Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Front Public Health ; 12: 1281072, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38726234

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Cross-border mobility (CBM) to visit social network members or for everyday activities is an important part of daily life for citizens in border regions, including the Meuse-Rhine Euroregion (EMR: neighboring regions from the Netherlands, Belgium, and Germany). We assessed changes in CBM during the COVID-19 pandemic and how participants experienced border restrictions. Methods: Impact of COVID-19 on the EMR' is a longitudinal study using comparative cross-border data collection. In 2021, a random sample of the EMR-population was invited for participation in online surveys to assess current and pre-pandemic CBM. Changes in CBM, experience of border restrictions, and associated factors were analyzed using multinomial and multivariable logistic regression analysis. Results: Pre-pandemic, 82% of all 3,543 participants reported any CBM: 31% for social contacts and 79% for everyday activities. Among these, 26% decreased social CBM and 35% decreased CBM for everyday activities by autumn 2021. Negative experience of border restrictions was reported by 45% of participants with pre-pandemic CBM, and was higher (p < 0.05) in Dutch participants (compared to Belgian; aOR= 1.4), cross-border [work] commuters (aOR= 2.2), participants with cross-border social networks of friends, family or acquaintances (aOR= 1.3), and those finding the measures 'limit group size' (aOR= 1.5) and 'minimalize travel' (aOR= 2.0) difficult to adhere to and finding 'minimalize travel' (aOR= 1.6) useless. Discussion: CBM for social contacts and everyday activities was substantial in EMR-citizens, but decreased during the pandemic. Border restrictions were valued as negative by a considerable portion of EMR-citizens, especially when having family or friends across the border. When designing future pandemic control strategies, policy makers should account for the negative impact of CBM restrictions on their citizens.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Male , Belgium , Adult , Middle Aged , Netherlands , Longitudinal Studies , Germany/epidemiology , Social Networking , Surveys and Questionnaires , SARS-CoV-2 , Travel/statistics & numerical data , Europe , Aged
2.
Thorax ; 79(5): 457-464, 2024 Apr 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38499346

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess health and activities of daily living (ADL) in SARS-CoV-2-positive adults with and without post-COVID-19 condition (PCC) and compare this with negative tested individuals. Furthermore, different PCC case definitions were compared with SARS-CoV-2-negative individuals. METHODS: All adults tested PCR positive for SARS-CoV-2 at the Public Health Service South Limburg (Netherlands) between June 2020 and November 2021 (n=41 780) and matched PCR negative individuals (2:1, on age, sex, year-quarter test, municipality; n=19 875) were invited by email. Health (five-level EuroQol five-dimension (EQ5D) index and EuroQol visual analogue scale (EQVAS)) and ADL impairment were assessed. PCC classification was done using the WHO case definition and five other common definitions. RESULTS: In total, 8409 individuals (6381 SARS-CoV-2 positive; 53±15 years; 57% female; 9 (7-11) months since test) were included. 39.4% of positives had PCC by the WHO case definition (EQVAS: 71±20; EQ5D index: 0.800±0.191; ADL impairment: 30 (10-70)%) and perceived worse health and more ADL impairment than negatives, that is, difference of -8.50 points (95% CI -9.71 to -7.29; p<0.001) for EQVAS, which decreased by 1.49 points (95% CI 0.86 to 2.12; p<0.001) in individuals with PCC for each comorbidity present, and differences of -0.065 points (95% CI -0.074 to -0.056; p<0.001) for EQ5D index, and +16.72% (95% CI 15.01 to 18.43; p<0.001) for ADL impairment. Health and ADL impairment were similar in negatives and positives without PCC. Replacing the WHO case definition with other PCC definitions yielded comparable results. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with PCC have substantially worse health and more ADL impairment than negative controls, irrespective of the case definition. Authorities should inform the public about the associated burden of PCC and enable adequate support.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Humans , Female , Male , Activities of Daily Living , COVID-19/epidemiology , Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome , Health Status , Chronic Disease
3.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 10(10): ofad471, 2023 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37885796

ABSTRACT

Background: Long-term symptoms after a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection (ie, post-coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19] condition or long COVID) constitute a substantial public health problem. Yet, the prevalence remains currently unclear as different case definitions are used, and negatively tested controls are lacking. We aimed to estimate post-COVID-19 condition prevalence using 6 definitions. Methods: The Prevalence, Risk factors, and Impact Evaluation (PRIME) post-COVID-19 condition study is a population-based sample of COVID-19-tested adults. In 2021, 61 655 adults were invited to complete an online questionnaire, including 44 symptoms plus a severity score (0-10) per symptom. Prevalence was calculated in both positively and negatively tested adults, stratified by time since their COVID-19 test (3-5, 6-11, or ≥12 months ago). Results: In positive individuals (n = 7405, 75.6%), the prevalence of long-term symptoms was between 26.9% and 64.1% using the 6 definitions, while in negative individuals (n = 2392, 24.4%), the prevalence varied between 11.4% and 32.5%. The prevalence of long-term symptoms potentially attributable to COVID-19 ranged from 17.9% to 26.3%. Conclusions: There is a (substantial) variation in prevalence estimates when using different post-COVID-19 condition definitions, as is current practice; there is limited overlap between definitions, indicating that the essential post-COVID-19 condition criteria are still unclear. Including negatives is important to determine long-term symptoms attributable to COVID-19. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05128695.

4.
Vaccine X ; 14: 100306, 2023 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37113740

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 booster vaccination has shown to add to the protection against infection with SARS-CoV2 and subsequent severe disease. This longitudinal cross-border study aimed to identify factors associated with COVID-19 booster vaccine intentions in an initially vaccinated adult population living in the Meuse-Rhine Euroregion (EMR; including the Netherlands, Belgium, and Germany) and differences between countries. Data collection took place in autumn of 2021 and consisted of online questionnaires sent to a random sample of the population based on governmental registries. Data from 3,319 fully and partially vaccinated adults were used to examine determinants of non-positive intention for a booster vaccination (i.e., uncertain or do not want), using multivariable logistic regression analyses weighted by age group, sex, and country. Compared to German residents, Dutch residents (OR = 2.4) and Belgian residents (OR = 1.4) were more likely to be uncertain or not want to receive a booster vaccine in September-October 2021. Factors independently associated with non-positive intention were female sex (OR = 1.6), absence of comorbidities (OR = 1.3), time since last vaccination less than 3 months ago for those fully vaccinated (OR = 1.6), being partially vaccinated (OR = 3.6), a negative experience with communication of COVID-19 measures (OR = 2.2), and regarding measures as ineffective (OR = 1.1). Results indicate that booster vaccine intentions differ between countries in the cross border Meuse-Rhine Euroregion. Non-positive intention for the booster vaccine is prevalent in all three countries of the EMR, but to a different extent, as shown in this study. Cross-border collaboration and sharing information and knowledge about vaccination strategies could play a role in limiting the impact of COVID-19.

5.
Front Med (Lausanne) ; 10: 1292446, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38162880

ABSTRACT

Background: Exercise-based treatments can worsen/exacerbate symptoms in people who were SARS-CoV-2 positive and living with post-COVID-19 condition (PL-PCC) and who have post-exertional malaise (PEM) or orthostatic intolerance (OI). Nevertheless, PEM and OI are not routinely assessed by clinicians. We estimated PEM and OI proportions in PL-PCC, as well as in people not living with PCC (PnL-PCC) and negatives (i.e., never reported a SARS-CoV-2 positive test), and identified associated factors. Methods: Participants from the Prevalence, Risk factors, and Impact Evaluation (PRIME) post-COVID-19 condition study were included. PEM and OI were assessed using validated questionnaires. PCC was defined as feeling unrecovered after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Multivariable regression analyses to study PEM and OI were stratified for sex. Results: Data from 3,783 participants were analyzed. In PL-PCC, the proportion of PEM was 48.1% and 41.2%, and the proportion of OI was 29.3% and 27.9% in women and men, respectively. Proportions were higher in PL-PCC than negatives, for PEM in women OR=4.38 [95%CI:3.01-6.38]; in men OR = 4.78 [95%CI:3.13-7.29]; for OI in women 3.06 [95%CI:1.97-4.76]; in men 2.71 [95%CI:1.75-4.21]. Associated factors were age ≤ 60 years, ≥1 comorbidities, and living alone. Conclusion: High proportions of PEM and OI are observed in PL-PCC. Standard screening for PEM and OI is recommended in PL-PCC to promote appropriate therapies.

6.
Front Public Health ; 10: 1032955, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36589958

ABSTRACT

Background: Persistent symptoms, described as long COVID or post-COVID-19 condition, pose a potential public health problem. Here, the design and recruitment of the PRIME post-COVID study is described. PRIME post-COVID is a large-scale population-based observational study that aims to improve understanding of the occurrence, risk factors, social, physical, mental, emotional, and socioeconomic impact of post-COVID-19 condition. Methods: An observational open cohort study was set up, with retrospective and prospective assessments on various health-conditions and health-factors (medical, demographic, social, and behavioral) based on a public health COVID-19 test and by self-report (using online questionnaires in Dutch language). Invited for participation were, as recorded in a public health registry, adults (18 years and older) who were tested for COVID-19 and had a valid Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) positive or negative test result, and email address. In November 2021, 61,655 individuals were invited by email to participate, these included all eligible adults who tested PCR positive between 1 June 2020 and 1 November 2021, and a sample of adults who tested negative (2:1), comparable in distribution of age, sex, municipality of residence and year-quarter of testing. New recruitment periods are planned as well. Participants are followed over time by regular follow-up measurements. Data are analyzed using the appropriate data-analyses methods. Discussion: The PRIME post-COVID study will provide insights into various health-related aspects of post-COVID-19 condition in the context of various stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results will inform practical guidance for society, clinical and public health practice for the prevention and care for long-term impact of COVID-19. Trial registration ClinicalTrialsgov identifier: NCT05128695.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Cohort Studies , Prospective Studies , Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome , Pandemics/prevention & control , Retrospective Studies , Prevalence , Risk Factors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...