Dataset Information

Parents' experiences with a sick or injured child during the COVID-19 lockdown: an online survey in the Netherlands.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To assess the impact of the COVID-19 lockdown on parents' health-seeking behaviour and care for a sick or injured child in the Netherlands.

Design and setting

An online survey on parents' experiences with a sick or injured child during the COVID-19 lockdown periods was disseminated through social media.

Participants

Parents living in the Netherlands with a sick or injured child during the lockdown periods from March to June 2020 and from December 2020 to February 2021 were eligible to participate.

Outcome measures

Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis were used to analyse family and children's characteristics, parents' response to a sick or injured child, and the perceived impact of the lockdown on child's severity of illness and treatment reported by parents. Analyses were stratified for children with and without chronic conditions.

Results

Of the 105 parents who completed the survey, 83% reported they would have sought medical help before lockdown compared with 88% who did seek help during lockdown for the same specific medical problem. Parents reported that changes in health services affected their child's severity of illness (31%) and their treatment (39%), especially for children with chronic conditions. These changes included less availability of healthcare services and long waiting lists, which mostly led to worsening of the child's illness. During lockdown, there was no change in health-seeking behaviour by parents of children with a chronic condition (N=51) compared with parents of children without a chronic condition.

Conclusion

Parents in the Netherlands who completed the survey were not deterred from seeking medical help for their sick or injured child during the COVID-19 lockdown periods. However, changes in health services affected child's severity of illness and treatment, especially for children with chronic conditions.

SUBMITTER: Tan CD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8640193 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo explore patients' experiences with receiving sick leave certificates via remote consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic and investigate whether there were differences among the types of remote consultation (telephone, video or text).DesignA nationwide online patient survey consisting of quantitative data supplemented by qualitative opinions conducted in Norway.SettingPrimary care.ParticipantsPatients who received a sick leave certificate via remote consultation in the period from 16 November to 15 December 2020.ResultsOf the 5429 respondents, 3233 (59.6%) received a sick leave certificate via telephone consultation, 657 (12.1%) via video consultation and 1539 (28.3%) via text-based e-consultation. Most respondents (76.8%) were satisfied. Only 10% of the respondents thought that the doctor would have obtained more information through an office appointment. The majority of the respondents (59.6%) found that they had as much time to explain the problem as at an office appointment. Some patients also thought that it was easier to formulate the problem via a remote consultation (18.2%) and agree with the doctor on the sick leave (10.3%).The users of text-based e-consultations were the most satisfied (79.3%, p<0.001) compared with those using telephone or video consultations. Among users of text-based e-consultations, there was a higher proportion of patients who thought that they had more time to explain the problem compared with an office appointment (p<0.001), it was easier to explain the problem (p<0.001) and agree with the doctor (p<0.001). Most respondents would use the same type of remote consultation if they were to contact the general practitioner (GP) for the same problem, with the highest proportion among the users of video consultations (62.1%, p<0.001).ConclusionsPatients were satisfied with communicating and receiving sick leave certificates via remote consultations. Future studies should investigate patients' and GPs' use and experiences in a postpandemic setting.

Project description:ObjectiveThe COVID-19 pandemic is more than a public health crisis. Lockdown measures have substantial societal effects, including a significant impact on parents with (young) children. Given the existence of persistent gender inequality prior to the pandemic, particularly among parents, it is crucial to study the societal impact of COVID-19 from a gender perspective. The objective of this paper is to use representative survey data gathered among Dutch parents in April 2020 to explore differences between mothers and fathers in three areas: paid work, the division of childcare and household tasks, and three dimensions of quality of life (leisure, work-life balance, relationship dynamics). Additionally, we explore whether changes take place in these dimensions by comparing the situation prior to the lockdown with the situation during the lockdown.MethodWe use descriptive methods (crosstabulations) supported by multivariate modelling (linear regression modelling for continuous outcomes; linear probability modelling (LPM) for binary outcomes (0/1 outcomes); and multinomial logits for multinomial outcomes) in a cross-sectional survey design.ResultsResults show that the way in which parents were impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic reflects a complex gendered reality. Mothers work in essential occupations more often than fathers, report more adjustments of the times at which they work, and experience both more and less work pressure in comparison to before the lockdown. Moreover, mothers continue to do more childcare and household work than fathers, but some fathers report taking on greater shares of childcare and housework during the lockdown in comparison to before. Mothers also report a larger decline in leisure time than fathers. We find no gender differences in the propensity to work from home, in perceived work-life balance, or in relationship dynamics.ConclusionIn conclusion, we find that gender inequality in paid work, the division of childcare and household work, and the quality of life are evident during the first lockdown period. Specifically, we find evidence of an increase in gender inequality in relation to paid work and quality of life when comparing the situation prior to and during the lockdown, as well as a decrease in gender inequality in the division of childcare and household work. We conclude that the unique situation created by restrictive lockdown measures magnifies some gender inequalities while lessening others.DiscussionThe insights we provide offer key comparative evidence based on a representative, probability-based sample for understanding the broader impact of lockdown measures as we move forward in the COVID-19 pandemic. One of the limitations in this study is the cross-sectional design. Further study, in the form of a longitudinal design, will be crucial in investigating the long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on gender inequality.

Project description:BackgroundOn the 19th of January, 2020, the Chief Medical Officer of Australia issued a statement about a novel coronavirus, or SARS-CoV-2. Since this date, there have been variable jurisdictional responses, including lockdowns, and restrictions on podiatry practice. This study aimed to describe impacts of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on the podiatry profession in Australia.MethodsThis was a cross sectional study of Australian podiatrists using demographic data collected between 2017 and 2020, and pandemic-related question responses collected between 30th March and 31st August, 2020. Data were collected online and participants described their work settings, patient funding types, business decisions and impacts, and information sources used to guide practice decisions during this time-period. Inductive thematic analysis was used to analyse open-ended questions about their practice impact of SARS-CoV-2.ResultsThere were 732 survey responses, with 465 Australian podiatrists or podiatric surgeons providing responses describing pandemic impact. From these responses, 223 (49% of 453) podiatrists reported no supply issues, or having adequate supplies for the foreseeable future with personal protective equipment (PPE) or consumables to support effective infection prevention and control. The most frequent responses about employment, or hours of work, impact were reported in the various categories of "business as usual" (n = 312, 67%). Participants described most frequently using the local state and territory Department of Health websites (n = 347, 75%), and the Australian Podiatry Association (n = 334, 72%) to make decisions about their business. Overarching themes which resounded through open-ended comments was that working through the pandemic was likened to a marathon, and not a sprint. Themes were: (i) commitment to do this, (ii) it's all in the plan, but not everything goes to plan, (iii) my support team must be part of getting through it, (iv) road blocks happen, and (v) nothing is easy, what's next?ConclusionPodiatrists in Australia reported variable pandemic impact on their business decisions, PPE stores, and their valued sources of information. Podiatrists also described their "marathon" journey through the pandemic to date, with quotes describing their challenges and highlights. Describing these experiences should provide key learnings for future workforce challenges, should further restrictions come into place.