Evaluating the Mental Health Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Urban South Africa: Perceived Risk of COVID-19 Infection and Childhood Trauma Predict Adult Depressive Symptoms

INTRODUCTION

The South African response to coronavirus was swift and assertive in testing, tracing, and quarantining those infected with COVID-19. Despite the rapid and effective public health response¹ the economic and social ramifications of quarantine have disproportionately afflicted those already socioeconomically disadvantaged in a society defined by its racial and economic inequity. Furthermore, harsh government sanctions to adhere to COVID-19 mitigation plans, including militarization, demolitions of informal settlements, and widespread police brutality have exacerbated already vulnerable communities who are unable to properly quarantine. These measures bring focus to the existing disproportionate inequalities in common mental disorders that are amplified by social distancing, strict quarantine measures, and the countrywide lockdown.

The South African government imposed a strict and militarized “national lockdown” policy on March 26, 2020 that prohibited citizens from leaving quarantine except for food, medicine, and essential labor. Worldwide, numerous aspects of life under forced confinement, including the limited physical mobility, emotional distress, and for some, extreme threats to survival, have substantially increased risk for mental distress and illness². Studies on the mental health consequences of quarantine worldwide have reported marked increases in risk for depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, and suicide³. For millions of South Africans, vulnerability to COVID-19 infection is amplified by other pre-existing adversities, such as hunger and violence, an overburdened healthcare system, a high prevalence of chronic and infectious disease, and alarming rates of poverty (55.5%) and unemployment (29%)⁴.

Based on evidence from recent pandemics (e.g. SARS, MERS), poorer mental health status before quarantine is a major risk factor for exacerbating the severity and duration of psychiatric morbidity after quarantine^5,6. Recent estimates show that the prevalence, incidence, and burden of mental illness in South Africa are relatively high compared to other countries: one in three (30.3%) South Africans will be diagnosed with a mental illness, a quarter of all cases (25%) are considered severe, and nearly half of citizens (47.5%) are at risk of developing a psychiatric disorder in their lifetime⁷. Despite these conditions, mental healthcare usage and access in South Africa is severely limited, with only 27% of patients with severe mental illnesses receiving treatment, 16% of citizens enrolled in medical aid, and only 0.31 psychiatrist per 100,00 uninsured population⁸. These severe barriers to care amidst high rates of mental illness suggest that mental healthcare must be a priority for thinking about how people experience and respond to quarantine. The limited capacity of government public health initiatives and lack of research on disease burdens of COVID-19 highlight the urgent need for additional screening, treatment, and research efforts nationwide.

To address these gaps, this study investigates the mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic among adults residing in Soweto, a major township southwest of Johannesburg, during the South African lockdown of 2020. Specifically, our analyses examine the relationships between perceived risk of COVID-19 infection and depressive symptoms and perceptions of COVID-19 and mental health. During the first six weeks of lockdown, we conducted follow-up, mixed-method interviews with adults enrolled in an existing epidemiological surveillance study to assess experiences of COVID-19 and adult depressive symptoms. To date, no study has empirically evaluated the mental health effects of COVID-19 experiences in South Africa.

METHODS

RESULTS

Complete data on perceived COVID-19 risk, depression, and covariates were available for 221 adults (Table 1). Participants included in the analytical sample were similar to those excluded (n = 113) with respect to depression scores (CES-D-10), gender, age, assets, density, coping scores, quality of life, psychiatric risk (GHQ-28), and adverse childhood experiences (p > 0.05). Perceived COVID-19 risk was significantly different from those excluded from the sample (p < 0.05). Adults in the analytical sample exhibited higher perceived risk of COVID-19 infection. Using the CES-D-10 cutoff score of 10, 14.5% of adults in our sample were at risk for major depressive disorder (MDD).

Table 2 shows the most common qualitative responses to the open-ended question, “How do you think COVID-19 affects the mind^*?” We found that most people said “no” (74%), COVID-19 does not affect the mind. Twenty percent indicated that COVID-19 causes what we coded as “anxiety” reflected by “there is so much fear since it started, you hear the increase in numbers of infected people everyday, you have no idea when it will come near you.” Other responses were “worries when it will stop,” “fear and panic,” and “fear of the future.” Some indicated that the infection itself would cause mental distress (16%), such as “the virus is a scary thought” and “I’m very afraid, being HIV+ I am very afraid of contracting corona because it might kill me.” Next, many people described “thinking too much” (10%), such as “coronavirus affects my mind because it is something that we are always thinking about.” The “lockdown” itself affected some (9%), such as “there are many restrictions” and “most people around the area don’t seem to be complying to the regulations.” Some spoke of financial stress (8%), such as “we cannot make a decent money under lockdown restrictions” and “no job brings in an income, food is now scarce.” Other common responses addressed stress like “it has added more stress since there were a lot of issues to deal with, for example the lack food for kids going to school.” Other challenges reported independently and overlapping with these primary responses include sadness that you cannot socialize, family stress and death – including not attending a loved one’s funeral, coping with the isolation of quarantine, and the chronic uncertainty of the days to come.

Table 3 presents the results of the OLS regression analyses of demographic, household, psychological, and environmental factors that predict depressive symptoms. The unadjusted model (Model l) predicting CES-D scores on perceived COVID-19 risk displays a positive significant relationship (β = 1.6, p = <0.001, 95% CI [0.79, 2.34]). This relationship between COVID-19 risk and depression remains highly significant after adjusting for gender, age, SES, and household density (p = <0.001) (Models 2-5). Models 6 through 10 examine the potential confounding effects of psychosocial experiences and behaviors in shaping the relationship between perceived COVID-19 risk and depressive symptoms. The effect of COVID-19 risk slightly weakens (β = 1.31, p = 0.001, 95% CI [0.53, 2.08]) after adjusting for past psychiatric risk assessed through the GHQ-28, which is positively and significantly associated with CES-D scores (p = <0.001) (Model 6). Adding childhood trauma into the model (Model 7) very modestly weakens the perceived COVID-19 risk coefficient (β = 1.30, p = 0.001, 95% CI [0.54, 2.07]). Social coping behavior is inversely and insignificantly related to CES-D scores (p = 0.872) (Model 8). Model 9 and 10 shows that self-reported quality of life is negatively and significantly related to adult depression symptoms after the lockdown (p = 0.022), while COVID-19 knowledge positive and significantly predicts CES-D scores (p = 0.003) and also strengthens the COVID-19 risk coefficient (β = 1.48, p = <0.001, 95% CI [0.73, 2.23]).

Figure 1 illustrates the positive relationship between perceived risk of COVID-19 infection and depression scores in our fully adjusted model: greater perceived risk of COVID-19 infection corresponds with greater depressive symptoms in our sample. Elevated psychiatric risk, childhood trauma, and a greater degree of “COVID-19 knowledge” were positive and significant predictors of worse depressive symptoms, while higher quality of life was inversely and significantly related. The fully adjusted model (Model 10) accounts for 21% of the variance in depressive symptoms. Additionally, a logistic regression of depression risk (using CES-D ≥10 as a cutoff for significant depressive symptoms) on perceived COVID-19 risk with identical covariates estimated that the odds of the presence of significant depressive symptoms is 1.99 (p = 0.016; 95% CI [1.14, 3.49]) for every one unit increase in perceived COVID-19 risk.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1. Predicted depression scores by perceived COVID-19 risk group

Note: Greater perceived risk of COVID-19 infection corresponds with greater depression symptomatology in adults living in Soweto. The effect of being in the “More risk” group is highly significant (p = <0.001) relative to being at “Less risk”, while the effect of perceiving that one is at the “Same risk” of COVID-19 infection relative to other individuals living in Soweto on depression symptoms is marginally significant (p = 0.095). The respective predicted CES-D-10 scores for each group are as provided: Less risk = 5.04, Same risk = 6.25, More risk = 8.17.

Finally, we ran an interaction term (Model 11) between perceived COVID-19 risk and childhood trauma to examine whether early stress altered the association between perceived COVID-19 risk and depression, as we hypothesized that greater childhood trauma would exacerbate the associations between depressive symptoms of COVID-19 risk. Model 11 shows evidence for a marginally significant crossover interaction between childhood trauma and perceived risk (F[1, 209] = 3.80, p = 0.0617) and accounts for 23% of the variance in depressive symptoms. Figure 2 demonstrates that the depressive impacts of heightened perceived COVID-19 risk were greater among individuals who reported worse histories of childhood trauma, yet negligible in the low risk group. The effects of psychiatric risk, COVID-19 knowledge, and quality of life on CES-D scores were consistent. Additional analyses show that COVID-19 knowledge and perceived COVID-19 risk were inversely and significantly related regardless of educational status, childhood trauma, psychiatric risk, coping ability, quality of life, and demographic factors (β = -0.047, p = 0.043, 95% CI [-0.09, -0.003]). An identical logistic regression model showed that the interaction between childhood trauma and perceived risk was not significant, likely due to the non-linearity assumed in logistic models¹³.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 2. Childhood trauma (ACES) and Depression scores (CESD) by COVID-19 risk group

Note: Greater childhood trauma (ACES) potentiates the positive relationship between greater perceived COVID-19 risk and the severity of depressive symptomatology. The effect of the interaction between childhood trauma and perceived COVID-19 risk on depression is marginally significant (F[1, 206] = 3.53, p = 0.0617).

DISCUSSION

The South African lockdown effectively prevented possible COVID-19 infections and associated morbidity and mortality risk: epidemiological models suggest the lockdown resulted in a 40-60% reduction in transmission relative to baseline after one month¹. The mental health consequences caused by the rapid and dramatic societal changes from the lockdown, however, cannot be overlooked in a country with considerable psychiatric morbidity, limited mental healthcare infrastructure, and high rates of poverty and unemployment. Our findings highlight that the depressive impacts of greater perceived COVID-19 infection risk were more severe among individuals who reported worse histories of childhood trauma. Additionally, our study emphasizes the prioritization and provision of accessible mental health resources for resource-limited communities in Soweto and across South Africa.

We discuss three main findings from our analyses. Few cases had been detected in Soweto during this first month of lockdown, although a portion of our sample perceived their risk as high and expressed deep anxiety and fear over personal and family well-being. Our first major finding is that people perceive their own risk for COVID-19 infection differently relative to others in their community. These risk perceptions were unaffected by age, gender, socioeconomic status, educational attainment, household density, coping ability, and whether people had heard of coronavirus and had been tested. Our qualitative data suggest that inability to properly social distance and quarantine, potent psychosocial stress, preexisting health conditions, unemployment, and food insecurity exacerbate existing individual and household strains among already vulnerable families, placing them at greater risk of disease susceptibility. Greater knowledge about the prevention and transmissibility of coronavirus was associated with lower perceived risk of COVID-19 infection. This result emphasizes importance of public health awareness campaigns and effective messaging around prevention strategies as well as the numerous impacts of preexisting structural vulnerabilities on differential perceptions of COVID-19 infection risk. This finding recapitulates the lessons learned from the HIV/TB epidemics in South Africa, that fundamental causes of infectious disease must be systematically prioritized across the continuum of public health responses, from emergency response, treatment, education, to prevention.

Second, while most did not think that COVID-19 affected their mental health, we found a variety of stressors that caused deep worry, anxiety, and rumination (“thinking too much”) in approximately 20% of adults. These constant foci during the lockdown were driven and exacerbated by the inability to care for themselves and their families, crippling financial concerns, personal vulnerability due to illness, the invisible nature of COVID-19 transmission, and a lack of awareness on COVID-19. It is unsurprising that the same factors that motivated concerns over mental distress also impacted one’s perception of their own risk of COVID-19, which highlights the coupling of perceived disease risk and depressives symptoms in our sample. The discordance between the highly prevalent perception in our interviews that COVID-19 did not impact mental health and the strong relationship between perceived risk and depressive symptoms, however, raises concern that participants may not be aware of the potential threats to their mental health during COVID-19.

Third, our main finding shows that higher self-perceived risk of COVID-19 infection is associated with greater depressive symptoms in adults with more severe histories of childhood trauma during the first six weeks of lockdown. This association remained after controlling for recent psychiatric risk, quality of life, COVID-19 knowledge, coping ability, and demographic factors. While the cross-sectional nature of our measures of perceived COVID-19 risk and depressive symptoms limits our ability to determine casual pathways that may precipitate these trends, the long-term impacts of early life trauma on adult risk perception and mental health are notable (Figure 2).

We propose two possible pathways that may explain the stronger depressive effects of heightened perceived COVID-19 risk, and vice versa, in relation to childhood trauma. First, increased severity of childhood trauma may cause durable increases in psychological and physiological stress reactivity into adulthood and increase one’s risk of developing MDD^14,15. A growing literature has documented that greater exposure to childhood trauma can alter the development of stress physiological mechanisms, such as hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis regulation, the immune system, and brain function, and leave lasting changes that extend across the lifecourse. For instance, individuals with histories of childhood trauma and chronic stress across development exhibit greater risk for increased psychological stress reactivity¹⁶, heightened cortisol reactivity¹⁷, elevated inflammatory profiles¹⁸ in response to future stressors. Recent evidence has reported the long-term impacts of childhood maltreatment on brain regions, such as the amygdala¹⁹ and hippocampus²⁰, that regulate the perceptions of threat appraisal and emotions (e.g. fear, sadness) and are involved in the pathogenesis of MDD²¹ and that epigenetic modification of genetic loci may underlie these processes²². These early life stress-linked alterations in stress physiology may subsequently predispose individuals to developing a suite of psychopathologies, including depression.

Conversely, greater past childhood trauma may increase the severity of adult depressive symptoms or MDD and increase emotional and biological sensitization to future stressors and adverse conditions. Childhood trauma is a well-known risk factor that influences the severity and duration of MDD and other psychopathologies^23,24. Additionally, key symptomatic behaviors of MDD, such as persistent feelings of victimization, learned hopelessness and helplessness, and negative appraisal^25,26 likely motivate the elevated self-perception of COVID-19 infection risk. Adults with histories of childhood trauma and greater MDD severity, particularly among melancholic MDD patients, have developed increased psychological²⁶ and neuroendocrine¹⁷ sensitization to future stressors. Previous research on perceived AIDS risk found that adult women with greater severity of childhood trauma reported increased perceptions of contracting HIV²⁸. Thus, elevated perceived COVID-19 infection risk may arise as a function of the depressive effects from childhood trauma. Future longitudinal research is needed to determine the precise mechanisms by which childhood trauma, perceived COVID infection risk, and depressive symptoms are related.

While we have examined the effects of a variety of individual-level factors across the lifecourse on perceived infection risk and depressive symptoms, the social and historical contexts from which many of these social and psychological factors arise are largely responsible for the current state of psychiatric morbidity and vulnerability to infection in Soweto today. Nearly all participants were born during the oppressive apartheid regime or shortly after its violent dissolution, which is when all reported childhood traumas took place. Though children were not always exposed to the everyday adversities and extreme traumas of racial segregationist cultures and policies, the distributive impacts of racialized and classed violence among families often times translated to poor housing quality, food insecurity, family violence, and child abuse^29,30. The psychological, economic, and structural legacies of apartheid violence manifest in the present moment where the intergenerational trauma of apartheid may persist and sustain racial and class disparities in mental illness, socioeconomic opportunity, and infectious disease risk. We offer this history to contextualize our findings and emphasize the importance of prioritizing accessible mental health and infectious disease prevention services countrywide.

CONCLUSION

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first investigation of the mental health impacts of COVID-19 experiences during the 2020 coronavirus pandemic and national lockdown in South Africa. We report that the relationship between increased depressive symptoms and greater perceived COVID-19 infection risk was more severe among adults who reported worse histories of childhood trauma. Adults were two times more likely to experience significant depressive symptoms for every one unit increase in perceived COVID-19 risk. Greater knowledge of COVID-19 prevention and transmission was associated with lower perceived risk of depression but higher depressive symptoms. While a large majority of participants reported that experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic did not affect their mental health (or “mind”), 10-20% of participants reported potent experiences of anxiety, fear, and “thinking too much” as a result of the pandemic. Our results highlight the compounding effects of past traumatic histories and recent stress exposures on exacerbating the severity of depressive symptoms among adults living in an urban South African context.

Funding

The research was funded by a grant (1R21TW010789-01A1) to EM from the Fogarty International Center at the US National Institutes of Health. AWK is supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship and the Fogarty International Center and National Institute of Mental Health, of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number D43 TW010543. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Author contributions

AWK conceptualized the question, study design, and analysis, oversaw data collection, conducted quantitative data analysis, and drafted the manuscript. TN assisted with data cleaning and analysis and reviewed the paper. EM acquired funding for the parent study, designed the study protocol, oversaw and conducted qualitative data analysis, and reviewed the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

We report no conflicts of interest.