How leadership behaviors influence the effects of job predictability and perceived employability on employee mental health – a multilevel,prospective study

ObjectivesThis study aimed to elucidate the potential moderating effect of fair-, empowering-, and supportive-leadership behaviors on the relationship between job predictability, future employability, and subsequent clinically relevant mental distress.MethodThe study had a full panel, prospective design, utilizing online, self-administered questionnaire data collected at two time points, two years apart. Fair-, empowering-, and supportive-leadership behaviors, job predictability and future employability were measured by the General Nordic Questionnaire for Psychological and Social Factors at Work (QPS_Nordic). Mental health was measured using the 10-item Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL-10), with cut-off set to >1.85 to identify clinically relevant cases. As data were nested within work units, a multilevel analytic approach was chosen.ResultsIndividual-level direct effects: (i) higher levels of job predictability [odds ratio (OR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70–0.98], (ii) future employability (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.74–0.93), (iii) fair- (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.68–0.91), empowering- (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.67–0.87), and supportive- (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.61–0.81) leadership behavior, and (iv) the combination “quality of leadership” (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.59–0.81) were significantly associated with a lower risk of reporting subsequent mental distress. Work-unit level direct effects: higher work-unit levels of fair- (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.34–0.80) and empowering- (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.40–0.94) leadership behaviors and quality of leadership (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.34–0.87) were significantly associated with a lowered risk of subsequent mental distress. Cross-level interactions: No cross-level interaction effects were shown.ConclusionsLeadership behaviors did not moderate the effects of job predictability and future employability on mental health. However, employees embedded within work-units characterized by fair, empowering and supportive leadership behaviors had a lower risk of subsequent mental distress.     

The Roles of General Health and COVID-19 Proximity in Contact Tracing App Usage: Cross-sectional Survey Study

BackgroundContact tracing apps are considered useful means to monitor SARS-CoV-2 infections during the off-peak stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Their effectiveness is, however, dependent on the uptake of such COVID-19 apps.ObjectiveWe examined the role of individuals’ general health status in their willingness to use a COVID-19 tracing app as well as the roles of socioeconomic characteristics and COVID-19 proximity.MethodsWe drew data from the WageIndicator Foundation Living and Working in Coronavirus Times survey. The survey collected data on labor market status as well as the potential confounders of the relationship between general health and COVID-19 tracing app usage, such as sociodemographics and regular smartphone usage data. The survey also contained information that allowed us to examine the role of COVID-19 proximity, such as whether an individual has contracted SARS-CoV-2, whether an individual has family members and colleagues with COVID-19, and whether an individual exhibits COVID-19 pandemic–induced depressive and anxiety symptoms. We selected data that were collected in Spain, Italy, Germany, and the Netherlands from individuals aged between 18 and 70 years (N=4504). Logistic regressions were used to measure individuals’ willingness to use a COVID-19 tracing app.ResultsWe found that the influence that socioeconomic factors have on COVID-19 tracing app usage varied dramatically between the four countries, although individuals experiencing forms of not being employed (ie, recent job loss and inactivity) consistently had a lower willingness to use a contact tracing app (effect size: 24.6%) compared to that of employees (effect size: 33.4%; P<.001). Among the selected COVID-19 proximity indicators, having a close family member with SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with higher contact tracing app usage (effect size: 36.3% vs 27.1%; P<.001). After accounting for these proximity factors and the country-based variations therein, we found that having a poorer general health status was significantly associated with a much higher likelihood of contact tracing app usage; compared to a self-reported “very good” health status (estimated probability of contact tracing app use: 29.6%), the “good” (estimated probability: +4.6%; 95% CI 1.2%-8.1%) and “fair or bad” (estimated probability: +6.3%; 95% CI 2.3%-10.3%) health statuses were associated with a markedly higher willingness to use a COVID-19 tracing app.ConclusionsCurrent public health policies aim to promote the use of smartphone-based contact tracing apps during the off-peak periods of the COVID-19 pandemic. Campaigns that emphasize the health benefits of COVID-19 tracing apps may contribute the most to the uptake of such apps. Public health campaigns that rely on digital platforms would also benefit from seriously considering the country-specific distribution of privacy concerns.     

Impacts of Digital Healthy Diet Literacy and Healthy Eating Behavior on Fear of COVID-19, Changes in Mental Health,and Health-Related Quality of Life among Front-Line Health Care Workers

Background: We aimed to examine the impacts of digital healthy diet literacy (DDL) and healthy eating behaviors (HES) on fear of COVID-19, changes in mental health, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among front-line healthcare workers (HCWs). Methods: An online survey was conducted at 15 hospitals and health centers from 6–19 April 2020. Data of 2299 front-line HCWs were analyzed—including socio-demographics, symptoms like COVID-19, health literacy, eHealth literacy, DDL, HES, fear of COVID-19, changes in mental health, and HRQoL. Regression models were used to examine the associations. Results: HCWs with higher scores of DDL and HES had lower scores of FCoV-19S (regression coefficient, B, −0.04; 95% confidence interval, 95% CI, −0.07, −0.02; p = 0.001; and B, −0.10; 95% CI, −0.15, −0.06; p < 0.001); had a higher likelihood of stable or better mental health status (odds ratio, OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00, 1.05; p = 0.029; and OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.00, 1.07; p = 0.043); and HRQoL (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01, 1.03; p = 0.006; and OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02, 1.06; p = 0.001), respectively. Conclusions: DDL and HES were found as independent predictors of fear of COVID−19, changes in mental health status, and HRQoL in front-line HCWs. Improving DDL and HES should be considered as a strategic approach for hospitals and healthcare systems.     

COVID-19 cases,hospitalizations and deaths after vaccination: a cohort event monitoring study,Islamic Republic of Iran

ObjectiveTo investigate the incidence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases, hospitalizations and deaths in Iranians vaccinated with either AZD1222 Vaxzevria, CovIran® vaccine, SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine (Vero Cell), Inactivated (lnCoV) or Sputnik V.MethodsWe enrolled individuals 18 years or older receiving their first COVID-19 vaccine dose between April 2021 and January 2022 in seven Iranian cities. Participants completed weekly follow-up surveys for 17 weeks (25 weeks for AZD1222) to report their COVID-19 status and hospitalization. We used Cox regression models to assess risk factors for contracting COVID-19, hospitalization and death.FindingsOf 89 783 participants enrolled, incidence rates per 1 000 000 person-days were: 528.2 (95% confidence interval, CI: 514.0–542.7) for contracting COVID-19; 55.8 (95% CI: 51.4–60.5) for hospitalization; and 4.1 (95% CI: 3.0–5.5) for death. Compared with SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine (Vero Cell), hazard ratios (HR) for contracting COVID-19 were: 0.70 (95% CI: 0.61−0.80) with AZD1222; 0.73 (95% CI: 0.62–0.86) with Sputnik V; and 0.73 (95% CI: 0.63–0.86) with CovIran®. For hospitalization and death, all vaccines provided similar protection 14 days after the second dose. History of COVID-19 protected against contracting COVID-19 again (HR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.69–0.84). Diabetes and respiratory, cardiac and renal disease were associated with higher risks of contracting COVID-19 after vaccination.ConclusionThe rates of contracting COVID-19 after vaccination were relatively high. SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine (Vero Cell) provided lower protection against COVID-19 than other vaccines. People with comorbidities had higher risks of contracting COVID-19 and hospitalization and should be prioritized for preventive interventions.     

Willingness to Receive COVID-19 Vaccination Among People Living With HIV and AIDS in China: Nationwide Cross-sectional Online Survey

BackgroundHIV infection is a significant independent risk factor for both severe COVID-19 presentation at hospital admission and in-hospital mortality. Available information has suggested that people living with HIV and AIDS (PLWHA) could benefit from COVID-19 vaccination. However, there is a dearth of evidence on willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccination among PLWHA.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccination among a national sample of PLWHA in China.MethodsThis cross-sectional online survey investigated factors associated with willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccination among PLWHA aged 18 to 65 years living in eight conveniently selected Chinese metropolitan cities between January and February 2021. Eight community-based organizations (CBOs) providing services to PLWHA facilitated the recruitment. Eligible PLWHA completed an online survey developed using a widely used encrypted web-based survey platform in China. We fitted a single logistic regression model to obtain adjusted odds ratios (aORs), which involved one of the independent variables of interest and all significant background variables. Path analysis was also used in the data analysis.ResultsOut of 10,845 PLWHA approached by the CBOs, 2740 completed the survey, and 170 had received at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. This analysis was performed among 2570 participants who had never received COVID-19 vaccination. Over half of the participants reported willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccination (1470/2570, 57.2%). Perceptions related to COVID-19 vaccination were significantly associated with willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccination, including positive attitudes (aOR 1.11, 95% CI 1.09-1.12; P<.001), negative attitudes (aOR 0.96, 95% CI 0.94-0.97; P<.001), perceived support from significant others (perceived subjective norm; aOR 1.53, 95% CI 1.46-1.61; P<.001), and perceived behavioral control (aOR 1.13, 95% CI 1.11-1.14; P<.001). At the interpersonal level, receiving advice supportive of COVID-19 vaccination from doctors (aOR 1.99, 95% CI 1.65-2.40; P<.001), CBO staff (aOR 1.89, 95% CI 1.51-2.36; P<.001), friends and/or family members (aOR 3.22, 95% CI 1.93-5.35; P<.001), and PLWHA peers (aOR 2.38, 95% CI 1.85-3.08; P<.001) was associated with higher willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccination. The overall opinion supporting COVID-19 vaccination for PLWHA on the internet or social media was also positively associated with willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccination (aOR 1.59, 95% CI 1.31-1.94; P<.001). Path analysis indicated that interpersonal-level variables were indirectly associated with willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccination through perceptions (β=.43, 95% CI .37-.51; P<.001).ConclusionsAs compared to PLWHA in other countries and the general population in most parts of the world, PLWHA in China reported a relatively low willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccination. The internet and social media as well as interpersonal communications may be major sources of influence on PLWHA’s perceptions and willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccination.     

The Influence of Social Distancing Behaviors and Psychosocial Factors on Physical Activity During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-sectional Survey Study

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has arguably facilitated a shift toward increased sedentariness and reduced physical activity. Moreover, there is mounting evidence that mental health has also declined during the pandemic. However, it remains unknown to what extent social distancing (SD) behaviors and mental health have affected the physical activity levels of the general population.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to determine the influence of SD behaviors and prevailing mental health on the odds of being physically active during the early COVID-19 pandemic response.MethodsA total of 4819 adults (2474/4819, 51.3%, female) from the US population with a median age of 46 (IQR 35-59) completed an online survey during the early pandemic response (April-June 2020). The survey included questions on adherence to 11 SD behaviors, and validated questionnaires which assessed self-reported physical activity, depression, anxiety, and mental well-being. Respondents were categorized into 2 physical activity groups: inactive (0-599 metabolic equivalent of task [MET]-minutes/week) and active (≥600 MET-minutes/week). A logistic generalized additive model (GAM) was used to determine which SD factors and mental health outcomes were associated with physical activity level.ResultsThe GAM analysis revealed that wearing a facemask in public (odds ratio [OR] 1.46, 95% CI 1.14-1.79; P=.003), limiting the use of public transport (OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.19-1.83; P=.001), and restricting travel outside the house (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.19-2.05; P=.002) were SD behaviors associated with higher odds of being more physically active. Conversely, avoiding physical activity outside the house was associated with higher odds of being inactive (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.46-0.63; P<.001). Leaving the house more frequently, and a higher mental well-being were associated with increasing odds of being physically active (P<.001). Engaging with a moderate number of SD behaviors (3-7 total) was positively associated with physical activity, whereas a very high SD vigilance (ie, engaging with ≥10 total behaviors) decreased the odds of being active during the early pandemic response.ConclusionsBased on the findings of our study, we suggest that future public health messaging of SD guidelines should include (1) a clear portrayal of the benefits of regular exercise on mental health; and (2) a specific focus on how to be physically active outdoors in a COVID-safe manner.     

Association of Substance Use With Behavioral Adherence to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Guidelines for COVID-19 Mitigation: Cross-sectional Web-Based Survey

BackgroundSubstance use is a risk factor for COVID-19 infection and adverse outcomes. However, reasons for elevated risk for COVID-19 in substance users are not well understood.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate whether alcohol or other drug use is associated with adherence to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines for COVID-19 mitigation. Preregistered analyses tested the hypothesis that greater use of alcohol and other drugs would be associated with lower CDC guideline adherence. A secondary objective was to determine whether substance use was associated with the likelihood of COVID-19 testing or outcome.MethodsA cross-sectional web-based survey was administered to a convenience sample recruited through Amazon’s Mechanical Turk platform from June 18 to July 19, 2020. Individuals aged 18 years or older and residing in Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, or Rhode Island were eligible to participate. The exposure of interest was past 7-day use of alcohol, cigarettes, electronic cigarettes, cannabis, stimulants, and nonmedical opioids. The primary outcome was CDC guideline adherence measured using a scale developed from behaviors advised to reduce the spread of COVID-19. Secondary outcomes were likelihood of COVID-19 testing and a positive COVID-19 test result. All analyses accounted for the sociodemographic characteristics.ResultsThe sample consisted of 1084 individuals (mean age 40.9 [SD 13.4] years): 529 (48.8%) men, 543 (50.1%) women, 12 (1.1%) other gender identity, 742 (68.5%) White individuals, 267 (24.6%) Black individuals, and 276 (25.5%) Hispanic individuals. Daily opioid users reported lower CDC guideline adherence than nondaily users (B=–0.24, 95% CI –0.44 to –0.05) and nonusers (B=–0.57, 95% CI –0.76 to –0.38). Daily alcohol drinkers reported lower adherence than nondaily drinkers (B=–0.16, 95% CI –0.30 to –0.02). Nondaily alcohol drinkers reported higher adherence than nondrinkers (B=0.10, 95% CI 0.02-0.17). Daily opioid use was related to greater odds of COVID-19 testing, and daily stimulant use was related to greater odds of a positive COVID-19 test.ConclusionsIn a regionally-specific, racially, and ethnically diverse convenience sample, adults who engaged in daily alcohol or opioid use reported lower CDC guideline adherence for COVID-19 mitigation. Any opioid use was associated with greater odds of COVID-19 testing, and daily stimulant use was associated with greater odds of COVID-19 infection. Cigarettes, electronic cigarettes, cannabis, or stimulant use were not statistically associated with CDC guideline adherence, after accounting for sociodemographic covariates and other substance use variables. Findings support further investigation into whether COVID-19 testing and vaccination should be expanded among individuals with substance-related risk factors.     

Individual-level factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among U.S. patients with cancer

IntroductionVaccine hesitancy in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic is a major public health concern in the US. Cancer patients are especially vulnerable to adverse COVID-19 outcomes and require targeted prevention efforts against COVID-19.MethodsWe used longitudinal survey data from patients seen at Moffitt Cancer Center to identify attitudes, beliefs, and sociodemographic factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination acceptance among cancer patients. Patients with confirmed invasive cancer diagnosis through Cancer Registry data were asked about vaccine acceptance through the question “Now that a COVID-19 vaccine is available, are you likely to get it?” and dichotomized into high accepters (already received it, would get it when available) and low accepters (waiting for a doctor to recommend it, waiting until more people received it, not likely to get it).ResultsMost patients (86.8% of 5,814) were high accepters of the COVID-19 vaccine. High accepters had more confidence in the effectiveness and safety of the vaccine than low accepters. Multivariable logistic regression showed older individuals (70–89 vs.18–49: OR:2.57, 95% CI:1.33–4.86), those with greater perceived severity of COVID-19 infection (very serious vs. not at all serious: OR:2.55, 95% CI:1.76–3.70), practicing more risk mitigation behaviors (per one standard deviation OR:1.75, 95% CI:1.57–1.95), and history of receiving the flu shot versus not (OR:6.56, 95% CI:5.25–8.20) had higher odds of vaccine acceptance. Individuals living with more than one other person (vs. alone: OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.35, 0.79) and those who were more socioeconomically disadvantaged (per 10 percentile points: OR: 0.89, 95 %CI: 0.85, 0.93) had lower odds of reporting vaccine acceptance.ConclusionMost patients with cancer have or would receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Those who are less likely to accept the vaccine have more concerns regarding effectiveness and side effects, are younger, more socioeconomically disadvantaged, and have lower perceptions of COVID-19 severity.     

Perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine and willingness to receive vaccination among health workers in Nigeria

ObjectivesThe study aimed to examine health workers’ perceptions of the coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine in Nigeria and their willingness to receive the vaccine when it becomes available.Methods This multi-center cross-sectional study used non-probability convenience sampling to enroll 1,470 hospital workers aged 18 and above from 4 specialized hospitals. A structured and validated self-administered questionnaire was used for data collection. Data entry and analysis were conducted using IBM SPSS ver. 22.0.Results The mean age of respondents was 40±6 years. Only 53.5% of the health workers had positive perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine, and only slightly more than half (55.5%) were willing to receive vaccination. Predictors of willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine included having a positive perception of the vaccine (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 4.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.50−5.69), perceiving a risk of contracting COVID-19 (AOR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.25–3.98), having received tertiary education (AOR, 3.50; 95% CI, 1.40−6.86), and being a clinical health worker (AOR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.01−1.68).Conclusion Perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine and willingness to receive the vaccine were sub-optimal among this group. Educational interventions to improve health workers'' perceptions and attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine are needed.     

Government trust,perceptions of COVID-19 and behaviour change: cohort surveys,Singapore

ObjectiveTo evaluate how public perceptions and trust in government communications affected the adoption of protective behaviour in Singapore during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.MethodsWe launched our community-based cohort to assess public perceptions of infectious disease outbreaks in mid-2019. After the first case of COVID-19 was reported in Singapore on 23 January, we launched a series of seven COVID-19 surveys to both existing and regularly enrolled new participants every 2 weeks. As well as sociodemographic properties of the participants, we recorded changing responses to judge awareness of the situation, trust in various information sources and perceived risk. We used multivariable logistic regression models to evaluate associations with perceptions of risk and self-reported adopted frequencies of protective behaviour.FindingsOur cohort of 633 participants provided 2857 unique responses during the seven COVID-19 surveys. Most agreed or strongly agreed that information from official government sources (99.1%; 528/533) and Singapore-based news agencies (97.9%; 522/533) was trustworthy. Trust in government communication was significantly associated with higher perceived threat (odds ratio, OR: 2.2; 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.6–3.0), but inversely associated with perceived risk of infection (OR: 0.6; 95% CI: 0.4–0.8) or risk of death if infected (OR: 0.6; 95% CI: 0.4–0.9). Trust in government communication was also associated with a greater likelihood of adopting protective behaviour.ConclusionOur findings show that trust is a vital commodity when managing an evolving outbreak. Our repeated surveys provided real-time feedback, allowing an improved understanding of the interplay between perceptions, trust and behaviour.     

Protective Behaviors and Secondary Harms Resulting From Nonpharmaceutical Interventions During the COVID-19 Epidemic in South Africa: Multisite,Prospective Longitudinal Study

BackgroundIn March 2020, South Africa implemented strict nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to contain the spread of COVID-19. Over the subsequent 5 months, NPI policies were eased in stages according to a national strategy. COVID-19 spread throughout the country heterogeneously; the disease reached rural areas by July and case numbers peaked from July to August. A second COVID-19 wave began in late 2020. Data on the impact of NPI policies on social and economic well-being and access to health care are limited.ObjectiveWe aimed to determine how rural residents in three South African provinces changed their behaviors during the first COVID-19 epidemic wave.MethodsThe South African Population Research Infrastructure Network nodes in the Mpumalanga (Agincourt), KwaZulu-Natal, (Africa Health Research Institute) and Limpopo (Dikgale-Mamabolo-Mothiba) provinces conducted up to 14 rounds of longitudinal telephone surveys among randomly sampled households from rural and periurban surveillance populations every 2-3 weeks. Interviews included questions on the following topics: COVID-19–related knowledge and behaviors, the health and economic impacts of NPIs, and mental health. We analyzed how responses varied based on NPI stringency and household sociodemographics.ResultsIn total, 5120 households completed 23,095 interviews between April and December 2020. Respondents’ self-reported satisfaction with their COVID-19–related knowledge and face mask use rapidly rose to 85% and 95%, respectively, by August. As selected NPIs were eased, the amount of travel increased, economic losses were reduced, and the prevalence of anxiety and depression symptoms fell. When the number of COVID-19 cases spiked at one node in July, the amount of travel dropped rapidly and the rate of missed daily medications doubled. Households where more adults received government-funded old-age pensions reported concerns about economic matters and medication access less often.ConclusionsSouth Africans complied with stringent, COVID-19–related NPIs despite the threat of substantial social, economic, and health repercussions. Government-supported social welfare programs appeared to buffer interruptions in income and health care access during local outbreaks. Epidemic control policies must be balanced against the broader well-being of people in resource-limited settings and designed with parallel support systems when such policies threaten peoples’ income and access to basic services.     

Association of Sources of COVID-19 Information with Vaccine Uptake,Preventive Behaviors,and Perceived Severity of COVID-19

ObjectiveTo investigate the association of using informal sources and reliance on multiple sources of information with actual COVID-19 vaccine uptake, the number of doses of vaccine received, COVID-19 testing, essential preventive measures, and perceived severity of COVID-19.DesignRetrospective cross-sectional study.Setting and ParticipantsOur study sample consisted of 9584 community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries, representing a weighted 50,029,030 beneficiaries from the Winter 2021 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey COVID-19 Supplement.MethodsTwo key independent variables were whether a respondent relied on a formal source (ie, traditional news, government guidance, or health care providers) or an informal source (ie, social media, Internet, or friends/family) the most for the COVID-19 information and the total number of information sources a respondent relied on.ResultsCompared with beneficiaries relying on formal sources of information, those relying on informal sources of information were less likely to receive COVID-19 vaccine (odds ratio [OR], 0.65; 95% CI, 0.56–0.75) and COVID-19 testing (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.74–0.98), to engage in preventive behaviors (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.50–0.74), to have high perception of COVID-19 severity, and were more likely to be unvaccinated vs 2 doses of vaccine (relative risk ratio [RRR], 1.64; 95% CI, 1.41–1.91). Relying on more information sources was significantly associated with higher odds of actual vaccine uptake (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.17–1.26), COVID-19 testing (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.07–1.15), engagement of essential preventive behaviors (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.25–1.42), having high perception of COVID-19 severity, and with lower likelihood of being unvaccinated vs 2 doses of vaccine (RRR, 0.82; 0.79–0.85).Conclusions and ImplicationsThe COVID-19 pandemic has made communicating information about coronavirus more important than ever. Our findings suggest that information from formal sources with expertise and more balanced sources of information were key to effective communication to prevent from COVID-19 infection among older adults.     

Ethnicity,household composition and COVID-19 mortality: a national linked data study

ObjectiveTo estimate the proportion of ethnic inequalities explained by living in a multi-generational household.DesignCausal mediation analysis.SettingRetrospective data from the 2011 Census linked to Hospital Episode Statistics (2017-2019) and death registration data (up to 30 November 2020).ParticipantsAdults aged 65 years or over living in private households in England from 2 March 2020 until 30 November 2020 (n=10,078,568).Main outcome measuresHazard ratios were estimated for COVID-19 death for people living in a multi-generational household compared with people living with another older adult, adjusting for geographic factors, socioeconomic characteristics and pre-pandemic health.ResultsLiving in a multi-generational household was associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 death. After adjusting for confounding factors, the hazard ratios for living in a multi-generational household with dependent children were 1.17 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06–1.30) and 1.21 (95% CI 1.06–1.38) for elderly men and women. The hazard ratios for living in a multi-generational household without dependent children were 1.07 (95% CI 1.01–1.13) for elderly men and 1.17 (95% CI 1.07–1.25) for elderly women. Living in a multi-generational household explained about 11% of the elevated risk of COVID-19 death among elderly women from South Asian background, but very little for South Asian men or people in other ethnic minority groups.Conclusion Elderly adults living with younger people are at increased risk of COVID-19 mortality, and this is a contributing factor to the excess risk experienced by older South Asian women compared to White women. Relevant public health interventions should be directed at communities where such multi-generational households are highly prevalent.     

The Association Between Chronic Disease and Serious COVID-19 Outcomes and Its Influence on Risk Perception: Survey Study and Database Analysis

BackgroundCOVID-19, a viral respiratory disease first reported in December 2019, quickly became a threat to global public health. Further understanding of the epidemiology of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the risk perception of the community may better inform targeted interventions to reduce the impact and spread of COVID-19.ObjectiveIn this study, we aimed to examine the association between chronic diseases and serious outcomes following COVID-19 infection, and to explore its influence on people’s self-perception of risk for worse COVID-19 outcomes.MethodsThis study draws data from two databases: (1) the nationwide database of all confirmed COVID-19 cases in Portugal, extracted on April 28, 2020 (n=20,293); and (2) the community-based COVID-19 Barometer survey, which contains data on health status, perceptions, and behaviors during the first wave of COVID-19 (n=171,087). We assessed the association between relevant chronic diseases (ie, respiratory, cardiovascular, and renal diseases; diabetes; and cancer) and death and intensive care unit (ICU) admission following COVID-19 infection. We identified determinants of self-perception of risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes using logistic regression models.ResultsRespiratory, cardiovascular, and renal diseases were associated with mortality and ICU admission among patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 infection (odds ratio [OR] 1.48, 95% CI 1.11-1.98; OR 3.39, 95% CI 1.80-6.40; and OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.66-3.06, respectively). Diabetes and cancer were associated with serious outcomes only when considering the full sample of COVID-19–infected cases in the country (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.03-1.64; and OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.03-1.89, respectively). Older age and male sex were both associated with mortality and ICU admission. The perception of risk for severe COVID-19 disease in the study population was 23.9% (n=40,890). This was markedly higher for older adults (n=5235, 46.4%), those with at least one chronic disease (n=17,647, 51.6%), or those in both of these categories (n=3212, 67.7%). All included diseases were associated with self-perceptions of high risk in this population.ConclusionsOur results demonstrate the association between some prevalent chronic diseases and increased risk of worse COVID-19 outcomes. It also brings forth a greater understanding of the community’s risk perceptions of serious COVID-19 disease. Hence, this study may aid health authorities to better adapt measures to the real needs of the population and to identify vulnerable individuals requiring further education and awareness of preventive measures.     

Differences in Clinical Presentation With Long COVID After Community and Hospital Infection and Associations With All-Cause Mortality: English Sentinel Network Database Study

BackgroundMost studies of long COVID (symptoms of COVID-19 infection beyond 4 weeks) have focused on people hospitalized in their initial illness. Long COVID is thought to be underrecorded in UK primary care electronic records.ObjectiveWe sought to determine which symptoms people present to primary care after COVID-19 infection and whether presentation differs in people who were not hospitalized, as well as post–long COVID mortality rates.MethodsWe used routine data from the nationally representative primary care sentinel cohort of the Oxford–Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre (N=7,396,702), applying a predefined long COVID phenotype and grouped by whether the index infection occurred in hospital or in the community. We included COVID-19 infection cases from March 1, 2020, to April 1, 2021. We conducted a before-and-after analysis of long COVID symptoms prespecified by the Office of National Statistics, comparing symptoms presented between 1 and 6 months after the index infection matched with the same months 1 year previously. We conducted logistic regression analysis, quoting odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs.ResultsIn total, 5.63% (416,505/7,396,702) and 1.83% (7623/416,505) of the patients had received a coded diagnosis of COVID-19 infection and diagnosis of, or referral for, long COVID, respectively. People with diagnosis or referral of long COVID had higher odds of presenting the prespecified symptoms after versus before COVID-19 infection (OR 2.66, 95% CI 2.46-2.88, for those with index community infection and OR 2.42, 95% CI 2.03-2.89, for those hospitalized). After an index community infection, patients were more likely to present with nonspecific symptoms (OR 3.44, 95% CI 3.00-3.95; P<.001) compared with after a hospital admission (OR 2.09, 95% CI 1.56-2.80; P<.001). Mental health sequelae were more strongly associated with index hospital infections (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.64-2.96) than with index community infections (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.21-1.53; P<.001). People presenting to primary care after hospital infection were more likely to be men (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.25-1.64; P<.001), more socioeconomically deprived (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.24-1.63; P<.001), and with higher multimorbidity scores (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.26-1.57; P<.001) than those presenting after an index community infection. All-cause mortality in people with long COVID was associated with increasing age, male sex (OR 3.32, 95% CI 1.34-9.24; P=.01), and higher multimorbidity score (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.34-3.29; P<.001). Vaccination was associated with reduced odds of mortality (OR 0.10, 95% CI 0.03-0.35; P<.001).ConclusionsThe low percentage of people recorded as having long COVID after COVID-19 infection reflects either low prevalence or underrecording. The characteristics and comorbidities of those presenting with long COVID after a community infection are different from those hospitalized. This study provides insights into the presentation of long COVID in primary care and implications for workload.     

Willingness to Exchange Health Information via Mobile Devices: Findings From a Population-Based Survey

PURPOSE

The rapid proliferation of mobile devices offers unprecedented opportunities for patients and health care professionals to exchange health information electronically, but little is known about patients’ willingness to exchange various types of health information using these devices. We examined willingness to exchange different types of health information via mobile devices, and assessed whether sociodemographic characteristics and trust in clinicians were associated with willingness in a nationally representative sample.

METHODS

We analyzed data for 3,165 patients captured in the 2013 Health Information National Trends Survey. Multinomial logistic regression analysis was conducted to test differences in willingness. Ordinal logistic regression analysis assessed correlates of willingness to exchange 9 types of information separately.

RESULTS

Participants were very willing to exchange appointment reminders (odds ratio [OR] = 6.66; 95% CI, 5.68–7.81), general health tips (OR = 2.03; 95% CI, 1.74–2.38), medication reminders (OR = 2.73; 95% CI, 2.35–3.19), laboratory/test results (OR = 1.76; 95% CI, 1.62–1.92), vital signs (OR = 1.63; 95% CI, 1.48–1.80), lifestyle behaviors (OR = 1.40; 95% CI, 1.24–1.58), and symptoms (OR = 1.62; 95% CI, 1.46–1.79) as compared with diagnostic information. Older adults had lower odds of being more willing to exchange any type of information. Education, income, and trust in health care professional information correlated with willingness to exchange certain types of information.

CONCLUSIONS

Respondents were less willing to exchange via mobile devices information that may be considered sensitive or complex. Age, socioeconomic factors, and trust in professional information were associated with willingness to engage in mobile health information exchange. Both information type and demographic group should be considered when developing and tailoring mobile technologies for patient-clinician communication.     

Risk factors for cooking-related burn injuries in children,WHO Global Burn Registry

ObjectiveTo assess the characteristics of cooking-related burn injuries in children reported to the World Health Organization Global Burn Registry.MethodsOn 1 February 2021, we downloaded data from the Global Burn Registry on demographic and clinical characteristics of patients younger than 19 years. We performed multivariate regressions to identify risk factors predictive of mortality and total body surface area affected by burns.FindingsOf the 2957 paediatric patients with burn injuries, 974 involved cooking (32.9%). More burns occurred in boys (532 patients; 54.6%) than in girls, and in children 2 years and younger (489 patients; 50.2%). Accidental contact and liquefied petroleum caused most burn injuries (729 patients; 74.8% and 293 patients; 30.1%, respectively). Burn contact by explosions (odds ratio, OR: 2.8; 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.4–5.7) or fires in the cooking area (OR: 3.0; 95% CI: 1.3–6.8), as well as the cooking fuels wood (OR: 2.2; 95 CI%: 1.3–3.4), kerosene (OR: 1.9; 95% CI: 1.0–3.6) or natural gas (OR: 1.5; 95% CI: 1.0–2.2) were associated with larger body surface area affected. Mortality was associated with explosions (OR: 7.5; 95% CI: 2.2–25.9) and fires in the cooking area (OR: 6.9; 95% CI: 1.9–25.7), charcoal (OR: 4.6; 95% CI: 2.0–10.5), kerosene (OR: 3.9; 95% CI: 1.4–10.8), natural gas (OR: 3.0; 95% CI: 1.5–6.1) or wood (OR: 2.8; 95% CI: 1.1–7.1).ConclusionPreventive interventions directed against explosions, fires in cooking areas and hazardous cooking fuels should be implemented to reduce morbidity and mortality from cooking-related burn injuries.     

Infection and death by COVID-19 in a cohort of healthcare workers in Mexico

Objective:This study aimed to estimate the risk of SARS-Cov2 infection and severe COVID-19 among healthcare workers from a major social security system.Methods:This study actively followed a cohort of social security workers from March to December 2020 to determine the number of laboratory-confirmed symptomatic cases, asymptomatic associated contacts and COVID-19-associated hospitalizations and deaths. Workers were classified into those providing direct care to infected patients (COVID teams), other active healthcare workers (OAHCW), and workers under home protection (HPW). The number of cases and rates were also estimated by job category.Results:Among a total of 542 381 workers, 41 461 were granted stay-at-home protection due to advanced age or comorbidities. Among the 500 920 total active workers, 85 477 and 283 884 were classified into COVID teams and OAHCW, respectively. Infection rates for COVID teams, OAHCW, and HPW were 20.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 19.8–20.4], 13.7% (95% CI 13.5–13.8), and 12.2% (95% CI 11.8–12.5), respectively. The risk of hospitalization was higher among HPW. COVID teams had lower mortality rate per 10 000 workers compared to HPW (5.0, 95% CI 4.0–7.0 versus 18.1, 95% CI 14.0–23.0). Compared to administrative workers, ambulance personnel (RR 1.20; 95% CI 1.09–1.32), social workers (RR 1.16; 95% CI 1.08–1.24), patient transporters (RR 1.15; 95% CI 1.09–1.22) and nurses (RR 1.13; 95% CI 1.10–1.15) had a higher risk of infection after adjusting for age and gender. Crude differences in mortality rates were observed according to job category, which could be explained by differences in age, sex, and comorbidity distribution. Diabetes, obesity, hypertension, hemolytic anemia, and HIV were associated with increased fatality rates.Conclusions:COVID team workers had higher infection rates compared to the total population of active workers and HPW. Doctors had lower risk of infection than respiratory therapists, nurses, and patient transporters, among whom interventions should be reconsidered to reduce risks. The presence of comorbidities, such as diabetes, obesity, arterial hypertension, hemolytic anemia, and HIV, increased the likelihood of complications caused by COVID-19, culminating in a poor prognosis.