75
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      How health anxiety influences responses to viral outbreaks like COVID-19: What all decision-makers, health authorities, and health care professionals need to know

      editorial
      *
      Journal of Anxiety Disorders
      Elsevier Ltd.

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Heath anxiety occurs when perceived bodily sensations or changes, including but not limited to those related to infectious diseases (e.g., fever, coughing, aching muscles), are interpreted as symptoms of being ill (Asmundson, Abramowitz, Richter, & Whedon, 2010; Taylor & Asmundson, 2004). Almost everyone experiences health anxiety to some degree, and the associated vigilance to potential health-related threat can be protective, helping identify early signs of health issues that prompt health-promoting behavior. But, when excessive, health anxiety can be detrimental. As illustrated by Kosic, Lindholm, Jarvholm, Hedman-Lagerlof, and Axelsson (2020) in this volume, high levels of health anxiety are becoming increasingly common and, given that high health anxiety is known to manifest following exposure to disease-related popular media (Asmundson et al., 2010), of which there is no current shortage with COVID-19, levels around the world and particularly in areas reporting confirmed cases are likely to be on the rise. Psychological factors are known to play a vital role in the success of public health strategies used to manage epidemics and pandemics; that is, risk communication, vaccination and antiviral therapy, hygiene practices, and social distancing. Health anxiety is important in influencing the success or failure of each of these strategies (Taylor, 2019). Accordingly, it is critical that public health decision-makers, health authorities, and health care providers across disciplines understand how health anxiety will influence responses to viral outbreaks, including current responses to COVID-19. Contemporary cognitive-behavioral models (e.g., Asmundson et al., 2010; Taylor & Asmundson, 2004) posit that health anxiety occurs along a continuum; that is, it varies in degree, from very low levels to very high levels, as opposed to varying in quality. These models also suggest that high levels of health anxiety are characterized primarily by catastrophic misinterpretations of bodily sensations and changes, dysfunctional beliefs about health and illness, and maladaptive coping behaviours. People with high health anxiety tend to misinterpret benign bodily sensations and changes as dangerous. In the case of viral outbreaks, depending on prior experiences with influenza and available information about the current outbreak, a person with high health anxiety may misinterpret benign muscle aches or coughing as a tell-tale signs that they are infected (Taylor & Asmundson, 2004; Wheaton, Abramowitz, Berman, Fabricant, & Olatunji, 2012). This, in turn, increases their anxiety. Misinterpretations of bodily sensations and changes are influenced by one’s beliefs about health and disease, which in those with high health anxiety often include beliefs that all bodily sensations and changes are signs of illness and that one is especially weak or vulnerable to becoming ill. In short, in the context of a viral outbreak or pandemic, individuals with high health anxiety are prone to misinterpreting harmless bodily sensations and changes as evidence that they are infected. This will, in turn, increase their anxiety, influence their ability to make rational decisions, and impact their behaviour. There are several ways in which high health anxiety may influence behavioural responses to the belief of being infected. On the one hand, some people with high health anxiety may regard hospitals and doctor’s offices as a source of contagion and, therefore, avoid seeking medical assistance. On the other hand, other people with high health anxiety tend to seek out health-related information and reassurance, often from doctors. As such, they may visit multiple doctors or even attend hospital emergency rooms in their pursuit of reassurance that their bodily sensations and changes are not due to infection. This behaviour, if it occurs, would add undue burden to health care resources. This was evident during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic, where the surge of patients on hospitals occurred even when the outbreak was only a rumor. At the time in the state of Utah, for example, there was heightened public concern about influenza but little actual disease prevalence; however, emergency room departments experienced substantial surges in patient volumes, with the volumes comparable to the increases experienced when the disease actually reached the state (McDonnell, Nelson, & Schunk, 2012). Most of the surge was due to pediatric visits. Young children frequently contract diseases with flu-like features (e.g., fever, cough, congestion), which were likely misinterpreted by their parents as possible signs of pandemic influenza. A recent article in the Journal of the American Medical Association highlights the need for hospital and medical clinic preparedness so that that concerns regarding COVID-19 do negatively impact normal medical care or compound its direct morbidity and mortality (Adalja, Toner, & Inglesby, 2020). People with high health anxiety also tend to engage in a variety of other maladaptive safety behaviours. In the context of viral outbreaks, this may include excessive hand washing, social withdrawal, and panic purchasing. It is noteworthy that all of these behaviours are consistent with public health recommendations for managing epidemics and pandemics; however, in the case of those with high health anxiety, they are taken to an extreme that can have negative consequences to the individual and their community. For example, the false sense of urgency for various products needed for self-quarantine may lead the health anxious person to over-spend on stockpiling unneeded resources (e.g., hand sanitizer, medications, protective masks). This can have a rippling detrimental impact on a community in need of these resources for other purposes, including normal medical care. Low levels of health anxiety can also have negative impacts on health behaviour (Asmundson, Taylor, Carleton, Weeks, & Hadjistavropoulos, 2012), including public health strategies for managing epidemics and pandemics. To illustrate, during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic, people who viewed themselves as having a low risk of infection were less likely to wash their hands (Gilles et al., 2011) and less likely to seek vaccination (Taha, Matheson, & Anisman, 2013). People who view themselves as being at low risk of infection will also be unlikely to change their social behaviour and disregard recommendations for social distancing. Failure to adhere to even the simplest recommendations, such as washing one’s hands and social distancing, can have significant negative impacts on any efforts to mitigate viral spread. Given that some people are now changing travel plans, organizers are cancelling conferences and other large public events, and hand sanitizer and other health “safety” and “survival” products are flying off the shelves, it is apparent that concern for personal safety is mounting as the number of COVID-19 cases continues to rise around the world. Health anxiety is one of the several psychological factors that will influence the way any given person responds to a viral outbreak (Taylor, 2019), including COVID-19. As per our recent recommendations (Asmundson & Taylor, 2020), more research is needed to understand how individual difference factors, including health anxiety, specifically impact behaviour in response to COVID-19. This will take some time. In the meantime, basic knowledge of how high and low levels of health anxiety will impact behaviour as it relates to strategies for containing and mitigating viral spread is important for all decision-makers, health authorities, and health care professional and needs to be communicated to the public in an effort to curb maladaptive or irresponsible decisions that may negatively impact these efforts.

          Related collections

          Most cited references8

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Coronaphobia: Fear and the 2019-nCoV outbreak

          The outbreak of the novel coronavirus, 2019-nCoV, has dominated headlines throughout the world. This is not surprising. The virus is new, rapidly spreading, with a mortality rate of about 2% at the time of writing this editorial, and there are many uncertainties concerning its origins, nature, and course. The number of 2019-nCoV infections continue to rise, as do the number of deaths. People are being quarantined. Surgical masks and gloves, often used as a barrier to viral transmission, are selling out, even though health authorities such as the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advise people that masks and gloves are not useful or necessary for avoiding infection in healthy people. Data from recent public opinion polls show that 2019-nCoV is having a significant psychological impact. An Angus Reid poll of 1354 Canadian adults conducted in early February 2020 indicated that one-third of respondents were worried about the virus and 7% were “very concerned” about becoming infected (Angus Reid Institute, 2020). At the time of the poll, only 4 Canadians were infected, indicating a very low risk for a country of approximately 37 million; yet, 7% of the population—that is, 2.6 million people—were very concerned. There was also an increase in hygienic and avoidance behaviours. Since hearing about the outbreak, 3% of respondents in the Angus Reid poll had purchased a facemask, 41% washed their hands more often, 4% avoided taking public transit, and 12% avoided public places (Angus Reid Institute, 2020). Consistent with findings from previous epidemics and pandemics (Taylor, 2019), many people in this poll (33%) were not confident that the healthcare system in their community was prepared to deal with new cases of the coronavirus. Lack of faith in the healthcare system is likely to fuel fears about the consequences of becoming infected. Broadly similar findings were reported in U.S. polls. A poll of 808 U.S. adults was conducted on January 31-February 1, 2020 (National Public Radio, 2020). Most respondents (66%) thought that 2019-nCoV was a real threat and most (56%) were very concerned about the spread of the coronavirus in the U.S. About a quarter (26%) of respondents thought the U.S. government was not doing enough to prevent the spread of infection. The Morning Consult company conducted a poll of 2200 American adults from January 24–26, 2020, at which time there were 5 cases of the coronavirus in the U.S. and no fatalities (Morning Consult, 2020). Over a third of respondents (37%) said they were very concerned about the coronavirus spreading in the U.S. A quarter (25%) of respondents were more worried about the coronavirus than they were about the 2014 outbreak of Ebola virus disease. Many respondents were not confident that the spread of infection could be controlled by the CDC or by President Donald Trump (20% and 54%, respectively). In the wake of the 2019-nCoV outbreak, there have been numerous reports of xenophobia directed toward Chinese people (Aguilera, 2020). For example, there have been reports of Chinese restaurants having to close or lay off staff because patrons are avoiding the premises, Chinese nationals have been barred from some restaurants, and cruise ship operators have announced bans on Chinese nationals from traveling on their cruise ships (e.g., Evelyn, 2020; Lowen, 2020). Many (32%) U.S. respondents in the Morning Consult poll blamed the Chinese government for the spread of 2019-nCoV into the U.S. The rise of infection-related xenophobia has been reported in many previous epidemics and pandemics, and appears to be an unfortunately common response when people are threatened with an infection that originates from outside of their community (Taylor, 2019). The fear of 2019-nCoV is likely due to its novelty and the uncertainties about how bad the current outbreak might become. Fear of 2019-nCoV is much greater than fear of seasonal influenza, even though the latter has killed considerably more people. According to the Morning Consult (2020) poll, 37% of Americans were very concerned about 2019-nCoV whereas 27% were very concerned about seasonal influenza, and most respondents (62%) were more worried about 2019-nCoV than they were about seasonal influenza. These figures contrast sharply with the actual number of infections and deaths in the U.S. due to these viruses. As of February 8, 2020, there had been 11 cases of 2019-nCoV in the U.S. and no fatalities. Yet during the seasonal flu season in the U.S. (i.e., from October 2019 to February 2020) there had been 22 million flu illnesses, 210,000 hospitalizations because of influenza, and 12,000 flu-related deaths (CDC, 2020). In other words, the American public was more worried about 11 cases of 2019-nCoV with no fatalities than it was about 22 million cases of flu infection and 12,000 fatalities. While the nature and impact of 2019-nCoV on mental health remains to be determined, there are clues in the existing literature that may help us begin to understand what to expect. Research on the psychological reactions to previous epidemics and pandemics suggests that various psychological vulnerability factors may play a role in coronaphobia, including individual difference variables such as the intolerance of uncertainty, perceived vulnerability to disease, and anxiety (worry) proneness (Taylor, 2019). More research is needed to understand the relationship between coronaphobia and coronavirus-related xenophobia. Research from other outbreaks of infectious disease suggests that individual difference variables such as the perceived vulnerability to disease may play a role in both coronaphobia and coronavirus-related xenophobia (Taylor, 2019). Likewise, lack of information and misinformation, often aided by sensational popular media headlines and foci, have been shown to fuel health-related fears and phobias (Taylor & Asmundson, 2004). These factors may also play a significant role in coronophobia. Much also remains to be learned about the best ways of reducing coronaphobia and related xenophobia. If infection is widespread, these phobias also will likely be widespread. Screen-and-treat approaches for coronaphobia could be implemented, in conjunction with community-based interventions for both infection-related fears and xenophobia (e.g., educational materials) (Taylor, 2019). The merits of such interventions, as well as the most accessible forms of delivery, remain to be investigated. An important question is whether healthcare systems throughout the world are ready to deal with the surge of so-called “worried well” patients; that is, the surge into hospital emergency rooms of people who misinterpret their bodily sensations as signs of potential infection with the 2019-nCoV coronavirus. During the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic there were reports of hospitals being flooded with “worried well” patients who mistakenly believed that their benign coughs or fevers were indications of pandemic influenza (Taylor, 2019). The same will occur for 2019-nCoV, and is likely happening right now in Wuhan, China, as we write this editorial. A great deal of media attention has been devoted to the critical question of whether the healthcare systems throughout the world are ready to deal with the influx of cases of coronavirus infection. What has been lacking in the media, and in news briefs from the WHO and CDC, is a discussion of whether we are ready for a surge of patients into hospital emergency rooms whose problems are not coronavirus, but minor respiratory ailments combined with coronaphobia. The current outbreak of 2019-nCoV represents a call to action for psychosocial researchers and practitioners. It is vitally important to understand the psychosocial fallout of 2019-nCoV, such as excessive fear (or lack of concern and due caution) and discrimination, and to find evidence-based ways of addressing these issues. This will be important not only for 2019-nCoV, but also for future outbreaks of infection. Regardless of whether 2019-nCoV becomes a pandemic, virologists predict that the next severe pandemic is inevitable and may arrive in the coming years (Taylor, 2019).
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Psychological Predictors of Anxiety in Response to the H1N1 (Swine Flu) Pandemic

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found

              Priorities for the US Health Community Responding to COVID-19

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                J Anxiety Disord
                J Anxiety Disord
                Journal of Anxiety Disorders
                Elsevier Ltd.
                0887-6185
                1873-7897
                10 March 2020
                April 2020
                10 March 2020
                : 71
                : 102211
                Affiliations
                [0005]Department of Psychology, University of Regina, Canada
                [0010]Department of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Canada
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author. gordon.asmundson@ 123456uregina.ca
                Article
                S0887-6185(20)30025-6 102211
                10.1016/j.janxdis.2020.102211
                7271220
                32179380
                c614cfbe-fbc3-4a6b-b101-3f9b37d9274d
                © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                Categories
                Article

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry

                Comments

                Comment on this article