Associations between adverse childhood experiences, attitudes towards COVID-19 restrictions and vaccine hesitancy: a cross-sectional study

Did childhood adversity increase the vulnerability of university students to the negative mental health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic?

OBJECTIVE

To examine a potential synergistic effect of history of childhood adversity and COVID-19 pandemic exposure on the association with mental health concerns in undergraduate students. Participants: We used U-Flourish Survey data from 2019 (pre-pandemic) and 2020 (during-pandemic) first-year cohorts (n = 3,149) identified at entry to a major Canadian University.

METHODS

Interactions between childhood adversity (physical and sexual abuse, and peer bullying) and COVID-19 pandemic exposure regarding mental health concern (depressive and anxiety symptoms, suicidality, and non-suicidal self-harm) were examined on an additive scale.

RESULTS

We found a positive additive interaction between physical abuse and pandemic exposure in relation to suicidality (combined effect was greater than additive effect (risk difference 0.54 vs. 0.36)). Conversely, less than additive interactions between peer bullying and pandemic regarding depression and anxiety were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Childhood adversities have diverse reactions to adult stressor depending on the nature of the childhood adversity and the mental health outcomes.

Disparities by Social Determinants of Health: Links Between Long COVID and Cardiovascular Disease

Long COVID has been defined by the World Health Organisation as "continuation or development of new symptoms 3 months after the initial SARS-CoV-2 infection, with these symptoms lasting for at least 2 months with no other explanation." Cardiovascular disease is implicated as a risk factor, concomitant condition, and consequence of long COVID. As well as heterogeneity in definition, presentation, and likely underlying pathophysiology of long COVID, disparities by social determinants of health, extensively studied and described in cardiovascular disease, have been observed in 3 ways. First, underlying long-term conditions, such as cardiovascular disease and its risk factors, are associated with incidence and severity of long COVID, and previously described socioeconomic disparities in these factors are important in exacerbating disparities in long COVID. Second, socioeconomic disparities in management of COVID-19 may themselves lead to distal disparities in long COVID. Third, there are socioeconomic disparities in the way that long COVID is diagnosed, managed, and prevented. Together, factors such as age, sex, deprivation, and ethnicity have far-reaching implications in this new postviral syndrome across its management spectrum. There are similarities and differences compared with disparities for cardiovascular disease. Some of these disparities are in fact, inequalities, that is, rather than simply observed variations, they represent injustices with costs to individuals, communities, and economies. This review of current literature considers opportunities to prevent or at least attenuate these socioeconomic disparities in long COVID and cardiovascular disease, with special challenges for research, clinical practice, public health, and policy in a new disease which is evolving.

Examining relationships between adverse childhood experiences and coping during the cost-of-living crisis using a national cross-sectional survey in Wales, UK

OBJECTIVES

Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) can affect individuals' resilience to stressors and their vulnerability to mental, physical and social harms. This study explored associations between ACEs, financial coping during the cost-of-living crisis and perceived impacts on health and well-being.

DESIGN

National cross-sectional face-to-face survey. Recruitment used a random quota sample of households stratified by health region and deprivation quintile.

SETTING

Households in Wales, UK.

PARTICIPANTS

1880 Welsh residents aged ≥18 years.

MEASURES

Outcome variables were perceived inability to cope financially during the cost-of-living crisis; rising costs of living causing substantial distress and anxiety; and self-reported negative impact of rising costs of living on mental health, physical health, family relationships, local levels of antisocial behaviour and violence, and community support. Nine ACEs were measured retrospectively. Socioeconomic and demographic variables included low household income, economic inactivity, residential deprivation and activity limitation.

RESULTS

The prevalence of all outcomes increased strongly with ACE count. Perceived inability to cope financially during the cost-of-living crisis increased from 14.0% with 0 ACEs to 51.5% with 4+ ACEs. Relationships with ACEs remained after controlling for socioeconomic and demographic factors. Those with 4+ ACEs (vs 0 ACEs) were over three times more likely to perceive they would be unable to cope financially and, correspondingly, almost three times more likely to report substantial distress and anxiety and over three times more likely to report negative impacts on mental health, physical health and family relationships.

CONCLUSIONS

Socioeconomically deprived populations are recognised to be disproportionately impacted by rising costs of living. Our study identifies a history of ACEs as an additional vulnerability that can affect all socioeconomic groups. Definitions of vulnerability during crises and communications with services on who is most likely to be impacted should consider childhood adversity and history of trauma.

Therapeutic Alliance and Group Cohesion Across Telehealth Delivery of Mentalizing-focused Parenting Groups

This study assessed changes in therapeutic alliance and group cohesion among parents/primary caregivers enrolled in Connecting and Reflecting Experience (CARE), a short-term, group-based, mentalizing-focused parenting program designed to support a diverse community facing socioeconomic and health disparities. Caregivers (N = 44) experiencing parenting stress or parent-child relational challenges were recruited from their children's outpatient psychiatry clinic to participate in one of nine 12-session telehealth CARE groups. Caregivers completed the Working Alliance Inventory-Short Revised and the Therapeutic Factors Inventory Cohesiveness subscale after CARE Sessions 1 and 12. Ratings of group cohesion and therapeutic bond with facilitators increased significantly across treatment. Findings indicate that caregivers from underserved families with high levels of parenting stress experienced an increase in group cohesion and therapeutic alliance throughout a telehealth adaptation of CARE.

The experience of traumatic events, psychological distress, and social support: links to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and trends with age in a group of older Australians

BACKGROUND

Vaccination is important to reduce disease-associated morbidity and mortality in an ageing global population. While older adults are more likely than younger adults to accept vaccines, some remain hesitant. We sought to understand how traumatic events, psychological distress and social support contribute to older adults' intention to receive a COVID-19 vaccine and whether these experiences change with age.

METHODS

We analysed survey data collected as part of the Sax Institute's 45 and Up Study in a population of Australian adults aged 60 years and over. Data were derived from the COVID Insights study; a series of supplementary surveys about how participants experienced the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

Higher intention to receive a COVID-19 vaccine was associated with greater social support (adjusted odds ratio (aOR):1.08; 95%CI:1.06-1.11; p <.001) while lower intention was associated with personally experiencing a serious illness, injury or assault in the last 12 months (aOR:0.79; 95% CI:0.64-0.98; p =.03). Social support and the experience of traumatic events increased significantly with age, while psychological distress decreased.

CONCLUSIONS

There may be factors beyond disease-associated risks that play a role in vaccine acceptance with age. Older Australians on the younger end of the age spectrum may have specific needs to address their hesitancy that may be overlooked.

To trust or not to trust in the thrall of the COVID-19 pandemic: Conspiracy endorsement and the role of adverse childhood experiences, epistemic trust, and personality functioning

RATIONALE

Conspiracy endorsement is a public health challenge for the successful containment of the COVID-19 pandemic. While usually considered a societal phenomenon, little is known about the equally important developmental backdrops and personality characteristics like mistrust that render an individual prone to conspiracy endorsement. There is a growing body of evidence implying a detrimental role of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) - a highly prevalent developmental burden - in the development of epistemic trust and personality functioning. This study aimed to investigate the association between ACEs and conspiracy endorsement in the general population, specifically questioning a mediating role of epistemic trust and personality functioning.

METHODS

Based on cross-sectional data from a representative German survey collected during the COVID-19 pandemic (N = 2501), we conducted structural equation modelling (SEM) where personality functioning (OPD-SQS) and epistemic trust (ETMCQ) were included as mediators of the association between ACEs and conspiracy endorsement. Bootstrapped confidence intervals (5000 samples, 95%-CI) are presented for all paths.

RESULTS

ACEs were significantly associated with conspiracy endorsement (β = 0.25, p < 0.001) and explained 6% of its variance. Adding epistemic trust and personality functioning as mediators increased the explained variance of conspiracy endorsement to 19% while the direct association between ACEs and conspiracy endorsement was diminished (β = 0.12, p < 0.001), indicating an indirect effect of personality functioning and epistemic trust in the association between ACEs and conspiracy endorsement. Fit indices confirmed good model fit.

CONCLUSIONS

Establishing an association between ACEs and conspiracy endorsement further increases the evidence for early childhood adversities' far-reaching and detrimental effects. By including epistemic trust and personality functioning, these findings contribute to a deeper understanding of the underlying mechanisms in the way that ACEs may be associated with conspiracy endorsement.

High Caregiver Adverse Childhood Experiences Are Associated With Pediatric Influenza and COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake

BACKGROUND

Factors surrounding vaccine uptake are complex. Although anxiety, which could influence vaccination decisions, has been associated with adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), little is known about links between caregiver ACEs and pediatric vaccine uptake. We evaluated associations between caregivers' ACEs and decisions to vaccinate their children with influenza and coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccines.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study of caregivers of patients ≥6 months at one pediatric primary care center (PPCC) was performed. Caregivers completed a 19-question survey examining caregiver ACEs, influenza vaccine acceptance and beliefs, and intention to vaccinate their child with the COVID-19 vaccine. Demographic characteristics, social risks (eg, housing and food insecurity), and vaccination data for children present with each caregiver were extracted from the electronic health record (EHR). Statistical analyses included χ2 tests for categorical variables and t-tests for continuous variables.

RESULTS

A total of 240 caregivers participated, representing 283 children (mean age of 5.9 years, 47% male). Twenty-four percent (n = 58) had high ACEs (≥4). Of those with high ACEs, 55% accepted pediatric influenza vaccination compared with 38% with low ACEs (P = .02). Those with high ACEs had more positive attitudes toward influenza vaccine safety and efficacy (P ≤ .02). Those with high, compared with low, ACEs were also more likely to accept COVID-19 vaccination (38% vs 24%; P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric influenza vaccination rates and intention to vaccinate children against COVID-19 differed between caregivers with high and low ACEs: those with more ACEs were more likely to vaccinate. Further studies assessing the role of caregiver ACEs on vaccine decision-making are warranted.

Association between traumatic life events and vaccine hesitancy: A cross-sectional Australian study

OBJECTIVES

We sought to identify associations between the experience of traumatic life events and vaccination intention to inform whether trauma-affected individuals require targeted interventions when addressing vaccine hesitancy.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted an online cross-sectional survey to identify whether direct or indirect exposure to various traumatic life events and the presence of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms are associated with willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine in an Australian sample.

METHODS

A national online questionnaire was administered to a representative sample of 1050 Australian adults in September 2021.

RESULTS

Lower willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine was associated with direct experience of a fire or explosion (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.23-0.78; P = 0.006), direct experience of severe human suffering (aOR:0.39; 95% CI: 0.21-0.71; P = 0.002) and screening positive for PTSD symptoms (aOR:0.52; 95% CI: 0.33-0.82; P = 0.005). Conversely, higher willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine was associated with indirect exposure to severe human suffering (aOR: 2.0; 95% CI: 1.21-3.22; P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that the experience of traumatic events and the presence of PTSD symptoms can contribute to vaccination decisions. Our work adds to the growing recognition of the need to effectively mediate the influence of traumatic experiences on encounters within the medical setting and supports the importance of addressing the needs of trauma-affected individuals in their vaccination experiences.

Recommendations for Population-Based Applications of the Adverse Childhood Experiences Study: Position Statement by the American College of Preventive Medicine

Introduction

Childhood adversity profoundly influences health, well-being, and longevity. Prevention and interventions to mitigate its harmful effects are essential. The American College of Preventive Medicine reviewed the research literature and other professional and governmental statements about adverse childhood experiences to support the development of evidence-based and population-focused recommendations about prevention, screening, and mitigation interventions for childhood adversity.

Methods

We performed an umbrella review to find, assess and synthesize the evidence from systematic reviews focused on 3 key questions: the prevention or mitigation of the effects of adverse childhood experiences; the association of screening for adverse childhood experiences with various benefits, including health outcomes; and the effectiveness and harms of interventions in individuals with elevated adverse childhood experience scores. Adverse childhood experience‒related recommendations from 6 professional and governmental organizations were also reviewed. On the basis of these reviews, the American College of Preventive Medicine developed a position statement through consensus.

Results

A total of 8 systematic reviews, including 260 studies in total, were identified and combined with adverse childhood experiences‒related recommendations from 6 professional organizations to support the American College of Preventive Medicine recommendations. The American College of Preventive Medicine offers 7 adverse childhood experiences‒related recommendations focused on screening, education/training, policy/practice, and research: 2 are evidence-based, and 5 are based on expert opinion. Notably, regarding secondary prevention of adverse childhood experiences, the American College of Preventive Medicine endorses population-level surveillance and research around childhood adversity but not adverse childhood experience screening in individual clinical encounters.

Conclusions

Despite limitations in the heterogeneity and quality of the published systematic reviews, the extant literature supports the American College of Preventive Medicine recommendations. Interventions to enhance protective factors and prevent and mitigate the consequences of adverse childhood experiences and other childhood adversity are promising and require further implementation and research.

Parental Adverse Childhood Experiences and Perpetration of Child Physical Punishment in Wales

Child physical punishment is harmful to children and, as such, is being prohibited by a growing number of countries, including Wales. Parents' own childhood histories may affect their risks of using child physical punishment. We conducted a national cross-sectional survey of Welsh adults and measured relationships between the number of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) parents (n = 720 with children aged < 18) had suffered during childhood and their use of physical punishment towards children. Overall, 28.2% of parents reported having ever physically punished a child, and 5.8% reported having done so recently (in the last year). Child physical punishment use increased with the number of ACEs parents reported. Parents with 4+ ACEs were almost three times more likely to have ever physically punished a child and eleven times more likely to have done so recently (vs. those with 0 ACEs). The majority (88.1%) of parents that reported recent child physical punishment had a personal history of ACEs, while over half reported recently having been hit themselves by a child. Child physical punishment is strongly associated with parents' own ACE exposure and can occur within the context of broader conflict. Prohibiting physical punishment can protect children and, with appropriate family support, may help break intergenerational cycles of violence.

Coping with adverse childhood experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic: Perceptions of mental health service providers

Background

Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) have been associated with long-term physical and mental health conditions, toxic stress levels, developing unstable interpersonal relationships, and substance use disorders due to unresolved childhood adversities.

Aims

This study assessed the perspectives of mental health providers (MHPs) regarding their adult patients’ coping with ACEs during COVID-19 in Houston, Texas. Specifically, we explored how individuals with ACEs are coping with the increased stresses of the pandemic, how MHPs may provide therapeutic support for individuals with ACEs during this pandemic, pandemic-related challenges of accessing and utilizing mental health services for individuals with ACEs, and the awareness and treatment of ACEs among MHPs.

Methods

Ten in-depth semi-structured virtual interviews were conducted with licensed MHPs from November 2021 to April 2022 in Houston, Texas. Interviews were coded and analyzed for emerging themes through an inductive open coding approach to discover insights regarding coping with ACEs during COVID-19.

Results

Four key themes experienced by individuals with ACEs emerged from the MHP interviews: (1) Maladaptive emotional dissonance and coping outlets during the pandemic, (2) Difficulties with social connectedness and significance of social support, (3) Heightened daily life stressors and coping with the ongoing disruption of the pandemic, and (4) Changing interactions with the mental health system. Themes from this study highlighted that resilience, seeking treatment, and strong social support can help develop healthy coping strategies among individuals with ACEs.

Conclusion

This study may help inform best clinical practices to develop interventions and policies regarding ACEs such as a resilience-promotion approach that targets all the socio-ecological levels. In addition, findings highlight the synergy of psychotherapeutic and pharmacological management via tele-health modalities, in helping individuals with ACEs continue receiving the care they deserve and need during a persistent pandemic and an uncertain future.

A Behavior Change Model to Address Caregiver Hesitancy around COVID-19 Vaccination in Pediatrics

Introduction

Many families express hesitancy around immunizing their children against COVID-19. We sought to better understand the perspectives of vaccine hesitant caregivers, and develop targeted recommendations for health care workers and policymakers to engage in more effective vaccine discussions.

Methods

We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with 23 caregivers recruited from a pediatric infectious diseases clinic, including a subset of patients referred to discuss vaccine hesitancy. Thematic analysis of the interviews identified themes that were mapped using behavior change models to identify perceived barriers and facilitators towards COVID-19 immunization.

Results

Barriers and facilitators were mapped to the WHO (World Health Organization) 3C’s (confidence, complacency, convenience) model of vaccine hesitancy as well as the COM-B (capability, opportunity, motivation) behavior change model. Barriers included mistrust in authorities, misperception of the risk of COVID-19 in children, and perceived health contraindications and negative previous vaccine experiences. Facilitators included positive relationships with healthcare workers, the promise of a “return to normal”, and societal pressures to immunize.

Conclusions

Efforts to increase vaccine uptake in the pediatric population must target specific barriers and facilitators to immunization expressed by caregivers. To address these concerns, we suggest: 1. Educating hesitant caregivers by highlighting the long-term pandemic effects on children and the threat of COVID-19 to children’s health, 2. Building on the trust caregivers have in healthcare workers by involving frontline workers in public health policy, and 3. Harnessing the power of peer pressure by mobilization of societal pressures and establishing COVID-19 vaccination as the norm in children.

Vaccine Hesitancy Under the Magnifying Glass: A Systematic Review of the Uses and Misuses of an Increasingly Popular Construct

Resistance to vaccines has hindered attempts to contain and prevent outbreaks of infectious diseases for centuries. More recently, however, the term "vaccine hesitancy" has been used to describe not necessarily outright resistance but also a delay in acceptance or uncertainty regarding vaccines. Given concerns about hesitancy and its impact on vaccine uptake rates, researchers increasingly shifted the focus from resistance to vaccines toward vaccine hesitancy. Acknowledging the urgency to accurately assess the phenomenon, it is critical to understand the state of the literature, focusing on issues of conceptualization and operationalization. To carry out this systematic review, we collected and analyzed all published empirical articles from 2000 to 2021 that explicitly included quantitative self-report measures of vaccine hesitancy (k = 86). Using a mixed-method approach, the review demonstrates and quantifies crucial inconsistencies in the measurement of the construct, lack of clarity in regard to the determination of who should or should not be defined as hesitant, and overreliance on unrepresentative samples. Crucially, our analysis points to a potential systematic bias toward exaggerating the level of hesitancy in the population. Modeling a vaccine hesitancy co-citation network, the analysis also points to the existence of insular academic silos that make it harder to achieve a unified measurement tool. Theoretical and practical implications for academics, practitioners, and policymakers are discussed.