COVID-19 Exposure and Family Impact Scales for Adolescents and Young Adults.

OBJECTIVE: To understand the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on adolescents and young adults (AYAs), we adapted the COVID-19 Exposure and Family Impact Scales (CEFIS; Kazak et al., 2021) for AYAs. Here, we report on the development, structure, and psychometric properties of the CEFIS-AYA. METHODS: The CEFIS-AYA was developed by a multidisciplinary, multi-institutional team using a rapid iterative process. Data from 3,912 AYAs from 21 programs at 16 institutions across the United States were collected from May 2020 to April 2021. We examined the underlying structure of the CEFIS-AYA using principal component analysis (PCA), calculated internal consistencies, and explored differences in scores by gender and age. RESULTS: Participants reported exposure to a range of COVID-19-related events (M = 9.08 events, of 28). On the bidirectional 4-point Impact scale, mean item scores were mostly above the midpoint, indicating a slightly negative impact. Kuder-Richardson 20/Cronbach's Alpha was good for Exposure (α = .76) and excellent for Impact (α = .93). PCA identified seven factors for Exposure (Severe COVID-19, Loss of Income, Limited Access to Essentials, COVID-19 Exposure, Disruptions to Activities, Disruptions to Living Conditions, and Designation as an Essential Worker) and five for Impact (Self and Family Relationships, Physical Well-Being, Emotional Well-Being, Social Well-Being, and Distress). Gender and age differences in CEFIS-AYA scores were identified. DISCUSSION: Initial reliability data are strong and support use of the CEFIS-AYA for measuring the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on AYAs in research and clinical care.

Validation of the COVID-19 Exposure and Family Impact Scales.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 Exposure and Family Impact Scales (CEFIS) were developed in Spring 2020 to assess effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on families and caregivers. Initial psychometric properties were promising. The current study examined the factor structure and evaluated convergent and criterion validity of the CEFIS in a new sample. METHODS: In October and November 2020, caregivers (N = 2,531) of youth (0-21 years) scheduled for an ambulatory care visit at Nemours Children's Hospital, Delaware completed the CEFIS and measures of convergent (PROMIS Global Mental Health Scale, Family Assessment Device) and criterion validity (PTSD Checklist-Civilian). Confirmatory factor analysis was used to examine the factor structure of the CEFIS. Bivariate correlations and logistic regression were used to examine convergent and criterion validity. RESULTS: Factor analysis supported the original six- and three-factor structures for the Exposure and Impact scales, respectively. Second-order factor analyses supported the use of Exposure, Impact, and Distress total scores. Higher scores on the CEFIS Exposure, Impact, and Distress scales were associated with increased mental health concerns and poorer family functioning. Higher scores on all CEFIS scales were also associated with greater odds of having clinically significant posttraumatic stress symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The CEFIS is a psychometrically sound measure of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on family and caregiver functioning and may also be useful in identifying families who would benefit from psychological supports.

Impact of Social Determinants and Digital Literacy on Telehealth Acceptance for Pediatric Cardiology Care Delivery during the Early Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether telehealth acceptance by parents of children with heart disease is predicted by sociodemographic and/or by parental digital literacy, and to assess parental perceptions of telehealth usability and reliability. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a single center study comparing telehealth acceptance versus visit cancellation/rescheduling for pediatric cardiology visits during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. All parent/guardians who consented to survey completion received a validated survey assessing their digital literacy. Consenting parents who accepted telehealth received an additional validated survey assessing their perceptions of telehealth usability and reliability. RESULTS: A total of 849 patients originally were scheduled for in-person visits between March 30 and May 8, 2020. Telehealth acceptance was highest among younger, publicly insured, Hispanic patients with primary diagnoses of arrhythmia/palpitations, chest pain, dysautonomia, dyslipidemia and acquired heart disease. Among parents who completed surveys, a determinant of telehealth acceptance was digital literacy. Telehealth was determined to be a usable and reliable means for health care delivery. CONCLUSION: Although the potential for inequitable selection of telehealth due to sociodemographic factors exists, we found that such factors were not a major determinant for pediatric cardiology care within a large, diverse, free-standing pediatric hospital.

COVID-19 Exposure and Family Impact Scales: Factor Structure and Initial Psychometrics.

OBJECTIVE: In response to the rapidly unfolding coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in spring 2020, we developed a caregiver-report measure to understand the extent to which children and families were exposed to events related to COVID-19 and their perceptions of its impact. This article reports on the factor structure and psychometric properties of this measure. METHODS: The COVID-19 Exposure and Family Impact Scales (CEFIS) were developed by a multidisciplinary, multi-institutional team using a rapid iterative process. Data from 1805 caregivers recruited from 28 programs at 15 institutions across the United States were collected from May-September 2020. We examined the underlying structure of the CEFIS using exploratory factor analyses and its internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha). RESULTS: Participants reported a range of COVID-19-related events (M = 8.71 events of 25). On the bidirectional 4-point impact scale, mean scores were mostly above the midpoint, indicating a slightly negative impact. Cronbach's alpha was excellent for Exposure (α = .80) and Impact (α = .92). Factor analysis identified six factors for Exposure (COVID-19 experiences, Access to essentials, Disruptions to living conditions, Loss of income, Family caregiving and activities, and Designation as an essential worker). There were three factors for Impact (Personal well-being, Family interactions, and Distress). DISCUSSION: The CEFIS has strong factors assessing Exposure to events related to COVID-19, and the Impact of these events on families of children in pediatric healthcare. These initial validation data support use of the CEFIS for measuring the effect of the pandemic.