Search

The COVID-19 pandemic and consequent lockdowns had a substantial impact on mental health. Distress and fatigue are highly correlated. However, little is known about the determinants of fatigue in the general population during the pandemic. This study aimed to examine the prevalence and predictors of fatigue during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK population. Online surveys were completed by a UK community cohort in April 2020 (wave 1), July-September 2020 (wave 2) and November-December 2020 (wave 3). In total, 3097 participants completed the wave 1 survey, and 1385 and 1087 participants (85.4% women) completed wave 2 and 3 surveys respectively. Fatigue was assessed using the Chalder Fatigue Scale at waves 2 and 3. Hair samples were provided by 827 participants (90.6% women) at wave 1 and wave 2, which were analyzed to indicate HairE (stress hormone). The mean total fatigue score during wave 2 was 14.7 (SD = 4.7), significantly higher than pre-pandemic levels observed in the community (mean difference 0.50, p = .003). At wave 2, 614 (44.3%) participants met the case definition for fatigue, only 15.6% of whom indicated that fatigue lasted for more than 6 months (suggesting it had started prior to the pandemic). Predictors of fatigue at wave 3 included being in a risk group, depression and belief in having COVID-19, which explained 23.8% of the variability in fatigue scores. Depression at wave 1 was the only significant predictor of remaining a fatigue case at wave 3. Fatigue was highly prevalent in the UK community during the COVID-19 pandemic and limited people's daily function. Depression and sociodemographic variables were significant predictors of fatigue.

Objective: To determine the effectiveness of an exercise and functional activity therapy intervention in adults with early dementia or mild cognitive impairment compared with usual care., Design: Randomised controlled trial., Setting: Participants' homes and communities at five sites in the United Kingdom., Participants: 365 adults with early dementia or mild cognitive impairment who were living at home, and family members or carers., Intervention: The intervention, Promoting activity, Independence, and Stability in Early Dementia and mild cognitive impairment (PrAISED), was a specially designed, dementia specific, rehabilitation programme focusing on strength, balance, physical activity, and performance of activities of daily living, which was tailored and progressive and addressed risk and the psychological needs of people with dementia. Up to 50 therapy sessions were provided over 12 months. The control group received usual care plus a falls risk assessment. Procedures were adapted during the covid-19 pandemic., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was score on the carer (informant) reported disability assessment for dementia scale 12 months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes were self-reported activities of daily living, physical activity, quality of life, balance, functional mobility, fear of falling, frailty, cognition, mood, carer strain, service use at 12 months, and falls between months 4 and 15., Results: 365 patient participants were randomised, 183 to intervention and 182 to control. The median age of participants was 80 years (range 65-95), median Montreal cognitive assessment score was 20 out of 30 (range 13-26), and 58% (n=210) were men. Intervention participants received a median of 31 therapy sessions (interquartile range 22-40) and reported completing a mean 121 minutes of PrAISED exercise each week. Primary outcome data were available for 149 intervention and 141 control participants. Scores on the disability assessment for dementia scale did not differ between groups: adjusted mean difference -1.3, 95% confidence interval -5.2 to 2.6; Cohen's d effect size -0.06, 95% confidence interval -0.26 to 0.15; P=0.51). Upper 95% confidence intervals excluded small to moderate effects on any of the range of outcome measures. Between months 4 and 15 the intervention group experienced 79 falls and the control group 200 falls (adjusted incidence rate ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.5 to 1.3; P=0.3)., Conclusion: The intensive PrAISED programme of exercise and functional activity training did not improve activities of daily living, physical activity, or quality of life; reduce falls; or improve any other secondary health status outcomes, despite good uptake. Future research should consider alternative approaches to maintaining ability and wellbeing in people with dementia., Trial Registration: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN15320670., Competing Interests: Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare: support from the National Institute for Health and Care Research for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The PRomoting Activity, Independence and Stability in Early Dementia (PrAISED) study delivered an exercise and functional activity programme to participants living with dementia. A Randomised Controlled Trial showed no measurable benefits in activities of daily living, physical activity or quality of life., Objective: To explore participants' responses to PrAISED and explain why an intervention that might be expected to have produced measurable health gains did not do so., Methods: A process evaluation using qualitative methods, comprising interviews and researcher notes., Setting: Data were collected in participants' homes or remotely by telephone or videoconferencing., Sample: A total of 88 interviews were conducted with 44 participants living with dementia (n = 32 intervention group; n = 12 control group) and 39 caregivers. A total of 69 interviews were conducted with 26 therapists., Results: Participants valued the intervention as proactively addressing health issues that were of concern to them, and as a source of social contact, interaction, information and advice. Facilitators to achieving positive outcomes included perceiving progress towards desired goals, positive expectations, therapists' skills and rapport with participants, and caregiver support. Barriers included: cognitive impairment, which prevented independent engagement and carry-over between sessions; chronic physical health problems and intercurrent acute illness and injury; 'tapering' (progressively infrequent supervision intended to help develop habits and independent activity); and the COVID-19 pandemic., Conclusions: Self-directed interventions may not be appropriate in the context of dementia, even in the mild stages of the condition. Dementia-specific factors affected outcomes including caregiver support, rapport with therapists, availability of supervision, motivational factors and the limitations of remote delivery. The effects of cognitive impairment, multimorbidity and frailty overwhelmed any positive impact of the intervention. Maintenance of functional ability is valued, but in the face of inevitable progression of disease, other less tangible outcomes become important, challenging how we frame 'health gain' and trial outcomes., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: Development and rollout of vaccines offers the best opportunity for population protection against the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) virus. However, hesitancy towards the vaccines might impede successful uptake in the United Kingdom, particularly in young adults who demonstrate the highest rates of hesitancy. This prospective study explored COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in young adults and whether the reasons behind these attitudes changed during the initial stages of the United Kingdom's vaccine rollout., Method: Data on vaccination intention were collected from a British university student cohort at three time points: October 2020, February 2021, and March 2021. This online survey included items on intention to receive a vaccine and a free-text response for the reasons behind this intention. Cochran's Q tests examined changes in rates of hesitancy and acceptance over time and free-text responses were analysed thematically., Results: At baseline, 893 students provided data, with 476 participants completing all three time points. Hesitancy declined over time, with 29.4% of participants expressing hesitancy at baseline, reducing to 9.1% at wave 2 and 5.9% at wave 3. The most commonly endorsed themes for those willing to accept a vaccine were self-protection against COVID-19 and pro-social reasons, including protecting the population or unspecific others, and ending the pandemic/returning to normal life. The most commonly endorsed hesitancy themes related to 'confidence' in the vaccines and potential personal risk, including insufficient testing/scientific evidence, concern about side effects, and long-term effects. These reasons remained the most commonly endorsed at both waves 2 and 3., Conclusions: While a decline in hesitancy was observed over time, the key reasons behind both vaccine acceptance and hesitancy remained consistent. Reasons behind hesitancy aligned with those of the general public, providing support for the use of generalist interventions. Pro-social reasons frequently underpinned vaccine acceptance, so cohort-specific interventions targeting those factors may be of benefit.

Objectives: Coronavirus 2019 vaccine responses in rare autoimmune rheumatic diseases (RAIRDs) remain poorly understood; in particular there is little known about whether people develop effective T cell responses. We conducted an observational study to evaluate the short-term humoral and cell-mediated T cell response after the second severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination in RAIRD patients compared with healthy controls (HCs)., Methods: Blood samples were collected after the second dose and anti-spike, anti-nucleocapsid antibody levels and SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses were measured and compared with those of HCs. Activation-induced marker and deep phenotyping assays were used to identify differences in T cells between high and no/low antibody groups, followed by multidimensional clustering., Results: A total of 50 patients with RAIRDs were included (31 with AAV, 4 with other systemic vasculitis, 9 with SLE and 6 with myositis). The median anti-spike levels were significantly lower in RAIRD patients compared with HCs (P < 0.0001). Fifteen (33%) patients had undetectable levels and 26 (57%) had levels lower than the lowest HC. Rituximab in the last 12 months (P = 0.003) was associated with reduced immunogenicity compared with a longer pre-vaccination period. There was a significant difference in B cell percentages (P = 0.03) and spike-specific CD4+ T cells (P = 0.02) between no/low antibody vs high antibody groups. Patients in the no/low antibody group had a higher percentage of terminally differentiated (exhausted) T cells., Conclusions: Following two doses, most RAIRD patients have lower antibody levels than the lowest HC and lower anti-spike T cells. RAIRD patients with no/low antibodies have diminished numbers and poor quality of memory T cells that lack proliferative and functional capacities., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.)

We survey 62 users of a university asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 testing service on details of their activities, protective behaviours and contacts in the 7 days prior to receiving a positive or negative SARS-CoV-2 PCR test result in the period October 2020-March 2021. The resulting data set is novel in capturing very detailed social contact history linked to asymptomatic disease status during a period of significant restriction on social activities. We use this data to explore 3 questions: (i) Did participation in university activities enhance infection risk? (ii) How do contact definitions rank in their ability to explain test outcome during periods of social restrictions? (iii) Do patterns in the protective behaviours help explain discrepancies between the explanatory performance of different contact measures? We classify activities into settings and use Bayesian logistic regression to model test outcome, computing posterior model probabilities to compare the performance of models adopting different contact definitions. Associations between protective behaviours, participant characteristics and setting are explored at the level of individual activities using multiple correspondence analysis (MCA). We find that participation in air travel or non-university work activities was associated with a positive asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 PCR test, in contrast to participation in research and teaching settings. Intriguingly, logistic regression models with binary measures of contact in a setting performed better than more traditional contact numbers or person contact hours (PCH). The MCA indicates that patterns of protective behaviours vary between setting, in a manner which may help explain the preference for any participation as a contact measure. We conclude that linked PCR testing and social contact data can in principle be used to test the utility of contact definitions, and the investigation of contact definitions in larger linked studies is warranted to ensure contact data can capture environmental and social factors influencing transmission risk., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Research suggests that psychological factors may influence vulnerability to SARS-CoV-2 infection, although the mechanisms are unclear., Purpose: We examined whether the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis may be a possible mechanism, by measuring the relationship between indices of psychological distress and cortisone in hair (hairE) in a UK cohort during the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: Participants (N = 827) provided two 3 cm hair samples over a 6-month period between April-September 2020. Samples reflected hairE in the 3 months prior to the collection date., Results: HairE in the first samples (T1: commenced April 2020) did not differ significantly from pre-pandemic population norms. However, hairE in the second samples (T2: commenced July 2020) were significantly higher than T1 and pre-pandemic population norms, with a 23% increase between T1 and T2. Linear regressions, controlling for age and gender, demonstrated that at both timepoints, hairE levels were greatest in people with a history of mental health difficulties. In addition, stress reported at T1 predicted greater hairE at T2 and a greater change in hairE between T1 and T2., Conclusions: These findings demonstrate that during the COVID-19 pandemic hairE was substantially elevated across a large community cohort, with greatest levels in those with a history of mental health difficulties and greatest changes in those reporting greatest levels of stress early in the pandemic. Further research is required with verified SARS-CoV-2 outcomes to determine whether the HPA axis is among the mechanisms by which a history of mental health difficulties and stress influence SARS-CoV-2 outcomes., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest AM is the director of Cortigenix (www.cortigenix.com). Cortigenix provided guidance on remote self-collection of hair samples by participants., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To explore barriers and facilitators to COVID-19, influenza, and pneumococcal vaccine uptake in immunosuppressed adults with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs)., Methods: Recruiting through national patient charities and a local hospital, participants were invited to take part in an in-depth, one-to-one, semi-structured interview with a trained qualitative researcher between November 2021 and January 2022. Data were analysed thematically in NVivo, cross-validated by a second coder and mapped to the SAGE vaccine hesitancy matrix., Results: Twenty participants (75% female, 20% non-white) were recruited. Barriers and facilitators spanned contextual, individual/group and vaccine/vaccination-specific factors. Key facilitators to all vaccines were higher perceived infection risk and belief that vaccination is beneficial. Key barriers to all vaccines were belief that vaccination could trigger IMID flare, and active IMID. Key facilitators specific to COVID-19 vaccines included media focus, high incidence, mass-vaccination programme with visible impact, social responsibility, and healthcare professionals' (HCP) confirmation of the new vaccines' suitability for their IMID. Novel vaccine technology was a concern, not a barrier. Key facilitators of influenza/pneumococcal vaccines were awareness of eligibility, direct invitation, and, clear recommendation from trusted HCP. Key barriers of influenza/pneumococcal vaccines were unaware of eligibility, no direct invitation or recommendation from HCP, low perceived infection risk, and no perceived benefit from vaccination., Conclusions: Numerous barriers and facilitators to vaccination, varying by vaccine-type, exist for immunosuppressed-IMID patients. Addressing vaccine benefits and safety for IMID-patients in clinical practice, direct invitation, and public-health messaging highlighting immunosuppression as key vaccination-eligibility criteria may optimise uptake, although further research should assess this., Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: AF, JH, KV, TC and JSN-V-T declare no competing interests. CM declares grants awarded from MRC, AHRC BMS and Versus Arthritis, and is Director of the NIHR SPCR. AA declares grants from AstraZeneca and Oxford Immunotec, personal payments from UpToDate, Springer, Menarini and Cadilla pharmaceuticals, consulting fees from Inflazome and NGM Biopharmaceuticals, meeting attendance/travel payments from Pfizer, and is co-chair for the OMERACT CPPD classification criteria and ACR/EULAR CPPD classification criteria working groups. JSN-V-T was seconded to the Department of Health and Social Care, England (DHSC) until 31st March 2022. The views expressed in this manuscript are those of its authors and not necessarily those of DHSC or the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI). These do not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

The global COVID-19 pandemic has impacted on the mental well-being of university students, but little attention has been given to international students, who may have a unique experience and perspective. The aim of this study was to explore the views of international students and university staff towards COVID-19 restrictions, self-isolation, their well-being, and support needs, through eight online focus groups with international students ( n = 29) and semi-structured interviews with university staff ( n = 17) at a higher education institution in England. Data were analysed using an inductive thematic approach, revealing three key themes and six subthemes: (1) practical, academic, and psychological challenges faced during self-isolation and the COVID-19 pandemic; (2) coping strategies to self-isolation and life during the pandemic; and (3) views on further support needed for international students. International students faced practical, academic, and psychological challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly relating to the rapid transition to online learning and the impact of social restrictions on integration with peers and well-being. Online social connections with peers, family, or new acquaintances reduced feelings of isolation and encouraged involvement in university life. Despite raising mental health concerns, most international students did not access mental health support services. Staff related this to perceived stigma around mental health in certain cultural groups. In conclusion, international students experienced specific practical and emotional challenges during the pandemic, and are at risk of mental ill-health, but may not actively seek out support from university services. Proactive and personalised approaches to student support will be important for positive student experiences and the retention of students who are studying abroad in the UK higher education system.

Background: Psychological factors can influence susceptibility to viral infections. We examined whether such influences are evident in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection., Methods: Participants (n = 102) completed measures of anxiety, depression, positive mood, and loneliness and provided a blood sample for the measurement of antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 spike and nucleocapsid proteins., Results: SARS-CoV-2 was significantly negatively associated with anxiety and depression. The model remained significant after adjustment for age and gender, although anxiety and depression were no longer significant independent predictors., Conclusions: These findings offer early support for the hypothesis that psychological factors may influence susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

Demographics and media discourse impact vaccine hesitancy. We explored the New Zealand public's perceptions of COVID-19 vaccines and associated media portrayal, and determined predictive factors associated with willingness to receive vaccines. A community cohort (N = 340) completed online surveys. A logistic regression explored whether characteristics predict willingness to receive the vaccine. Textual data were analysed thematically. Willingness to receive the vaccine was high (90%). Having a postgraduate degree (p =.026), trying to receive an influenza vaccine (p <.001) and fewer concerns (p <.001) predicted willingness. Health keyworkers (p <.001) were less willing. Participants wanted the vaccine for protection and returning to normality. Reasons against receiving vaccines regarded safety, efficacy, and an unclear roll-out plan. The media was reported to generally provide good/positive coverage, but also engage in unbalanced reporting and spreading misinformation. Education strategies should include collaborations between media and scientists and focus on distributing easy-to-access information. Health keyworkers should be reassured of testing/safety., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Previous research has shown that psychological factors, such as stress and social support, are associated with greater susceptibility to viral respiratory illnesses and more severe symptoms. During the COVID-19 pandemic there has been a well-documented deterioration in psychological well-being and increased social isolation. This raises questions as to whether those experiencing psychological adversity during the pandemic are more at risk of contracting and/or experiencing COVID-19 symptoms., Purpose: To examine the relationship between psychological factors and the risk of COVID-19 self-reported infection and the symptomatic experience of SARS-CoV-2 (indicated by the number and severity of symptoms)., Methods: As part of a longitudinal prospective observational cohort study, 1,087 adults completed validated measures of psychological well-being during April 2020 and self-reported incidence of COVID-19 infection and symptom experience across the pandemic through to December 2020. Regression models were used to explore these relationships controlling for demographic and occupational factors., Results: Greater psychological distress during the early phase of the pandemic was significantly associated with subsequent self-reported SARS-CoV-2 infection as well as the experience of a greater number and more severe symptoms., Conclusions: COVID-19 infection and symptoms may be more common among those experiencing elevated psychological distress. Further research to elucidate the mechanisms underlying these associations is needed., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Behavioral Medicine.)

Contact tracing for infectious diseases can be partially automated using mobile applications. However, the success of these tools is dependent on significant uptake and frequent use by the public. This study explored the barriers and facilitators to the New Zealand (NZ) general public's use of the COVID-19 contact NZ COVID Tracer app. Adults (≥18 years, N = 373) in NZ. Qualitative and quantitative data were gathered from a nation-wide online survey. App use and frequency of use were presented as descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were analyzed thematically. 31% reported using the app frequently, 24% used it sometimes, 21% had installed but not used it, and 24% had not installed it. Barriers to use include technical issues, privacy and security concerns, forgetfulness and a lack of support from businesses. The perceived risk of contracting COVID-19, government recommendations and communications, and the importance of contact tracing facilitated use. Technical, user, business, and government factors influenced the public's use of a COVID-19 contact tracing app. The development of apps requiring minimal user effort and initial user testing may improve uptake. Enabling environments and better risk communication may improve uptake of similar community-driven contact tracing apps during future pandemics.

Objectives: Severe Acute Respiratory Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was identified in late 2019, spreading to over 200 countries and resulting in almost two million deaths worldwide. The emergence of safe and effective vaccines provides a route out of the pandemic, with vaccination uptake of 75-90% needed to achieve population protection. Vaccine hesitancy is problematic for vaccine rollout; global reports suggest only 73% of the population may agree to being vaccinated. As a result, there is an urgent need to develop equitable and accessible interventions to address vaccine hesitancy at the population level., Study Design: & Method: We report the development of a scalable digital intervention seeking to address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and enhance uptake of COVID-19 vaccines in the United Kingdom. Guided by motivational interviewing (MI) principles, the intervention includes a series of therapeutic dialogues addressing 10 key concerns of vaccine-hesitant individuals. Development of the intervention occurred linearly across four stages. During stage 1, we identified common reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy through analysis of existing survey data, a rapid systematic literature review, and public engagement workshops. Stage 2 comprised qualitative interviews with medical, immunological, and public health experts. Rapid content and thematic analysis of the data provided evidence-based responses to common vaccine concerns. Stage 3 involved the development of therapeutic dialogues through workshops with psychological and digital behaviour change experts. Dialogues were developed to address concerns using MI principles, including embracing resistance and supporting self-efficacy. Finally, stage 4 involved digitisation of the dialogues and pilot testing with members of the public., Discussion: The digital intervention provides an evidence-based approach to addressing vaccine hesitancy through MI principles. The dialogues are user-selected, allowing exploration of relevant issues associated with hesitancy in a non-judgmental context. The text-based content and digital format allow for rapid modification to changing information and scalability for wider dissemination., (Copyright © 2021 The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

This qualitative study explored the impact of COVID-19 self-isolation and social restriction measures on university students, through the perspectives of both students and the staff supporting them. The study comprised 11 focus groups (students) and 26 individual interviews (staff) at a higher education institution in England during a period of national lockdown (January-March 2021). Participants were university students ( n = 52) with self-isolation experiences and university staff ( n = 26) with student-facing support roles. Focus group and interview data were combined and analysed using an inductive thematic approach. Four themes emerged: 'Adaptation during the pandemic', 'Practical, environmental, and emotional challenges of self-isolating', 'Social factors and their impact on COVID-19 testing and self-isolation adherence', and 'Supporting self-isolation'. Students and staff struggled with the imposed restrictions and shift to online education. Students found it difficult to adapt to new expectations for university life and reported missing out on professional and social experiences. Students and staff noted concerns about the impact of online teaching on educational outcomes. Students endorsed varied emotional responses to self-isolation; some felt unaffected whilst others experienced lowered mood and loneliness. Students were motivated by pro-social attitudes; campaigns targeting these factors may encourage continued engagement in protective behaviours. Staff struggled to manage their increased workloads delivering support for self-isolating students. Universities must consider the support needs of students during self-isolation and prepare for the long-term impacts of the pandemic on student wellbeing and educational attainment. Greater support should be provided for staff during transitional periods, with ongoing monitoring of workforce stress levels warranted.

Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused unprecedented disruption to daily life. This study investigated depression, anxiety and stress in New Zealand (NZ) during the first 10 weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic, and associated psychological and behavioural factors. It also compares the results with a similar cross-sectional study in the UK., Design: Cross-sectional study., Setting: NZ community cohort., Participants: N=681 adults (≥18 years) in NZ. The cohort was predominantly female (89%) with a mean age of 42 years (range 18-87). Most (74%) identified as NZ European and almost half (46%) were keyworkers. Most were non-smokers (95%) and 20% identified themselves as having clinical risk factors which would put them at increased or greatest risk of COVID-19., Main Outcome Measures: Depression, anxiety, stress, positive mood and engagement in health behaviours (smoking, exercise, alcohol consumption)., Results: Depression and anxiety significantly exceeded population norms (p<0.0001). Being younger (p<0.0001) and most at risk of COVID-19 (p<0.05) were associated with greater depression, anxiety and stress. Greater positive mood, lower loneliness and greater exercise were protective factors for all outcomes (p<0.0001). Smoking (p=0.037) and alcohol consumption (p<0.05) were associated with increased anxiety. Pet ownership was associated with lower depression (p=0.006) and anxiety (p=0.008). When adjusting for age and gender differences, anxiety (p = 0.002) and stress (p = 0.007) were significantly lower in NZ than in the UK. The NZ sample reported lower perceived risk (p<0.0001) and worry about COVID-19 (p<0.0001) than the UK sample., Conclusions: The NZ population had higher depression and anxiety compared with population norms. Younger people and those most at risk of COVID-19 reported poorer mental health. Interventions should promote frequent exercise, and reduce loneliness and unhealthy behaviours., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

We aimed to explore university students' perceptions and experiences of SARS-CoV-2 mass asymptomatic testing, social distancing and self-isolation, during the COVID-19 pandemic. This qualitative study comprised of four rapid online focus groups conducted at a higher education institution in England, during high alert (tier 2) national COVID-19 restrictions. Participants were purposively sampled university students ( n = 25) representing a range of gender, age, living circumstances (on/off campus), and SARS-CoV-2 testing/self-isolation experiences. Data were analysed using an inductive thematic approach. Six themes with 16 sub-themes emerged from the analysis of the qualitative data: 'Term-time Experiences', 'Risk Perception and Worry', 'Engagement in Protective Behaviours', 'Openness to Testing', 'Barriers to Testing' and 'General Wellbeing'. Students described feeling safe on campus, believed most of their peers are adherent to protective behaviours and were positive towards asymptomatic testing in university settings. University communications about COVID-19 testing and social behaviours need to be timely and presented in a more inclusive way to reach groups of students who currently feel marginalised. Barriers to engagement with SARS-CoV-2 testing, social distancing and self-isolation were primarily associated with fear of the mental health impacts of self-isolation, including worry about how they will cope, high anxiety, low mood, guilt relating to impact on others and loneliness. Loneliness in students could be mitigated through increased intra-university communications and a focus on establishment of low COVID-risk social activities to help students build and enhance their social support networks. These findings are particularly pertinent in the context of mass asymptomatic testing programmes being implemented in educational settings and high numbers of students being required to self-isolate. Universities need to determine the support needs of students during self-isolation and prepare for the long-term impacts of the pandemic on student mental health and welfare support services.

Objectives: The number of people testing positive for Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) in the UK, particularly among young adults, is increasing. We report here on the mental health of young adults and related psychological and behavioural responses to the pandemic and consider the role of these factors in fuelling the increase in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in this group., Methods: An online survey was completed during the first six weeks of the first UK-wide lockdown by 3097 respondents, including data for 364 respondents aged 18-24 years. The survey included measures of mental health and indices capturing related psychological and behavioural responses to the pandemic., Results: The mental health of 18- to 24-years-olds in the first 6 weeks of lockdown was significantly poorer than that of older respondents and previously published norms: with 84% reporting symptoms of depression and 72% reporting symptoms of anxiety. Young adults also reported significantly greater loneliness and reduced positive mood, both of which were also associated with greater mental health difficulties., Conclusions: We contend that the combination of mental health, social and economic considerations may have contributed to the rise of COVID-19 infections in young adults, and ascribing blame to this group will not aid our efforts to regain control of the disease., (Copyright © 2020 The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)