Background The COVID-19 pandemic has affected people’s engagement in health behaviors, especially those that protect individuals from SARS-CoV-2 transmission, such as handwashing/sanitizing. This study investigated whether adherence to the World Health Organization’s (WHO) handwashing guidelines (the outcome variable) was associated with the trajectory of the COVID-19 pandemic, as measured by the following 6 indicators: (i) the number of new cases of COVID-19 morbidity/mortality (a country-level mean calculated for the 14 days prior to data collection), (ii) total cases of COVID-19 morbidity/mortality accumulated since the onset of the pandemic, and (iii) changes in recent cases of COVID-19 morbidity/mortality (a difference between country-level COVID-19 morbidity/mortality in the previous 14 days compared to cases recorded 14–28 days earlier). Methods The observational study (#NCT04367337) enrolled 6064 adults residing in Australia, Canada, China, France, Gambia, Germany, Israel, Italy, Malaysia, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Singapore, and Switzerland. Data on handwashing adherence across 8 situations (indicated in the WHO guidelines) were collected via an online survey (March–July 2020). Individual-level handwashing data were matched with the date- and country-specific values of the 6 indices of the trajectory of COVID-19 pandemic, obtained from the WHO daily reports. Results Multilevel regression models indicated a negative association between both accumulation of the total cases of COVID-19 morbidity (B = −.041, SE = .013, p = .013) and mortality (B = −.036, SE = .014 p = .002) and handwashing. Higher levels of total COVID-related morbidity and mortality were related to lower handwashing adherence. However, increases in recent cases of COVID-19 morbidity (B = .014, SE = .007, p = .035) and mortality (B = .022, SE = .009, p = .015) were associated with higher levels of handwashing adherence. Analyses controlled for participants’ COVID-19-related situation (their exposure to information about handwashing, being a healthcare professional), sociodemographic characteristics (gender, age, marital status), and country-level variables (strictness of containment and health policies, human development index). The models explained 14–20% of the variance in handwashing adherence. Conclusions To better explain levels of protective behaviors such as handwashing, future research should account for indicators of the trajectory of the COVID-19 pandemic. Trial registration Clinical Trials.Gov, #NCT04367337

Background Patterns of protective health behaviors, such as handwashing and sanitizing during the COVID-19 pandemic, may be predicted by macro-level variables, such as regulations specified by public health policies. Health behavior patterns may also be predicted by micro-level variables, such as self-regulatory cognitions specified by health behavior models, including the Health Action Process Approach (HAPA). Purpose This study explored whether strictness of containment and health policies was related to handwashing adherence and whether such associations were mediated by HAPA-specified self-regulatory cognitions. Methods The study (NCT04367337) was conducted among 1,256 adults from Australia, Canada, China, France, Gambia, Germany, Israel, Italy, Malaysia, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Singapore, and Switzerland. Self-report data on cross-situational handwashing adherence were collected using an online survey at two time points, 4 weeks apart. Values of the index of strictness of containment and health policies, obtained from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker database, were retrieved twice for each country (1 week prior to individual data collection). Results Across countries and time, levels of handwashing adherence and strictness of policies were high. Path analysis indicated that stricter containment and health policies were indirectly related to lower handwashing adherence via lower self-efficacy and self-monitoring. Less strict policies were indirectly related to higher handwashing adherence via higher self-efficacy and self-monitoring. Conclusions When policies are less strict, exposure to the SARS-CoV-2 virus might be higher, triggering more self-regulation and, consequently, more handwashing adherence. Very strict policies may need to be accompanied by enhanced information dissemination or psychosocial interventions to ensure appropriate levels of self-regulation.

No abstract

No abstract

A left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is a mechanical device that treats advanced heart failure. Patients coping with an LVAD need extensive instrumental and medical support, which is usually provided by the spouse. Therefore, it seems that dyadic coping strategies play a crucial role as either mitigators or hinderers of couples’ illness management in the context of LVADs. The aim of this research was to formulate a typology of dyadic coping strategies applied by these couples, as unfolded in their mutual and individual subjective experiences. The research was performed in collaboration with an LVAD implantation unit at a medium-sized hospital in Israel. Couples ( N = 17) participated in an in-depth dyadic interview using a semi-structured interview guide, and the data collected were analyzed using content analysis. Our findings suggest that couples coping with an LVAD develop strategies for handling fear, processing and accepting their illness narratives, adjusting their level of independence and intimacy, and utilizing humor. Moreover, our analysis showed that each couple utilized a unique mix of dyadic coping strategies. To the best of our knowledge, the current study is the first to explore the dyadic coping strategies of couples coping with an LVAD. Our results may constitute a base for developing dyadic intervention programs and clinical recommendations to improve the quality of life and relationships of patients and their spouses while coping with LVAD implementation.