4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The Psychological and Quality of Life Impacts on Women in Hong Kong during the COVID-19 Pandemic

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          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

          The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has caused a global health crisis. The adverse impacts on Asian women, including those in Hong Kong, are substantial. This cross-sectional online study examined the impacts of COVID-19 on Hong Kong women, including psychological effects, self-belief in coping, and quality of life, and was conducted over 4 weeks from July to August 2020. Females aged over 18, living in Hong Kong, and that could read Chinese, were included. Among 417 participants, 50.8% were aged below 50, 66.7% were married, 57.1% were caregivers, 61.4% had a family income of <USD 2600, and 70.3% attained higher secondary education or above. The results show that 32.2%, 42.4%, and 44.9% of participants had negative emotions of stress, anxiety, and depression. There are significant negative correlations between emotional state and different aspects of quality of life, but positive correlations between general self-efficacy and different aspects of quality of life. COVID-19 induced significant psychological and quality of life impacts on females in Hong Kong. The policymakers, healthcare professionals, and social support organizations should establish appropriate strategies and policies to support women during the COVID-19 pandemic or similar future crises.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

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

          G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences

          G*Power (Erdfelder, Faul, & Buchner, 1996) was designed as a general stand-alone power analysis program for statistical tests commonly used in social and behavioral research. G*Power 3 is a major extension of, and improvement over, the previous versions. It runs on widely used computer platforms (i.e., Windows XP, Windows Vista, and Mac OS X 10.4) and covers many different statistical tests of the t, F, and chi2 test families. In addition, it includes power analyses for z tests and some exact tests. G*Power 3 provides improved effect size calculators and graphic options, supports both distribution-based and design-based input modes, and offers all types of power analyses in which users might be interested. Like its predecessors, G*Power 3 is free.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Immediate Psychological Responses and Associated Factors during the Initial Stage of the 2019 Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Epidemic among the General Population in China

            Background: The 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic is a public health emergency of international concern and poses a challenge to psychological resilience. Research data are needed to develop evidence-driven strategies to reduce adverse psychological impacts and psychiatric symptoms during the epidemic. The aim of this study was to survey the general public in China to better understand their levels of psychological impact, anxiety, depression, and stress during the initial stage of the COVID-19 outbreak. The data will be used for future reference. Methods: From 31 January to 2 February 2020, we conducted an online survey using snowball sampling techniques. The online survey collected information on demographic data, physical symptoms in the past 14 days, contact history with COVID-19, knowledge and concerns about COVID-19, precautionary measures against COVID-19, and additional information required with respect to COVID-19. Psychological impact was assessed by the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), and mental health status was assessed by the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21). Results: This study included 1210 respondents from 194 cities in China. In total, 53.8% of respondents rated the psychological impact of the outbreak as moderate or severe; 16.5% reported moderate to severe depressive symptoms; 28.8% reported moderate to severe anxiety symptoms; and 8.1% reported moderate to severe stress levels. Most respondents spent 20–24 h per day at home (84.7%); were worried about their family members contracting COVID-19 (75.2%); and were satisfied with the amount of health information available (75.1%). Female gender, student status, specific physical symptoms (e.g., myalgia, dizziness, coryza), and poor self-rated health status were significantly associated with a greater psychological impact of the outbreak and higher levels of stress, anxiety, and depression (p < 0.05). Specific up-to-date and accurate health information (e.g., treatment, local outbreak situation) and particular precautionary measures (e.g., hand hygiene, wearing a mask) were associated with a lower psychological impact of the outbreak and lower levels of stress, anxiety, and depression (p < 0.05). Conclusions: During the initial phase of the COVID-19 outbreak in China, more than half of the respondents rated the psychological impact as moderate-to-severe, and about one-third reported moderate-to-severe anxiety. Our findings identify factors associated with a lower level of psychological impact and better mental health status that can be used to formulate psychological interventions to improve the mental health of vulnerable groups during the COVID-19 epidemic.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                ijerph
                International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
                MDPI
                1661-7827
                1660-4601
                23 June 2021
                July 2021
                : 18
                : 13
                : 6734
                Affiliations
                [1 ]School of Nursing, Tung Wah College, Hong Kong, China; meyrickchow@ 123456twc.edu.hk
                [2 ]LKS Faculty of Medicine, School of Nursing, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China; stanley.lam@ 123456hku.hk
                [3 ]Hong Kong Federation of Women’s Centres, Hong Kong, China; liliane.cck@ 123456gmail.com (L.C.K.C.); sisi.liu@ 123456womencentre.org.hk (S.P.S.L.)
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: mariahung@ 123456twc.edu.hk ; Tel.: +852-3468-6804
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9989-9498
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7426-7603
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6826-1539
                Article
                ijerph-18-06734
                10.3390/ijerph18136734
                8267857
                34201456
                05ecc1ae-687d-447e-acc8-d29c7d038b49
                © 2021 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 10 May 2021
                : 18 June 2021
                Categories
                Article

                Public health
                covid-19 pandemic,psychological impacts,quality of life,hong kong,women,depression,anxiety,stress,self-efficacy

                Comments

                Comment on this article