Search

The world is social distancing, and compulsory confinement has caused stress, psychological instability, stigmatization, fear, and discrimination in the general population. In this cross-sectional survey study, we administered the Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S) to hospital medical and nonmedical personnel. A total of 1216 participants were surveyed from May 25 to May 29 of 2020. We asked all the staff for their participation in the study, and physical copies of the survey were distributed to the staff willing to participate. All surveys were answered anonymously. We found that the global FCV-19S mean score was 16.4 ± 6.1, with a significant difference between women and men's scores. Medical students presented higher scores than experienced medical personnel. Additionally, the medical and nursing personnel presented a higher level of fear than hospital staff who did not work directly with COVID-19 patients. Our findings suggest that greater knowledge of medicine or infectious diseases could decrease the overall psychological impact of the pandemic disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to assess the fear caused by the COVID-19 pandemic among health services users in Greece. The study involved 1260 participants from three health services units in the prefecture of Corinthia. The COVID-19 Fear Scale (FCV-19S) and the Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced Inventory (Brief-COPE) were used to assess fear levels. Results showed that females experienced a significantly higher fear of COVID-19 (15.9 compared to 15.4), while the age group of>60 years had the highest mean score (16.6). Individuals in retirement showed a greater fear of COVID-19 (16.8), while health sector employees had lower fear scores (15.1). Chronically ill patients had a higher fear of COVID-19 (16.5 as opposed to 15.5 of healthy persons), while people considering that the COVID-19 pandemic will be dealt with soon presented lower levels of fear compared to those not considering it or being uncertain. According to the Brief-COPE questionnaire, fear of COVID-19 total scores was positively correlated with two of the coping subscales; the emotion-focused and the avoidant-coping. The study's findings can contribute to the identification of fear and coping strategies for the development of targeted interventions and mental health support programs during this global crisis.

Jean-Philippe Rozon,1,2 Mélanie Hébert,2 Serge Bourgault,2 Mathieu Caissie,2 Laurence Letartre,2 Eric Tourville,2 Ali Dirani2 1Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada; 2Department of Ophthalmology, Centre Universitaire d’Ophtalmologie, CHU de Québec – Université Laval, Québec, QC, CanadaCorrespondence: Ali DiraniDepartment of Ophthalmology, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050 Ste-Foy Street, Quebec City, QC G1S 4L8, CanadaTel +1 418 525-4444Fax +1 418 682-7557Email drdirani@gmail.comPurpose: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, news related to the pandemic has created a feeling of fear, particularly among high-risk groups including elderly patients. This study aimed to assess the fear associated with COVID-19 and to evaluate the fear of vision decrease related to the delay of treatment in neovascular age-related macular degeneration patients (nAMD) during the pandemic.Patients and Methods: This is a prospective cross-sectional study of 160 actively treated patients with nAMD enrolled between September and November 2020 at a tertiary hospital in Québec, Canada. For each participant, demographic and clinical data were collected. The anxiety was rated in a questionnaire composed of two sections: the Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S) and eight additional questions to assess ophthalmology-related COVID-19 statements.Results: The mean ± standard deviation level of FCV-19S was 17.05± 4.38. In the multivariable analysis, it was significantly higher in women (p< 0.001) and lower in patients with a high school education vs elementary school (p=0.009). In the ophthalmology-related statements, 16% feared vision loss because of difficulties in maintaining regular follow-ups during the pandemic. The female gender was significantly associated with a higher tendency to postpone their appointment (p=0.03). No association was found between the patients’ underlying disease characteristics and higher fear of vision loss.Conclusion: Despite the massive impact of the pandemic, anxiety related to COVID-19 and delaying ophthalmology treatments remained relatively low in nAMD patients. Greater explanations to address this fear may reduce anxiety level, especially among female patients and those with an elementary school education.Keywords: vision loss fear, fear assessment, Fear of COVID-19 Scale, anti-VEGF

The presence of COVID-19 has had psychological consequences among health personnel; these include fear, anxiety, and depression. In the current study, we used the Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S) to assess the response to fear within health staff in Mexico. This was a cross-sectional survey study in which we administered the Spanish version of the FCV-19S to hospital staff. The FCV-19S is a seven-item questionnaire that assesses the severity of fear caused by COVID-19. A total of 2860 participants—1641 female and 1218 male personnel from three hospitals—were included in the study. The internal reliability of the scale was good, with Cronbach's alpha of.902. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted on the seven items of the FCV-19S, showing good model fit (χ2 (7) = 29.40, p <.001; CFI =.99; TLI =.99; RMSEA =.03; SRMR =.010; AIC = 71.40). We found a global FCV-19S mean score of 19.3 ± 6.9, with a significant difference in scores between women and men. Our survey shows a significantly higher level of fear in nursing and administrative personnel, which may be explained by the nursing staff being in close contact with infected patients and the administrative staff lacking understanding of the possible implications of the infection, compared with nonclinical hospital personnel. Our results are consistent with those of other researchers. We must remember that fear is a reaction and that we must be courageous enough to trust validated infection prevention practices to provide the highest standard of care, in the safest environment that we can, for as long as we can. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVID-19 is a major source of fear, stress, and anxiety as well as a major factor impacting the health and wellbeing of people worldwide. The present study builds on the recently developed "Fear of COVID-19 Scale" (Ahorsu et al., In International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00270-8, 2020). The sample comprised of 850 participants, male and female young adults from Russia and Belarus. The majority of survey participants are university students and graduates. Females, students, and others from Russia report higher levels of COVID-19-related fear than those from Belarus. Respondents from Russia and Belarus report less fear than people from Iran who were surveyed earlier. The scale used for the present survey evidenced a good Cronbach's Alpha measure of internal consistency or reliability (0.809). Clearly, further research is needed across locations and over time about the nature and extent of fear caused by COVID 19. Overall, the FCV-19S appears to be a valuable and brief instrument that may provide useful information for intervention and policy purposes to migrate fear and problem behavior linked to infectious disease outbreaks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Low levels of agreement between caregiver and child reports of acute pain are well documented. Aims: This study builds on prior research through exploring factors that may contribute to low caregiver–child concordance. Specifically, the study examined the influence of adult and child sex on adult judgments of children's pain and fear during venipuncture and examined whether trait parental pain catastrophizing, empathy, and anxiety predicted judgment accuracy. Methods: Using a judgment study paradigm, 160 participants (82 women) viewed 20 10-s video clips of children (10 boys, 10 girls) undergoing venipuncture and rated each child's pain and fear. Adults' ratings were compared to the children's own ratings. Adults completed measures of trait parental pain catastrophizing, dispositional empathy, and trait anxiety. Results: Adults accurately judged boys' pain and fear significantly more often than that of girls. Further, adults underestimated and overestimated girls' pain and overestimated girls' fear significantly more frequently than that of boys. No effects of adult sex or adult by child sex interactions emerged. Parental pain catastrophizing significantly predicted underestimation of girls' pain, with adults who engaged in more catastrophizing being less likely to underestimate girls' pain. The variables did not predict adult judgment of child pain for women and men separately and did not predict adult judgment of child fear when examined by adult sex, child sex, or both combined. Conclusions: Child sex influences adult pain and fear judgments, with girls being more vulnerable to inaccurate assessment than boys. Higher levels of parental pain catastrophizing may buffer against adults' propensities to underestimate girls' pain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to compare three behavioural tests to assess fear of humans in breeding gilts and sows in a commercial setting. Two hundred and thirty-two crossbred gilts and sows were studied and the tests were: HAT, behavioural response of sows individually held in an arena to a stationary experimenter (n = 232); HT A , behavioural response of sows in a group pen to an approaching experimenter (n = 232); HT W , behavioural response of sows in a farrowing crate to an approaching experimenter (n = 116). The validated HAT has been used extensively in research to assess fear of humans in pigs and it has been consistently shown that handling treatments designed to differentially affect the pigs' fear of humans produced the expected variations in the approach behaviour of pigs to a stationary experimenter. However, the HAT is impractical for regular on-farm assessment of fear as it involves moving animals individually to an empty pen and is time consuming. There is no evidence in the literature of a well-validated practical test to assess fear of humans in sows in commercial settings and therefore the validity of the HT A and the HT W was investigated by examining their relationship with the HAT. A principal component (PCA) analysis was conducted on each data set for the HAT and HT A to identify a small set of factors for each test that represents the underlying relationships between the variables in each test. For each test a single ‘factor’ (Factor1HAT and Factor2HT A ) was identified that provided an appropriate summary of the data. Only three behavioural variables were measured for the HT W , and as such were not suitable for PCA and therefore were treated individually. Spearman rank correlations were used to investigate the relationships between Factor1HAT and both Factor2HT A and the HT W variables. The effects of group, parity, time of day, test order in the HAT or HT A , test order in the penand experimenter on Factor1HAT, Factor2HT A and the three HT W variables were also studied. A low but significant correlation was found between the HT W and the HAT score (r = 0.24, P = 0.02), while a moderate significant correlation was found between the HAT and HT A scores (r = 0.37, P < 0.01). These relationships suggest that the HT A has reasonable validity; however, further research is required to modify the HT A in order to improve its validity while maintaining its feasibility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study evaluated the ability of 5 different fear classification procedures to discriminate between 3 fear levels and to correlate with 6 commonly used dependent measures of fear. A standardized fear assessment procedure was administered on 2 separate trials to 71 women participants. Following the completion of the assessment trials, the participants’ data were scored and regrouped according to 5 fear classification procedures (behavioral, self-report, skin conductance level, skin response amplitude, and heart rate). This design permitted each procedure to be evaluated to the same target stimulus and at the same point in time. The classifications of participants on the basis of behavior and skin conductance response were found to be most effective selection procedures with self-report, skin conductance level, and heart rate being the least. Reliability of the findings was assessed by a test-retest procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]