%) (23.07%) (19.23%) (6.15%) (9.2%) (18.4%) (23.07%)

UG UG(15.3%) UG UG UG UG UG(4.6%) PG (20%) (4.6%) (6.1%) (4.6%) (10.7%) (12%)

PG Others PG PG PG PG PGEducation (7.6%) (4.6%) (15.3%) (7.6%) (7.6%) (24.6%) (15%)

Others Others Others Others Others Others(3.0%) (4.6%) (6.1%) (6.1%) (10.7%) (7.6%)


Joint F Joint F Joint F Joint F Joint F Joint F Joint FFamily type (4.6%) (12%) (9.2%) (4.6%) (3%) (24.6%) (3%)

Nuclear Nuclear Nuclear Nuclear Nuclear Nuclear NuclearF (10.7%) F (27.6%) F(18.4%) F(12.3%) F(1.5%) F(33.8%) F(33.8%)

Occupation Unempl. Unempl. Unempl. Unempl. Unempl. Unempl. Unempl.(1.5%) (9.2%) (0%) (3%) (0%) (6.1%) (9.2%)

Employed Employed Employed Employed Employed Employed Employed(0%) (10.7%) (6.1%) (4.6%) (1.5%) (12.3%) (7.6%)

Students Students Students Students Students Students Students(13.8%) (20%) (21.5%) (9.2%) (1.5%) (40%) (21.5%)

Below Below Below Below Below Below Below10K 10K 10K 10K 10K 10K 10K

(6.1%) (9.2%) (4.6%) (7.6%) (0%) (21.5%) (7.6%)Income 10K-30K 10K-30K 10K-30K 10K-30K 10K-30K 10K-30K 10K-30K

(6.1%) (13.8%) (15.3%) (6.1%) (1.5%) (27.6%) (13.8%)Above- Above- Above- Above- Above- Above- Above-

30K 30K 30K 30K 30K 30K 30K(3%) (20%) (4.6%) (3aw%) (0%) (12.3%) (15.3%)

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes(1.5%) (3%) (0%) (0%) (0%) (4.6%) (0%)

HoMI No No No No No No No(11%) (38%) (28%) (18.4%) (3%) (53.8%) (38.4%)

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesFHoMI (0%) (4.6%) (1.5%) (3%) (0%) (6%) (3%)

No No No No No No No(15%) (23%) (35.3%) (13.8%) (3%) (52%) (35%)

Source: Primary data, 2021

Table 2 is showing the socio-demographic profile of the discretevariables under study. In gender 16.2% participants score normal itmeans they haven’t had any symptoms regarding mental issues. Scorerange 11-12, >15 and > 20 having distress and sever problem andpsychological distress. Level of wellbeing score range between17-25(32.7%) have best quality of life while score range between 0-8 (21.5%)and 9-1(45%) have poor and moderate quality of life.

In education, most of the participants (39.28 per cent) score typicalway of life, which comes to the score under 11-12 while wellbeing 46.0per cent of participant belong to poor quality of life. In family type, jointfamily is less affected due to COVID while nuclear family is highlyaffected by typical to severe problems in both general health andwellbeing. In occupation, unemployed and employed moderately affecteddue to corona and lockdown while students have severe problems andpsychological distress. History of mental illness is as usual but familyhistory of mental illness comes under typical condition, 3 per centparticipants respond they and their family members face criticalcondition due to coronavirus and lockdown.


Table-3. Multivariate Test

Effect Value F SigGHQ * WB Pillai’s Trace 4.260 36.000 .889

Wilks’ Lambda 1.05 13.242 .887

*Sig <0.5; **Sig <0.01; *** Sig <0.001 N.S. = Not Significant;

Multivariate test is applied to analyse the impact of COVID-19on mental health and wellbeing. Here Pillai Trace value is 4.260 andWilks’ lamda value is 1.05 while significant values is higher than(p=0.05). No significant difference was found between General Healthquestionnaire and wellbeing among any of these variables.

Table-4. Tests of Between-Subjects

Tests of Between-Subjects Mean Square F Sig

GHQ * WB Gender .244 1.170 .456Marital .094 .453 .915Domicile .327 1.123 .480Education .295 .471 .904Occupation .395 .728 .727Income .862 2.957 .092Family type .154 .462 .909Religion .411 .548 .855Category .810 1.767 .248History of Mental Illness .033 .198 .997Family History of Mental Illness .115 .922 .595

In Multivariatetest (MANOVA) analyses between General Healthquestionnaire, wellbeing with gender, marital status, domicile,occupation, income etc. A separate ANOVA was conducted for eachdependent variable and theevaluated alpha p=0.025. All significantvalues are greater than p values so there are no significant differenceson statistic values.

Ethical statement

The participation in this research has been entirely voluntary.All responses are anonymous and no data has been collected that canbe used in any way to identify.

Discussions

Present study on Youth mental health and wellbeing show levelof mental health status during COVID-19. It suggests that with respect


to the initial psychological responses of the general public from31st January to 2nd February 2020 within two weeks into thecountry’s outbreak of COVID-19 and one day after WHO declaredpublic health emergency of international concern, 53.8 per cent ofrespondents rated the psychological impact of outbreak as moderate orsevere; 16.5 per cent of respondents reported moderate to severedepressive symptoms; 28.8 per cent of respondents reported moderateto severe anxiety symptoms; and 8.1 per cent reported moderate tosevere stress levels. In this study, it’s found that history of mentalhealth revealed that 4.6 per cent accepted that they suffered mentalhealth problem in past while 9.2 per cent participants accepted mentalissues in the family.

A recent study in China investigated the effect of COVID-19 onpublic psychological status and reported that females were threetimesat a higher risk of developing anxiety. On the other hand, highereducation level was associated with a lower risk of developing depressionby 0.39 time, these results are in-line with our study findings (Wang etal., 2020). Another study with 52,730 participants revealed that 35.0per cent of respondents experienced psychological distress during theepidemic with female respondents showing a higher risk of psychologicaldistress when compared to males. Similarly, our results showed thatfemales demonstrated a higher risk of anxiety and depression (p < .05)which is in-line with reported data during epidemics, where women,particularly those working in healthcare, were prone to developingdepression and anxiety (Lai, Tang, Chau, Fung & Li, 2020; Cheng etal., 2003).

Several past studies have identified resources associated with infamilies in which a member has been diagnosed with severe mentalillness. But in present study important factors associated with COVIDhas major impact on mental health were not assessed like ‘daily activities& routines of the family’, ‘community support’, ‘positive & affirmingcommunication patterns’, social support from the immediate & distantsocial network during the crisis’.The prevalence of mild or moderatepsychological impact as measured by GHQ-12. It was higher for threepoints 7.5 to 11.25, 11.2 to 15.0 and 18.75 to 22.5. These scoresindicated evidence of distress and suggest severe problems andpsychological distress due to the fact that it assesses the psychologicalimpact after an event. In this study, respondents might refer theCOVID-19 outbreak as the event while the below scores did not specifyany such event.

Limitations: The study is done with a smallsample and a limitednumber of variables with a standardized tool.


Conclusion

To conclude, Youth mental health is closely associated with health,after pandemic its prevalence rate is high and its effect on well beingand regular life routine. They are worried about health and their familymembers contracting COVID-19 but they believe they would survive ifinfected. It’s found that one in two among Youth people experience stressand anxiety while average mental wellbeing is worse for young women,as well as for younger youth.

REFERENCES

Bech, P. (2004). Measuring the dimension of psychological general wellbeing by theWHO-5. Quality of Life Newsletter, 15-16.

Cheng, H. L., Mostoslavsky, R., Saito, S. I., Manis, J. P., Gu, Y., Patel, P., ... & Chua,K. F. (2003). Developmental defects and p53 hyperacetylation in Sir2 homolog(SIRT1)-deficient mice. Proceedings of the National Academy ofSciences, 100(19), 10794-10799.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Facilitating optimal motivation and psychologicalwellbeing across life’s domains. Canadian Psychology, 49(1), 14-23.

Goldberg, D. & Williams, P. (1988). A users guide to the General HealthQuestionnaire. Slough: NFER-Nelson.

Gonzalez, S. P., Gardiner, D., Bausch, J. Danish, M., Moitra, E., & Yan, L. X. (2020).Youth and COVID-19: impacts on jobs, education, rights and mental well-being: Survey report 2020. Gemeva: ILO.

Holmes, E. A., O’Connor, R. C., Perry, V. H., Tracey, I., Wessely, S., Arseneault, L.,... & Bullmore, E. (2020). Multidisciplinary research priorities for the COVID-19 pandemic: A call for action for mental health science. The LancetPsychiatry, 7(6), 547-560.

Ilo, A., Romsi, P., & Mäkelä, J. (2020). Infrared thermography and vascular disordersin diabetic feet. Journal of diabetes science and technology, 14(1), 28-36.

Lai, T. H., Tang, E. W., Chau, S. K., Fung, K. S., & Li, K. K. (2020). Stepping upinfection control measures in ophthalmology during the novel coronavirusoutbreak: An experience from Hong Kong. Graefe’s Archive for Clinicaland Experimental Ophthalmology, 258(5), 1049-1055.

Naser, A. Y., Dahmash, E. Z., Al Rousan, R., Alwafi, H., Alrawashdeh, H. M., Ghoul,I., & Alyami, H. S. (2020). Mental health status of the general population,healthcare professionals, and university students during 2019 coronavirusdisease outbreak in Jordan: A cross sectional study. Brain andbehavior, 10(8), e01730.

Nearchou, F., Flinn, C., Niland, R., Subramaniam, S. S., & Hennessy, E. (2020).Exploring the impact of COVID-19 on mental health outcomes in childrenand adolescents: A systematic review. International journal ofenvironmental research and public health, 17(22), 8479.

Pukale, R., Sharma, D., Bhakuni, H., & Krishnia, K. K. (2020). An integrativeapproach towards prevention & management of psychological illnessesduring COVID 19 crisis. Journal of Ayurveda and Integrated MedicalSciences, 5(4), 292-300.

Sastre, M. T. M., & Ferrière, G. (2000). Family ‘decline’ and the subjective wellbeingof adolescents. Social Indicators Research, 49(1), 69-82.

Shek, D. T. (1997). Family environment and adolescent psychological wellbeing,school adjustment, and problem behavior: A pioneer study in a Chinesecontext. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 158(1), 113-128.


Thyloth, M., Singh, H., & Subramanian, V. (2016). Increasing burden of mentalillnesses across the globe: Current status. Indian Journal of SocialPsychiatry, 32(3), 254. Retrieved from http://www.indjsp.org/text.asp?2016/32/3/254/193208retrieved on 16-12-2020

Van Wel, F., Linssen, H., & Abma, R. (2000). The parental bond and the wellbeingof adolescents and young adults. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 29(3),307-318.

Wang, Z., Ye, D., Wang, M., Zhao, M., Li, D., Ye, J., & Wan, J. (2020). Clinicalfeatures of COVID-19 patients with different outcomes in wuhan: Aretrospective observational study. BioMed Research International.doi:10.1155/2020/2138387


YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH AND WELL-BEING DURING COVID-19 ...

Documents

Transcript of YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH AND WELL-BEING DURING COVID-19 ...