Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Aust N Z J Psychiatry ; : 48674231175618, 2023 Jun 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20239050

ABSTRACT

AIMS: We assessed the mental health effects of Australia's 2019-2020 bushfires 12-18 months later, predicting psychological distress and positive psychological outcomes from bushfire exposure and a range of demographic variables, and seeking insights to enhance disaster preparedness and resilience planning for different profiles of people. METHODS: We surveyed 3083 bushfire-affected and non-affected Australian residents about their experiences of bushfire, COVID-19, psychological distress (depression, anxiety, stress, post-traumatic stress disorder) and positive psychological outcomes (resilient coping, wellbeing). RESULTS: We found high rates of distress across all participants, exacerbated by severity of bushfire exposure. For people who were bushfire-affected, being older, having less financial stress, and having no or fewer pre-existing mental disorders predicted both lower distress and higher positive outcomes. Being male or having less income loss also predicted positive outcomes. Severity of exposure, higher education and higher COVID-19-related stressors predicted both higher distress and higher positive outcomes. Pre-existing physical health diagnosis and previous bushfire experience did not significantly predict distress or positive outcomes. RECOMMENDATIONS: To promote disaster resilience, we recommend investment in mental health, particularly for younger adults and for those in rural and remote areas. We also recommend investment in mechanisms to protect against financial distress and the development of a broader definition of bushfire-related impacts than is currently used to capture brushfires' far-reaching effects.

2.
Social & Personality Psychology Compass ; : 1, 2023.
Article in English | Academic Search Complete | ID: covidwho-2313401

ABSTRACT

COVID‐19 vaccination is widely regarded as an individual decision, resting upon individual characteristics and demographic factors. In this research, we provide evidence that psychological group membership, and more precisely, social cohesion—a multidimensional concept that encompasses one's sense of connectedness to, and interrelations within, a group—can help us understand COVID‐19 vaccination intentions (Study 1) and uptake (Study 2). Study 1 is a repeated‐measures study with a representative sample of 3026 Australians. We found evidence that social cohesion can be conceptualised as a multidimensional structure;moreover, social cohesion at Wave 1 (early in the COVID‐19) predicted greater vaccination intention and lower perceived risk of vaccination at Wave 2 (4 months later). In Study 2 (a cross‐sectional study, N = 499), the multidimensional structure of social cohesion was associated with greater uptake of vaccine doses (in addition to willingness to receive further doses and perceived risk of the vaccine). These relations were found after controlling for a series of demographic (i.e., sex, age, income), health‐related factors (i.e., subjective health;perceived risk;having been diagnosed with COVID‐19), and individual differences (political orientation, social dominance orientation, individualism). These results demonstrate the need to go beyond individual factors when it comes to behaviours that protect groups, and particularly when examining COVID‐19 vaccination—one of the most important ways of slowing the spread of the virus. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Social & Personality Psychology Compass is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

3.
BMJ Support Palliat Care ; 2021 Mar 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2289621

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Natural disasters are becoming more frequent and severe, and place additional strains on end-of-life care services and users. Although end-of-life and palliative care are considered essential components of disaster planning and response, there are gaps in understandings about their real-life application, and how natural disasters impact end-of-life care. OBJECTIVE: To synthesise existing evidence of the impacts of natural disasters (eg, bushfires, communicable pandemics, etc) on end-of-life care. METHODS: A systematic review with a narrative synthesis was undertaken. The review was registered on PROSPERO (registration: CRD42020176319). PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, Science Direct and Web of Science were searched for studies published in English between 2003 and 2020, with findings explicitly mentioning end-of-life care impacts in relation to a natural disaster. Articles were appraised for quality using a JBI-QARI tool. RESULTS: Thirty-six empirical studies met the inclusion criteria and quality assessment. Findings were synthesised into three key themes: impacts on service provision, impacts on service providers and impacts on service users. This review demonstrates that natural disasters impact profoundly on end-of-life care, representing a stark departure from a palliative care approach. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical practitioners, policy makers and researchers must continue to collaborate for viable solutions to achieve universal access to compassionate and respectful end-of-life care, during natural disasters. Using models, policies and practices already developed in palliative care, involving those most impacted in disaster planning and anticipating barriers, such as resource shortages, enables development of end-of-life care policies and practices that can be rapidly implemented during natural disasters.

4.
BMC Palliat Care ; 22(1): 21, 2023 Mar 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2265946

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Natural disasters are becoming more frequent and severe and profoundly impact the end-of-life care experience, including service provision. There is a paucity of research examining healthcare workers' experiences in responding to care demands when disasters strike. This research aimed to fill this gap by exploring end-of-life care providers' perceptions of the impact of natural disasters on end-of-life care. METHODS: Between Feb 2021-June 2021 ten in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with healthcare professionals providing end-of-life care during recent natural disasters, COVID-19, and/or fires and floods. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed using a hybrid inductive and deductive thematic approach. RESULTS: The overarching theme from the healthcare workers' accounts was of being unable to provide effective compassionate and quality care - "I can't make all this work." They spoke of the considerable burdens the system imposed on them, of being overextended and overwhelmed, having their roles overturned, and losing the human element of care for those at end-of-life. CONCLUSION: There is urgent need to pioneer effective solutions to minimise the distress of healthcare professionals in delivering end-of-life care in disaster contexts, and to improve the experience of those dying.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hospice Care , Natural Disasters , Terminal Care , Humans , Qualitative Research , Health Personnel
5.
Aust N Z J Public Health ; 46(3): 304-306, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1583719

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: We assessed differences between Australians' perceptions of their own compliance with coronavirus restrictions and their perceptions of community compliance. METHODS: We surveyed a national quota sample of 1,691 Australians in August and September 2020. Participants reported their level of compliance with coronavirus restrictions and estimated compliance from others in their state/territory. RESULTS: Overwhelmingly, most people reported complying with restrictions. They believed their fellow community members were much less compliant. Age and other demographics were only weakly associated with self-reported compliance and perceptions of others' compliance. CONCLUSIONS: The results are consistent with prevalent cognitive biases, including the tendency to believe one is better-than-average, and to more easily recall instances of deviances from social norms. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: We recommend public health messaging avoids amplifying instances of social transgressions of coronavirus restrictions. Instead, the widespread nature of social compliance with restrictions across the country should be emphasised.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Australia , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Self Report , Surveys and Questionnaires
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL