Evaluating the Psychological Impacts Related to COVID-19 of Vietnamese People Under the First Nationwide Partial Lockdown in Vietnam

Abstract

This is the first time in Vietnam that people have undergone “social distancing” to minimize the spreading of infectious disease, COVID-19. These deliberate preemptive strategies may have profound impacts on the mental health of the population. Therefore, this study aimed to identify the psychological impacts of COVID-19 on Vietnamese people and associated factors. We conducted a cross-sectional study during a one-week social distancing and isolation from April 7 to 14, 2020, in Vietnam. A snowball sampling technique was carried out to recruit participants. Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) was utilized to assess the psychological impacts of the COVID-19. Of all participants, 233 (16.4%) reported low level of PTSS; 76 (5.3%) rated as moderate, and 77 (5.4%) reported extreme psychological conditions. Being female, above 44 years old, or having a higher number of children in the family were positively associated with a higher level of psychological distress. Being self-employed/unemployed/retired was associated with a higher score of intrusion and hyperarousal subscale. Individuals who have a history of touching objects with the possibility of spreading coronavirus (utensils) were related to a higher level of avoidance. There were relatively high rates of participants suffering from PTSS during the first national lockdown related to COVID-19. Comprehensive strategies for the screen of psychological problems and to support high-risk groups are critical, especially females, middle-aged adults and the elderly, affected laborers, and health care professionals.

Perceived psychological stress and associated factors in the early stages of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic: Evidence from the general Chinese population

“…In this study, females were found to be more likely to suffer higher psychological stress. This result was consistent with the previous study, which also found that female may be associated with the worse psychological status during COVID-19 epidemic [24,25].…”

“…Women may be more likely to have sleep problem, depressive symptom [26], and more intrusive flashbacks as they were more sensitivity to emotional stimuli and resulted in altered immune function and hormone level [25,27]. We also found that unmarried respondents were more likely to suffer higher pressure.…”

Sex differences and Psychological Stress: Responses to the COVID-19 epidemic in China

“…That female's stress was greater than that of males was also consistent with existing evidence [14,16] and similar studies conducted during the pandemic of COVID-19 from different countries [22][23][24][25]. The nding correspondents to epidimeological research suggesting that females have a higher risk of psychological outcomes [35].…”

“…Sex differences in self-reported stress are further re ected in the perceived need of psychological support services, which are often most evident in females. The sex differences of stress should be paid attention, and the government should provide appropriated paychological support services to improve female's resilience and alleviate their distress [23].…”

The psychological impact of COVID-19 and restrictive measures in the world

“…Validated versions of the tests in the various languages spoken in the seven countries were employed. Moreover, considering previous researches performed on a one-country level, IES-R and DASS-21 were used during COVID-19 research in China ( Hao et al., 2020 ), India ( Chew et al., 2020 ), Vietnam ( Le et al., 2020 ), Singapore ( Tan et al., 2020 ), and Philippines ( Tee et al., 2020 ); MASS was adopted in Italy ( Conversano et al., 2020 ; Baiano et al., 2020 ) and Brazil (Kozasa et al., 2020); PSS10 was used in Brazil (Kozasa et al., 2020), China ( Duan et al., 2020 ; Yan et al., 2020 ) and Colombia ( Pedrozo-Pupo et al., 2020 ); PHQ9 was employed in Greece ( Skapinakis et al., 2020 ), Italy ( Rapisarda et al., 2020 ), Spain ( Garre-Olmo et al., 2021 ) and China ( Yao, 2020 ); Brief-COPE was used in Australia ( Gurvich et al., 2020 ), Greece ( Skapinakis et al., 2020 ), United Kingdom ( Dawson and Golijani-Moghaddam, 2020 ) and USA ( Umucu and Lee, 2020 ).…”