Background: The unprecedented severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) constitutes a serious public health concern. However, adoption of COVID-19-related preventive behaviours remain relatively unknown. This study investigated predictors of preventive behaviours. Methods: An analytical sample of 897 Singaporean adults who were quota sampled based on age, gender, and ethnicity were recruited through a web-enabled survey. Outcomes were adoption of, or increased frequency of preventive behaviours (avoiding social events; avoiding public transport; reducing time spent shopping and eating out; wearing a mask in public; avoiding hospitals/clinics; keeping children out of school, washing hands/using sanitisers; keeping surroundings clean; avoiding touching public surfaces; working from/studying at home). Public perceptions regarding COVID-19 (chances of getting COVID-19; perceived likelihood of COVID-19-related intensive care unit (ICU) admission; government trust; self-efficacy; perceived appropriateness of COVID-19 behaviours; response efficacy), anxiety, and demographic characteristics (age; ethnicity; marital status; education; chronic conditions; current living arrangements) were investigated as predictors of preventive behaviours adopted during COVID-19 in binomial and ordered logistic regressions. Results: Though adoption of preventive behaviours among Singaporeans varied, it was, overall, high, and consistent with government recommendations. Nearly a quarter reported moderate to severe anxiety (General Anxiety Disorder 7-item – GAD-7 scores). Respondents who perceived higher COVID-19 risks, had higher government trust, higher self-efficacy, and perceived that others acted appropriately reported increased adoption/frequency of preventive measures. The strongest indicator of behavioural change was response efficacy. Respondents who were older, highly educated, anxious and married reported higher adoption/frequency of preventive measures. Conclusion: To successfully influence appropriate preventive behaviours, public health messages should highlight response efficacy, increase self-efficacy, and promote trust in governmental response. Focus should be on demographic segments with low adoptions, such as younger individuals and those with low education.

No abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has galvanized the global response towards the development of new vaccines based on novel technologies at an unprecedented pace. Since the widespread implementation of vaccination campaigns, case reports on vaccines' systemic side effects, including ocular manifestations, have emerged. Since administered vaccines are generally not able to cause the disease in the recipient, or induce an immune response against the pathogen, we hypothesize that the development of ocular phenomena post-COVID-19 vaccination may occur via an immune response elicited by the vaccine. Of many, the most common ocular adverse events include facial nerve palsy, central venous sinus thrombosis and acute anterior uveitis. These COVID-19 vaccine-induced ocular (CVIO) adverse events could resemble the ocular findings in some of the COVID-19 patients. This review will provide a comprehensive overview of published ocular side effects potentially associated with COVID-19 vaccination and serve as a springboard for further research into CVIO adverse events.

No abstract

Summary Significant sleep disturbance can occur following major abdominal surgery. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of earplugs and eye masks in improving sleep quality and patient satisfaction, reducing nursing demands and in the incidence of delirium in patients after major abdominal surgery. We conducted a randomised controlled trial in 100 patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. We randomly allocated participants to sleep with or without earplugs and eye masks on postoperative days 1–3. The primary outcome measure was sleep quality as measured by the Richards‐Campbell Sleep Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were patient satisfaction, frequency of nursing demand and incidence of delirium measured by the Neelon and Champagne Confusion Scale. Median (IQR [range]) sleep scores were 64 (38‐74 [0‐100] and 60 (44–82 [18–100]) for the control and intervention groups, respectively (p = 0.310). Age and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index scores were found to be significant factors affecting sleep quality. There were no differences in patient satisfaction, reduction in frequency of nursing demands or incidence of delirium on postoperative days 1–3 after major abdominal surgery. The compliance rate in the intervention group was 60–65%. This study has demonstrated that the use of earplugs and eye masks did not contribute to improvements in sleep quality. Of note, sleep quality was moderate, with higher age and worse baseline sleep quality contributing to worse sleep scores. More studies are needed to investigate interventions to improve sleep quality after major abdominal surgery.