Effects of aerobic and strength training on depression, anxiety, and health self-perception levels during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed at comparing the depression and anxiety levels, and health self-perception during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic among subjects who practice aerobic, strength, and mixed (aerobic and strength) exercises and nonsports participants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included 304 Brazilians of both sexes in this cross-sectional study. All participants were recruited through online advertisement and completed a self-administered questionnaire regarding the personal information, level of restriction adopted, physical activity, and mood state screening (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and General Anxiety Disorder-7). We divided the participants into four groups: strength sports group (CrossFit or strength training), aerobic/endurance sports groups (running, cycling, triathlon, or swimming), mixed sports groups (individuals who practice endurance and strength sports), and nonsports group. RESULTS: The Kruskal-Wallis test showed a significant effect of the group on the depression and anxiety levels. Meanwhile, the post-hoc comparisons showed a significantly lower depression level in the mixed and aerobic sports groups than in the strength sports and nonsports groups, and a significantly lower anxiety level in the mixed and aerobic sports groups than in the nonsports group. Furthermore, participants in the mixed, strength, and aerobic sports groups presented a better level of health self-assessment than the nonsports group, and those in the mixed sports group had a better level of health self-assessment than the strength or aerobic sports groups. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals practicing aerobic exercises present lower depression and anxiety levels than those practicing strength training and are inactive. However, individuals who practice strength exercises and aerobics have the best levels of health perception.

SARS-CoV-2 Ig G among Healthcare Workers and the General Population

It is assumed that healthcare workers are at the highest risk to be infected by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, few data from healthcare workers who do not primarily take care of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection support this assumption. We investigated the prevalence of immunoglobulin G (Ig G) against SARS-CoV-2 among healthcare workers who do not primarily take care of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection and the general population in a well-defined geographical area. The first part of the study was conducted in May 2020 in Val Mesolcina (Southern Switzerland), a valley with ~8000 inhabitants. All healthcare workers were invited. All participants (n = 488) of the Swiss Longitudinal Cohort Study (SWICOS), a cohort representative of the general population, were also invited. Circulating Ig G against spike protein subunit 1 of SARS-CoV-2 were tested in each subject. Subjects with positive Ig G were tested again after 6 months. The condition of being a healthcare worker, rather than a part of the general population, was tested as a predictor of seroprevalence positivity by both simple and multiple (adjusted for age and sex) logistic regression. Eleven (2.6%) of the 423 SWICOS participants and 46 (16%) out of 289 healthcare workers were positive for antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. The seroprevalence OR was 7.01 (95% CI: 3.53-15.47) for healthcare workers as compared to SWICOS participants. After adjusting for age and gender, the seroprevalence OR was 5.13 (95% CI: 2.54-10.40). About three quarters of the subjects in the SWICOS (73%) and in healthcare (79%) group with a previous positive serology still presented positive Ig G against the SARS-CoV-2 after 6 months. The present seroprevalence data point out that the SARS-CoV-2 infection is seven times higher among healthcare workers than in the general population of Val Mesolcina. Efforts to effectively protect all the healthcare personnel are needed.