Mean Platelet Volume and Platelet Distribution Width Level in Patients with Panic Disorder

Background: Changes in platelet indices have been reported in patients with panic disorder (PD). However, previous study findings are contradictory and inconclusive. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the platelet indices in patients with PD. Materials and Methods: Patients with PD (n = 123) and healthy controls (n = 133) were enrolled in this case control study. The platelet indices (mean platelet volume [MPV] and platelet distribution width [PDW]) along with red blood cell (RBC) indices (RBC count and red cell distribution width [RDW]) were compared between the two groups using the unpaired t-test. Results: Patients with PD had lower MPV (7.53 ± 0.93 fL vs. 8.91 ± 1.24 fL, P < 0.0001), higher PDW (16.96 ± 0.85 fL vs. 14.71 ± 2.07 fL, P < 0.0001), and higher platelet count (274.2 ± 80.66 × 109 L−1 vs. 243.1 ± 93.89 × 109 L−1, P < 0.005) than the healthy controls. Furthermore, there were significant differences between patients with PD and healthy controls in terms of their RBC count (4.32 ± 0.56 × 1012 L−1 vs. 4.08 ± 0.80 × 1012 L−1, P = 0.007) and RDW (16.48 ± 2.26 fL vs. 15.01 ± 2.25 fL, P < 0.0001). Conclusion: Patients with PD have increased PDW and RDW. The platelet and RBC indices may prove to be useful etiological and prognostic markers in patients with PD

Infectious disease outbreak related stigma and discrimination during the COVID-19 pandemic: Drivers, facilitators, manifestations, and outcomes across the world

Being part of a social minority (e.g. migrants, people of color or Asian descent in Western countries) is not itself a risk factor for contracting Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). However, certain groups of people across the world are being targeted by COVID-19 related stigma (COS) and discrimination, which constitutes a growing concern (Bagcchi, 2020). There is an urgent need to better understand it, as it may pose a barrier for accessing testing and health care and for maintaining treatment adherence (Stangl et al., 2019). It is very likely that COS is the consequence of multiple socio-ecological drivers (e.g., fear, misinformation) and facilitators (e.g., racism, poverty) (Logie, 2020). In this letter, we attempt to explore COS related factors based on the real-life experiences of a group of psychiatrists from thirteen countries using the health stigma and discrimination framework (HSDF) (Stangl et al., 2019). We categorized these experiences as per the process domains (such as drivers, facilitators); and these process domains along with examples/responses are depicted in Fig. (1)