Perceptions and knowledge regarding the COVID-19 pandemic between U.S. and China: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2, a new coronavirus first reported by China on December 31st, 2019, has led to a global health crisis that continues to challenge governments and public health organizations. Understanding COVID-19 knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) is key for informing messaging strategies to contain the pandemic. Cross-national studies (e.g.: comparing China to the U.S.) are needed to better understand how trans-cultural differences may drive differences in pandemic response and behaviors. The goal of the study is to compare knowledge and perceptions of COVID-19 between adults in China and the U.S. These data will provide insight into challenges these nations may face in coordinating pandemic response. METHODS: This is a convergent mixed methods study comparing responses from China and the U.S. to a multinational COVID-19 KAP online survey. The survey included five quantitative constructs and five open-ended questions. Chinese respondents (n = 56) were matched for gender, age, education, perceived social standing, and time of survey completion with a U.S. cohort (n = 57) drawn from 10,620 U.S. RESPONDENTS: Quantitative responses were compared using T-test & Fisher-Exact tests. Inductive thematic analysis was applied to open-ended questions. RESULTS: Both U.S. and Chinese samples had relatively high intention to follow preventive behaviors overall. Differences in intended compliance with a specific recommendation appear to be driven by the different cultural norms in U.S. and China. Both groups expressed trepidation about the speed of COVID-19 vaccine development, driven by concern for safety among Chinese respondents, and concern for efficacy among U.S. RESPONDENTS: The Chinese cohort expressed worries about other countries' passive handling of the pandemic while the U.S. cohort focused on domestic responses from individuals and government. U.S. participants appeared more knowledgeable on some aspects of COVID-19. Different perspectives regarding COVID-19 origins were identified among the two groups. Participants from both samples reported high trust in health professionals and international health organizations. CONCLUSIONS: Mixed methods data from this cross-national analysis suggests sociocultural differences likely influence perceptions and knowledge of COVID-19 and its related public health policies. Discovering and addressing these culturally-based differences and perceptions are essential to coordinate a global pandemic response.

Voices from the Pandemic: A Qualitative Study of Family Experiences and Suggestions regarding the Care of Critically Ill Patients.

Rationale: Intensive care unit (ICU) visitation restrictions during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic have drastically reduced family-engaged care. Understanding the impact of physical distancing on family members of ICU patients is needed to inform future policies. Objectives: To understand the experiences of family members of critically ill patients with COVID-19 when physically distanced from their loved ones and to explore ways clinicians may support them. Methods: This qualitative study of an observational cohort study reports data from 74 family members of ICU patients with COVID-19 at 10 United States hospitals in four states, chosen based on geographic and demographic diversity. Adult family members of patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19 during the early phase of the pandemic (February-June 2020) were invited to participate in a phone interview. Interviews followed a semistructured guide to assess four constructs: illness narrative, stress experiences, communication experiences, and satisfaction with care. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using an inductive approach to thematic analysis. Results: Among 74 interviewees, the mean age was 53.0 years, 55% were white, and 76% were female. Physical distancing contributed to substantial stress and harms (nine themes). Participants described profound suffering and psychological illness, unfavorable perceptions of care, and weakened therapeutic relationship between family members and clinicians. Three communication principles emerged as those most valued by family members: contact, consistency, and compassion (the 3Cs). Family members offered suggestions to guide clinicians faced with communicating with physically distanced families. Conclusions: Visitation restrictions impose substantial psychological harms upon family members of critically ill patients. Derived from the voics of family members, our findings warrant strong consideration when implementing visitation restrictions in the ICU and advocate for investment in infrastructure (including staffing and videoconferencing) to support communication. This study offers family-derived recommendations to operationalize the 3Cs to guide and improve communication in times of physical distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.