Association of Child Masking With COVID-19-Related Closures in US Childcare Programs.

Importance: It is not known how effective child masking is in childcare settings in preventing the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. This question is critical to inform health policy and safe childcare practices. Objective: To assess the association between masking children 2 years and older and subsequent childcare closure because of COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective, 1-year, longitudinal electronic survey study of 6654 childcare professionals at home- and center-based childcare programs in all 50 states was conducted at baseline (May 22 to June 8, 2020) and follow-up (May 26 to June 23, 2021). Using a generalized linear model (log-binomial model) with robust SEs, this study evaluated the association between childcare program closure because of a confirmed or suspected COVID-19 case in either children or staff during the study period and child masking in both early adoption (endorsed at baseline) and continued masking (endorsed at baseline and follow-up), while controlling for physical distancing, other risk mitigation strategies, and program and community characteristics. Exposures: Child masking in childcare programs as reported by childcare professionals at baseline and both baseline and follow-up. Main Outcomes and Measures: Childcare program closure because of a suspected or confirmed COVID-19 case in either children or staff as reported in the May 26 to June 23, 2021, end survey. Results: This survey study of 6654 childcare professionals (mean [SD] age, 46.9 [11.3] years; 750 [11.3%] were African American, 57 [0.9%] American Indian/Alaska Native, 158 [2.4%] Asian, 860 [12.9%] Hispanic, 135 [2.0%] multiracial [anyone who selected >1 race on the survey], 18 [0.3%] Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and 5020 [75.4%] White) found that early adoption (baseline) of child masking was associated with a 13% lower risk of childcare program closure because of a COVID-19 case (adjusted relative risk, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.77-0.99), and continued masking for 1 year was associated with a 14% lower risk (adjusted relative risk, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.74-1.00). Conclusions and Relevance: This survey study of childcare professionals suggests that masking young children is associated with fewer childcare program closures, enabling in-person education. This finding has important public health policy implications for families that rely on childcare to sustain employment.

Associations between postpartum depression and assistance with household tasks and childcare during the COVID-19 pandemic: evidence from American mothers.

BACKGROUND: The early postpartum period is recognized cross-culturally as being important for recovery, with new parents receiving increased levels of community support. However, COVID-19-related lockdown measures may have disrupted these support systems, with possible implications for mental health. Here, we use a cross-sectional analysis among individuals who gave birth at different stages of the pandemic to test (i) if instrumental support access in the form of help with household tasks, newborn care, and care for older children has varied temporally across the pandemic, and (ii) whether access to these forms of instrumental support is associated with lower postpartum depression scores. METHODS: This study used data from the COVID-19 And Reproductive Effects (CARE) study, an online survey of pregnant persons in the United States. Participants completed postnatal surveys between April 30 - November 18, 2020 (n = 971). Logistic regression analysis tested whether birth timing during the pandemic was associated with odds of reported sustained instrumental support. Linear regression analyses assessed whether instrumental support was associated with lower depression scores as measured via the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression survey. RESULTS: Participants who gave birth later in the pandemic were more likely to report that the pandemic had not affected the help they received with household work and newborn care (p < 0.001), while access to childcare for older children appeared to vary non-linearly throughout the pandemic. Additionally, respondents who reported that the pandemic had not impacted their childcare access or help received around the house displayed significantly lower depression scores compared to participants who reported pandemic-related disruptions to these support types (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The maintenance of postpartum instrumental support during the pandemic appears to be associated with better maternal mental health. Healthcare providers should therefore consider disrupted support systems as a risk factor for postpartum depression and ask patients how the pandemic has affected support access. Policymakers seeking to improve parental wellbeing should design strategies that reduce disease transmission, while facilitating safe interactions within immediate social networks (e.g., through investment in COVID-19 testing and contact tracing). Cumulatively, postpartum instrumental support represents a potential tool to protect against depression, both during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 Impact on Childcare in Agricultural Populations.

The corona virus pandemic pulled back the curtain on rural America's already fragile childcare system and shed light on the critical role that quality, affordable, accessible childcare plays in the lives of workers and families, as well as in the success of agricultural businesses. This commentary aims to describe how existing childcare problems were exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, potentially impacting both the health and economics of farm households and farmworker families. For solutions to be successful, efforts will need to be collaborative, with federal interventions spurred on by childcare stakeholders. Successful collaborations will result in a better childcare system that nurtures children while their parents contribute to our nation's production of agricultural products.

Purchasing, consumption, demographic and socioeconomic variables associated with shifts in alcohol consumption during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Restrictions introduced to reduce the spread of COVID-19 have had major impacts on the living circumstances of Australians. This paper aims to provide insight into shifts in alcohol consumption and associated factors during the epidemic. DESIGN AND METHODS: A cross-sectional convenience sample of 2307 Australians aged 18 and over who drank at least monthly was recruited through social media. Respondents were asked about their alcohol consumption and purchasing in 2019 prior to the epidemic plus similar questions about their experiences in the month prior to being surveyed between 29 April and 16 May 2020. RESULTS: Reports of average consumption before (3.53 drinks per day [3.36, 3.71 95% confidence interval]) and during (3.52 [3.34, 3.69]) the pandemic were stable. However, young men and those who drank more outside the home in 2019 reported decreased consumption during the pandemic, and people with high levels of stress and those who bulk-bought alcohol when restrictions were announced reported an increase in consumption relative to those who did not. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: A reported increase in consumption among those experiencing more stress suggests that some people may have been drinking to cope during the epidemic. Conversely, the reported decrease in consumption among those who drank more outside of their home in 2019 suggests that closing all on-trade sales did not result in complete substitution of on-premise drinking with home drinking in this group. Monitoring of relevant subgroups to assess long-term changes in consumption in the aftermath of the epidemic is recommended.

Improving the mental health of abandoned children: Experiences from a global online intervention.

In today's world of global migration and urbanization, millions of children are separated from parents. Their mental health and future competences as citizens depend on the quality of care from foster parents and group home staff in nonparental care settings. Caregivers are challenged by poor work conditions, too many children, and a lack of knowledge about care for traumatized children. How can our profession match this challenge by upscaling interventions? Digital designs for applications of psychology are growing, recently accelerated by the COVID-19 crisis. From 2008, the author developed a blended learning intervention. In partnerships with nongovernmental organizations and government agencies, care recommendations from an international network of researchers are transformed into start-up seminars for staff, followed by a 6-month online classroom education. Students learn and practice how to train local caregiver groups in attachment-based care, using training sessions developed in local languages, adjusted to culture. At present, the author's Fairstart Foundation educated 500 staff from partners in 26 countries, who have trained the caregivers of some 40,000 children. The theoretical, logistic and technical steps from research to daily caregiver-child practices are described, to inspire discussions of how online designs and international partnerships may benefit underserved populations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

'Intelligent' lockdown, intelligent effects? Results from a survey on gender (in)equality in paid work, the division of childcare and household work, and quality of life among parents in the Netherlands during the Covid-19 lockdown.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic is more than a public health crisis. Lockdown measures have substantial societal effects, including a significant impact on parents with (young) children. Given the existence of persistent gender inequality prior to the pandemic, particularly among parents, it is crucial to study the societal impact of COVID-19 from a gender perspective. The objective of this paper is to use representative survey data gathered among Dutch parents in April 2020 to explore differences between mothers and fathers in three areas: paid work, the division of childcare and household tasks, and three dimensions of quality of life (leisure, work-life balance, relationship dynamics). Additionally, we explore whether changes take place in these dimensions by comparing the situation prior to the lockdown with the situation during the lockdown. METHOD: We use descriptive methods (crosstabulations) supported by multivariate modelling (linear regression modelling for continuous outcomes; linear probability modelling (LPM) for binary outcomes (0/1 outcomes); and multinomial logits for multinomial outcomes) in a cross-sectional survey design. RESULTS: Results show that the way in which parents were impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic reflects a complex gendered reality. Mothers work in essential occupations more often than fathers, report more adjustments of the times at which they work, and experience both more and less work pressure in comparison to before the lockdown. Moreover, mothers continue to do more childcare and household work than fathers, but some fathers report taking on greater shares of childcare and housework during the lockdown in comparison to before. Mothers also report a larger decline in leisure time than fathers. We find no gender differences in the propensity to work from home, in perceived work-life balance, or in relationship dynamics. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, we find that gender inequality in paid work, the division of childcare and household work, and the quality of life are evident during the first lockdown period. Specifically, we find evidence of an increase in gender inequality in relation to paid work and quality of life when comparing the situation prior to and during the lockdown, as well as a decrease in gender inequality in the division of childcare and household work. We conclude that the unique situation created by restrictive lockdown measures magnifies some gender inequalities while lessening others. DISCUSSION: The insights we provide offer key comparative evidence based on a representative, probability-based sample for understanding the broader impact of lockdown measures as we move forward in the COVID-19 pandemic. One of the limitations in this study is the cross-sectional design. Further study, in the form of a longitudinal design, will be crucial in investigating the long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on gender inequality.