LeadinCare: A Qualitative Informed Digital Training Platform Development to Increase Physicians' Soft Communication Skills After COVID-19.

The post-COVID-19 pandemic era has placed new demands on physicians. One of these demands is the need to use targeted knowledge and soft communication skills, to address the psychosocial problems (e.g. vaccine hesitancy, fears) of individuals with Chronic Physical Illnesses (CPIs). Focusing on training physicians in targeted soft communication skills can help health care systems to address psychosocial-type problems. Yet, such training programs are rarely implemented, effectively.This study aimed to (a) understand physicians' implementation challenges when using soft communication skills during the COVID-19 pandemic; (b) identify beliefs, barriers, and facilitators that can influence physicians' behaviours to use soft communication skills; and (c) inform the content of the LeadinCare; a new digital training platform, designed to improve physicians' soft communication skills, by leveraging the TDF Theoretical Domain Framework (TDF).We conducted 14 in-depth semi-structured interviews with physicians in Greece, supporting non-COVID-19 cases with CPIs. We analyzed their data using inductive and deductive approaches.Physicians highlighted time, inability to see patients in person, absence of space for non-COVID-19 cases, and poor organizational procedures as barriers to using soft communication skills. Five TDF domains (beliefs) were identified as the most salient to inform the LeadinCare platform: (1) practical and well-organized knowledge; (2) skills that support patients and their relatives; (3) physicians' beliefs about capabilities to use the skills; (4) beliefs about consequences of using the skills (job satisfaction); and (5) the use of digital, interactive, and on-demand platforms (environmental context & resources). We mapped the domains in six narrative-based practices that informed the content of the LeadinCare.Physicians need skills that go beyond talking and towards cultivating resilience and flexibility.

The impact of government actions and risk perception on the promotion of self-protective behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: We aim to understand the factors that drive citizens of different countries to adhere to recommended self-protective behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Survey data was obtained through the COVID-19 Impact project. We selected countries that presented a sufficiently complete time series and a statistically relevant sample for running the analysis: Cyprus, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Latvia, Spain, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America. To identify country-specific differences in self-protective behaviors, we used previous evidence and change-point detection analysis to establish variations across participating countries whose effect was then assessed by means of interrupted series analysis. RESULTS: A high level of compliance with health and governmental authorities' recommendations were generally observed in all included countries. The level of stress decreased near the period when countries such as Cyprus, Greece or the United Kingdom relaxed their prevention behavior recommendations. However, this relaxation of behaviors did not occur in countries such as Germany, Ireland, or the United States. As observed in the change-point detection analysis, when the daily number of recorded COVID-19 cases decreased, people relaxed their protective behaviors (Cyprus, Greece, Ireland), although the opposite trend was observed in Switzerland. DISCUSSION: COVID-19 self-protective behaviors were heterogeneous across countries examined. Our findings show that there is probably no single winning strategy for exiting future health crises, as similar interventions, aimed to promote self-protective behaviors, may be received differently depending on the specific population groups and on the particular geographical context in which they are implemented.

Predictors of changing patterns of adherence to containment measures during the early stage of COVID-19 pandemic: an international longitudinal study.

BACKGROUND: Identifying common factors that affect public adherence to COVID-19 containment measures can directly inform the development of official public health communication strategies. The present international longitudinal study aimed to examine whether prosociality, together with other theoretically derived motivating factors (self-efficacy, perceived susceptibility and severity of COVID-19, perceived social support) predict the change in adherence to COVID-19 containment strategies. METHOD: In wave 1 of data collection, adults from eight geographical regions completed online surveys beginning in April 2020, and wave 2 began in June and ended in September 2020. Hypothesized predictors included prosociality, self-efficacy in following COVID-19 containment measures, perceived susceptibility to COVID-19, perceived severity of COVID-19 and perceived social support. Baseline covariates included age, sex, history of COVID-19 infection and geographical regions. Participants who reported adhering to specific containment measures, including physical distancing, avoidance of non-essential travel and hand hygiene, were classified as adherence. The dependent variable was the category of adherence, which was constructed based on changes in adherence across the survey period and included four categories: non-adherence, less adherence, greater adherence and sustained adherence (which was designated as the reference category). RESULTS: In total, 2189 adult participants (82% female, 57.2% aged 31-59 years) from East Asia (217 [9.7%]), West Asia (246 [11.2%]), North and South America (131 [6.0%]), Northern Europe (600 [27.4%]), Western Europe (322 [14.7%]), Southern Europe (433 [19.8%]), Eastern Europe (148 [6.8%]) and other regions (96 [4.4%]) were analyzed. Adjusted multinomial logistic regression analyses showed that prosociality, self-efficacy, perceived susceptibility and severity of COVID-19 were significant factors affecting adherence. Participants with greater self-efficacy at wave 1 were less likely to become non-adherence at wave 2 by 26% (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.74; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.77; P < .001), while those with greater prosociality at wave 1 were less likely to become less adherence at wave 2 by 23% (aOR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.79; P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that in addition to emphasizing the potential severity of COVID-19 and the potential susceptibility to contact with the virus, fostering self-efficacy in following containment strategies and prosociality appears to be a viable public health education or communication strategy to combat COVID-19.

Psychologists' experiences who managed waitlists in mental-health services during the COVID-19 lockdown: A mixed-method study

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic increased the demand for mental-health services worldwide. Consequently, it also increased the length of the waitlists for mental-health services, putting a strain on adult mental-health services (AMHS) and the healthcare professionals dealing with these lists. There is little research about how psychologists managed waitlist practices, e.g., scheduling screening appointments, determining clients' availability in an offered appointment, providing evidence-based bibliotherapy, or using priority waiting scales. It remains unclear what their experiences were with these practices and how effective these practices were during the pandemic. Method: The current convergent, concurrent mixed-method study investigated waitlist-management practices, synthesizing quantitative and qualitative data from an online survey (n = 20 participants) applied in two local AMHS in Ireland. Results: The most common practices used by psychologists were opt-in systems, maintaining regular contact with clients, informing them about the waiting time, and providing evidence-based bibliotherapy. Screening was the least-used practice. The qualitative analysis highlights the emotional burden psychologists experienced from the use of waitlist practices, particularly when they had to inform the client of the waiting time or put a client back onto a waitlist. Discussion: Psychologists reported a lack of resources and increases in administrative workload as barriers to implementing practices. Managerial, organizational, and policy-based recommendations are proposed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Illness Perceptions of COVID-19 in Europe: Predictors, Impacts and Temporal Evolution.

Objective: Illness perceptions (IP) are important predictors of emotional and behavioral responses in many diseases. The current study aims to investigate the COVID-19-related IP throughout Europe. The specific goals are to understand the temporal development, identify predictors (within demographics and contact with COVID-19) and examine the impacts of IP on perceived stress and preventive behaviors. Methods: This was a time-series-cross-section study of 7,032 participants from 16 European countries using multilevel modeling from April to June 2020. IP were measured with the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire. Temporal patterns were observed considering the date of participation and the date recoded to account the epidemiological evolution of each country. The outcomes considered were perceived stress and COVID-19 preventive behaviors. Results: There were significant trends, over time, for several IP, suggesting a small decrease in negativity in the perception of COVID-19 in the community. Age, gender, and education level related to some, but not all, IP. Considering the self-regulation model, perceptions consistently predicted general stress and were less consistently related to preventive behaviors. Country showed no effect in the predictive model, suggesting that national differences may have little relevance for IP, in this context. Conclusion: The present study provides a comprehensive picture of COVID-19 IP in Europe in an early stage of the pandemic. The results shed light on the process of IP formation with implications for health-related outcomes and their evolution.

Psychologists’ Experiences Who Managed Waitlists in Mental-Health Services During the COVID-19 Lockdown

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic increased the demand for mental-health services worldwide. Consequently, it also increased the length of the waitlists for mental-health services, putting a strain on adult mental-health services (AMHS) and the healthcare professionals dealing with these lists. There is little research about how psychologists managed waitlist practices, e.g., scheduling screening appointments, determining clients' availability in an offered appointment, providing evidence-based bibliotherapy, or using priority waiting scales. It remains unclear what their experiences were with these practices and how effective these practices were during the pandemic. Method: The current convergent, concurrent mixed-method study investigated waitlist-management practices, synthesizing quantitative and qualitative data from an online survey (n = 20 participants) applied in two local AMHS in Ireland. Results: The most common practices used by psychologists were opt-in systems, maintaining regular contact with clients, informing them about the waiting time, and providing evidence-based bibliotherapy. Screening was the least-used practice. The qualitative analysis highlights the emotional burden psychologists experienced from the use of waitlist practices, particularly when they had to inform the client of the waiting time or put a client back onto a waitlist. Discussion: Psychologists reported a lack of resources and increases in administrative workload as barriers to implementing practices. Managerial, organizational, and policy-based recommendations are proposed.

To Help or Not to Help? Prosocial Behavior, Its Association With Well-Being, and Predictors of Prosocial Behavior During the Coronavirus Disease Pandemic.

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic fundamentally disrupted humans' social life and behavior. Public health measures may have inadvertently impacted how people care for each other. This study investigated prosocial behavior, its association well-being, and predictors of prosocial behavior during the first COVID-19 pandemic lockdown and sought to understand whether region-specific differences exist. Participants (N = 9,496) from eight regions clustering multiple countries around the world responded to a cross-sectional online-survey investigating the psychological consequences of the first upsurge of lockdowns in spring 2020. Prosocial behavior was reported to occur frequently. Multiple regression analyses showed that prosocial behavior was associated with better well-being consistently across regions. With regard to predictors of prosocial behavior, high levels of perceived social support were most strongly associated with prosocial behavior, followed by high levels of perceived stress, positive affect and psychological flexibility. Sociodemographic and psychosocial predictors of prosocial behavior were similar across regions.

Mental Health and Adherence to COVID-19 Protective Behaviors among Cancer Patients during the COVID-19 Pandemic: An International, Multinational Cross-Sectional Study.

A population-based cross-sectional study was conducted during the first COVID-19 wave, to examine the impact of COVID-19 on mental health using an anonymous online survey, enrolling 9565 individuals in 78 countries. The current sub-study examined the impact of the pandemic and the associated lockdown measures on the mental health, and protective behaviors of cancer patients in comparison to non-cancer participants. Furthermore, 264 participants from 30 different countries reported being cancer patients. The median age was 51.5 years, 79.9% were female, and 28% had breast cancer. Cancer participants reported higher self-efficacy to follow recommended national guidelines regarding COVID-19 protective behaviors compared to non-cancer participants (p < 0.01). They were less stressed (p < 0.01), more psychologically flexible (p < 0.01), and had higher levels of positive affect compared to non-cancer participants. Amongst cancer participants, the majority (80.3%) reported COVID-19, not their cancer, as their priority during the first wave of the pandemic and females reported higher levels of stress compared to males. In conclusion, cancer participants appeared to have handled the unpredictable nature of the first wave of the pandemic efficiently, with a positive attitude towards an unknown and otherwise frightening situation. Larger, cancer population specific and longitudinal studies are warranted to ensure adequate medical and psychological care for cancer patients.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on mental health: An international study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic triggered vast governmental lockdowns. The impact of these lockdowns on mental health is inadequately understood. On the one hand such drastic changes in daily routines could be detrimental to mental health. On the other hand, it might not be experienced negatively, especially because the entire population was affected. METHODS: The aim of this study was to determine mental health outcomes during pandemic induced lockdowns and to examine known predictors of mental health outcomes. We therefore surveyed n = 9,565 people from 78 countries and 18 languages. Outcomes assessed were stress, depression, affect, and wellbeing. Predictors included country, sociodemographic factors, lockdown characteristics, social factors, and psychological factors. RESULTS: Results indicated that on average about 10% of the sample was languishing from low levels of mental health and about 50% had only moderate mental health. Importantly, three consistent predictors of mental health emerged: social support, education level, and psychologically flexible (vs. rigid) responding. Poorer outcomes were most strongly predicted by a worsening of finances and not having access to basic supplies. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that on whole, respondents were moderately mentally healthy at the time of a population-wide lockdown. The highest level of mental health difficulties were found in approximately 10% of the population. Findings suggest that public health initiatives should target people without social support and those whose finances worsen as a result of the lockdown. Interventions that promote psychological flexibility may mitigate the impact of the pandemic.