[COVID-19: Knowledge, risk perception and strategies for handling the pandemic]

[Continuous SARS-CoV-2 monitoring in day care centres: A qualitative interview study on the experiences of childcare workers and parents with different self-sampling methods in the home environment]

BACKGROUND

Since the beginning of the corona pandemic in Germany in January 2020, day care centres (DCC) have faced the challenge of reliably detecting cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection as early and reliably as possible in order to avoid major outbreaks and closures. Conducting regular virological screening tests for asymptomatic DCC children and childcare workers requires a high level of acceptance among participants and should be as easy as possible to implement. The present study aimed to evaluate childcare workers' and parents' attitudes and experiences regarding the acceptance and feasibility of various screening methods. This assessment was conducted using additional qualitative interviews designed for home-based screening in the context of a screening study in DCCs.

METHOD

From May to July 2021, childcare workers and parents of children in nine DCCs in Wuerzburg independently carried out screening tests for SARS-CoV-2 at home twice a week as part of the "Würzburg Child Care Study in the COVID-19 Pandemic 2.0". The participants were offered two self-sampling methods (mouth-rinsing fluid for pooled PCR tests and/or nasal rapid antigen self-tests). Before and after the 12-week test phase, telephone interviews were conducted with a selected sample of childcare workers and parents in order to ascertain initial attitudes and further experiences with the two self-sampling methods and their implementation. The interviews were fully transcribed for analysis and subjected to a qualitative content analysis according to Kuckartz.

RESULTS

Of the 1,026 eligible participants, 591 individuals, including 139 childcare workers and the parents of 452 children, agreed to take part in the screening tests. A total of 49 interviews were conducted with a specifically selected sample (20 before the start of the test, 29 after the end of the test). In the qualitative content analysis, three overarching topics emerged: 'aspects of the test performance', 'aspects of the perception of safety' and 'aspects of the testing in children'. Regardless of the fact that the various test methods and test features were perceived very differently, conducting the tests at home was found to be feasible.

DISCUSSION

The differentiated insights into the participants' perspectives provide valuable information about factors that influence the acceptance of self-testing. These should be taken into account before such a measure is introduced in DCCs if necessary.

CONCLUSION

The assessment of test procedures is strongly influenced by individual preferences. Test concepts should be implemented with as little time and organisational effort as possible in order to promote willingness to participate. Clear study information and quick feedback on test results can enhance the sense of security among parents and childcare workers.

Climate-sensitive health counselling in Germany: a cross-sectional study about previous participation and preferences in the general public

BACKGROUND

In response to climate change (CC), medicine needs to consider new aspects in health counselling of patients. Such climate-sensitive health counselling (CSHC) may include counselling patients on preventing and coping with climate-sensitive diseases or on leading healthy and climate-friendly lifestyles. This study aimed to identify previous participation in and preferences for CSHC as well as associated sociodemographic and attitudinal factors among the general public in Germany.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study in a population-based online panel in five German federal states (04-06/2022). We performed descriptive statistics and multivariable regression analysis to assess prior participation in CSHC and content preferences regarding CSHC, as well as associations between sociodemographic variables and general preference for CSHC.

RESULTS

Among 1491 participants (response rate 47.1%), 8.7% explicitly reported having participated in CSHC, while 39.9% had discussed at least one CSHC-related topic with physicians. In the studied sample, 46.7% of participants would like CSHC to be part of the consultation with their physician, while 33.9% rejected this idea. Participants aged 21 to 40 years (versus 51 to 60), individuals alarmed about CC (versus concerned/cautious/disengaged/doubtful/dismissive), and those politically oriented to the left (vs. centre or right) showed greater preference for CSHC in the multivariable regression model. Most participants wanted to talk about links to their personal health (65.1%) as opposed to links to the health of all people (33.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Almost half of the participants in this sample would like to receive CSHC, especially those who are younger, more alarmed about CC and more politically oriented to the left. More research and training on patient-centred implementation of CSHC is needed.

To Remind or Not to Remind During Recruitment? An Analysis of an Online Panel in Germany

Objective: To explore the role of reminders in recruiting and maintaining participation in an online panel. Methods: 50,045 individuals from five German federal states were invited by regular mail to participate in the online study "Health-Related Beliefs and Healthcare Experiences in Germany." Those who did not respond to the first attempt received a postal reminder. Comparisons of sociodemographic characteristics and responses were made between first-attempt respondents and those who enrolled after the second letter. Results: After the initial letter, 2,216 (4.4%, 95%CI: 4.3%-4.6%) registered for the study; after a reminder 1,130 (2.5%, 2.3%-2.6% of those reminded) enrolled. Minor sociodemographic differences were observed between the groups and the content of the responses did not differ. Second-attempt respondents were less likely to participate in subsequent questionnaires: 67.3% of first-attempt vs. 43.3% of second-attempt respondents participated in their fourth survey. Recruitment costs were 79% higher for second-attempt respondents. Conclusion: While reminders increased the number of participants, lower cost-effectiveness and higher attrition of second-attempt respondents support the use of single invitation only for studies with a similar design to ours when the overall participation is low.

[Pre-existing Mental Disorders and Depressiveness in the Second Wave of the SARS-CoV-2-Pandemic - The Role of Pandemic-Associated Stressors]

The second wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic was characterized by drastic restrictions. From previous pandemics as well as from the first wave, it is known that especially individuals with a history of mental disorders may be highly vulnerable to develop poor mental health. Therefore, this paper examines the association of prior mental disorders (PMD) and depressiveness in the 2nd pandemic wave, considering general stress, perceived isolation, perception of political measures to curb the pandemic, fears regarding consequences of the pandemic and changes in the employment and income situation. A cross-sectional analysis was conducted with data of 812 participants of the health related beliefs and health care experiences in Germany study (HeReCa). The association between PMD and depressiveness was studied by means of weighted (for education and age) logistic regression, adjusted for the named variables as well as sociodemographic characteristics. Individuals with PMD displayed substantially more often higher depressiveness than individuals without PMD (OR: 25.1; 95% CI: 11.0-57.3). This association decreased partially by accounting for higher general stress and stress from isolation. Lack of partnership, low income, and male sex were associated with higher depressiveness, but only marginally changed the association of PMD and depressiveness. Overall, during the pandemic, persons with PMD were more likely to develop higher depressiveness than persons without. It is strongly advised to provide care for mental illness in pandemic times, which can be completed by E-Mental-Health or professional support for coping with stress.

Public information needs and preferences on COVID-19: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Right from the beginning of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic the general public faced the challenge to find reliable and understandable information in the overwhelming flood of information. To enhance informed decision-making, evidence-based information should be provided. Aim was to explore the general public's information needs and preferences on COVID-19 as well as the barriers to accessing evidence-based information.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional study. Nine hundred twenty-seven panel members were invited to an online survey (12/2020-02/2021). The HeReCa-online-panel is installed at the Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg to assess regularly the general public's view on health issues in five regions in Germany. The survey was set up in LimeSurvey, with nine items, multiple-choice and open-ended questions that allowed to gather qualitative data. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively and a content analysis was carried out to categorise the qualitative data.

RESULTS

Six hundred thirty-six panel members provided data; mean age 52 years, 56.2% female, and 64.9% with higher education qualifications. Asked about relevant topics related to COVID-19, most participants selected vaccination (63.8%), infection control (52%), and long-term effects (47.8%). The following 11 categories were derived from the qualitative analysis representing the topics of interest: vaccination, infection control, long-term effects, therapies, test methods, mental health, symptoms, structures for pandemic control, infrastructure in health care, research. Participants preferred traditional media (TV 70.6%; radio 58.5%; newspaper 32.7%) to social media, but also used the internet as sources of information, becoming aware of new information on websites (28.5%) or via email/newsletter (20.1%). The knowledge question (Which European country is most affected by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic?) was correctly answered by 7.5% of participants. The Robert Koch Institute (93.7%) and the World Health Organization (78%) were well known, while other organisations providing health information were rarely known (< 10%). Barriers to accessing trustworthy information were lack of time (30.7%), little experience (23.1%), uncertainty about how to get access (22.2%), complexity and difficulties in understanding (23.9%), and a lack of target group orientation (15,3%).

CONCLUSIONS

There are extensive information needs regarding various aspects on COVID-19 among the general population. In addition, target-specific dissemination strategies are still needed to reach different groups.

Development and Content Validation of a Comprehensive Health Literacy Survey Instrument for Use in Individuals with Asthma during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Individuals with chronic conditions have been faced with many additional challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. Individual health literacy (HL) as the ability to access, understand, evaluate, and apply pandemic-related information has thus become ever more important in these populations. The purpose of this study was to develop and content-validate a comprehensive HL survey instrument for people with asthma based on an integrated framework, and on previous surveys and other instruments for use in the general population and vulnerable groups. Beside HL, assumed determinants, mediators, and health outcomes were embraced in the framework. A mixed-method design was used. A comprehensive examination of the available literature yielded an initial pool of 398 single items within 20 categories. Based on content validity indices (CVI) of expert ratings (n = 11) and the content analysis of cognitive interviews with participants (n = 9), the item pool was reduced, and individual items/scales refined or modified. The instrument showed appropriate comprehensibility (98.0%), was judged relevant, and had an acceptable CVI at scale level (S-CVI/Ave = 0.91). The final version comprises 14 categories measured by 38 questions consisting of 116 single items. In terms of content, the instrument appears a valid representation of behavioural and psychosocial constructs pertaining to a broad HL understanding and relevant to individuals with asthma during the COVID-19 pandemic. Regular monitoring of these behavioural and psychosocial constructs during the course of the pandemic can help identify needs as well as changes during the course of the pandemic, which is particularly important in chronic disease populations.

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and knowledge, attitude and practice toward COVID-19 in the Republic of Srpska-Bosnia & Herzegovina: A population-based study

The aim of the study was to assess the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in the Republic of Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and to analyse the knowledge, attitudes and practices of the population toward COVID-19. This population-based study was conducted in a group of 1,855 randomly selected individuals from all municipalities from 1 December 2020 to 15 January 2021. All individuals were asked to sign a consent form and to fill in a questionnaire, following which a blood samples were collected. Total anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were determined in serum specimens using the total Ab ELISA assay. The overall seroprevalence rate was 40.3%. Subjects aged <65 years were 2.06 times more likely to be seropositive than those aged ≥65, and 30% of seropositive individuals presented no COVID-19 symptoms. The household members of seropositive individuals were 2.24 times more likely to develop COVID-19 symptoms than the household members of seronegative individuals. More than 95% of respondents believe that preventive measures are very important to control the infection transmission. Majority of respondents wear the masks properly, maintain the required physical distance whenever possible and wash hands with soap. Nearly 50% of individuals were of the opinion that the vaccine could prevent the infection. This study showed that an overall SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity rate by the middle of January 2021 was very high. Attitudes and practices regarding the COVID-19 indicate that additional efforts should be taken in order to improve the health education with a focus on preventive measures and vaccination.

Citizens, doctors, politicians - who´s an expert in times of COVID-19? A survey in Austria and Germany

Background

This study aimed to explore which measures and risk factors for a COVID − 19 infection are considered most important in the general population, health experts and policymakers and to assess the level of agreement across the groups from Austria and Germany.

Methods

A two-phased survey was conducted, participants were matched according to age and gender. Three different groups were asked which measures they considered most relevant in reducing a COVID-19 transmission, to determine which factors contribute most to the risk of disease, and to evaluate the level of agreement in the assessment of risk factor relevance for (a) the transmission of the disease and (b) the risk of a severe course of COVID-19.

Results

Risk factors for an infection that were selected from all three groups were immunosuppression/deficiency, cancer, chronic lung disease, smoking, age and working as a health care professional. Interrater agreement per population was only poor to slight and results were highly heterogeneous.

Conclusions

Our survey shows a broad spectrum of opinions and the associated general uncertainty about the risk factors for infection and a severe course of disease across the groups. Profound knowledge of politicians and experts is of high relevance to provide the public with valid information to ensure cooperation fighting the pandemic.

Trial registration

https://apps.who.int/trialsearch/ (ID: DRKS00022166). Registered 15 June 2020.

The Early Stage of the COVID-19 Outbreak in Tunisia, France, and Germany: A Systematic Mapping Review of the Different National Strategies

The multitude of national strategies used against the COVID-19 pandemic makes it necessary to review and synthesize them in order to identify potential gaps and shortcomings, and to help prioritize future control efforts. This systematic mapping review is aimed at identifying the coronavirus pandemic management strategies adopted by France, Tunisia, and Germany during the early stage of the COVID-19 outbreak. A set of government websites in addition to the PubMed and Google Scholar databases were searched to identify scientific articles and institutional documents related to the national strategies of the three countries up until July 2020. The references included were mapped and narratively synthesized based on the pillars of the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework of the Strategic Preparedness and Response Plan defined by the World Health Organization. Of the 2765 records screened, 65 documents were included in the study. The analysis of these documents showed that Germany was the first country to implement mass screening of cases and that France was the first country to implement measures to impose general containment at the national level. It also showed that Tunisia was the only country to have imposed the confinement of passengers on repatriation flights in dedicated containment centers and at the expense of the state.

Perception of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease: Real-Life Experience From Pakistan

Introduction

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NALFD) has become one of the most pervasive causes of hepatic pathology. Because of its marked association with metabolic syndrome, type II diabetes and cardiovascular disease, NAFLD has gained substantial focus recently. Its prevalence and incidence are on the rise in Pakistan. However, due to its indolent and mostly asymptomatic course, NAFLD is often overlooked. This reckless behavior towards a potentially deadly disease is influenced most notably by disinformation or flawed perception, although there are a number of other complex socioeconomic components to this as well. With respect to NAFLD, the gap between disease understanding and steps for management is growing in the Pakistani society. With this study, we hoped and aimed to evaluate just how far and wide these shortcomings were found and how was NAFLD perceived in the local populace via a self-administered survey.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional observational cohort study undertaken at the Department of Gastroenterology, Jinnah Postgraduate Medical Centre, and Medical Unit II, Dow University of Health Sciences, Ojha Campus, Karachi, Pakistan. All patients ≥18 years with a diagnosis of NAFLD were included in the study. NAFLD was diagnosed on the basis of sonographic evidence. All ultrasounds were done by a senior expert radiologist with at least 10 years of postgraduate experience. Ultrasounds were performed twice in all patients to rule out human error and bias. Perceptions regarding the knowledge of NAFLD were assessed using a self-administered survey questionnaire.

Results

The female-to-male ratio in our cohort was 3:1. The mean age and body mass index (BMI) recorded were 39.85 ± 9.79 years and 31.21 ± 3.6 kg/m², respectively. Sixty participants (26.4%) knew about their disease (NAFLD) while only 36 (15.9%) knew what NAFLD was and only 33 (14.5%) participants knew about the cardiovascular risk associated with it. Nearly two-thirds of the patients considered themselves overweight, while 180 (79.3%) of them were willing to lose weight. However, just about half of the cohort admitted the need for improved eating habits and increased physical activity/exercise in their daily lives. Fifty-seven (25.1%) patients admitted to using alternative or quack medications and only 45 (19.8%) patients considered them harmful.

Conclusions

Patients harboring NAFLD have little to no knowledge about the disease and its nature or the fact that they are suffering from it despite being diagnosed clinically. Furthermore, while the general populace is willing to accept being overweight and having unhealthy eating habits, their willingness in initiating real-life practical steps to manage NAFLD is lacking.

Lessons From the First Wave of COVID-19: Work-Related Consequences, Clinical Knowledge, Emotional Distress, and Safety-Conscious Behavior in Healthcare Workers in Switzerland

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) imposes an unusual risk to the physical and mental health of healthcare workers and thereby to the functioning of healthcare systems during the crisis. This study investigates the clinical knowledge of healthcare workers about COVID-19, their ways of acquiring information, their emotional distress and risk perception, their adherence to preventive guidelines, their changed work situation due to the pandemic, and their perception of how the healthcare system has coped with the pandemic. It is based on a quantitative cross-sectional survey of 185 Swiss healthcare workers directly attending to patients during the pandemic, with 22% (n = 40) of them being assigned to COVID-19-infected patients. The participants answered between 16th June and 15th July 2020, shortly after the first wave of COVID-19 had been overcome and the national government had relaxed its preventive regulations to a great extent. The questionnaire incorporated parts of the "Standard questionnaire on risk perception of an infectious disease outbreak" (version 2015), which were adapted to the case of COVID-19. Clinical knowledge was lowest regarding the effectiveness of standard hygiene (p < 0.05). Knowledge of infectiousness, incubation time, and life-threatening disease progression was higher, however still significantly lower than regarding asymptomatic cases and transmission without physical contact (p < 0.001). 70% (95%-confidence interval: 64-77%) of the healthcare workers reported considerable emotional distress on at least one of the measured dimensions. They worried significantly more strongly about patients, elderly people, and family members, than about their own health (p < 0.001). Adherence to (not legally binding) preventive guidelines by the government displayed patterns such that not all guidelines were followed equally. Most of the participants were faced with a lack of protective materials, personnel, structures, processes, and contingency plans. An increase in stress level was the most prevalent among the diverse effects the pandemic had on their work situation. Better medical equipment (including drugs), better protection for their own mental and physical health, more (assigned) personnel, more comprehensive information about the symptoms of the disease, and a system of earlier warning were the primary lessons to be learned in view of upcoming waves of the pandemic.

The US Public's Perception of the Threat of COVID-19 During the Rapid Spread of the COVID-19 Outbreak: Cross-Sectional Survey Study

BACKGROUND

The rapid spread of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States has made people uncertain about their perceptions of the threat of COVID-19 and COVID-19 response measures. To mount an effective response to this epidemic, it is necessary to understand the public's perceptions, behaviors, and attitudes.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to test the hypothesis that people's perceptions of the threat of COVID-19 influence their attitudes and behaviors.

METHODS

This study used an open dataset of web-based questionnaires about COVID-19. The questionnaires were provided by Nexoid United Kingdom. We selected the results of a questionnaire on COVID-19-related behaviors, attitudes, and perceptions among the US public. The questionnaire was conducted from March 29 to April 20, 2020. A total of 24,547 people who lived in the United States took part in the survey.

RESULTS

In this study, the average self-assessed probability of contracting COVID-19 was 33.2%, and 49.9% (12,244/24,547) of the respondents thought that their chances of contracting COVID-19 were less than 30%. The self-assessed probability of contracting COVID-19 among women was 1.35 times that of males. A 5% increase in perceived infection risk was significantly associated with being 1.02 times (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.02-1.02; P<.001) more likely to report having close contact with >10 people, and being 1.01 times (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.01-1.01; P<.001) more likely to report that cohabitants disagreed with taking steps to reduce the risk of contracting COVID-19. However, there was no significant association between participants who lived with more than 5 cohabitants or less than 5 cohabitants (P=.85). Generally, participants who lived in states with 1001-10,000 COVID-19 cases, were aged 20-40 years, were obese, smoked, drank alcohol, never used drugs, and had no underlying medical conditions were more likely to be in close contact with >10 people. Most participants (21,017/24,547, 85.6%) agreed with washing their hands and maintaining social distancing, but only 20.2% (4958/24,547) of participants often wore masks. Additionally, male participants and participants aged <20 years typically disagreed with washing their hands, maintaining social distancing, and wearing masks.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey is the first attempt to describe the determinants of the US public's perception of the threat of COVID-19 on a large scale. The self-assessed probability of contracting COVID-19 differed significantly based on the respondents' genders, states of residence, ages, body mass indices, smoking habits, alcohol consumption habits, drug use habits, underlying medical conditions, environments, and behaviors. These findings can be used as references by public health policy makers and health care workers who want to identify populations that need to be educated on COVID-19 prevention and health.