Dataset Information

Multiple forms of mass anxiety in coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Heightened public anxiety was observed at the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our study enriches scholarly understanding of this mass response by investigating both generic and pandemic-specific anxiety that explain preventive health behavior.

Methods

In our two-phase, mixed-methods study, pandemic-specific anxiety items elicited during the qualitative phase from March 2-8, 2020 were then tested in the quantitative phase from March 16-22, 2020. Eligible participants were U.S. or U.K. residents aged 18-65.

Results

Of the 1,400 participants, 52% met the criteria for moderate to severe anxiety. In addition to anxiety over possible personal COVID-19 infection, participants were also anxious about others' health, others' reactions (e.g., panic-buying, discrimination), societal problems (e.g., economic slowdown, healthcare system breakdown), and personal finances. The positive association between generic anxiety and hygiene practice frequency was explained by two interpersonal-oriented forms of pandemic-specific anxiety: anxiety over others' health (b = 0•0040, 95% CI: 0•0031-0•0050) and others' reactions (0•0031, 0•0021-0•0042).

Limitations

The study was conducted with participants from developed countries at an early stage of the pandemic, and the results were not necessarily generalizable to developing countries or other stages of the pandemic. Also, hygiene practices was the sole behavior of interest, and the findings may differ for other behaviors.

Conclusions

The new findings indicate the importance of adopting a nuanced approach that unveils the multifaceted nature of anxiety using a mixed-methods design. Individuals from COVID-19-affected regions experience pandemic-specific anxiety due to concerns related to not only personal but also interpersonal-oriented issues.

SUBMITTER: Cheng C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8460399 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimThe aim of the study was to determine levels of depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms and factors associated with psychological burden amongst critical care healthcare workers in the early stages of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.MethodsAn anonymous Web-based survey distributed in April 2020. All healthcare workers employed in a critical care setting were eligible to participate. Invitations to the survey were distributed through Australian and New Zealand critical care societies and social media platforms. The primary outcome was the proportion of healthcare workers who reported moderate to extremely severe scores on the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale-21 (DASS-21).ResultsOf the 3770 complete responses, 3039 (80.6%) were from Australia. A total of 2871 respondents (76.2%) were women; the median age was 41 years. Nurses made up 2269 (60.2%) of respondents, with most (2029 [53.8%]) working in intensive care units. Overall, 813 (21.6%) respondents reported moderate to extremely severe depression, 1078 (28.6%) reported moderate to extremely severe anxiety, and 1057 (28.0%) reported moderate to extremely severe stress scores. Mean ± standard deviation values of DASS-21 depression, anxiety, and stress scores amongst woman vs men was as follows: 8.0 ± 8.2 vs 7.1 ± 8.2 (p = 0.003), 7.2 ± 7.5 vs 5.0 ± 6.7 (p < 0.001), and 14.4 ± 9.6 vs 12.5 ± 9.4 (p < 0.001), respectively. After adjusting for significant confounders, clinical concerns associated with higher DASS-21 scores included not being clinically prepared (? = 4.2, p < 0.001), an inadequate workforce (? = 2.4, p = 0.001), having to triage patients owing to lack of beds and/or equipment (? = 2.6, p = 0.001), virus transmission to friends and family (? = 2.1, p = 0.009), contracting coronavirus disease 2019 (? = 2.8, p = 0.011), being responsible for other staff members (? = 3.1, p < 0.001), and being asked to work in an area that was not in the respondents' expertise (? = 5.7, p < 0.001).ConclusionIn this survey of critical care healthcare workers, between 22 and 29% of respondents reported moderate to extremely severe depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms, with women reporting higher scores than men. Although female gender appears to play a role, modifiable factors also contribute to psychological burden and should be studied further.

Project description:BackgroundWork-related stress and burnout were documented to be high among pediatric radiologists prior to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. New challenges arose from the COVID-19 pandemic, potentially introducing new stressors and anxieties.ObjectiveTo evaluate potential sources of stress and anxiety for pediatric radiology faculty during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic.Materials and methodsWe conducted a survey of attending physician members of the Society for Pediatric Radiology in North America from April 27, 2020, to May 22, 2020. The response rate was 21% (251/1,206). Survey questions included demographic information and questions regarding working remotely, personal protective equipment, redeployment, personal wellness, wellness resources and financial concerns. A psychometrician reviewed the questions to ensure minimal risk of misinterpretation.ResultsMedian age of respondents was 48 years (range 33-70 years) with median number of years in practice of 14 (range 1-45 years). Fifty-three percent of respondents were women and 46% were men. Because of an increase in remote work, 69% of respondents endorsed feeling more isolated from a lack of regular interaction with colleagues. Fifty-three percent of respondents indicated that it is challenging to work remotely while overseeing home schooling for children. In comparison to men, women reported overall higher work-related stress and anxiety (P=0.02), higher feelings of guilt from radiology staff (i.e. technologists and nurses) being more exposed to COVID-19 (P=0.02) and higher levels of stress providing for dependents (P=0.04). Most respondents thought that departmental leadership was effective and respondents were not concerned about meeting financial obligations or job loss.ConclusionThe early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic caused additional stress and anxiety for pediatric radiology faculty and disproportionally affected women. Given the continuously evolving state of the COVID-19 pandemic, these results could aid in planning and implementation of future strategies to combat burnout in radiology. Specific attention should be directed to different stressors experienced by female versus male radiologists, especially in regard to dependent care.

Project description:The current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is spreading globally at an accelerated rate, with a basic reproduction number (R0) of 2-2.5, indicating that 2-3 persons will be infected from an index patient. A serious public health emergency, it is particularly deadly in vulnerable populations and communities in which healthcare providers are insufficiently prepared to manage the infection. As of March 16, 2020, there are more than 180,000 confirmed cases of COVID-19 worldwide, with more than 7000 related deaths. The SARS-CoV-2 virus has been isolated from asymptomatic individuals, and affected patients continue to be infectious 2 weeks after cessation of symptoms. The substantial morbidity and socioeconomic impact have necessitated drastic measures across all continents, including nationwide lockdowns and border closures. Pregnant women and their fetuses represent a high-risk population during infectious disease outbreaks. To date, the outcomes of 55 pregnant women infected with COVID-19 and 46 neonates have been reported in the literature, with no definite evidence of vertical transmission. Physiological and mechanical changes in pregnancy increase susceptibility to infections in general, particularly when the cardiorespiratory system is affected, and encourage rapid progression to respiratory failure in the gravida. Furthermore, the pregnancy bias toward T-helper 2 (Th2) system dominance, which protects the fetus, leaves the mother vulnerable to viral infections, which are more effectively contained by the Th1 system. These unique challenges mandate an integrated approach to pregnancies affected by SARS-CoV-2. Here we present a review of COVID-19 in pregnancy, bringing together the various factors integral to the understanding of pathophysiology and susceptibility, diagnostic challenges with real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assays, therapeutic controversies, intrauterine transmission, and maternal-fetal complications. We discuss the latest options in antiviral therapy and vaccine development, including the novel use of chloroquine in the management of COVID-19. Fetal surveillance, in view of the predisposition to growth restriction and special considerations during labor and delivery, is addressed. In addition, we focus on keeping frontline obstetric care providers safe while continuing to provide essential services. Our clinical service model is built around the principles of workplace segregation, responsible social distancing, containment of cross-infection to healthcare providers, judicious use of personal protective equipment, and telemedicine. Our aim is to share a framework that can be adopted by tertiary maternity units managing pregnant women in the flux of a pandemic while maintaining the safety of the patient and healthcare provider at its core.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The current ongoing pandemic outbreak of COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease 2019) has globally affected 213 countries and territories with more than 2.5 million confirmed cases and thousands of casualties. The unpredictable and uncertain COVID-19 outbreak has the potential of adversely affecting the psychological health on individual and community level. Currently all efforts are focused on the understanding of epidemiology, clinical features, mode of transmission, counteract the spread of the virus, and challenges of global health, while crucially significant mental health has been overlooked in this endeavor. METHOD:This review is to evaluate past outbreaks to understand the extent of adverse effects on psychological health, psychological crisis intervention, and mental health management plans. Published previous and current articles on PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Elsevier about psychological impact of infectious diseases outbreaks and COVID-19 has been considered and reviewed. COMMENTS:COVID-19 is leading to intense psychosocial issues and comprising mental health marking a secondary health concern all around the world. Globally implementing preventive and controlling measures, and cultivating coping and resilience are challenging factors; modified lifestyle (lockdown curfew, self-isolation, social distancing and quarantine); conspiracy theories, misinformation and disinformation about the origin, scale, signs, symptoms, transmission, prevention and treatment; global socioeconomic crisis; travel restrictions; workplace hazard control; postponement and cancellation of religious, sports, cultural and entertainment events; panic buying and hoarding; incidents of racism, xenophobia, discrimination, stigma, psychological pressure of productivity, marginalization and violence; overwhelmed medical centers and health organizations, and general impact on education, politics, socioeconomic, culture, environment and climate - are some of the risk factors to aggravate further problems.

Project description:Controversy exists whether the cause of death due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is directly related to the infection or to underlying conditions. The purpose of this study is to assess the relationship of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection with the cause of death in hospitalized patients.DesignRetrospective observational study; deidentified discharge summaries of deceased patients were reviewed by two intensivists and classified as coronavirus disease 2019-related (caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) or coronavirus disease 2019-unrelated (not caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 or indeterminate) deaths. For classification disagreement, a separate group of three intensivists reviewed the discharge summaries and arbitrated to determine the cause of death.SettingSingle-center study performed at the University of Texas Medical Branch.PatientsAll adult patients (> 18 yr) admitted from March 10, 2020, to October 22, 2020, with positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 test results who expired during their hospitalization were identified.InterventionsNone.Measurements and main resultsPatient demographics, comorbidities, prescribed medications, and ventilatory support data were collected. Comparison between groups was performed using t test and chi-square test. During the study period, 1,052 patients were admitted within 14 days of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-positive test results, of whom 100 expired during the hospitalization. Deceased patients were predominantly male and older than 65 years. Obesity (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2) was present in 41%, and common comorbidities included hypertension (47%), diabetes (30%), and heart failure (20%). Death was classified as directly caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in 85% and not caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in 5%. An indeterminate cause of death in 10% was due to insufficient information or an atypical presentation. The observed interrater agreement on the cause of death classification was 81%.ConclusionsIn this single-center study, the majority of deaths in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-positive hospitalized patients were related to a typical or atypical presentation of coronavirus disease 2019 disease.