This randomized control study assessed the effectiveness of in-person and remote psychological support interventions in reducing post-traumatic stress symptoms in post-COVID-19 patients. Two hundred twenty-five patients were randomized to control, in-person, and remote intervention groups. The severity of post-traumatic stress and psychological symptoms was assessed at baseline, at six months, and at twelve months. Our results did not reveal a significant overall difference between the control and intervention groups. However, among patients with initial higher post-traumatic stress symp- toms, a more significant decrease in distress was observed in the intervention group compared to the control group. No significant difference between in-person and remote interventions was found, suggesting both modalities are applicable. Secondary psychological symptoms (depression, anxiety, and sleep problems) also decreased in the high-distress subgroup following the intervention, but benefits were not maintained at twelve months. This study underlines the potential benefits of tailored psychological interventions in COVID-19 recovery, particularly for individuals with higher levels of distress. It also underscores the need for sustained ongoing psychological support and the utility of in-person and remote sup- port modalities. Further studies should consider these findings when designing interventions to improve post-COVID-19 patient psychological health outcomes.
Learning from the COVID-19 challenge: an Italian RCT study on an intervention’s effectiveness in reducing mental health symptoms in hospitalized patients
Rizzi D;Gambini G.;Benzi I. M. A.;De Silvestri;A. Rovati;Perlini S.;Musella V;L. Barone;
2024-01-01
Abstract
This randomized control study assessed the effectiveness of in-person and remote psychological support interventions in reducing post-traumatic stress symptoms in post-COVID-19 patients. Two hundred twenty-five patients were randomized to control, in-person, and remote intervention groups. The severity of post-traumatic stress and psychological symptoms was assessed at baseline, at six months, and at twelve months. Our results did not reveal a significant overall difference between the control and intervention groups. However, among patients with initial higher post-traumatic stress symp- toms, a more significant decrease in distress was observed in the intervention group compared to the control group. No significant difference between in-person and remote interventions was found, suggesting both modalities are applicable. Secondary psychological symptoms (depression, anxiety, and sleep problems) also decreased in the high-distress subgroup following the intervention, but benefits were not maintained at twelve months. This study underlines the potential benefits of tailored psychological interventions in COVID-19 recovery, particularly for individuals with higher levels of distress. It also underscores the need for sustained ongoing psychological support and the utility of in-person and remote sup- port modalities. Further studies should consider these findings when designing interventions to improve post-COVID-19 patient psychological health outcomes.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.