The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic affects people’s health and health-related quality of life (HRQoL), especially in those who have suspected COVID-19 symptoms (S-COVID-19-S). We examined the effect of modifications of health literacy (HL) on depression and HRQoL. A cross-sectional study was conducted from 14 February to 2 March 2020. 3947 participants were recruited from outpatient departments of nine hospitals and health centers across Vietnam. The interviews were conducted using printed questionnaires including participants’ characteristics, clinical parameters, health behaviors, HL, depression, and HRQoL. People with S-COVID-19-S had a higher depression likelihood (OR, 2.88; p < 0.001), lower HRQoL-score (B, −7.92; p < 0.001). In comparison to people without S-COVID-19-S and low HL, those with S-COVID-19-S and low HL had 9.70 times higher depression likelihood (p < 0.001), 20.62 lower HRQoL-score (p < 0.001), for the people without S-COVID-19-S, 1 score increment of HL resulted in 5% lower depression likelihood (p < 0.001) and 0.45 higher HRQoL-score (p < 0.001), while for those people with S-COVID-19-S, 1 score increment of HL resulted in a 4% lower depression likelihood (p = 0.004) and 0.43 higher HRQoL-score (p < 0.001). People with S-COVID-19-S had a higher depression likelihood and lower HRQoL than those without. HL shows a protective effect on depression and HRQoL during the epidemic.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has imposed a heavy burden on health care systems and governments. Health literacy (HL) and eHealth literacy (as measured by the eHealth Literacy Scale [eHEALS]) are recognized as strategic public health elements but they have been underestimated during the pandemic. HL, eHEALS score, practices, lifestyles, and the health status of health care workers (HCWs) play crucial roles in containing the COVID-19 pandemic. Objective The aim of this study is to evaluate the psychometric properties of the eHEALS and examine associations of HL and eHEALS scores with adherence to infection prevention and control (IPC) procedures, lifestyle changes, and suspected COVID-19 symptoms among HCWs during lockdown. Methods We conducted an online survey of 5209 HCWs from 15 hospitals and health centers across Vietnam from April 6 to April 19, 2020. Participants answered questions related to sociodemographics, HL, eHEALS, adherence to IPC procedures, behavior changes in eating, smoking, drinking, and physical activity, and suspected COVID-19 symptoms. Principal component analysis, correlation analysis, and bivariate and multivariate linear and logistic regression models were used to validate the eHEALS and examine associations. Results The eHEALS had a satisfactory construct validity with 8 items highly loaded on one component, with factor loadings ranked from 0.78 to 0.92 explaining 76.34% of variance; satisfactory criterion validity as correlated with HL (ρ=0.42); satisfactory convergent validity with high item-scale correlations (ρ=0.80-0.84); and high internal consistency (Cronbach α=.95). HL and eHEALS scores were significantly higher in men (unstandardized coefficient [B]=1.01, 95% CI 0.57-1.45, P<.001; B=0.72, 95% CI 0.43-1.00, P<.001), those with a better ability to pay for medication (B=1.65, 95% CI 1.25-2.05, P<.001; B=0.60, 95% CI 0.34-0.86, P<.001), doctors (B=1.29, 95% CI 0.73-1.84, P<.001; B 0.56, 95% CI 0.20-0.93, P=.003), and those with epidemic containment experience (B=1.96, 95% CI 1.56-2.37, P<.001; B=0.64, 95% CI 0.38-0.91, P<.001), as compared to their counterparts, respectively. HCWs with higher HL or eHEALS scores had better adherence to IPC procedures (B=0.13, 95% CI 0.10-0.15, P<.001; B=0.22, 95% CI 0.19-0.26, P<.001), had a higher likelihood of healthy eating (odds ratio [OR] 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.06, P=.001; OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.02-1.07, P=.002), were more physically active (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.02-1.03, P<.001; OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.03-1.05, P<.001), and had a lower likelihood of suspected COVID-19 symptoms (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.96-0.98, P<.001; OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.95-0.98, P<.001), respectively. Conclusions The eHEALS is a valid and reliable survey tool. Gender, ability to pay for medication, profession, and epidemic containment experience were independent predictors of HL and eHEALS scores. HCWs with higher HL or eHEALS scores had better adherence to IPC procedures, healthier lifestyles, and a lower likelihood of suspected COVID-19 symptoms. Efforts to improve HCWs’ HL and eHEALS scores can help to contain the COVID-19 pandemic and minimize its consequences.

ObjectivesWe examined impacts and interactions of COVID-19 response involvement, health-related behaviours and health literacy (HL) on anxiety, depression, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among healthcare workers (HCWs).DesignA cross-sectional study was conducted. Data were collected 6 April to 19 April 2020 using online-based, self-administered questionnaires.Setting19 hospitals and health centres in Vietnam.Participants7 124 HCWs aged 21–60 years.ResultsThe COVID-19 response-involved HCWs had higher anxiety likelihood (OR (95% CI)=4.41 (3.53 to 5.51)), higher depression likelihood (OR(95% CI)=3.31 (2.71 to 4.05)) and lower HRQoL score (coefficient, b(95% CI)=−2.14 (−2.89 to −1.38)), compared with uninvolved HCWs. Overall, HCWs who smoked or drank at unchanged/increased levels had higher likelihood of anxiety, depression and lower HRQoL scores; those with unchanged/healthier eating, unchanged/more physical activity and higher HL scores had lower likelihood of anxiety, depression and higher HRQoL scores. In comparison to uninvolved HCWs who smoked or drank at never/stopped/reduced levels, involved HCWs with unchanged/increased smoking or drinking had lower anxiety likelihood (OR(95% CI)=0.34 (0.14 to 0.83)) or (OR(95% CI)=0.26 (0.11 to 0.60)), and lower depression likelihood (OR(95% CI)=0.33 (0.15 to 0.74)) or (OR(95% CI)=0.24 (0.11 to 0.53)), respectively. In comparison with uninvolved HCWs who exercised at never/stopped/reduced levels, or with those in the lowest HL quartile, involved HCWs with unchanged/increased exercise or with one-quartile HL increment reported lower anxiety likelihood (OR(95% CI)=0.50 (0.31 to 0.81)) or (OR(95% CI)=0.57 (0.45 to 0.71)), lower depression likelihood (OR(95% CI)=0.40 (0.27 to 0.61)) or (OR(95% CI)=0.63 (0.52 to 0.76)), and higher HRQoL scores (b(95% CI)=2.08 (0.58 to 3.58)), or (b(95% CI)=1.10 (0.42 to 1.78)), respectively.ConclusionsPhysical activity and higher HL were found to protect against anxiety and depression and were associated with higher HRQoL. Unexpectedly, smoking and drinking were also found to be coping behaviours. It is important to have strategic approaches that protect HCWs’ mental health and HRQoL.

Purpose: We examined factors associated with health literacy among elders with and without suspected COVID-19 symptoms (S-COVID-19-S). Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted at outpatient departments of nine hospitals and health centers 14 February−2 March 2020. Self-administered questionnaires were used to assess patient characteristics, health literacy, clinical information, health-related behaviors, and depression. A sample of 928 participants aged 60–85 years were analyzed. Results: The proportion of people with S-COVID-19-S and depression were 48.3 and 13.4%, respectively. The determinants of health literacy in groups with and without S-COVID-19-S were age, gender, education, ability to pay for medication, and social status. In people with S-COVID-19-S, one-score increment of health literacy was associated with 8% higher healthy eating likelihood (odds ratio, OR, 1.08; 95% confidence interval, 95%CI, 1.04, 1.13; p < 0.001), 4% higher physical activity likelihood (OR, 1.04; 95%CI, 1.01, 1.08, p = 0.023), and 9% lower depression likelihood (OR, 0.90; 95%CI, 0.87, 0.94; p < 0.001). These associations were not found in people without S-COVID-19-S. Conclusions: The older people with higher health literacy were less likely to have depression and had healthier behaviors in the group with S-COVD-19-S. Potential health literacy interventions are suggested to promote healthy behaviors and improve mental health outcomes to lessen the pandemic's damage in this age group.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic causes a huge burden for affected countries. Several public health interventions were applied to contain the infection. However, the pandemic itself and the lockdown measure negatively influence people's lifestyles and psychological health. Purpose: To explore determinants of healthy dietary intake and depression, and examine the interaction between healthy dietary intake and COVID-19 lockdown on depression. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted at 18 hospitals and health centers from February 14 to May 31, 2020. Data of 8,291 outpatients were collected including patients' characteristics, clinical parameters, health literacy, healthy dietary intake (using the healthy eating score, HES), other health-related behaviors, and depression (using the patient health questionnaire, PHQ). Depression was defined as PHQ score ≥ 10. Results: Protective factors of healthy dietary intake and depression were higher education, better medication payment ability, higher social status, more physical activity, and higher health literacy, whereas older age, ever married, own business or other types of occupation, lockdown, suspected COVID-19 symptoms, and comorbidity were associated with lower HES scores and a higher depression likelihood. Besides, overweight/obesity and alcohol drinking were associated with lower HES scores. As compared with patients not under lockdown and with lowest HES score, those who were under lockdown and with lowest HES score had 10.6 times higher depression likelihood (odds ratio, OR, 10.60; 95% CI 6.88, 16.32; p < 0.001), whereas people with higher HES score had 15% lower depression likelihood (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.82, 0.89; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Healthy dietary intake and depression were determined by several sociodemographic, clinical, and behavioral factors. Lockdown measure affects people's dietary intake behavior and depression. Importantly, healthy dietary intake potentially modifies the negative effect of lockdown on depression.