ABSTRACT
Introduction: During the pandemic of new coronavirus infection, some medical students were actively recruited to work with infected patients, which could provoke depression, anxiety, and stress. The concept of baseline beliefs predicts characteristics of individuals' experience of trauma. Objective(s): The study aimed to determine depression, anxiety, and stress levels in medical students and examine their baseline beliefs, as well as the relationship between baseline beliefs and emotional reactions. Method(s): Data were collected in the spring and summer of 2020 using a Google form that we developed. Thirty-seven medical students participated in the study. The WAS-37 questionnaire was used to examine baseline beliefs and the DASS-21 to measure depression, anxiety, and stress. Both questionnaires were adapted for use in Russia. Result(s): We found that 78 % of the respondents had no depression, 86 % had no manifestations of anxiety, and 83 % felt stressfree. The mean values on the "Benevolence in the World" scale (M = 32.3+/-8.0) were within the average normative values, those on the "Justice" scale (M= 19.8+/-5.0) were below them, and those on the "Self-Image" scale (M = 29.6+/-5.9), "Luck" (M = 32.5+/-6.9) and "Controlling Beliefs" (M = 27.3+/-4.1) were above the average normative values. We found only one statistically significant relationship between emotional reactions and baseline beliefs, a negative correlation between depression and luck (rx = -0.360, p < 0.05). Conclusion(s): In pandemic medical students, beliefs about one's luck were associated with lower levels of depression.
ABSTRACT
Aims: COVID-19 may have delayed cancer diagnoses. We compared times from first symptom to presentation, diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer before and during the pandemic, and patient and general practitioner (GP) responses to COVID-19. Method(s): Questionnaires were mailed to Victorian patients with primary lung cancer (n = 218, response 34%) diagnosed within the previous 6-months (Nov 2018-Nov 2020, 89% had surgery, 72% stage I/II). Their GPs were also sent questionnaires (n = 140, response 69%). Fifty-four patients were diagnosed from April 2020 (COVID- 19 period);47 patients and 25 GPs completed COVID-19-specific questionnaires. Interviews were conducted with six patients diagnosed in June/July 2020. Diagnostic route and timeliness of care before and during COVID-19 were compared using Chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests. Content analysis was applied to interview data. Result(s): Routes to diagnosis were similar for those diagnosed before and during COVID-19 (77% and 65% via symptoms to GP, respectively, p = .31). Median time from first symptom to presentation was marginally shorter after COVID-19, 17 versus 23 days (p = .08). Time from presentation to diagnosis and treatment did not differ. DuringCOVID-19, few patients had telehealth for initial appointments (5% GP, 11.5% specialist appointments). Almost all (98%) reported no delays due to COVID-19. Similarly, 79% of GPs reported no impact of COVID-19 on their patient's diagnostic pathway. However, more broadly, 33% of GPs ordered fewer blood tests and imaging, saw fewer patients, and 72% perceived waiting longer for specialist/hospital appointments post-COVID-19;with most (74%) reporting increased use of telehealth. In interviews, patients' greatest difficulties were related to hospital experiences, particularly not being allowed visitors. Conclusion(s): For lung cancer, we found no adverse impact of COVID- 19 on timeliness of diagnosis and treatment, and presentation may have been quicker. Telehealth use for lung cancer patients was limited, though more general changes in GP practice due to COVID-19 were evident. .