Author: Peter Gamillscheg

Peter Gamillscheg, Agata Łaszewska, Stefanie Kirchner, Kathryn Hoffmann, Judit Simon, Susanne Mayer

Full link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39443935/

Abstract

Background: Long COVID-19 challenges health and social systems globally. International research finds major inequalities in prevalence and healthcare utilization as patients describe difficulties with accessing health care. In order to improve long-term outcomes it is vital to understand any underlying access barriers, for which relevant evidence on long COVID-19 is thus far lacking in a universal healthcare system like Austria. This study aims to comprehensively identify access barriers and facilitators faced by long COVID-19 patients in Austria and explore potential socioeconomic and demographic drivers in health and social care access.

Methods: Applying an exploratory qualitative approach, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 15 experts including medical professionals and senior health officials as well as focus groups with 18 patients with confirmed long COVID-19 diagnosis reflecting varying participant characteristics (age, gender, urbanicity, occupation, education, insurance status) (July-Nov 2023). Data were analysed following a thematic framework approach, drawing on a comprehensive ‘access to health care’ model.

Results: Based on expert and patient experiences, several access barriers and facilitators emerged along all dimensions of the model. Main themes included scepticism and stigma by medical professionals, difficulties in finding knowledgeable doctors, limited specialist capacities in the ambulatory care sector, long waiting times for specialist care, and limited statutory health insurance coverage of treatments resulting in high out-of-pocket payments. Patients experienced constant self-organization of their patient pathway as stressful, emphasizing the need for multidisciplinary care and centralized coordination. Facilitators included supportive social environments, telemedicine, and informal information provided by a nationwide patient-led support group. Differences in patient experiences emerged, among others, as women and younger patients faced gender- and age-based stigmatization. Complementary health insurance reduced the financial strain, however, did not ease capacity constraints, which were particularly challenging for those living in rural areas.

Conclusions: The findings of this study indicate a call for action to improve the long COVID-19 situation in Austria by empowering both providers and patients via increased information offerings, strengthened interdisciplinary treatment structures and telemedicine offerings as well as research funding. Our insights on potentially relevant socioeconomic and demographic drivers in access barriers lay the necessary foundation for future quantitative inequality research.

Keywords: Barriers; Demographic; Facilitators; Healthcare access; Inequalities; Long COVID-19; Post COVID-19 syndrome; Socioeconomic.

Peter Gamillscheg, Susanne Mayer, Monika Pietrzak-Franger, Carina Hilmar, Alina Lange, Judit Simon, Agata Łaszewska

Full link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38867264/

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.

Keywords: COVID-19; Information source; Non-pharmaceutical intervention; Public health measure; Sociodemographic.