Search Results (3)

Despite the vaccine against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) being reported to be safe and effective, the unwillingness to vaccinate and doubts are still common. The aim of this international study was to assess the major reasons for the unwillingness to vaccinate in a group of students from Poland (n = 1202), Bangladesh (n = 1586), India (n = 484), Mexico (n = 234), Egypt (n = 566), Philippines (n = 2076), Pakistan (n = 506), Vietnam (n = 98) and China (n = 503). We conducted an online cross-sectional study that aimed to assess (1) the percentage of vaccinated and unvaccinated students and (2) the reasons associated with willingness/unwillingness to the vaccine. The study included 7255 respondents from 9 countries with a mean age of 21.85 ± 3.66 years. Only 22.11% (n = 1604) of students were vaccinated. However, the majority (69.25%, n = 5025) expressed a willingness to be vaccinated. More willing to vaccinate were students in informal relationships who worked mentally, used psychological/psychiatric services before the pandemic, and studied medicine. There are cultural differences regarding the reasons associated with the unwillingness to vaccinate, but some ‘universal’ might be distinguished that apply to the whole group. Full article

Background: This study aimed to compare the severity of psychological impact, anxiety and depression between people from two developing countries, Iran and China, and to correlate mental health parameters with variables relating to the COVID-19 pandemic. Although China and Iran are developing countries based on the World Bank’s criteria, these two countries are different in access to resources and health care systems. We hypothesized that Iranians would show higher levels of depression, anxiety and stress as compared to Chinese. Methods: This study collected information related to the COVID-19 pandemic including physical health, precautionary measures and knowledge about the pandemic. We also used validated questionnaires such as the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) and the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21) to assess the mental health status. Results: There were a total of 1411 respondents (550 from Iran; 861 from China). The mean IES-R scores of respondents from both countries were above the cut-off for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms. Iranians had significantly higher levels of anxiety and depression (p < 0.01). Significantly more Iranians believed COVID-19 was transmitted via contact, practised hand hygiene, were unsatisfied with health information and expressed less confidence in their doctors, but were less likely to wear a facemask (p < 0.001). Significantly more Iranians received health information related to COVID-19 via television while Chinese preferred the Internet (p < 0.001). Conclusions: This cross-country study found that Iranians had significantly higher levels of anxiety and depression as compared to Chinese. The difference in reported measures between respondents from Iran and China were due to differences in access to healthcare services and governments’ responses to the pandemic. Full article

Background: The 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic is a public health emergency of international concern and poses a challenge to psychological resilience. Research data are needed to develop evidence-driven strategies to reduce adverse psychological impacts and psychiatric symptoms during the epidemic. The aim of this study was to survey the general public in China to better understand their levels of psychological impact, anxiety, depression, and stress during the initial stage of the COVID-19 outbreak. The data will be used for future reference. Methods: From 31 January to 2 February 2020, we conducted an online survey using snowball sampling techniques. The online survey collected information on demographic data, physical symptoms in the past 14 days, contact history with COVID-19, knowledge and concerns about COVID-19, precautionary measures against COVID-19, and additional information required with respect to COVID-19. Psychological impact was assessed by the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), and mental health status was assessed by the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21). Results: This study included 1210 respondents from 194 cities in China. In total, 53.8% of respondents rated the psychological impact of the outbreak as moderate or severe; 16.5% reported moderate to severe depressive symptoms; 28.8% reported moderate to severe anxiety symptoms; and 8.1% reported moderate to severe stress levels. Most respondents spent 20–24 h per day at home (84.7%); were worried about their family members contracting COVID-19 (75.2%); and were satisfied with the amount of health information available (75.1%). Female gender, student status, specific physical symptoms (e.g., myalgia, dizziness, coryza), and poor self-rated health status were significantly associated with a greater psychological impact of the outbreak and higher levels of stress, anxiety, and depression (p < 0.05). Specific up-to-date and accurate health information (e.g., treatment, local outbreak situation) and particular precautionary measures (e.g., hand hygiene, wearing a mask) were associated with a lower psychological impact of the outbreak and lower levels of stress, anxiety, and depression (p < 0.05). Conclusions: During the initial phase of the COVID-19 outbreak in China, more than half of the respondents rated the psychological impact as moderate-to-severe, and about one-third reported moderate-to-severe anxiety. Our findings identify factors associated with a lower level of psychological impact and better mental health status that can be used to formulate psychological interventions to improve the mental health of vulnerable groups during the COVID-19 epidemic. Full article