Determinants of social distancing adherence.

Introduction: Governments and public health authorities across many jurisdictions implemented social (physical) distancing measures to contain the spread of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Adherence to these measures is variable and likely influenced by various factors. This study aimed to 1) identify the individual sociodemographic, COVID-19 and social distancing related, and psychological determinants of social distancing adherence, and 2) explore regional differences in social distancing adherence in the United States (U.S.) and English-speaking Canada based on each region's discrepant response to social distancing restrictions. Methods: A web-based repeated cross-sectional survey was conducted in 4,942 English-speaking participants from the four most populous U.S. states, specifically New York, California, Texas, and Florida, and Canada (www.covid19-database.com). The study was conducted at two timepoints, from May 1 to 5, 2020 (n = 1,019, Canadian participants only) and from July 6 to 10, 2020 (n = 3,923). Separate univariate models were computed for individual sociodemographic, COVID-19 and social distancing related, and psychological determinants of social distancing adherence. To determine the total variance explained, a univariate analysis including all of the determinants was performed. Regional differences in social distancing were compared between the four U.S. states and Canada, and between the U.S. as a whole and Canada. Results: Adherence to social distancing was higher in May (mean = 4.4/5.0±0.7) compared to July (mean = 4.3/5.0±0.7) [t (4940) = 6.96, p < 0.001], likely a reflection of relaxing restrictions. There were no regional differences in adherence. Sociodemographic, COVID-19 and social distancing related, and psychological determinants explained 10, 36, and 23% of the variance of social distancing adherence, respectively. Higher perceived seriousness of COVID-19 [ß (SE) = 0.39 (0.01), p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.22], lower risk propensity [ß (SE) = -0.15 (0.01), p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.06], germ aversion [ß (SE) = 0.12 (0.01), p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.03], age [ß (SE) = 0.01 (0.00), p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.02], and greater social support [ß (SE) = 0.03 (0.00), p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.02] had the largest effects on social distancing adherence. Conclusion: Public service initiatives to emphasize the serious consequences of infection and targeted interventions toward certain sociodemographic groups, such as younger adults and vulnerable individuals in greater need of social support, may help enhance the public's adherence to social distancing measures during subsequent waves of COVID-19 and future pandemics.

Determinants of social distancing adherence

Introduction Governments and public health authorities across many jurisdictions implemented social (physical) distancing measures to contain the spread of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Adherence to these measures is variable and likely influenced by various factors. This study aimed to 1) identify the individual sociodemographic, COVID-19 and social distancing related, and psychological determinants of social distancing adherence, and 2) explore regional differences in social distancing adherence in the United States (U.S.) and English-speaking Canada based on each region's discrepant response to social distancing restrictions. Methods A web-based repeated cross-sectional survey was conducted in 4,942 English-speaking participants from the four most populous U.S. states, specifically New York, California, Texas, and Florida, and Canada (www.covid19-database.com). The study was conducted at two timepoints, from May 1 to 5, 2020 (n = 1,019, Canadian participants only) and from July 6 to 10, 2020 (n = 3,923). Separate univariate models were computed for individual sociodemographic, COVID-19 and social distancing related, and psychological determinants of social distancing adherence. To determine the total variance explained, a univariate analysis including all of the determinants was performed. Regional differences in social distancing were compared between the four U.S. states and Canada, and between the U.S. as a whole and Canada. Results Adherence to social distancing was higher in May (mean = 4.4/5.0±0.7) compared to July (mean = 4.3/5.0±0.7) [t(4940) = 6.96, p < 0.001], likely a reflection of relaxing restrictions. There were no regional differences in adherence. Sociodemographic, COVID-19 and social distancing related, and psychological determinants explained 10, 36, and 23% of the variance of social distancing adherence, respectively. Higher perceived seriousness of COVID-19 [β (SE) = 0.39 (0.01), p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.22], lower risk propensity [β (SE) = −0.15 (0.01), p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.06], germ aversion [β (SE) = 0.12 (0.01), p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.03], age [β (SE) = 0.01 (0.00), p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.02], and greater social support [β (SE) = 0.03 (0.00), p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.02] had the largest effects on social distancing adherence. Conclusion Public service initiatives to emphasize the serious consequences of infection and targeted interventions toward certain sociodemographic groups, such as younger adults and vulnerable individuals in greater need of social support, may help enhance the public's adherence to social distancing measures during subsequent waves of COVID-19 and future pandemics.

COVID-19 behavior determinants dataset.

The COVID-19 Behavior Determinants Database (http://covid19-database.com) is a research project that examined the sociodemographic and psychological determinants of COVID-19 related attitudes and behaviors. It is a comprehensive web-based survey that was administered to adults ages 18 or older (total n=8070) from the United States of America (n = 5326), including the four most populous states, specifically New York, California, Florida, and Texas, and Canada (n = 2744), including all provinces, except Quebec. The survey was collected at three timepoints, May 2020 (n=1019), July 2020 (n=4027), and March 2021 (n=3024). Participants provided detailed sociodemographic information and completed a battery of psychological assessments. Participants also provided information about prior testing for COVID-19 and perceived seriousness of COVID-19 and the need for current physical (social) distancing restrictions. The database is helpful to researchers and public health policy decision-makers who are interested in investigating and identifying the determinants of COVID-19 related attitudes and behaviors in North America.

The new frontline: exploring the links between moral distress, moral resilience and mental health in healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Global health crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, confront healthcare workers (HCW) with increased exposure to potentially morally distressing events. The pandemic has provided an opportunity to explore the links between moral distress, moral resilience, and emergence of mental health symptoms in HCWs. METHODS: A total of 962 Canadian healthcare workers (88.4% female, 44.6 + 12.8 years old) completed an online survey during the first COVID-19 wave in Canada (between April 3rd and September 3rd, 2020). Respondents completed a series of validated scales assessing moral distress, perceived stress, anxiety, and depression symptoms, and moral resilience. Respondents were grouped based on exposure to patients who tested positive for COVID-19. In addition to descriptive statistics and analyses of covariance, multiple linear regression was used to evaluate if moral resilience moderates the association between exposure to morally distressing events and moral distress. Factors associated with moral resilience were also assessed. FINDINGS: Respondents working with patients with COVID-19 showed significantly more severe moral distress, anxiety, and depression symptoms (F > 5.5, p < .020), and a higher proportion screened positive for mental disorders (Chi-squared > 9.1, p = .002), compared to healthcare workers who were not. Moral resilience moderated the relationship between exposure to potentially morally distressing events and moral distress (p < .001); compared to those with higher moral resilience, the subgroup with the lowest moral resilience had a steeper cross-sectional worsening in moral distress as the frequency of potentially morally distressing events increased. Moral resilience also correlated with lower stress, anxiety, and depression symptoms (r > .27, p < .001). Factors independently associated with stronger moral resilience included: being male, older age, no mental disorder diagnosis, sleeping more, and higher support from employers and colleagues (B [0.02, |-0.26|]. INTERPRETATION: Elevated moral distress and mental health symptoms in healthcare workers facing a global crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic call for the development of interventions promoting moral resilience as a protective measure against moral adversities.

Vaccine Hesitancy Is a Barrier to Achieving Equitable Herd Immunity Among Racial Minorities

Introduction: Racial minority groups have been disproportionately affected by the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Vaccine hesitancy may be a major barrier to achieving equitable herd immunity and must be addressed to reduce the excess morbidity and mortality of COVID-19 in disproportionately affected communities. This study aimed to determine if COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, and its factors vaccine complacency and confidence, are more prominent among disproportionately affected racial minority groups. Methods:We collected data from participants aged 18 years or older from the four most populous U.S. states, including New York, California, Florida, and Texas, and Canada. Data were collected using a web-based survey platform. Data are available at http://www.covid19-database.com. Results:Data from 4,434 participants were included [mean (SD) age = 48.7 (17.2) and 50.4% women]. Vaccine hesitancy was higher in Black, Indigenous (Native American and Indigenous People of Canada, including First Nations, Inuit and Métis), and Latinx compared to White participants, while no difference was found between East Asian and White participants. The group differences in vaccine hesitancy for Indigenous and Black compared to White participants remained after controlling for sociodemographic factors. Determinants of vaccine complacency were equivalent between disproportionately affected racial groups and white participants. Vaccine confidence (i.e., trust in vaccine benefit) was generally lower in all racial groups compared to White participants. Differences in vaccine mistrust comparing Black and East Asian to White participants remained after controlling for sociodemographic factors. Discussion:Disproportionately affected racial minorities may have higher vaccine hesitancy and lower confidence in COVID-19 vaccines. Public health and other relevant government services should address vaccine hesitancy among racial minorities using a culturally sensitive, community-centered approach to attain equitable herd immunity.

Stuck in a lockdown: Dreams, bad dreams, nightmares, and their relationship to stress, depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: An upsurge in dream and nightmare frequency has been noted since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic and research shows increases in levels of stress, depression and anxiety during this time. Growing evidence suggests that dream content has a bi-directional relationship with psychopathology, and that dreams react to new, personally significant and emotional experiences. The first lockdown experience was an acute event, characterized by a combination of several unprecedent factors (new pandemic, threat of disease, global uncertainty, the experience of social isolation and exposure to stressful information) that resulted in a large-scale disruption of life routines. This study aimed at investigating changes in dream, bad dream and nightmare recall; most prevalent dream themes; and the relationship between dreams, bad dreams, nightmares and symptoms of stress, depression and anxiety during the first COVID-19 lockdown (April-May 2020) through a national online survey. METHODS: 968 participants completed an online survey. Dream themes were measured using the Typical Dreams Questionnaire; stress levels were measured by the Cohen's Perceived Stress Scale; symptoms of anxiety were assessed by Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) scale; and symptoms of depression were assessed using the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology. RESULTS: 34% (328) of participants reported increased dream recall during the lockdown. The most common dream themes were centered around the topics of 1) inefficacy (e.g., trying again and again, arriving late), 2) human threat (e.g., being chased, attacked); 3) death; and 4) pandemic imagery (e.g., being separated from loved ones, being sick). Dream, bad dream and nightmare frequency was highest in individuals with moderate to severe stress levels. Frequency of bad dreams, nightmares, and dreams about the pandemic, inefficacy, and death were associated with higher levels of stress, as well as with greater symptoms of depression and anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: Results support theories of dream formation, environmental susceptibility and stress reactivity. Dream content during the lockdown broadly reflected existential concerns and was associated with increased symptoms of mental health indices.

Individual determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

BACKGROUND: Novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy is a barrier to achieving herd immunity, and thus, a prominent public health concern. This study aimed to identify the determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy based on the World Health Organization's '3Cs' model (i.e., confidence, complacency, and convenience) in the United States (U.S.) and Canada. METHODS: Data from 7678 adults ages 18 or older were collected from the four most populous U.S. States, specifically New York, California, Florida, and Texas, and from English-speaking Canada at three timepoints, in May and July 2020, and March 2021 using a web-based survey (www.covid19-database.com). Sociodemographic information was collected, and comprehensive psychological assessments were administered. Univariate analyses were performed to identify the individual determinants of vaccine hesitancy, which were categorized as: 1) vaccine confidence, 2) vaccine complacency, 3) sociodemographic, and 4) other psychological factors. A series of models were computed using these categorizations. RESULTS: Mistrust of vaccine benefit (ß(SE) = 0.67(0.01), p<0.001, partial η2 = 0.26) and lower perceived seriousness of COVID-19 (ß(SE) = 0.68(0.02), p<0.001, partial η2 = 0.12) were the principal determinants of vaccine hesitancy. Right-wing political affiliation (ß(SE) = 0.32(0.02), p<0.001, partial η2 = 0.03), higher risk propensity (ß(SE) = 0.24(0.02), p<0.001, partial η2 = 0.03), and less negative mental health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic (ß(SE) = 0.20(0.01), p<0.001, partial η2 = 0.03) were the main sociodemographic and psychological determinants. Other sociodemographic determinants included younger age, women, race, and employment status. Lack of vaccine confidence and complacency explained 38% and 21% of the variance in vaccine hesitancy, respectively; whereas, sociodemographic and psychological determinants explained 13% and 11% of the variance in vaccine hesitancy, respectively. DISCUSSION: Targeted and tailored public health interventions that enhance the public's confidence in vaccines and emphasize the risk and seriousness of COVID-19 may address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Efforts directed toward specific marginalized and underserved groups may be required to promote vaccine confidence.

Benefits of Digital Health Resources for Substance Use Concerns in Women: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Digital health resources are being increasingly used to support women with substance use concerns. Although empirical research has demonstrated that these resources have promise, the available evidence for their benefit in women requires further investigation. Evidence supports the capacity of interventions that are sex-, gender-, and trauma-informed to improve treatment access and outcomes and to reduce health system challenges and disparities. Indeed, both sex- and gender-specific approaches are critical to improve health and gender equity. Violence and trauma are frequent among those with substance use concerns, but they disproportionately affect those who identify as female or women, further underscoring the need for trauma-informed care as well. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this investigation was to evaluate the evidence supporting the efficacy or effectiveness of online or mobile interventions for risky or harmful substance use in adults who identify as female or women, or who report a history of trauma. METHODS: This scoping review is based on an academic search in MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, Embase, Cochrane Central, and CINAHL, as well as a grey literature search in US and Canadian government and funding agency websites. Of the 7807 records identified, 465 remained following title and abstract screening. Of these, 159 met all eligibility criteria and were reviewed and synthesized. RESULTS: The 159 records reflected 141 distinct studies and 125 distinct interventions. Investigations and the interventions evaluated predominantly focused on alcohol use or general substance use. Evaluated digital health resources included multisession and brief-session interventions, with a wide range of therapeutic elements. Multisession online and mobile interventions exhibited beneficial effects in 86.1% (105/122) of studies. Single-session interventions similarly demonstrated beneficial effects in 64.2% (43/67) of study conditions. Most investigations did not assess gender identity or conduct sex- or gender-based analyses. Only 13 investigations that included trauma were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the overall promise of digital health interventions for substance use concerns, direct or quantitative evidence on the efficacy or effectiveness of interventions in females or women specifically is weak.

Emerging New Psychiatric Symptoms and the Worsening of Pre-existing Mental Disorders during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Canadian Multisite Study: Nouveaux symptômes psychiatriques émergents et détérioration des troubles mentaux préexistants durant la pandémie de la COVID-19: une étude canadienne multisite.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused global disruptions with serious psychological impacts. This study investigated the emergence of new psychiatric symptoms and the worsening of pre-existing mental disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic, identified factors associated with psychological worsening, and assessed changes in mental health service use. METHODS: An online survey was circulated between April 3 and June 23, 2020. Respondents were asked to complete mental health questionnaires based on 2 time referents: currently (i.e., during the outbreak) and in the month preceding the outbreak. A total of 4,294 Canadians between 16 and 99 years of age were subdivided based on the presence of self-reported psychiatric diagnoses. RESULTS: The proportion of respondents without prior psychiatric history who screened positive for generalized anxiety disorder and depression increased by 12% and 29%, respectively, during the outbreak. Occurrences of clinically important worsening in anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation symptoms relative to pre-outbreak estimates were significantly higher in those with psychiatric diagnoses. Furthermore, 15% to 19% of respondents reported increased alcohol or cannabis use. Worse psychological changes relative to pre-outbreak estimate were associated with female sex, younger age, lower income, poorer coping skills, multiple psychiatric comorbidities, previous trauma exposure, deteriorating physical health, poorer family relationships, and lower exercising. Reductions in mental health care were associated with increased suicidal ideation. CONCLUSION: The worsening in mental health symptoms and the decline in access to care call for the urgent development of adapted interventions targeting both new mental disorders and pre-existing psychiatric conditions affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Social, financial and psychological stress during an emerging pandemic: observations from a population survey in the acute phase of COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: The negative impacts of COVID-19 have rippled through every facet of society. Understanding the multidimensional impacts of this pandemic is crucial to identify the most critical needs and to inform targeted interventions. This population survey study aimed to investigate the acute phase of the COVID-19 outbreak in terms of perceived threats and concerns, occupational and financial impacts, social impacts and stress between 3 April and 15 May 2020. METHODS: 6040 participants are included in this report. A multivariate linear regression model was used to identify factors associated with stress changes (as measured by the Cohen's Perceived Stress Scale (PSS)) relative to pre-outbreak retrospective estimates. RESULTS: On average, PSS scores increased from low stress levels before the outbreak to moderate stress levels during the outbreak (p<0.001). The independent factors associated with stress worsening were: having a mental disorder, female sex, having underage children, heavier alcohol consumption, working with the general public, shorter sleep duration, younger age, less time elapsed since the start of the outbreak, lower stress before the outbreak, worse symptoms that could be linked to COVID-19, lower coping skills, worse obsessive-compulsive symptoms related to germs and contamination, personalities loading on extraversion, conscientiousness and neuroticism, left wing political views, worse family relationships and spending less time exercising and doing artistic activities. CONCLUSION: Cross-sectional analyses showed a significant increase from low to moderate stress during the COVID-19 outbreak. Identified modifiable factors associated with increased stress may be informative for intervention development. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04369690; Results.

Profiles of sleep changes during the COVID-19 pandemic: Demographic, behavioural and psychological factors.

This study aimed to evaluate changes in sleep during the COVID-19 outbreak, and used data-driven approaches to identify distinct profiles of changes in sleep-related behaviours. Demographic, behavioural and psychological factors associated with sleep changes were also investigated. An online population survey assessing sleep and mental health was distributed between 3 April and 24 June 2020. Retrospective questions were used to estimate temporal changes from before to during the outbreak. In 5,525 Canadian respondents (67.1% females, 16-95 years old: Mean ± SD = 55.6 ± 16.3 years), wake-up times were significantly delayed relative to pre-outbreak estimates (p < .001, ηp2  = 0.04). Occurrences of clinically meaningful sleep difficulties significantly increased from 36.0% before the outbreak to 50.5% during the outbreak (all p < .001, g ≥ 0.27). Three subgroups with distinct profiles of changes in sleep behaviours were identified: "Reduced Time in Bed", "Delayed Sleep" and "Extended Time in Bed". The "Reduced Time in Bed" and "Delayed Sleep" subgroups had more adverse sleep outcomes and psychological changes during the outbreak. The emergence of new sleep difficulties was independently associated with female sex, chronic illnesses, being employed, family responsibilities, earlier wake-up times, higher stress levels, as well as heavier alcohol use and television exposure. The heterogeneity of sleep changes in response to the pandemic highlights the need for tailored interventions to address sleep problems.