This review assesses various sources regarding obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) symptoms and the coronavirus pandemic via a study of literature related to OCD conditions in the United States, China, the United Kingdom, and India. Coronavirus’s morbidity and its status as a global pandemic transmittable from one person to another has subsequently intensified the personal perception of distress. The projected shortage of vital medical equipment to fight coronavirus due to daily increases in COVID-19 cases creates social unrest. The world confronts perpetual news about high numbers of coronavirus cases, more people in quarantine, and more deaths; those not infected feel increasing fear about its proximity. Social media, print media, and electronic sources offer much advice on how to prevent coronavirus infection. Pandemics extend beyond pathophysiology and medical phenomena to associations with intense psychosocial impact. Studies have established that people with existing mental disorders are prone to relapses, the fear of faulty COVID-19 prevention measures, distress, and suicidal thoughts during pandemics. Precautionary measures aim to slow the spread of coronavirus, but these radical repetitive measures create great anxiety in the mental health of individuals suffering from OCD. Despite the nature of their conditions, these people must adhere to routine processes, such as washing hands, wearing masks and gloves, and sanitizing hands. Given the asymptomatic nature of people suffering from OCD, the routine measures for addressing COVID-19 have a hectic and adverse effect on their mental health and their state of relaxation. Through a systematic literature review, this paper provides insight into the coronavirus pandemic’s implications for OCD symptoms.
Drinking motives have been identified as important predictors of alcohol consumption. Similarly, the degree of readiness to change (RTC) can predict behavioral changes when drinking alcohol. However, the link between drinking motives and RTC has not been explored in previous research. The aim of this study is to investigate whether the four drinking motives (coping, enhancement, social, conformity) can predict the three stages of RTC (precontemplation, contemplation and action) in relation to alcohol consumption. Two hundred and fifty-two undergraduates’ students completed an online self-assessment survey on Qualtrics that assessed motives for alcohol use, drinking behavior, and RTC. Hierarchical regressions showed that among the four specific drinking motives, coping motives significantly predicted all three stages of RTC; conformity motives positively predicted the action stage of change; social motives negatively predicted the precontemplation and action stages of change; enhancement motives were not significant in predicting RTC stages. These results indicate that the three RTC levels can be predicted by coping, social, and conformity motives, but not by enhancement motives. Additionally, given the importance of coping motives, it might be useful to address and include healthier coping mechanisms as part of clinical interventions and prevention methods to circumvent unsafe drinking behaviors independent of a single RTC stage.
In Saudi Arabia, it is generally perceived that private special education institutes (SEIs) provide a higher quality education than their public counterparts. Parents tend to trust and invest in private rather than public institutes. This is principally attributed to the greater financial capacity of private special institutes, which ensures services can be provided more effectively. Investigating this perspective, this study seeks to bridge the gap often observed and commented upon between public and private SEIs, and to reflect critically on how the needs of all students with intellectual disabilities can be met within the public system. A comparative case study of two SEIs in Saudi Arabia for students with intellectual disabilities, one public and one private, was designed. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with parents, teachers and principals. A key finding of this study is that there is a major difference in the workplace cultures of public and private institutes. This results in several observable factors that were found to contribute to the quality of provision for learners.