Research highlights several risk and resilience factors at multiple ecological levels that influence individuals’ mental health and wellbeing in their everyday lives and, more specifically, in disaster or outbreak situations. However, there is limited research on the role of these factors in the early days of the COVID-19 crisis. The present study examined if and how potential risk factors (i.e., reduction in income, job insecurity, feelings of vulnerability to contracting the virus, lack of confidence in avoiding COVID-19, compliance with preventative policies) and resilience factors (i.e., trait resilience, family functioning, social support, social participation, and trust in healthcare institutions) are associated with mental health and well-being outcomes, and whether these resilience factors buffer (i.e., moderate) the associations between risk factors and said outcomes. One to two weeks after the government recommended preventative measures, 1,122 Canadian workers completed an online questionnaire, including multiple wellbeing outcome scales in addition to measures of potential risk and resilience factors. Structural equation models were tested, highlighting that overall, the considered risk factors were associated with poorer wellbeing outcomes, except social distancing which was associated with lower levels of stress. Each of the potential resilience factors was found to have a main effect on one or more of the wellbeing outcomes. Moderation analysis indicated that in general these resilience factors did not, however, buffer the risk factors. The findings confirm that the COVID-19 crisis encompasses several stressors related to the virus as well as to its impact on one’s social, occupational, and financial situation, which put people at risk for lower wellbeing as early as one to two weeks after the crisis began. While several resilience factors emerged as positively related to wellbeing, such factors may not be enough, or sufficiently activated at that time, to buffer the effects of the numerous life changes required by COVID-19. From an ecological perspective, while mental health professionals and public health decision-makers should offer/design services directly focused on mental health and wellbeing, it is important they go beyond celebrating individuals’ inner potential for resilience, and also support individuals in activating their environmental resources during a pandemic.

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study is to examine the contribution of health behaviors (self-management and coping), quality of care, and individual characteristics (depressive symptoms, self-efficacy, illness representations) as mediators in the relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and glycemic control.MethodsA sample of 295 adult patients with type 2 diabetes was recruited at the end of a diabetes education course. Glycemic control was evaluated through glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c). Living in poverty and education level were used as indicators of SES.ResultsBootstrapping analysis showed that the significant effects of poverty and education level on HbA1c were mediated by avoidance coping and depressive symptoms. The representation that diabetes is unpredictable significantly mediated the relationship between living in poverty and HbA1c, while healthy diet mediated the relationship between education level and HbA1c.ConclusionsTo improve glycemic control among patients with low SES, professionals should regularly screen for depression, offering treatment when needed, and pay attention to patients' illness representations and coping strategies for handling stress related to their chronic disease. They should also support patients in improving their self-management skills for a healthy diet.

No abstract

Background: Due to the current coronavirus (COVID-19) crisis, workplaces have had to make significant alterations in the way they conduct business. This, in addition to the current financial instability, may put workers at risk of experiencing job insecurity and, in turn, lower wellbeing. Job insecurity is a key determinant of wellbeing, but little is known on how it is impacted by public health crises, and more specifically how it relates to workers' positive and negative wellbeing in the midst of a pandemic. Research is lacking on resilience levers that workplace interventions should target to support wellbeing in times of insecurity. Objective: Framed from a multidisciplinary perspective (public health, positive and organizational psychology), the study explores (1) workers' job (in)security during the COVID-19 pandemic one to two weeks after social distancing measures were implemented by Canadian governments, (2) how job (in)security relates to wellbeing during the pandemic, and (3) the potential positive effects of workplace-related resilience levers. Method: 1,073 Canadian workers working full-/part-time or who were temporarily laid off completed an online survey, including measures of wellbeing at work or in general, job security and potential resilience levers (workplace disaster preparedness, policy, social capital). Results: Multiple regression findings highlight that marginalized workers (e.g., women, migrants, people facing financial hardships) reported lower job security, and having temporarily lost one's job was negatively associated with job security. Low job security was related to lower scores across measures of wellbeing. Distress was high in the sample. Workplace disaster preparedness, policy and social capital were associated with higher wellbeing. The effects of these resilience levers tended to be stronger at higher job security levels. Discussion: Recommendations include a systemic, collaborative approach that includes policies fostering job security as well as resilience-promoting interventions in the workplace to protect/increase the wellbeing of workers during COVID-19.

Mood and anxiety disorders are the most prevalent mental disorders. People with such disorders implement self-management strategies to reduce or prevent their symptoms and to optimize their health and well-being. Even though self-management strategies are known to be essential to recovery, few researchers have examined them. The aim of this study is to explore strategies used by people recovering from depressive, anxiety, and bipolar disorders by asking 50 of them to describe their own strategies. Strategies were classified according to dimensions of recovery: social, existential, functional, physical, and clinical. Within these themes, 60 distinct strategies were found to be used synergistically to promote personal recovery as well as symptom reduction. Findings highlight the diversity of strategies used by people, whether they have depressive, anxiety, or bipolar disorders. This study underscores the importance of supporting self-management in a way that respects individual experience.