Dataset Information

Mental health over nine months during the SARS-CoV2 pandemic: Representative cross-sectional survey in twelve waves between April and December 2020 in Austria.

ABSTRACT:

Background

There is accumulating evidence about detrimental impacts of the pandemic on population mental health, but knowledge on risk of groups specifically affected by the pandemic and variations across time is still limited.

Methods

We surveyed approximately n=1,000 Austrian residents in 12 waves between April and December 2020 (n=12,029). Outcomes were suicidal ideation (Beck Suicidal Ideation Scale), depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), anxiety (Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale), and domestic violence. We also assessed the perceived burden from the pandemic. Demographic and Covid-19 specific occupational and morbidity-related variables were used to explain outcomes in multivariable regression analyses, controlling for well-established risk factors of mental ill-health, and variations over time were analyzed.

Results

Young age, working in healthcare or from home, and own Covid-19 illness were consistent risk factors controlling for a wide range of known mental health risk factors. Time patterns in the perceived burden from Covid-19-related measures were consistent with the time sequence of restrictions and relaxations of governmental measures. Depressive and anxiety symptoms were relatively stable over time, with some increase of depression during the second phase of lockdowns. Domestic violence increased immediately after both hard lockdowns. Suicidal ideation decreased slightly over time, with a low during the second hard lockdown. Mental health indicators for women and young people showed some deterioration over time, whereas those reporting own Covid-19 illness improved.

Limitations

Data from before the pandemic were not available.

Conclusions

Among mental health outcomes, increases in domestic violence and, to some smaller extent, depressive symptoms, appeared most closely related to the timing of hard lockdowns. Healthcare staff, individuals working from home, those with Covid-19, as well as young people and women are non-traditional risk groups who warrant heightened attention in prevention during and in the aftermath of the pandemic.

SUBMITTER: Niederkrotenthaler T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8426850 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo describe COVID-19 vaccine distribution operations in United States Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) institutions and offices from December 16, 2020-April 14, 2021, report vaccination coverage among staff and incarcerated people, and identify factors associated with vaccination acceptance among incarcerated people.MethodsThe BOP COVID-19 vaccination plan and implementation timeline are described. Descriptive statistics and vaccination coverage were calculated for the BOP incarcerated population using data from the BOP electronic medical record. Coverage among staff was calculated using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Vaccination Administration Management System. Vaccination coverage in the BOP versus the overall United States adult population was compared by state/territory. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression models were developed to identify demographic, health-related, and institution-level factors associated with vaccination acceptance among incarcerated people, using hierarchical linear modeling to account for institution-level clustering.ResultsBy April 14, 2021, BOP had offered COVID-19 vaccination to 37,870 (100%) staff and 88,173/126,413 (69.8%) incarcerated people, with acceptance rates of 50.2% and 64.2%, respectively. At the time of analysis, vaccination coverage in BOP was comparable to coverage in the overall adult population in the states and territories where BOP institutions and offices are located. Among incarcerated people, factors associated with lower vaccination acceptance included younger age, female sex, non-Hispanic Black and Asian race/ethnicity, and having few underlying medical conditions; factors associated with higher acceptance included having a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, being born outside the United States, and being assigned to a Federal Detention Center.ConclusionsEarly COVID-19 vaccination efforts in BOP have achieved levels of coverage similar to the general population. To build on this initial success, BOP can consider strategies including re-offering vaccination to people who initially refused and tailoring communication strategies to groups with lower acceptance rates.

Project description:BackgroundA year after the start of the COVID-19 outbreak, the global rollout of vaccines gives us hope of ending the pandemic. Lack of vaccine confidence, however, poses a threat to vaccination campaigns. This study aims at identifying individuals' characteristics that explain vaccine willingness in Flanders (Belgium), while also describing trends over time (July-December 2020).MethodsThe analysis included data of 10 survey waves of the Great Corona Survey, a large-scale online survey that was open to the general public and had 17,722-32,219 respondents per wave. Uni- and multivariable general additive models were fitted to associate vaccine willingness with socio-demographic and behavioral variables, while correcting for temporal and geographical variability.ResultsWe found 84.2% of the respondents willing to be vaccinated, i.e., respondents answering that they were definitely (61.2%) or probably (23.0%) willing to get a COVID-19 vaccine, while 9.8% indicated maybe, 3.9% probably not and 2.2% definitely not. In Flanders, vaccine willingness was highest in July 2020 (90.0%), decreased over the summer period to 80.2% and started to increase again from late September, reaching 85.9% at the end of December 2020. Vaccine willingness was significantly associated with respondents' characteristics: previous survey participation, age, gender, province, educational attainment, household size, financial situation, employment sector, underlying medical conditions, mental well-being, government trust, knowing someone with severe COVID-19 symptoms and compliance with restrictive measures. These variables could explain much, but not all, variation in vaccine willingness.ConclusionsBoth the timing and location of data collection influence vaccine willingness results, emphasizing that comparing data from different regions, countries and/or timepoints should be done with caution. To maximize COVID-19 vaccination coverage, vaccination campaigns should focus on (a combination of) subpopulations: aged 31-50, females, low educational attainment, large households, difficult financial situation, low mental well-being and labourers, unemployed and self-employed citizens.