COVID-19 stressors for Hispanic/Latino patients living with type 2 diabetes: a qualitative study.

Background and aim: During the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, nationwide lockdowns caused disruption in the diets, physical activities, and lifestyles of patients with type 2 diabetes. Previous reports on the possible association between race/ethnicity, COVID-19, and mortality have shown that Hispanic/Latino patients with type 2 diabetes who are socioeconomically disadvantaged are disproportionately affected by this novel virus. The aim of this study was to explore stressors associated with changes in diabetes self-management behaviors. Our goal was to highlight the health disparities in these vulnerable racial/ethnic minority communities and underscore the need for effective interventions. Methods and participants: Participants were enrolled in part of a larger randomized controlled trial to compare diabetes telehealth management (DTM) with comprehensive outpatient management (COM) in terms of critical patient-centered outcomes among Hispanic/Latino patients with type 2 diabetes. We conducted a thematic analysis using patient notes collected from two research nurses between March 2020 and March 2021. Two authors read through the transcripts independently to identify overarching themes. Once the themes had been identified, both authors convened to compare themes and ensure that similar themes were identified within the transcripts. Any discrepancies were discussed by the larger study team until a consensus was reached. Results: Six themes emerged, each of which can be categorized as either a source or an outcome of stress. Sources of stress associated with the COVID-19 pandemic were (1) fear of contracting COVID-19, (2) disruptions from lockdowns, and (3) financial stressors (e.g., loss of income). Outcomes of COVID-19 stressors were (1) reduced diabetes management (e.g., reduced diabetes monitoring and physical activity), (2) suboptimal mental health outcomes (e.g., anxiety and depression), and (3) outcomes of financial stressors. Conclusion: The findings indicated that underserved Hispanic/Latino patients with type 2 diabetes encountered a number of stressors that led to the deterioration of diabetes self-management behaviors during the pandemic.

Examining Changes in Sleep Duration Associated with the Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Who is Sleeping and Who is Not?

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in social isolation and reports of insomnia. However, reports of changes in sleep duration and associated factors are few. To determine the impact of COVID-19 on changes in sleep behavior, data were analyzed from an online survey of adults recruited via social media that included questions asking whether the respondent slept less or more after the onset of the pandemic as well as self-reported sociodemographic and occupational information; beliefs about COVID-19; and responses pertaining to loneliness, anxiety, and depression. There were 5,175 respondents; 53.9% had a change in sleep duration.17.1% slept less and 36.7% slept more. Sleeping more was related to greater education, being single/divorced/separated, unemployed or a student. Being retired, divorced/separated or a homemaker, and living in the Mountain or Central time zones were associated with less sleep. Beliefs that COVID-19 would result in personal adverse consequences was associated with both more and less sleep. However, the strongest associations for both more and less sleep were seen with depression, anxiety, and loneliness. In summary, changes in sleep duration since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic were highly prevalent among social media users and were associated with several sociodemographic factors and beliefs that COVID-19 would have adverse personal impacts. However, the strongest associations occurred with worse mental health suggesting that improvements may occur with better sleep.Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/08964289.2021.2002800 .

Digital Communications Technology Use and Feelings of Anxiety, Depression, and Loneliness Among Older Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Some have touted technology as a panacea for overcoming the isolation associated with COVID-19 mitigation policies; yet, these tools are not widely adopted by older adults. With data from the COVID-19 supplement to the National Health and Aging Trends Survey, we conduct adjusted Poisson regression modeling to examine digital communications use during COVID-19 and feelings of anxiety, depression, and loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic among older adults (65+ years of age). Adjusted Poisson regression revealed that those who reported frequent use of video calls with friends and family (aPR = 1.22, 95% CI:1.06-1.41) and with healthcare providers (aPR = 1.22, 95% CI:1.03-1.45) were more likely to report feelings of anxiety than those not using these platforms; yet, reports of in-person visits with friends and family (aPR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.66-0.93) and with healthcare providers (aPR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.77-1.01) were associated with fewer feelings of depression and loneliness, respectively. Future research is needed to tailor digital technology to support older adults.

Socioeconomic predictors of COVID-19-related health disparities among United States workers: A structural equation modeling study

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted the physical and mental health, and the economic stability, of specific population subgroups in different ways, deepening existing disparities. Essential workers have faced the greatest risk of exposure to COVID-19;women have been burdened by caretaking responsibilities;and rural residents have experienced healthcare access barriers. Each of these factors did not occur on their own. While most research has so far focused on individual factors related to COVID-19 disparities, few have explored the complex relationships between the multiple components of COVID-19 vulnerabilities. Using structural equation modeling on a sample of United States (U.S.) workers (N = 2800), we aimed to 1) identify factor clusters that make up specific COVID-19 vulnerabilities, and 2) explore how these vulnerabilities affected specific subgroups, specifically essential workers, women and rural residents. We identified 3 COVID-19 vulnerabilities: financial, mental health, and healthcare access;9 out of 10 respondents experienced one;15% reported all three. Essential workers [standardized coefficient (β) = 0.23;unstandardized coefficient (B) = 0.21, 95% CI = 0.17, 0.24] and rural residents (β = 0.13;B = 0.12, 95% CI = 0.09, 0.16) experienced more financial vulnerability than non-essential workers and non-rural residents, respectively. Women (β = 0.22;B = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.65, 0.74) experienced worse mental health than men;whereas essential workers reported better mental health (β = -0.08;B = -0.25, 95% CI = -0.38, -0.13) than other workers. Rural residents (β = 0.09;B = 0.15, 95% CI = 0.07, 0.24) experienced more healthcare access barriers than non-rural residents. Findings highlight how interrelated financial, mental health, and healthcare access vulnerabilities contribute to the disproportionate COVID-19-related burden among U.S. workers. Policies to secure employment conditions, including fixed income and paid sick leave, are urgently needed to mitigate pandemic-associated disparities.

What predicts people's belief in COVID-19 misinformation? A retrospective study using a nationwide online survey among adults residing in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Tackling infodemics with flooding misinformation is key to managing the COVID-19 pandemic. Yet only a few studies have attempted to understand the characteristics of the people who believe in misinformation. METHODS: Data was used from an online survey that was administered in April 2020 to 6518 English-speaking adult participants in the United States. We created binary variables to represent four misinformation categories related to COVID-19: general COVID-19-related, vaccine/anti-vaccine, COVID-19 as an act of bioterrorism, and mode of transmission. Using binary logistic regression and the LASSO regularization, we then identified the important predictors of belief in each type of misinformation. Nested vector bootstrapping approach was used to estimate the standard error of the LASSO coefficients. RESULTS: About 30% of our sample reported believing in at least one type of COVID-19-related misinformation. Belief in one type of misinformation was not strongly associated with belief in other types. We also identified 58 demographic and socioeconomic factors that predicted people's susceptibility to at least one type of COVID-19 misinformation. Different groups, characterized by distinct sets of predictors, were susceptible to different types of misinformation. There were 25 predictors for general COVID-19 misinformation, 42 for COVID-19 vaccine, 36 for COVID-19 as an act of bioterrorism, and 27 for mode of COVID-transmission. CONCLUSION: Our findings confirm the existence of groups with unique characteristics that believe in different types of COVID-19 misinformation. Findings are readily applicable by policymakers to inform careful targeting of misinformation mitigation strategies.

Employment conditions as barriers to the adoption of COVID-19 mitigation measures: how the COVID-19 pandemic may be deepening health disparities among low-income earners and essential workers in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted economically-disadvantaged populations in the United States (US). Precarious employment conditions may contribute to these disparities by impeding workers in such conditions from adopting COVID-19 mitigation measures to reduce infection risk. This study investigated the relationship between employment and economic conditions and the adoption of COVID-19 protective behaviors among US workers during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Employing a social media advertisement campaign, an online, self-administered survey was used to collect data from 2,845 working adults in April 2020. Hierarchical generalized linear models were performed to assess the differences in engagement with recommended protective behaviors based on employment and economic conditions, while controlling for knowledge and perceived threat of COVID-19, as would be predicted by the Health Belief Model (HBM). RESULTS: Essential workers had more precarious employment and economic conditions than non-essential workers: 67% had variable income; 30% did not have paid sick leave; 42% had lost income due to COVID-19, and 15% were food insecure. The adoption of protective behaviors was high in the sample: 77% of participants avoided leaving home, and 93% increased hand hygiene. Consistent with the HBM, COVID-19 knowledge scores and perceived threat were positively associated with engaging in all protective behaviors. However, after controlling for these, essential workers were 60% and 70% less likely than non-essential workers, who by the nature of their jobs cannot stay at home, to stay at home and increase hand hygiene, respectively. Similarly, participants who could not afford to quarantine were 50% less likely to avoid leaving home (AOR: 0.5; 95% CI: 0.4, 0.6) than those who could, whereas there were no significant differences concerning hand hygiene. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings are consistent with the accumulating evidence that the employment conditions of essential workers and other low-income earners are precarious, that they have experienced disproportionately higher rates of income loss during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic and face significant barriers to adopting protective measures. Our findings underscore the importance and need of policy responses focusing on expanding social protection and benefits to prevent the further deepening of existing health disparities in the US.

Socioeconomic predictors of COVID-19-related health disparities among United States workers: A structural equation modeling study.

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted the physical and mental health, and the economic stability, of specific population subgroups in different ways, deepening existing disparities. Essential workers have faced the greatest risk of exposure to COVID-19; women have been burdened by caretaking responsibilities; and rural residents have experienced healthcare access barriers. Each of these factors did not occur on their own. While most research has so far focused on individual factors related to COVID-19 disparities, few have explored the complex relationships between the multiple components of COVID-19 vulnerabilities. Using structural equation modeling on a sample of United States (U.S.) workers (N = 2800), we aimed to 1) identify factor clusters that make up specific COVID-19 vulnerabilities, and 2) explore how these vulnerabilities affected specific subgroups, specifically essential workers, women and rural residents. We identified 3 COVID-19 vulnerabilities: financial, mental health, and healthcare access; 9 out of 10 respondents experienced one; 15% reported all three. Essential workers [standardized coefficient (ß) = 0.23; unstandardized coefficient (B) = 0.21, 95% CI = 0.17, 0.24] and rural residents (ß = 0.13; B = 0.12, 95% CI = 0.09, 0.16) experienced more financial vulnerability than non-essential workers and non-rural residents, respectively. Women (ß = 0.22; B = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.65, 0.74) experienced worse mental health than men; whereas essential workers reported better mental health (ß = -0.08; B = -0.25, 95% CI = -0.38, -0.13) than other workers. Rural residents (ß = 0.09; B = 0.15, 95% CI = 0.07, 0.24) experienced more healthcare access barriers than non-rural residents. Findings highlight how interrelated financial, mental health, and healthcare access vulnerabilities contribute to the disproportionate COVID-19-related burden among U.S. workers. Policies to secure employment conditions, including fixed income and paid sick leave, are urgently needed to mitigate pandemic-associated disparities.

Impact of COVID-19-related knowledge on protective behaviors: The moderating role of primary sources of information.

This study assessed the modifying role of primary source of COVID-19 information in the association between knowledge and protective behaviors related to COVID-19 among adults living in the United States (US). Data was collected from 6,518 US adults through an online cross-sectional self-administered survey via social media platforms in April 2020. Linear regression was performed on COVID-19 knowledge and behavior scores, adjusted for sociodemographic factors. An interaction term between knowledge score and primary information source was included to observe effect modification by primary information source. Higher levels of knowledge were associated with increased self-reported engagement with protective behaviors against COVID-19. The primary information source significantly moderated the association between knowledge and behavior, and analyses of simple slopes revealed significant differences by primary information source. This study shows the important role of COVID-19 information sources in affecting people's engagement in recommended protective behaviors. Governments and health agencies should monitor the use of various information sources to effectively engage the public and translate knowledge into behavior change during an evolving public health crisis like COVID-19.

Food insecurity among households with children during the COVID-19 pandemic: results from a study among social media users across the United States.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, approximately 11% of households were food insecure prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. The present study aims to describe the prevalence of food insecurity among adults and households with children living in the United States during the pandemic. METHODS: This study utilized social media as a recruitment platform to administer an original online survey on demographics and COVID-related food insecurity. The survey was disseminated through an advertisement campaign on Facebook and affiliated platforms. Food insecurity was assessed with a validated six-item United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Household Food Security Survey Module, which was used to create a six-point numerical food security score, where a higher score indicates lower food security. Individual-level participant demographic information was also collected. Logistic regressions (low/very-low compared with high/marginal food security) were performed to generate adjusted odds ratios (AOR) and 95%CIs for food insecurity and select demographic characteristics. RESULTS: Advertisements reached 250,701 individuals and resulted in 5,606 complete surveys. Overall, 14.7% of participants self-identified as having low or very low food security in their households, with higher prevalence (17.5%) among households with children. Unemployment (AOR:1.76, 95%CI:1.09-2.80), high school or lower education (AOR:2.25, 95%CI:1.29-3.90), and low income (AOR[$30,000-$50,000]:5.87, 95%CI:3.35-10.37; AOR[< $30,000]:10.61, 95%CI:5.50-20.80) were associated with higher odds of food insecurity in multivariable models among households with children (and the whole sample). CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate exacerbation of food insecurity during the pandemic. The study will be instrumental in guiding additional research and time-sensitive interventions targeted towards vulnerable food insecure subgroups.

Knowledge, beliefs, mental health, substance use, and behaviors related to the COVID-19 pandemic among US adults: a national online survey.

Aim: Given the need for data to inform public health messaging to mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic, this national survey sought to assess the state of COVID-19-related knowledge, beliefs, mental health, substance use changes, and behaviors among a sample of U.S. adults. Subject and methods: In the period March 20-30, 2020, we collected data on COVID-19-related knowledge, awareness and adoption of preventive practices, depression and anxiety (Patient Health Questionnaire-4), stress (Impact of Event Scale-6), pessimism, and tobacco and alcohol use. Differences between age groups (18-39 years, 40-59 years and ≥ 60 years) were tested using Pearson's chi-squared tests or ANOVAs; associations between drinking and smoking and depression, anxiety, and stress were tested using adjusted logistic regression models. Results: Approximately half of the sample (N Total = 6391) were 50-69 years old and 58% were female. COVID-19 knowledge (mean = 12.0; SD = 1.2) and protective practice awareness (mean = 9.1; SD = 0.8) were high. Among respondents, 44% had a score consistent with depression and anxiety (PHQ-4 score ≥ 6), and 52% reported high stress scores (≥ median of 1.33). COVID-19-related anxiety and depression were associated with increased drinking (AOR = 1.79; 95% CI = 1.49, 2.15) and smoking (AOR = 2.17; 95% CI = 1.64, 2.88). High stress scores were also associated with increased drinking (AOR = 1.80; 95% CI = 1.49, 2.17, p < 0.001) and smoking (AOR = 1.75; 95% CI = 1.31, 2.33). Conclusions: In spite of high knowledge levels, important gaps were identified. High prevalence of poor mental health outcomes and associated increases in drinking and smoking warrant ongoing risk communications tailoring to effectively disseminate information and expanding psychosocial services, particularly via telehealth, to mitigate the negative mental health impact of COVID-19. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10389-021-01564-4.

Regional and socioeconomic predictors of perceived ability to access coronavirus testing in the United States: results from a nationwide online COVID-19 survey.

PURPOSE: Access to COVID-19 testing remained a salient issue during the early months of the pandemic, therefore this study aimed to identify 1) regional and 2) socioeconomic predictors of perceived ability to access Coronavirus testing. METHODS: An online survey using social media-based advertising was conducted among U.S. adults in April 2020. Participants were asked whether they thought they could acquire a COVID-19 test, along with basic demographic, socioeconomic and geographic information. RESULTS: A total of 6,378 participants provided data on perceived access to COVID-19 testing. In adjusted analyses, we found higher income and possession of health insurance to be associated with perceived ability to access Coronavirus testing. Geographically, perceived access was highest (68%) in East South Central division and lowest (39%) in West North Central. Disparities in health insurance coverage did not directly correspond to disparities in perceived access to COVID-19 testing. CONCLUSIONS: Sex, geographic location, income, and insurance status were associated with perceived access to COVID-19 testing; interventions aimed at improving either access or awareness of measures taken to improve access are warranted. These findings from the pandemic's early months shed light on the importance of disaggregating perceived and true access to screening during such crises.

Increased alcohol use during the COVID-19 pandemic: The effect of mental health and age in a cross-sectional sample of social media users in the U.S.

The COVID-19 pandemic has triggered a public health crisis of unprecedented scale. Increased alcohol use has been extensively documented during other crises, particularly among persons with anxiety and depression. Despite COVID-19's differential impact by age, the association of age, mental health and alcohol use during the pandemic has not been explored. This study aimed to examine whether age modified the association of anxiety and depressive symptoms with alcohol use during the COVID-19 pandemic. Two online surveys were administered to U.S. adult social media users in March and April 2020. Generalized linear models were conducted in 2020 among 5850 respondents (52.9% female; 22.0% aged 18-39 years, 47.0% aged 40-59 years, and 31.0% aged ≥60 years) to examine if age modified the association of anxiety and depression symptomatology and alcohol use. Overall, 29% of respondents reported increased alcohol use. Adjusted odds ratios of reporting increased alcohol use were 1.41 (95% CI = 1.20-1.66) among respondents with anxiety symptoms and 1.64 (95% CI = 1.21-2.23) among those with depressive symptoms compared to those without such symptoms. Whereas respondents aged 18-39 years had the highest probability of reporting increased alcohol use, the probability of older persons (40-59 and ≥60 years) reporting increased drinking was much greater among those with symptoms of anxiety and depression, compared to those without symptoms. These findings warrant age-differentiated public health messaging on the risks of excessive alcohol use and scale-up of substance use services for middle-aged and older adults with symptoms of depression and anxiety.

Trends and Predictors of COVID-19 Information Sources and Their Relationship With Knowledge and Beliefs Related to the Pandemic: Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, there is a heightened need to understand health information seeking behaviors to address disparities in knowledge and beliefs about the crisis. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed sociodemographic predictors of the use and trust of different COVID-19 information sources, as well as the association between information sources and knowledge and beliefs about the pandemic. METHODS: An online survey was conducted among US adults in two rounds during March and April 2020 using advertisement-based recruitment on social media. Participants were asked about their use of 11 different COVID-19 information sources as well as their most trusted source of information. The selection of COVID-related knowledge and belief questions was based on past empirical literature and salient concerns at the time of survey implementation. RESULTS: The sample consisted of 11,242 participants. When combined, traditional media sources (television, radio, podcasts, or newspapers) were the largest sources of COVID-19 information (91.2%). Among those using mainstream media sources for COVID-19 information (n=7811, 69.5%), popular outlets included CNN (24.0%), Fox News (19.3%), and other local or national networks (35.2%). The largest individual information source was government websites (87.6%). They were also the most trusted source of information (43.3%), although the odds of trusting government websites were lower among males (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.58, 95% CI 0.53-0.63) and those aged 40-59 years and ≥60 years compared to those aged 18-39 years (AOR 0.83, 95% CI 0.74-0.92; AOR 0.62, 95% CI 0.54-0.71). Participants used an average of 6.1 sources (SD 2.3). Participants who were male, aged 40-59 years or ≥60 years; not working, unemployed, or retired; or Republican were likely to use fewer sources while those with children and higher educational attainment were likely to use more sources. Participants surveyed in April were markedly less likely to use (AOR 0.41, 95% CI 0.35-0.46) and trust (AOR 0.51, 95% CI 0.47-0.56) government sources. The association between information source and COVID-19 knowledge was mixed, while many COVID-19 beliefs were significantly predicted by information source; similar trends were observed with reliance on different types of mainstream media outlets. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 information source was significantly determined by participant sociodemographic characteristics and was also associated with both knowledge and beliefs about the pandemic. Study findings can help inform COVID-19 health communication campaigns and highlight the impact of using a variety of different and trusted information sources.

Social media as a recruitment platform for a nationwide online survey of COVID-19 knowledge, beliefs, and practices in the United States: methodology and feasibility analysis.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has evolved into one of the most impactful health crises in modern history, compelling researchers to explore innovative ways to efficiently collect public health data in a timely manner. Social media platforms have been explored as a research recruitment tool in other settings; however, their feasibility for collecting representative survey data during infectious disease epidemics remain unexplored. OBJECTIVES: This study has two aims 1) describe the methodology used to recruit a nationwide sample of adults residing in the United States (U.S.) to participate in a survey on COVID-19 knowledge, beliefs, and practices, and 2) outline the preliminary findings related to recruitment, challenges using social media as a recruitment platform, and strategies used to address these challenges. METHODS: An original web-based survey informed by evidence from past literature and validated scales was developed. A Facebook advertisement campaign was used to disseminate the link to an online Qualtrics survey between March 20-30, 2020. Two supplementary male-only and racial minority- targeted advertisements were created on the sixth and tenth day of recruitment, respectively, to address issues of disproportionate female- and White-oriented gender- and ethnic-skewing observed in the advertisement's reach and response trends. RESULTS: In total, 6602 participant responses were recorded with representation from all U.S. 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. The advertisements cumulatively reached 236,017 individuals and resulted in 9609 clicks (4.07% reach). Total cost of the advertisement was $906, resulting in costs of $0.09 per click and $0.18 per full response (completed surveys). Implementation of the male-only advertisement improved the cumulative percentage of male respondents from approximately 20 to 40%. CONCLUSIONS: The social media advertisement campaign was an effective and efficient strategy to collect large scale, nationwide data on COVID-19 within a short time period. Although the proportion of men who completed the survey was lower than those who didn't, interventions to increase male responses and enhance representativeness were successful. These findings can inform future research on the use of social media recruitment for the rapid collection of survey data related to rapidly evolving health crises, such as COVID-19.