Search

Objective/background: To describe and characterize insomnia symptoms and nightmare profiles in Portugal during the first six weeks of a national lockdown due to COVID-19.Patients/methods: An open cohort study was conducted to collect information of the general population during the first wave of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 pandemic in Portugal. We analyzed data from 5011 participants (≥16 years) who answered a weekly questionnaire about their well-being. Two questions about the frequency of insomnia and nightmares about COVID-19 were consecutively applied during six weeks (March-May 2020). Latent class analysis was conducted and different insomnia and nightmare profiles were identified. Associations between individual characteristics and both profiles were estimated using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).Results: Five insomnia (No insomnia, Stable-mild, Decreasing-moderate, Stable-severe, Increasing-severe) and three nightmares profiles (Stable-mild, Stable-moderate, Stable-severe) were identified. Being female, younger, perceiving their income as insufficient and feelings of fear towards COVID-19 were associated with higher odds of insomnia (Women: OR = 6.98 95%CI: 4.18-11.64; ≥60 years: OR = 0.30 95%CI: 0.18-0.53; Insufficient income: adjusted OR (aOR) = 8.413 95%CI: 3.93-16.84; Often presenting fear of being infected with SARS-CoV-2 infection: aOR = 9.13 95%CI: 6.36-13.11), and nightmares (Women: OR = 2.60 95%CI: 1.74-3.86; ≥60 years: OR = 0.45 95%CI: 0.28-0.74; Insufficient income: aOR = 2.60 95%CI: 1.20-5.20; Often/almost always presenting fear of being infected with SARS-CoV-2 infection: aOR = 6.62 95%CI: 5.01-8.74). Having a diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 virus infection was associated with worse patterns of nightmares about the pandemic.Conclusions: Social and psychological individual factors are important characteristics to consider in the development of therapeutic strategies to support people with sleep problems during the COVID-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To compare spinal and lower limb pain in adolescents regarding prevalence, characteristics, causes, and impact., Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted in 13-year-old adolescents (female n=2210; male n=2353) from the Portuguese Generation XXI birth cohort. Data were collected between 2018 and 2020 through personal interviews by applying the Luebeck Pain Questionnaire. The pain features examined in each anatomical location (back and lower limb) were recurrence, duration, frequency, intensity, perceived causes, and impact on school and leisure activities. Frequencies and the Chi-square test were used., Results: Questionnaires from 4563 adolescents were analysed, 57.9% had pain in the last three months (main pain in the spine: 11.6%; main pain in the lower limb: 29.0%). Of those, 69.4% and 62.4% reported recurrent pain in the spine and lower limb, respectively. Recurrent pain was more frequent in girls than in boys (spine: 80.0%; 57.0%; lower limb: 70.4%; 58.1% respectively). Pain lasted more than three months in most adolescents (spine: about 60%; lower limb: above 50%); frequency was similarly high in both regions and both sexes (girls: 47.0%; boys: 45.7% in the spine; girls: 45.7%; boys: 40.3% in the lower limb); intensity was rated as high by girls (spine: 45.5%; lower limb: 47.3%) and moderate by boys (spine: 42.0%; lower limb: 41.0%). The leading causes of pain were daily living activities, both for the spine (girls: 65.9%; boys: 76.5%) and the lower limb (girls: 62.2%; boys: 72.1%). Psychosocial causes were the second most common cause of spinal pain (girls: 25.0%; boys: 21.0%). Other causes of lower limb pain were traumatic (girls: 25.5%; boys: 16.6%) and physical factors (girls: 20.7%; boys: 23.8%). Absences from school (girls: 11.7%; boys: 4.8%) and restrictions of leisure activities (girls: 20.7%; boys: 25.2%) were more related to pain in the lower limb., Conclusion: More than half of the adolescents reported spinal or lower limb recurrent pain, which presents a higher frequency, higher intensity, and longer duration in the spine. However, lower limb pain led to more concurrent limitations.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to explore concerns and coping mechanisms during the first national COVID-19 lockdown in Portugal. The general population provided statements via an open comment box as part of an online prospective study., Study Design: This was an Internet-based open cohort study., Methods: Individuals aged ≥16 years were eligible to participate in this study. Inductive content analysis was performed on completed questionnaires submitted between 23 and 29 March 2020 and 27 April and 3 May 2020 (corresponding with the early and late phases of the first national lockdown, respectively)., Results: Data suggest the prominence of behavioural and emotional responses to COVID-19; namely, self-compliance with measures promoted by the government; adopting practices of self-care and supporting/protecting others; and enacting hope (both currently and for the future). Concerns were related to the perception of vulnerabilities for oneself, family and others and to challenging situations presenting in society (e.g. physical and mental health, academic/professional careers, income, social inequality, potential discrimination and stigmatisation, inconsistent information and negative approach to the news), coupled with criticism, scepticism or doubts about government policy and performance of the healthcare system. Expressions of fear and worry and non-compliance with mitigation measures by others (e.g. close relatives, employees and general population) emerged as additional concerns., Conclusions: Continuous assessment of behavioural and emotional responses to the COVID-19 pandemic is needed to support effective communication and public health policies that are sensitive to the concerns, motivations and expectations of the population. Awareness of changing public opinions enables governments to continue to effectively mobilise the population to take recommended actions to reduce the transmission of COVID-19., (Copyright © 2022 The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)