One of the few saving graces in the COVID-19 pandemic has been the very low proportion of
children and young people (CYP) severely affected by actual infection (Naja et al., 2020). Even the
post infectious syndrome (PIMS-TS) CYP has thankfully been rare (Whittaker et al., 2020). Yet CYP have been
affected significantly by the pandemic, in many cases as “collateral damage” from the
impact and public health measures introduced because of the pandemic (Crawley et al., 2020), and a
major concern has been the impact on mental health.In the first wave of the pandemic, data emerged from China suggesting increased levels of
anxiety in CYP (Zhou et al.,
2020). A larger pre-existing longitudinal study of CYP using data sets from
12 countries also found increased levels of depression through the first wave, but
stable levels anxiety (Barendse et
al., 2021). As time has progressed, increasing amounts of data have emerged
describing changes in mental health in CYP since before the pandemic. One particularly
important data set in the UK is the NHS Digital CYP survey which recurrently measures
representative samples of CYP in the UK, with the primary aim being the measurement of
prevalence of a likely mental health disorder (Vizard et al., 2020). In the most recent
report in 2021, the proportion at high risk of problems rose from one in nine in 2017 to
one in six by February 2021, with a doubling of the proportion of CYP at risk of eating
problems over that same time period. Clinicians are also seeing this increase playing
out in CYP presenting to mental health services. Though initially seeing reduced numbers
of referrals in many places during the first lockdown, since then numbers have increased
dramatically (Huang & Ougrin,
2021). Mental health crisis presentations also appear to have significantly
increased including to general paediatric settings (Hudson et al., 2021) which present huge
challenges for services and service users alike.Whilst it now seems clear that there has been a deterioration in CYP mental health since
the pandemic, an important next question is why – not least so that we
can understand how to mitigate in this ongoing, or future pandemics. It is not difficult
to make plausible hypotheses. Many countries initiated recurrent periods of lockdown
which included closure of schools, and reduced access to family and friends; and
isolation is known to be associated with depression in CYP (Loades et al., 2020). CYP, in particular those
with mental health disorders, also reported reduced access to healthcare for support
during the first lockdown (Crosby et
al., 2020). Economic pressures on families are known to affect CYP mental
health (Melchior et al.,
2012) and the NHS digital data CYP health data described above reported that
those with a likely mental health disorder were around twice as likely to live in a
house fallen behind on housing payments such as a mortgage. The increase in the numbers
of CYP presenting with eating disorders is still not well understood, although it has
been postulated that amongst other factors, disruption to routine and pressure to
exercise have played a part (Solmi
et al., 2021). Not all CYP of course have done badly and some thrived
especially during the first wave (Ford et al., 2021) – so we need better research to understand why some did
badly and some did not.One key area opened up widely in the pandemic has been the impact of inequalities. In the
UK NHS digital mental health data, black CYP were three times more likely to live in a
household that had recently fallen behind with bills. The impact on education has also
been worse in certain ethnic groups. From a cohort of 40,000 UK households, the National
Foundation for Educational Research found that in the first wave of the pandemic, most
children spent less than 3 hours per day on learning activities, and pupils from higher
income households spent the most time on home school work (Eivers et al., 2020). Bayrakdar and colleagues
reported from the Understanding Society Study that children who received free school
meals, children from lower-educated and single- parent families and children with
Pakistani or Bangladeshi backgrounds spent much less time on home schooling during the
first wave (Bayrakdar & Guveli,
2020). Such disparities are concerning for the prospects of this young
generation, in particular increasing existing disparities between socio- economic and
ethnic groupings. This critically also includes mental health outcomes given the
associations between socio-economic factors such as poverty with worse mental health
throughout the life course (Elliott,
2016).It is upon this theme, the impact of the pandemic on CYP, that this edition of Clinical
Child Psychology and Psychiatry focuses, with a wide range of papers on this topic. All
of them speak to how and why CYP have been affected, and provide important information
on the needs of these CYP, and how things might be done differently. At the time of
writing, with the new Omicron variant spreading around the world, we are reminded that
this pandemic may still have new surprises ahead, for example through new variants. The
likelihood of repeat uses of public health interventions such as lockdowns seems
unclear. In this context, we are unready for potential repeat disruptions for CYP’s
lives which appear to have been associated with worsened mental health for many.
Solutions to the increase in need for care for mental health in CYP have not progressed
since before the pandemic, and we knew that in many places it already was unfit for
purpose. Couched as it is in an era of divisive politics, the COVID-19 pandemic has led
to polarised views and antagonism about how the pandemic has and should been managed.
Often however, the world, especially through science, challenges us to take and hold two
contradictory positions in our minds simultaneously. It is entirely possible to
appreciate the need for public health interventions to support one part of society,
whilst simultaneously appreciating the needs of the impact of those interventions upon
another. Whatever anyone’s politics are, CYP are essential not only as current,
vulnerable citizens requiring advocacy, but also as the citizens who will mould and
deliver the future - they most certainly will be paying for the bill. We owe it to them
to understand the impacts upon them better, make a clear voice for them, and to think
outside the box to how we can protect and improve their well-being.
Authors: Maria Melchior; Jean-François Chastang; Bruno Falissard; Cédric Galéra; Richard E Tremblay; Sylvana M Côté; Michel Boivin Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-12-26 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Elizabeth Whittaker; Alasdair Bamford; Julia Kenny; Myrsini Kaforou; Christine E Jones; Priyen Shah; Padmanabhan Ramnarayan; Alain Fraisse; Owen Miller; Patrick Davies; Filip Kucera; Joe Brierley; Marilyn McDougall; Michael Carter; Adriana Tremoulet; Chisato Shimizu; Jethro Herberg; Jane C Burns; Hermione Lyall; Michael Levin Journal: JAMA Date: 2020-07-21 Impact factor: 157.335
Authors: Ewelina Czenczek-Lewandowska; Justyna Leszczak; Justyna Wyszyńska; Joanna Baran; Aneta Weres; Bogumił Lewandowski Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-09-05 Impact factor: 4.614