Pre-outbreak determinants of perceived risks of corona infection and preventive measures taken. A prospective population-based study

COVID-19 Prevention and Mitigation Decision-Making Processes While Navigating Chronic Disease Care: Perspectives of Black Adults with Heart Failure and Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Heart failure and diabetes are comorbidities that disproportionately contribute to high morbidity and mortality among Blacks. Further compounding the racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 health outcomes, Blacks with cardiometabolic diseases are at high risk of experiencing serious complications or mortality from COVID-19. This study aimed to assess how Blacks with heart failure and diabetes navigated chronic care management during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A mixed methods study including in-depth interviews and surveys with adults diagnosed with heart failure and diabetes (n = 17) was conducted in 2021-2022. Verbatim transcripts were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

Participants reported that while the pandemic initially caused delays in access to health services, shifts to telemedicine allowed for continued care despite preferences for in-person appointments. Various sources of information were used in different ways to make decisions on how to best reduce health risks due to COVID-19, but individuals and institutions affiliated with science and medicine, or who promoted information from these sources, were considered to be the most trusted sources of information among those who relied on outside guidance when making health-related decisions. Individuals' self-awareness of their own high-risk status and perceived control over their exposure levels to the virus informed what COVID-19 prevention and mitigation strategies people used.

CONCLUSION

Information backed by scientific data was an important health communication tool that alongside other factors, such as fear of mortality due to COVID-19, encouraged individuals to get vaccinated and adopt other COVID-19 prevention and mitigation behaviors.

The prevalence, incidence, and risk factors of mental health problems and mental health service use before and 9 months after the COVID-19 outbreak among the general Dutch population. A 3-wave prospective study

Objectives

Gain insight into the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the prevalence, incidence, and risk factors of mental health problems among the Dutch general population and different age groups in November-December 2020, compared with the prevalence, incidence, and risk factors in the same period in 2018 and 2019. More specifically, the prevalence, incidence, and risk factors of anxiety and depression symptoms, sleep problems, fatigue, impaired functioning due to health problems, and use of medicines for sleep problems, medicines for anxiety and depression, and mental health service.

Methods

We extracted data from the Longitudinal Internet studies for the Social Sciences (LISS) panel that is based on a probability sample of the Dutch population of 16 years and older by Statistics Netherlands. We focused on three waves of the longitudinal Health module in November-December 2018 (T1), November-December 2019 (T2), and November-December 2020 (T3), and selected respondents who were 18 years and older at T1. In total, 4,064 respondents participated in all three surveys. Data were weighted using 16 demographics profiles of the Dutch adult population. The course of mental health problems was examined using generalized estimating equations (GEE) for longitudinal ordinal data and differences in incidence with logistic regression analyses. In both types of analyses, we controlled for sex, age, marital status, employment status, education level, and physical disease.

Results

Among the total study sample, no significant increase in the prevalence of anxiety and depression symptoms, sleep problems, fatigue, impaired functioning due to health problems, use of medicines for sleep problems, of medicines for anxiety and depression, and of mental health service in November-December 2020 was observed, compared with the prevalence in November-December 2018 and 2019 (T3 did not differ from T1 and T2). Among the four different age categories (18–34, 35–49, 50–64, and 65 years old and older respondents), 50–64 years respondents had a significantly lower prevalence of anxiety and depression symptoms at T3 than at T1 and T2, while the prevalence at T1 and T2 did not differ. A similar pattern among 65+ respondents was found for mental health service use. We found no indications that the incidence of examined health problems at T2 (no problems at T1, problems at T2) and T3 (no problems at T2, problems at T3) differed. Risk factors for mental health problems at T2 were mostly similar to risk factors at T3; sex and age were less/not a risk factor for sleep problems at T3 compared with at T2.

Conclusions

The prevalence, incidence, and risk factors of the examined mental health problems examined nine months after the COVID-19 outbreak appear to be very stable across the end of 2018, 2019, and 2020 among the Dutch adult population and different age categories, suggesting that the Dutch adult population in general is rather resilient given all disruptions due to this pandemic.

COVID-19 state anxiety of older adults: effects of defensive information processes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

To explore coping processes used by adults aged 60 and above (defined as high age-related risk group) in reaction to the COVID-19 threat, and the associations between these processes and state anxiety.

DESIGN AND METHODS

A cross-sectional study with 498 respondents of an online survey, 72 (15%) in the high age-related risk group. Questionnaires measured: background variables, state anxiety, and COVID-19 related perceptions.

RESULTS

The high age-related risk group perceived the coronavirus as more severe, their belongingness to a risk group as higher, and the behavioral recommendations as more effective compared to the low age-related risk group. The part of perceived vulnerability that is not explained by belonging to an age-related risk group (defined as residual perceived vulnerability) was lower in the high age-related risk group. Mediation analysis indicated that the high (compared to the low) age-related risk group had lower anxiety levels, and that this effect was mediated by lower residual perceived vulnerability and higher perceived disease severity levels.

CONCLUSIONS

The higher age-related risk group maintains a relatively moderate level of anxiety without denying their belonging to a high risk group. This can be explained by defensive processing of COVID-19 related information and by developmental processes.

Does personality predict responses to the COVID-19 crisis? Evidence from a prospective large-scale study

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly disrupted people’s daily routines and infused their lives with considerable insecurity and uncertainty. However, individuals’ responses to the pandemic vary widely. The present study investigates the role of personality traits for key aspects of people’s responses to the COVID-19 crisis. In a prospective design using a large-scale panel study ( N = 2217) that represents the heterogeneity of the adult population in Germany, we examined whether Big Five domains and facets measured prior to the pandemic predicted individuals’ responses to the pandemic in terms of: (a) perceptions of infection risks; (b) behavioral changes to prevent infection; (c) beliefs in the effectiveness of policy measures to combat the further spread of coronavirus; and (d) trust in relevant policymakers and institutions regarding the handling of coronavirus. Results revealed that personality explained only a small portion (between 0.6% and 3.8%) of the variance in the four outcomes. Nonetheless, several Big Five domains and facets had at least small-to-moderate, and theoretically plausible, associations with the outcomes. Overall, Agreeableness and its Trust facet showed the most robust associations with the four outcomes. Most trait–outcome associations were also robust to controlling for three possible confounders (sex, age, and risk-group membership).

A Systematic Review on Sex- and Gender-Sensitive Research in Public Mental Health During the First Wave of the COVID-19 Crisis

Background: Sex and gender are important modifiers of mental health and behavior in normal times and during crises. We investigated whether they were addressed by empirical, international research that explored the mental health and health behavior ramifications after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We systematically searched the databases PsyArXiv, PubMed, PsycInfo, Psyndex, PubPsych, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for studies assessing mental health outcomes (main outcomes) as well as potential risk and protective health behavior (additional outcomes) up to July 2, 2020. Findings: Most of the 80 publications fulfilling the selection criteria reflected the static difference perspective treating sex and gender as dichotomous variables. The focus was on internalizing disorders (especially anxiety and depression) burdening women in particular, while externalizing disorders were neglected. Sex- and gender-specific evaluation of mental healthcare use has also been lacking. With respect to unfavorable health behavior in terms of adherence to prescribed protective measures, men constitute a risk group. Interpretations: Women remain a vulnerable group burdened by multiple stresses and mental health symptoms. The neglect of sex- and gender-specific evaluation of aggression-related disorders, substance addiction, and mental healthcare use in the early stage represents a potentially dangerous oversight. Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020192026, PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020192026.