Dataset Information

Perceived Risk and Associated Shielding Behaviors in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis During the Coronavirus 2019 Pandemic.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To investigate the perceived risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and outcomes as well as shielding practices among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

We surveyed participants with RA in a large health care system between July 16 and November 8, 2020. Participants reported RA treatment, COVID-19 risk perception, and shielding practices (eg, masks, social distancing, and quarantining). We examined the association of demographic and disease-specific factors with risk perception and the association of risk perception with shielding practices.

Results

Of 494 participants, 195 (40%), 169 (34%), and 130 (26%) strongly agreed, agreed, or were uncertain/disagreed that their RA put them at higher risk for COVID-19 or poor outcomes, respectively. Younger age (odds ratio [OR]: 0.98), having a comorbidity (OR: 1.60), and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) use (OR: 1.75) were independently associated with a higher perceived risk. Among those who strongly agreed, agreed, or were uncertain/disagreed that they had greater risk, 165 (85%), 118 (70%), and 69 (53%), respectively, practiced all three shielding measures (P < 0.0001). Those who strongly agreed or agreed that they were at higher risk were more likely to use all three shielding practices (OR: 4.16 and 1.97, respectively). bDMARD use and glucocorticoid use were associated with using all three shielding measures (OR: 1.99 and 1.81, respectively).

Conclusion

Perception of COVID-19 risk among patients with RA varies substantially. Factors associated with perceived risk are different from those found to be associated with worse outcomes in observational studies. Greater perceived risk is associated with more strict shielding, which has implications for patient education and mental health.

SUBMITTER: Cook C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8653208 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAfter emerging in China, the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) quickly spread to all parts of the country and became a global public health emergency. The Chinese government immediately took a series of protective and quarantine measures to prevent the spread of the virus, and these measures may have negative effects on behavior and psychological health. This study aimed to examine the associations between factors related to COVID-19 measures and mental health symptoms among Chinese college students in different pandemic areas.MethodsAn online survey was administered to 14,789 college students from February 4 to 12, 2020. After excluding the participants who did not complete the questionnaire, the quality of the questionnaire was checked. Finally, the sample included 11,787 college students from 16 cities and 21 universities in China. The areas included the city of Wuhan (Area 1), the neighboring province of Hubei (Area 2), first-tier cities (Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou [Area 3]), and other provinces (Area 4).ResultsThe average age of the participants was 20.51 ± 1.88 years. One-third of the participants were men. In total, 25.9 and 17.8% reported depression and anxiety, respectively. We also explored COVID-19-related factors, such as infection risk, perceived resistance to COVID-19 (or susceptibility to COVID-19 infection), perceived physical symptoms, family or friends, direct or indirect contact with confirmed cases, and having sought psychological counseling, which were significantly associated with anxiety and depression symptoms. Higher screen time, lower physical activity, higher soda and tea beverages (also called sugar sweetened beverages intake), use of alternative medicines or food supplements (including Chinese herbal medicines and vitamins), and decreased meal frequency were all correlated with higher depression and anxiety symptoms (depression: χ2 = 25.57 and anxiety: χ2 = 39.42). Coping with COVID-19 partially mediated the associations between some related lifestyle behaviors, anxiety, and depression. The conditional process model analysis results supported our hypotheses that lifestyle health behaviors and coping style were both predictors of anxiety and depression symptoms, and their direct and indirect effects were moderated by sex.ConclusionsCompared with the city of Wuhan, other epidemic areas had a lower risk of mental health problems. Lifestyle health behaviors and coping styles alleviated mental health symptoms. COVID-19-related social stressors were positively associated with mental health symptoms.

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.

Project description:ObjectivesWhile most pediatric coronavirus disease 2019 cases are not life threatening, some children have severe disease requiring emergent resuscitative interventions. Resuscitation events present risks to healthcare provider safety and the potential for compromised patient care. Current resuscitation practices and policies for children with suspected/confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 are unknown.DesignMulti-institutional survey regarding inpatient resuscitation practices during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.SettingInternet-based survey.SubjectsU.S. PICU representatives (one per institution) involved in resuscitation system planning and oversight.InterventionsNone.Measurements and main resultsOf 130 institutions surveyed, 78 (60%) responded. Forty-eight centers (62%) had admitted coronavirus disease 2019 patients; 26 (33%) reported code team activation for patients with suspected/confirmed coronavirus disease 2019. Sixty-seven respondents (86%) implemented changes to inpatient emergency response systems. The most common changes were as follows: limited number of personnel entering patient rooms (75; 96%), limited resident involvement (71; 91%), and new or refined team roles (74; 95%). New or adapted technology is being used for coronavirus disease 2019 resuscitations in 58 centers (74%). Most institutions (57; 73%) are using enhanced personal protective equipment for all coronavirus disease 2019 resuscitation events; 18 (23%) have personal protective equipment policies dependent on the performance of aerosol generating procedures. Due to coronavirus disease 2019, most respondents are intubating earlier during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (56; 72%), utilizing video laryngoscopy (67; 86%), pausing chest compressions during laryngoscopy (56; 72%), and leaving patients connected to the ventilator during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (56; 72%). Responses were varied regarding airway personnel, prone cardiopulmonary resuscitation, ventilation strategy during cardiopulmonary resuscitation without an airway in place, and extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Most institutions (46; 59%) do not have policies regarding limitations of resuscitation efforts in coronavirus disease 2019 patients.ConclusionsMost U.S. pediatric institutions rapidly adapted their resuscitation systems and practices in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Changes were commonly related to team members and roles, personal protective equipment, and airway and breathing management, reflecting attempts to balance quality resuscitation with healthcare provider safety.