COVID-19 may have increased global support for universal health coverage: multi-country observational study.

Introduction: The multiple risks generated by the COVID-19 pandemic intensified the debate about healthcare access and coverage. Whether the burden of disease caused by the coronavirus outbreak changed public opinion about healthcare provision remains unclear. In this study, it was specifically examined if the pandemic changed support for governmental intervention in healthcare as a proxy to support for universal health coverage (UHC). It also examined which psychological factors related to the socioeconomic interdependence exposed by the pandemic may be associated with a potential change. Methods: Online survey data was collected over 18 months (from March 2020 to August 2021) across 73 countries, containing various social attitudes and risk perceptions related to COVID-19. This was a convenience sample composed of voluntary participants (N = 3,176; age 18 years and above). Results: The results show that support for government intervention in healthcare increased across geographical regions, age groups, and gender groups (an average increase of 39%), more than the support for government intervention in other social welfare issues. Factors related to socioeconomic interdependence predicted increased support for government intervention in healthcare, namely, social solidarity (ß = 0.14, p < 0.0001), and risk to economic livelihood (ß = 0.09, p < 0.0001). Trust in the government to deal with COVID-19 decreased over time, and this negative trajectory predicted a demand for better future government intervention in healthcare (ß = -0.10, p = 0.0003). Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic may have been a potential turning point in the global public support for UHC, as evidenced by a higher level of consensus that governments should be guarantors of healthcare.

Age differences in hedonic adaptation to societal restrictions? Positive and negative affect trajectories during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in 33 nations.

We examined age group differences in hedonic adaptation trajectories of positive and negative affect (PA/NA) at different arousal levels during the severe societal restrictions that governments implemented to contain the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (March to June 2020). Data from 10,509 participants from 33 countries and 12 weekly assessments were used (67% women, aged 18 to 85 +, on average 318 participants per country (SD = 434) and 5.6 assessments (SD = 2.5) per participant). Multilevel models (level 1: assessments, level 2: participants, level 3: countries) were fit to examine trajectories of low to high arousal PA and NA during the phase of tightening societal restrictions, the phase of stable peak restrictions, and the phase of easing restrictions separately. During the entire study period mean levels of PA were lower in emerging and young adults (aged 18-44) than older adults, whereas mean NA levels were higher. During peak societal restrictions, participants reported increasingly more PA, especially high-arousal emotions (d = .36 per month vs. .19 unaroused). NA levels decreased over time, especially high-arousal emotions (d = .35 vs. .14 p/month). These hedonic adaptation trajectories were largely similar across age groups. Nevertheless, up to 30% of the participants increased in NA and up to 6% decreased in PA, against the general trend, demonstrating substantial individual differences in emotional adaptation. Finally, heterogeneity in the effects of time on affect was larger on the individual level than the country level. Emotional recovery trajectories during the first lockdown in the COVID-19 pandemic were virtually similar across age groups in 33 countries, across valence and arousal levels, suggesting age advantages in emotional well-being remain restricted to mean-level differences rather than emotion dynamics. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).