Impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic and its public health measures go beyond physical and mental health and incorporate wider well-being impacts in terms of what people are free to do or be. We explored ...the impacts of the Covid-19 lockdown and relevant vulnerabilities on capability well-being, mental health and social support in Austria.
Adult Austrian residents (n = 560) provided responses to a cross-sectional online survey about their experiences during Covid-19 lockdown (15 March-15 April 2020). Instruments measuring capabilities (OxCAP-MH), depression and anxiety (HADS), social support (MSPSS) and mental well-being (WHO-5) were used in association with six pre-defined vulnerabilities using multivariable linear regression.
31% of the participants reported low mental well-being and only 30% of those with a history of mental health treatment received treatment during lockdown. Past mental health treatment had a significant negative effect across all outcome measures with an associated capability well-being score reduction of - 6.54 (95%CI, - 9.26, - 3.82). Direct Covid-19 experience and being 'at risk' due to age and/or physical health conditions were also associated with significant capability deprivations. When adjusted for vulnerabilities, significant capability reductions were observed in association with increased levels of depression (- 1.77) and anxiety (- 1.50), and significantly higher capability levels (+ 3.75) were associated with higher levels of social support. Compared to the cohort average, individual capability impacts varied between - 9% for those reporting past mental health treatment and + 5% for those reporting one score higher on the social support scale.
Our study is the first to assess the capability limiting aspects of lockdown and relevant vulnerabilities alongside their impacts on mental health and social support. The negative capability well-being, mental health and social support impacts of the Covid-19 lockdown were strongest for people with a history of mental health treatment. Future public health policies concerning lockdowns should pay special attention to improve social support levels in order to increase public resilience.
Abstract
Background
Introducing national lockdown has been effective in containing Covid-19. However, several studies indicated negative impacts of lockdowns on the well-being and mental health of ...many people. In Austria, the first Covid-19-related lockdown was introduced on 16 March 2020 with most restrictions being lifted 1 month later. Seven months after that, in November 2020, the second full lockdown was implemented. The aim of this study was to compare the perceptions and experiences of the general population related to the first and second Covid-19 lockdowns in Austria.
Methods
Two waves of an online survey were conducted in May and December 2020 asking respondents about their concerns related to the Covid-19 illness, personal experiences of the lockdowns, perceptions of and compliance with imposed public health measures, and the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on different aspects of life during the two lockdowns. Descriptive statistics including frequency analysis were used to compare respondents’ answers collected in the two waves of the survey. T-test and chi-square tests were used to test differences between the two lockdowns.
Results
Five hundred sixty participants were included in the first wave and a sub-sample of 134 participants in the second wave of data collection. During the second lockdown, study respondents were more concerned about their family members contracting Covid-19 when compared with the first lockdown. Compliance with public health measures was overall lower during the second lockdown, although it varied according to the type of the measure. Closure of schools was seen as the least essential restriction during the second lockdown, while wearing masks gained additional approval between the first and the second lockdown. Larger negative impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic on friendships, leisure activities, education and community were reported during the second lockdown.
Conclusions
The study found that the extended duration of the pandemic and recurring lockdowns restricting freedom of movement and social contacts appear to have caused significant disruptions to many areas of life. Furthermore, declining adherence to most public health measures over time raises a question about the effectiveness of future lockdown measures.
Abstract
The Austrian government imposed multiple major lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic, but the relevant measures and their perceptions varied over time. The aim of this study was to compare ...the over-time impacts of the three COVID-19 lockdowns between March 2020 and December 2021 for (capability) wellbeing and mental health in Austria. Adult Austrian residents (n = 87) completed an online survey about their experiences during three COVID-19 lockdowns, including capabilities (OxCAP-MH), depression and anxiety (HADS), and general wellbeing (WHO-5). Differences across the baseline and follow-up scores of these instruments were summarised by demographic/socioeconomic characteristics. Longitudinal comparisons of the impacts of the lockdowns were conducted using random effect models on panel data for overall instrument scores and individual capability items. The levels of (capability) wellbeing and mental health decreased for most respondents across the three lockdowns: average 2.4% reduction in OxCAP-MH scores, 18.8% and 9% increases in HADS depression and anxiety subscale scores respectively, and 19.7% reduction in WHO-5 score between the first and third lockdowns. Mental health treatment prior to the pandemic, social support and satisfaction with government measures were the most influential characteristics that determine the association with impacts of the chain of lockdowns. Our study is the first to assess the differential capability limiting aspects of lockdowns over time alongside their impacts on mental health and general wellbeing and calls for special attention for mental health patients, isolation and satisfaction with government measures.
A comprehensive, comparable assessment of the economic disease burden and the value of relevant care forms a major challenge in the case of mental diseases. This study aimed to inform the development ...of a resource use measurement (RUM) instrument and harmonized reference unit costs valid for multi-sectoral and multi-national cost assessments for mental health diseases as part of the European PECUNIA project.
An iterative, multi-methods approach was applied. Systematic literature reviews appended with national grey literature searches in six European countries were conducted to generate preliminary, literature-based, international, mental health-related service and resource use lists for all investigated sectors in 2018. As part of a multi-national expert survey, these lists were reviewed by 18 Austrian sector-specific experts regarding the clarity, relevance, comprehensiveness and availability in the Austrian context.
Out of 295 items included in the preliminary, international, sector-specific lists (health and social care-201 items, criminal justice-35 items, education-39 items; patient, family and informal care-20 items), a total of 261 items and descriptions (88%) were considered clear by all experts. 42 items (14%) were considered not existing in Austria, and 111 items (38%) were prioritized regarding their relevance in the national context. Thirteen additional items (4%) were suggested to be added to accommodate for Austria-specific features of the individual sectors. Major typological difficulties based on item names were observed.
The identified country-specific variations and general typological bias and their potential contributions to service and resource use cost variations across countries and sectors call for further systematic investigation. Next, PECUNIA will develop internationally harmonized and comparable definitions of the listed items and their units of analysis based on a new conceptual multi-sectoral costing framework. The developed lists will require consolidation and further prioritization for the development of a patient-reported RUM instrument and consequent reference unit cost valuation.
Chronic pain is among the most burdensome conditions. Its prevalence ranges between 12% and 30% in Europe, with an estimated 21% among Austrian adults. The economic impact of chronic pain from a ...societal perspective, however, has not been sufficiently researched. This study aims to provide an estimate of the societal costs for working-age adults with chronic pain in Austria. It explores the impact of sex, number of pain sites, self-reported pain severity, health literacy and private health insurance on costs associated with chronic pain.
A bottom-up cost-of-illness study was conducted based on data collected from 54 adult patients with chronic pain at three Viennese hospital outpatient departments. Information on healthcare costs including out-of-pocket expenses and productivity losses due to absenteeism and informal care were collected over 12 months. Resource use estimates were combined with unit costs and mean costs per patient were calculated in € for year 2016.
Mean annual societal costs were estimated at EUR 10191. Direct medical costs were EUR 5725 including EUR 1799 out-of-pocket expenses (mainly pain relieving activities and private therapy). Productivity losses including informal care amounted to EUR 4466. Total costs for women and patients with three or more pain sites were significantly higher. No association with health literacy was found but there was a tendency towards higher out-of-pocket expenses for patients with complementary private health insurance.
This study is the first to provide a comprehensive assessment of the individual and societal burden of chronic pain in Austria. It highlights that chronic pain is associated with substantial direct medical costs and productivity losses. Patient costs may show systematic differences by health insurance status, implying a need for future research in this area.
With rising healthcare costs comes an increasing demand for evidence-informed resource allocation using economic evaluations worldwide. Furthermore, standardization of costing and reporting methods ...both at international and national levels are imperative to make economic evaluations a valid tool for decision-making. The aim of this review is to assess the availability and consistency of costing evidence that could be used for decision-making in Austria. It describes systematically the current economic evaluation and costing studies landscape focusing on the applied costing methods and their reporting standards. Findings are discussed in terms of their likely impacts on evidence-based decision-making and potential suggestions for areas of development.
A systematic literature review of English and German language peer-reviewed as well as grey literature (2004-2015) was conducted to identify Austrian economic analyses. The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, SSCI, EconLit, NHS EED and Scopus were searched. Publication and study characteristics, costing methods, reporting standards and valuation sources were systematically synthesised and assessed.
A total of 93 studies were included. 87% were journal articles, 13% were reports. 41% of all studies were full economic evaluations, mostly cost-effectiveness analyses. Based on relevant standards the most commonly observed limitations were that 60% of the studies did not clearly state an analytical perspective, 25% of the studies did not provide the year of costing, 27% did not comprehensively list all valuation sources, and 38% did not report all applied unit costs.
There are substantial inconsistencies in the costing methods and reporting standards in economic analyses in Austria, which may contribute to a low acceptance and lack of interest in economic evaluation-informed decision making. To improve comparability and quality of future studies, national costing guidelines should be updated with more specific methodological guidance and a national reference cost library should be set up to allow harmonisation of valuation methods.
Abstract Background Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, it was a key priority for governments globally to ensure agreement with, and subsequently adherence to, imposed public health measures, ...specifically non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). Prior research in this regard highlighted the role of COVID-19 information sources as well as sociodemographic and other personal characteristics, however, there is only limited evidence including both. To bridge this gap, this study investigated the associations of COVID-19 information sources such as social media and participant characteristics with agreement with and adherence to NPIs during the first lockdown in Austria. Methods An online survey was conducted in May 2020 among adult Austrian residents asking about their experiences during the first lockdown. Collected data included sociodemographic characteristics, main COVID-19-related information sources, agreement with/adherence to three NPIs (no physical contact to family members not living in the same household, leisurely walks restricted to members of the same household, mandatory face masks) and information about perceived social support using the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS), anxiety/depression levels using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), whether participants felt well advised by the government, and whether participants perceived the pandemic to threaten their income. Ordered and multinomial logistic regression models were employed to achieve the research aims. Results The cross-sectional sample consisted of 559 Austrian residents. Using social media as main COVID-19 information source was consistently associated with lower agreement with NPIs. A positive association with agreement with measures was found for higher educational backgrounds and higher anxiety levels. By contrast, higher levels of depression, not feeling well advised by the government, and perceiving the pandemic as an economic threat were negatively associated with agreement with measures. Moreover, the use of social media as main COVID-19 information source and not feeling well advised by the government were associated with lower adherence to NPIs. By contrast, higher levels of education were associated with higher adherence. Conclusions This comprehensive analysis emphasizes the associations of COVID-19 information sources as well as sociodemographic and other participant characteristics with agreement with and adherence to NPIs, bearing important implications for future public health crisis communication strategies.
IntroductionIn light of this growing palliative care and end of life care patient population, as well as new (expensive) drugs and treatments, quality research providing evidence for decision-making ...is required. However, common research guidance is lacking in this field, especially in respect to the methods applied in economic evaluations. Therefore, the aim of the planned systematic review is to identify and summarise relevant information on methodological challenges, potential solutions and recommendations for conducting economic evaluations of interventions in adult patients, irrespective of their underlying disease and gender in the palliative or end of life care settings, with no restrictions in regards to countries/geographical regions. The results of this systematic review may help to clarify the current methodological questions and form the basis of new, setting specific methods guidelines and support ongoing applied economic evaluations in the field.Methods and analysisA systematic review will be conducted using Medline, Embase, Health Technology Assessment Database and NHS Economic Evaluation Database to identify the studies published from 1999 onwards with relevant information on methodological challenges, potential solutions and recommendations for conducting economic evaluations in the palliative or end of life care settings. Articles in English, German, Spanish, French or Dutch language will be considered. Two independent reviewers will conduct the screening of articles; any discrepancies will be resolved by discussion and involvement of a third reviewer. Predesigned data extraction forms will be applied, consequently narratively synthesised and categorised. Studies’ methodological quality will be critically appraised. Besides existing economic guidelines and checklists for specific information on the palliative and end of life care sector will be searched.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required, as this is a planned systematic review of published literature. An article will be disseminated in a related peer-reviewed journal, as well as presented at leading palliative care and health economic conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020148160.
PDF
