Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Front Psychol ; 14: 1116566, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2321765

ABSTRACT

Objectives: We aimed to (1) describe the course of the emotional burden (i.e., depression, anxiety, and stress) in a general population sample during the coronavirus pandemic in 2020 and 2021 and (2) explore the association between emotional burden and a serologically proven infection with SARS-CoV-2. Study design: This longitudinal study involved a sample of community-dwelling persons aged ≥14 years from the general population of South Tyrol (Province of Bolzano-Bozen, Northern Italy). Data were collected at two stages over a 1-year period in 2020 and 2021. Methods: Persons were invited to participate in a survey on socio-demographic, health-related and psychosocial variables (e.g., age, chronic diseases, Depression Anxiety Stress Scale, DASS-21), as well as in the serological testing for of SARS-CoV-2-specific immunoglobulins. Results: In 2020, 855 (23.8%) out of 3,600 persons participated; in 2021, 305 (35.7%) out of 855 were tested again. We observed a statistically significant decrease in mean DASS-21 scores for depression, stress, and total scores between 2020 and 2021, yet not for anxiety. Persons with a confirmed SARS-CoV-2-infection between the first and second data collection exhibited increased emotional burden compared to those without SARS-CoV-2-infection. The odds of participants with a self-reported diagnosis of mental disorder for future infection with SARS-CoV-2 was almost four times higher than that of participants without mental disorders (OR:3.75; 95%CI:1.79-7.83). Conclusion: Our findings support to the hypothesis of a psycho-neuroendocrine-immune interplay in COVID-19. Further research is necessary to explore the mechanisms underlying the interplay between mental health and SARS-CoV-2 infections.

2.
Business and Society Review ; 127(Suppl 1):193-222, 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1870806

ABSTRACT

The COVID‐19 crisis forced organizations to radically rethink how to lead their workforce. Facing an unprecedented drop in consumer demand, business leaders struggled to balance staying financially solvent with the responsibility of supporting their employees during the crisis. Early surveys found many employees did not perceive their organizations communicated a clear plan of action;others questioned whether their employers cared about workers' health and safety. While researchers have examined perceived organizational support, studies are only now starting to examine workers' perceived support during a pandemic. The study used a mixed method design to collect quantitative and qualitative data from 949 workers during the COVID‐19 crisis. Results revealed employees working outside the home and furloughed workers perceived lower quality support than employees working remotely. While some employees recommended changes to create a safer work environment, others suggested more frequent communication and/or reassurance about job security/pay. The findings suggest leaders should recognize the nature of support workers need varies. Leaders should customize support to meet the needs of specific groups, especially essential employees working outside the home and furloughed workers. Beyond the pandemic, the results suggest organizational leaders should reexamine their approach to employee support to better prepare for future crises.

3.
Epidemiol Infect ; 149: e194, 2021 08 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1467027

ABSTRACT

Estimating the spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection in communities is critical. We surveyed 2244 stratified random sample community members of the Gardena valley, a winter touristic area, amidst the first expansion phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe. We measured agreement between Diasorin and Abbott serum bioassay outputs and the Abbott optimal discriminant threshold of serum neutralisation titres with recursive receiver operating characteristic curve. We analytically adjusted serum antibody tests for unbiased seroprevalence estimate and analysed the determinants of infection with non-response weighted multiple logistic regression. SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was 26.9% (95% CI 25.2-28.6) by June 2020. The bioassays had a modest agreement with each other. At a lower threshold than the manufacturer's recommended level, the Abbott assay reflected greater discrimination of serum neutralisation capacity. Seropositivity was associated with place and economic activity, not with sex or age. Symptoms like fever and weakness were age-dependent. SARS-CoV-2 mitigation strategies should account for context in high prevalence areas.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19 Serological Testing , Female , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Neutralization Tests , Prevalence , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Sensitivity and Specificity , Seroepidemiologic Studies
4.
Pathog Glob Health ; 116(2): 128-136, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1462228

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has been threatening the healthcare and socioeconomic systems of entire nations. While population-based surveys to assess the distribution of SARS-CoV-2 infection have become a priority, pre-existing longitudinal studies are ideally suited to assess the determinants of COVID-19 onset and severity.The Cooperative Health Research In South Tyrol (CHRIS) study completed the baseline recruitment of 13,393 adults from the Venosta/Vinschgau rural district in 2018, collecting extensive phenotypic and biomarker data, metabolomic data, densely imputed genotype and whole-exome sequencing data.Based on CHRIS, we designed a prospective study, called CHRIS COVID-19, aimed at: 1) estimating the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections; 2) screening for and investigating the determinants of incident infection among CHRIS participants and their household members; 3) monitoring the immune response of infected participants prospectively.An online screening questionnaire was sent to all CHRIS participants and their household members. A random sample of 1450 participants representative of the district population was invited to assess active (nasopharyngeal swab) or past (serum antibody test) infections. We prospectively invited for complete SARS-CoV-2 testing all questionnaire completers gauged as possible cases of past infection and their household members. In positive tested individuals, antibody response is monitored quarterly for one year. Untested and negative participants receive the screening questionnaire every four weeks until gauged as possible incident cases or till the study end.Originated from a collaboration between researchers and community stakeholders, the CHRIS COVID-19 study aims at generating knowledge about the epidemiological, molecular, and genetic characterization of COVID-19 and its long-term sequelae.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/genetics
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL