1
|
Wang CW, de Jong EP, Faure JA, Ellington JL, Chen CHS, Chan CC. Exploring the Barriers and Facilitators of Mask-Wearing Behavior During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Taiwan, the United States, the Netherlands, and Haiti: A Qualitative Study. Disaster Med Public Health Prep 2024; 18:e23. [PMID: 38351541 DOI: 10.1017/dmp.2024.4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/16/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study explored the barriers and facilitators of mask-wearing behaviors during the pandemic in Taiwan, the United States, the Netherlands, and Haiti. METHODS Face-to-face interviews were conducted in Taiwan and online interviews were conducted with participants in the United States, the Netherlands, and Haiti. RESULTS In general, the habit of wearing a mask before coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was reported by Taiwanese participants. Additionally, Taiwanese participants perceived that wearing a mask was a social responsibility during the pandemic, suggesting that the collectivistic context might influence mask-wearing behavior. Unlike the Taiwanese population, some people in the United States and the Netherlands were reluctant to wear masks due to perceived restrictions on their freedom. Participants from Haiti mentioned that people who wore masks encountered violence, bullying, and discrimination. The results of this study suggest that political leadership and mask mandates have a strong impact on people's mask-wearing behavior. CONCLUSIONS These findings have valuable implications for the design of diverse behavioral interventions to enhance mask-wearing as part of infectious disease preparedness. Additionally, the findings from these countries offer valuable insights for the development of effective public health interventions to enhance society's resilience during the current pandemic and future infectious disease outbreaks.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chia-Wen Wang
- Institute of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore
- Lloyd's Register Foundation Institute for the Public Understanding of Risk, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - Erik Pieter de Jong
- Global Health Program, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Josemyrne Ashley Faure
- Global Health Program, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | | | - Chi-Hsin Sally Chen
- Institute of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Chang-Chuan Chan
- Institute of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
- Global Health Program, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Schönweitz FB, Zimmermann BM, Hangel N, Fiske A, McLennan S, Sierawska A, Buyx A. Solidarity and reciprocity during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal qualitative interview study from Germany. BMC Public Health 2024; 24:23. [PMID: 38166737 PMCID: PMC10763370 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-023-17521-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2023] [Accepted: 12/18/2023] [Indexed: 01/05/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND While solidarity practices were important in mitigating the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, their limits became evident as the pandemic progressed. Taking a longitudinal approach, this study analyses German residents' changing perceptions of solidarity practices during the COVID-19 pandemic and examines potential reasons for these changes. METHODS Adults living in Germany were interviewed in April 2020 (n = 46), October 2020 (n = 43) and October 2021 (n = 40) as part of the SolPan Research Commons, a large-scale, international, qualitative, longitudinal study uniquely situated in a major global public health crisis. Interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS While solidarity practices were prominently discussed and positively evaluated in April 2020, this initial enthusiasm waned in October 2020 and October 2021. Yet, participants still perceived solidarity as important for managing the pandemic and called for institutionalized forms of solidarity in October 2020 and October 2021. Reasons for these changing perceptions of solidarity included (i) increasing personal and societal costs to act in solidarity, (ii) COVID-19 policies hindering solidarity practices, and (iii) a perceived lack of reciprocity as participants felt that solidarity practices from the state were not matching their individual efforts. CONCLUSIONS Maintaining solidarity contributes to maximizing public health during a pandemic. Institutionalized forms of solidarity to support those most in need contribute to perceived reciprocity among individuals, which might increase their motivation to act in solidarity. Thus, rather than calling for individual solidarity during times of crisis, authorities should consider implementing sustaining solidarity-based social support systems that go beyond immediate crisis management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Franziska B Schönweitz
- Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, Department of Clinical Medicine, TUM School of Medicine and Health, TUM School of Social Sciences and Technology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Bettina M Zimmermann
- Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, Department of Clinical Medicine, TUM School of Medicine and Health, TUM School of Social Sciences and Technology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
- Institute of Philosophy and Multidisciplinary Center for Infectious Diseases, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
| | - Nora Hangel
- Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, Department of Clinical Medicine, TUM School of Medicine and Health, TUM School of Social Sciences and Technology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
- Leibniz Center for Science and Society (LCSS), Leibniz University of Hannover, Hannover, Germany
| | - Amelia Fiske
- Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, Department of Clinical Medicine, TUM School of Medicine and Health, TUM School of Social Sciences and Technology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Stuart McLennan
- Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, Department of Clinical Medicine, TUM School of Medicine and Health, TUM School of Social Sciences and Technology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Anna Sierawska
- Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, Department of Clinical Medicine, TUM School of Medicine and Health, TUM School of Social Sciences and Technology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
- Institute for History of Medicine, Technical University of Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Alena Buyx
- Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, Department of Clinical Medicine, TUM School of Medicine and Health, TUM School of Social Sciences and Technology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Neumann E, Ballmer L, Studhalter O, Schmid N, Jung HH. Dementia During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Experiences From Clinicians, Patients, and Caregivers in Switzerland. Gerontol Geriatr Med 2023; 9:23337214231164911. [PMID: 37013164 PMCID: PMC10064187 DOI: 10.1177/23337214231164911] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2023] [Revised: 02/26/2023] [Accepted: 03/03/2023] [Indexed: 04/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the Swiss health care system, affecting especially vulnerable people, such as patients suffering from dementia. The purpose of this study was to investigate the challenges experienced by dementia patients, their carers, and clinicians during the pandemic in Switzerland. Methods: An online survey was sent to all memory clinics in the German speaking part of Switzerland. Patients diagnosed with dementia and their carers were recruited for semi-structured telephone interviews at the memory clinic of the University Hospital Zurich. Results: A total of 28 clinicians, 17 carers, and seven patients participated in this study. According to the clinicians, all aspects of clinical work were affected by the pandemic. Carers did not perceive a significant role of the pandemic in the disease progression of the patients, despite many challenges faced. Patients described a high level of conscientiousness during the pandemic. Recommendations for future scenarios were provided from all groups. Conclusion: In order to increase the systemic resilience of the Swiss health care system, it is important to consider the experiences and recommendations of vulnerable groups and health care professionals for future public health measures and policies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eileen Neumann
- University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland
- University of Zurich, Switzerland
- Eileen Neumann, Department of Neurology, University Hospital Zurich, Frauenklinikstrasse 26, Zurich 8091, Switzerland.
| | | | | | | | - Hans H. Jung
- University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland
- University of Zurich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Zimmermann BM, Paul KT, Araújo ER, Buyx A, Ferstl S, Fiske A, Kraus D, Marelli L, McLennan S, Porta V, Prainsack B, Radhuber IM, Saxinger G. The social and socio-political embeddedness of COVID-19 vaccination decision-making: A five-country qualitative interview study from Europe. Vaccine 2023; 41:2084-2092. [PMID: 36813665 PMCID: PMC9933319 DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.02.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/05/2022] [Revised: 02/02/2023] [Accepted: 02/03/2023] [Indexed: 02/18/2023]
Abstract
The uptake ofCOVID-19 vaccines has varied considerably across European countries. This study investigates people's decision-making process regarding vaccination by analyzing qualitative interviews (n = 214) with residents from five European countries: Austria, Germany, Italy, Portugal, and Switzerland. We identify three factors that shape vaccination decision-making: individual experiences and pre-existing attitudes towards vaccination, social environment, and socio-political context. Based on this analysis, we present a typology of decision-making regarding COVID-19 vaccines, where some types present stable stances towards vaccines and others change over time. Trust in government and relevant stakeholders, broader social factors, and people's direct social environment were particularly relevant to these dynamics. We conclude that vaccination campaigns should be considered long-term projects (also outside of pandemics) in need of regular adjustment, communication and fine-tuning to ensure public trust. This is particularly pertinent for booster vaccinations, such as COVID-19 or influenza.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bettina M Zimmermann
- Institute for Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland; Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, School of Social Sciences, TUM School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
| | - Katharina T Paul
- Department of Political Science & Research Platform Governance of Digital Practices (DigiGov), University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Wien, Austria.
| | - Emília R Araújo
- Institute of Social Sciences, Research Center on Communication Studies, University of Minho, Gualtar, 4710-057 Braga, Portugal.
| | - Alena Buyx
- Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, School of Social Sciences, TUM School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
| | - Sebastian Ferstl
- Department of Political Science & Research Platform Governance of Digital Practices (DigiGov), University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Wien, Austria.
| | - Amelia Fiske
- Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, School of Social Sciences, TUM School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
| | - David Kraus
- Department of Political Science & Research Platform Governance of Digital Practices (DigiGov), University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Wien, Austria.
| | - Luca Marelli
- Department of Medical Biotechnology and Translational Medicine, University of Milan, Via Vanvitelli 32, 20129 Milan, Italy; Life Sciences & Society Lab, Centre for Sociological Research, KU Leuven, Parkstraat 45, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.
| | - Stuart McLennan
- Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, School of Social Sciences, TUM School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
| | - Vittoria Porta
- Department of Experimental Oncology, IEO, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia IRCCS, Via Adamello 16, 20139 Milan, Italy.
| | - Barbara Prainsack
- Department of Political Science & Research Platform Governance of Digital Practices (DigiGov), University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Wien, Austria.
| | - Isabella M Radhuber
- Department of Political Science, University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Wien, Austria.
| | - Gertrude Saxinger
- Department of Political Science, University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Wien, Austria Institute of Social Anthropology, University of Bern, Lerchenweg 36, 3012 Bern, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Zimmermann B, Buyx A, McLennan S. Newspaper coverage on solidarity and personal responsibility in the COVID-19 pandemic: A content analysis from Germany and German-speaking Switzerland. SSM Popul Health 2023; 22:101388. [PMID: 37008806 PMCID: PMC10043459 DOI: 10.1016/j.ssmph.2023.101388] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2022] [Revised: 03/22/2023] [Accepted: 03/24/2023] [Indexed: 03/29/2023] Open
Abstract
Solidarity and personal responsibility have been repeatedly called upon during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study quantifies and contextualizes the use of these terms in newspaper coverage in Germany and German-speaking Switzerland based on n = 640 articles from six functionally equivalent newspapers. The term solidarity in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic was mentioned in 541/640 articles (84.5%) and was primarily used during phases with high death rates and comparatively stringent policies in place, supporting the idea that solidarity was used to explain restrictive measures to the population and motivate people to comply with these measures. German newspapers published more articles on solidarity than Swiss-German newspapers, consistent with more stringent COVID-19 policies in Germany. Personal responsibility was mentioned in 133/640 articles (20.8%), meaning that the term was less frequently discussed than solidarity. Articles covering personal responsibility included more negative evaluations during phases of high infection rates as compared to phases of low infection rates. Findings indicate that the two terms were, at least to some extent, used in newspaper reporting to contextualize and justify COVID-19 policy during phases of high infection rates. Moreover, the term solidarity was used in a high variety of different contexts and the inherent limits of solidarity were rarely mentioned. Policymakers and journalists need to take this into account for future crises to not jeopardize the positive effects of solidarity.
Collapse
|
6
|
Zimmermann BM, Wagenaar H, Kieslich K, Prainsack B, Meyers G, Buyx A, El-Sayed S, Fiske A, Galasso I, Geiger S, Hangel N, Horn R, Johnson S, Kuiper JML, Lucivero F, McLennan S, Paul KT, Pot M, Radhuber I, Samuel G, Sharon T, Siffels L, Van Hoyweghen I, Awad S, Bourgeron T, Eichinger J, Gaille M, Haddad C, Hayes S, Hoffman A, Jasser M, Kenens J, Lanzing M, Libert S, Lievevrouw E, Marelli L, Ongolly F, Phillips A, Pinel C, Riesinger K, Roberts S, Saxinger G, Schlogl L, Schönweitz F, Sierawska A, Spahl W, Stendahl E, Vanstreels S, Vidolov S, Weiss E. Democratic research: Setting up a research commons for a qualitative, comparative, longitudinal interview study during the COVID-19 pandemic. SSM. QUALITATIVE RESEARCH IN HEALTH 2022; 2:100158. [PMID: 36092769 PMCID: PMC9448682 DOI: 10.1016/j.ssmqr.2022.100158] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2022] [Revised: 07/22/2022] [Accepted: 08/22/2022] [Indexed: 04/23/2023]
Abstract
The sudden and dramatic advent of the COVID-19 pandemic led to urgent demands for timely, relevant, yet rigorous research. This paper discusses the origin, design, and execution of the SolPan research commons, a large-scale, international, comparative, qualitative research project that sought to respond to the need for knowledge among researchers and policymakers in times of crisis. The form of organization as a research commons is characterized by an underlying solidaristic attitude of its members and its intrinsic organizational features in which research data and knowledge in the study is shared and jointly owned. As such, the project is peer-governed, rooted in (idealist) social values of academia, and aims at providing tools and benefits for its members. In this paper, we discuss challenges and solutions for qualitative studies that seek to operate as research commons.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bettina M Zimmermann
- Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
- Institute for Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Bernoullistrasse 28, 4056, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Hendrik Wagenaar
- Institute for Advanced Studies, Josefstädter Straße 39, 1080, Vienna, Austria
| | - Katharina Kieslich
- Department of Political Science, University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Vienna, Austria
| | - Barbara Prainsack
- Department of Political Science, University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Vienna, Austria
| | - Gert Meyers
- Tilburg Institute for Law Technology and Society, Tilburg University, Tilburg, the Netherlands
- Centre for Sociological Research, KU Leuven, Parkstraat 45, 3000, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Alena Buyx
- Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Seliem El-Sayed
- Department of Political Science, University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Vienna, Austria
| | - Amelia Fiske
- Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Ilaria Galasso
- ERC MISFIRES, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
| | - Susi Geiger
- University College Dublin Business School, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
| | - Nora Hangel
- Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Ruth Horn
- Ethox Centre and Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, OX3 7LF, Oxford, UK
| | - Stephanie Johnson
- Ethox Centre and Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, OX3 7LF, Oxford, UK
| | - Janneke M L Kuiper
- Centre for Sociological Research, KU Leuven, Parkstraat 45, 3000, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Federica Lucivero
- Ethox Centre and Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, OX3 7LF, Oxford, UK
| | - Stuart McLennan
- Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Katharina T Paul
- Department of Political Science, University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Vienna, Austria
| | - Mirjam Pot
- Department of Political Science, University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Vienna, Austria
| | - Isabella Radhuber
- Research Network Latin America - Department of Political Science, University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010, Wien, Austria
| | - Gabrielle Samuel
- Department of Global Health and Social Medicine, King's College London, Bush House North East Wing, 30 Aldwych, WC2B 4BG, London, UK
| | - Tamar Sharon
- iHub Department of Philosophical Ethics and Political Philosophy, Radboud University, Erasmusplein 1, 6525, HT Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Lotje Siffels
- iHub Department of Philosophical Ethics and Political Philosophy, Radboud University, Erasmusplein 1, 6525, HT Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Ine Van Hoyweghen
- Centre for Sociological Research, KU Leuven, Parkstraat 45, 3000, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Sula Awad
- ERC MISFIRES, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
| | - Théo Bourgeron
- School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Chrystal MacMillan Building, 15a George Square, Edinburgh EH8 9LD, UK
| | - Johanna Eichinger
- Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
- Institute for Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Bernoullistrasse 28, 4056, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Marie Gaille
- Laboratoire Sphere, Paris Diderot University, 5 Rue Thomas Mann, 75013, Paris, France
| | - Christian Haddad
- Austrian Institute for International Affairs, Währinger Straße 3/12, 1090 Vienna, Austria
| | - Sarah Hayes
- Vienna School of International Studies, Diplomatische Akademie Wien, Favoritenstraße 15A, 1040, Vienna, Austria
| | - Andrew Hoffman
- iHub Department of Philosophical Ethics and Political Philosophy, Radboud University, Erasmusplein 1, 6525, HT Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Marie Jasser
- Department of Political Science, University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Vienna, Austria
| | - Joke Kenens
- Centre for Sociological Research, KU Leuven, Parkstraat 45, 3000, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Marjolein Lanzing
- iHub Department of Philosophical Ethics and Political Philosophy, Radboud University, Erasmusplein 1, 6525, HT Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Sébastien Libert
- Division of Psychiatry, University College London, Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Rd, Bloomsbury, London, UK
| | - Elisa Lievevrouw
- Centre for Sociological Research, KU Leuven, Parkstraat 45, 3000, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Luca Marelli
- Centre for Sociological Research, KU Leuven, Parkstraat 45, 3000, Leuven, Belgium
- Department of Medical Biotechnology and Translational Medicine, University of Milan
| | - Fernandos Ongolly
- ERC MISFIRES, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
| | - Amicia Phillips
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 35, 3000, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Clémence Pinel
- Department of Public Health Øster Farimagsgade 5, P.O. Box 2099, DK-1014, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Katharina Riesinger
- Department of Political Science, University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Vienna, Austria
| | - Stephen Roberts
- Institute for Global Health, University College London, 30 Guilford Street, London, WC1N 1EH, UK
| | - Gertrude Saxinger
- Department of Political Science, University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Vienna, Austria
- Department of Social and Cultural Anthropology, University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Vienna, Austria
| | - Lukas Schlogl
- Department of Political Science, University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Vienna, Austria
| | - Franziska Schönweitz
- Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Anna Sierawska
- Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Wanda Spahl
- Department of Political Science, University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Vienna, Austria
| | - Emma Stendahl
- Jönköping International Business School, Jönköping University, Gjuterigatan 5, 553 18 Jönköping, Sweden
| | - Siemen Vanstreels
- Centre for Sociological Research, KU Leuven, Parkstraat 45, 3000, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Simeon Vidolov
- ERC MISFIRES, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
| | - Elias Weiss
- Department of Political Science, University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Haier J, Beller J, Adorjan K, Bleich S, de Greck M, Griesinger F, Heppt MV, Hurlemann R, Mees ST, Philipsen A, Rohde G, Schilling G, Trautmann K, Combs SE, Geyer S, Schaefers J. Differences in Stakeholders' Perception of the Impact of COVID-19 on Clinical Care and Decision-Making. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14174317. [PMID: 36077852 PMCID: PMC9454870 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14174317] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/03/2022] [Revised: 08/30/2022] [Accepted: 08/31/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Pandemics are related to changes in clinical management. Factors that are associated with individual perceptions of related risks and decision-making processes focused on prevention and vaccination, but perceptions of other healthcare consequences are less investigated. Different perceptions of patients, nurses, and physicians on consequences regarding clinical management, decisional criteria, and burden were compared. Study Design: Cross-sectional OnCoVID questionnaire studies. Methods: Data that involved 1231 patients, physicians, and nurses from 11 German institutions that were actively involved in clinical treatment or decision-making in oncology or psychiatry were collected. Multivariate statistical approaches were used to analyze the stakeholder comparisons. Results: A total of 29.2% of professionals reported extensive changes in workload. Professionals in psychiatry returned severe impact of pandemic on all major aspects of their clinical care, but less changes were reported in oncology (p < 0.001). Both patient groups reported much lower recognition of treatment modifications and consequences for their own care. Decisional and pandemic burden was intensively attributed from professionals towards patients, but less in the opposite direction. Conclusions: All of the groups share concerns about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare management and clinical processes, but to very different extent. The perception of changes is dissociated in projection towards other stakeholders. Specific awareness should avoid the dissociated impact perception between patients and professionals potentially resulting in impaired shared decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joerg Haier
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Hannover, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany
- Correspondence:
| | - Johannes Beller
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Hannover, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany
- Medical Sociology Unit, Hannover Medical School, 30625 Hannover, Germany
| | - Kristina Adorjan
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Hospital, 80336 Munich, Germany
| | - Stefan Bleich
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Hannover Medical School, 30625 Hannover, Germany
| | - Moritz de Greck
- Department of Psychiatry, Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital, 60590 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Frank Griesinger
- Department of Hematology and Oncology, Pius-Hospital Oldenburg, Carl von Ossietzky University, 26121 Oldenburg, Germany
| | - Markus V. Heppt
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Erlangen, 91054 Erlangen, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), 91054 Erlangen, Germany
| | - René Hurlemann
- Department of Psychiatry, Karl-Jaspers-Hospital, 26160 Oldenburg, Germany
| | - Soeren Torge Mees
- Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, Friedrichstadt General Hospital, 01067 Dresden, Germany
| | - Alexandra Philipsen
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital, 53127 Bonn, Germany
| | - Gernot Rohde
- Department of Respiratory Medicine and Allergology, University Hospital, 60590 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Georgia Schilling
- Department of Hematology, Oncology, Palliative Care and Rheumatology, Asklepios Tumorzentrum, 22763 Hamburg, Germany
| | - Karolin Trautmann
- Department of Hematology and Oncology, University Hospital, 01307 Dresden, Germany
| | - Stephanie E. Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Klinikum Rechts der Isar, 81675 Munich, Germany
| | - Siegfried Geyer
- Medical Sociology Unit, Hannover Medical School, 30625 Hannover, Germany
| | - Juergen Schaefers
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Hannover, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Wismans A, van der Zwan P, Wennberg K, Franken I, Mukerjee J, Baptista R, Marín JB, Burke A, Dejardin M, Janssen F, Letina S, Millán JM, Santarelli E, Torrès O, Thurik R. Face mask use during the COVID-19 pandemic: how risk perception, experience with COVID-19, and attitude towards government interact with country-wide policy stringency. BMC Public Health 2022; 22:1622. [PMID: 36028876 PMCID: PMC9412789 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-022-13632-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2022] [Accepted: 06/09/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND During the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, governments imposed numerous regulations to protect public health, particularly the (mandatory) use of face masks. However, the appropriateness and effectiveness of face mask regulations have been widely discussed, as is apparent from the divergent measures taken across and within countries over time, including mandating, recommending, and discouraging their use. In this study, we analyse how country-level policy stringency and individual-level predictors associate with face mask use during the early stages of the global COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD First, we study how (self and other-related) risk perception, (direct and indirect) experience with COVID-19, attitude towards government and policy stringency shape face mask use. Second, we study whether there is an interaction between policy stringency and the individual-level variables. We conduct multilevel analyses exploiting variation in face mask regulations across countries and using data from approximately 7000 students collected in the beginning of the pandemic (weeks 17 through 19, 2020). RESULTS We show that policy stringency is strongly positively associated with face mask use. We find a positive association between self-related risk perception and mask use, but no relationship of mask use with experience with COVID-19 and attitudes towards government. However, in the interaction analyses, we find that government trust and perceived clarity of communication moderate the link between stringency and mask use, with positive government perceptions relating to higher use in countries with regulations and to lower use in countries without regulations. CONCLUSIONS We highlight that those countries that aim for widespread use of face masks should set strict measures, stress self-related risks of COVID-19, and use clear communication.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annelot Wismans
- Department of Applied Economics, Erasmus School of Economics, Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
- The Erasmus University Rotterdam Institute for Behavior and Biology (EURIBEB), P.O. Box 1738, 3000DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Peter van der Zwan
- Department of Business Studies, Institute of Tax Law and Economics, Leiden Law School, Leiden University, 2311ES, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Karl Wennberg
- Institute for Analytical Sociology, Linköping University, SE-601 74, Norrköping, Sweden
- Stockholm School of Economics, PO Box 6501, SE-113 83, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Ingmar Franken
- The Erasmus University Rotterdam Institute for Behavior and Biology (EURIBEB), P.O. Box 1738, 3000DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Psychology, Education & Child Studies, Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jinia Mukerjee
- Montpellier Business School, CEDEX 4, 2300 Avenue des Moulins, 34080, Montpellier, France
| | - Rui Baptista
- CEG-IST, Instituto Superior Técnico, University of Lisbon, 1049-001, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Jorge Barrientos Marín
- Department of Economics, University of Antioquia, PO Box 1228, Calle 70 52-21, Medellín, Colombia
| | - Andrew Burke
- Trinity Business School, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, D02 H308, Ireland
| | - Marcus Dejardin
- Université catholique de Louvain, B-1348, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
- Université de Namur, B-5000, Namur, Belgium
| | - Frank Janssen
- Université catholique de Louvain, B-1348, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
| | - Srebrenka Letina
- Institute for Analytical Sociology, Linköping University, SE-601 74, Norrköping, Sweden
- University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8QQ, UK
| | | | - Enrico Santarelli
- Department of Economics, University of Bologna, 40126, Bologna, Italy
| | - Olivier Torrès
- Montpellier Business School, CEDEX 4, 2300 Avenue des Moulins, 34080, Montpellier, France
- University of Montpellier, 34000, Montpellier, France
| | - Roy Thurik
- Department of Applied Economics, Erasmus School of Economics, Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- The Erasmus University Rotterdam Institute for Behavior and Biology (EURIBEB), P.O. Box 1738, 3000DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Montpellier Business School, CEDEX 4, 2300 Avenue des Moulins, 34080, Montpellier, France
| |
Collapse
|