Quality of life during the epidemic of COVID-19 and its associated factors among enterprise workers in East China

Abstract

Background The COVID-19 related lockdown and home confinement might have an important impact on the quality of life in enterprise workers. We investigated the quality of life during the epidemic in enterprise workers who just returned to work, and assessed its potential influencing factors to have a better understanding of the impact of COVID-19 epidemic lockdown and home confinement. Methods This was a cross-sectional study of enterprise workers conducted in Deqing and Taizhou, Zhejiang Province, China. The Chinese version of EQ5D was used to assess life quality, and information about general characteristics and COVID-19 related factors was collected by a structured questionnaire, which was distributed through the social application “WeChat”. Multiple liner regression was used to investigate potential influencing factors. Results A total of 2420 participants were enrolled, 59.5% of which worked in Deqing. About 50% of the participants reported worries about the COVID-2019 epidemic and 40.2% had a centralized or home quarantine during the epidemic. The mean EQ-5D score and VAS were 0.990 and 93.5. Multiple liner regression showed that the quality of life measures was related to physical activities (β = 0.006) and keeping home ventilation (β = 0.063) in Deqing, and were related to wearing a mask when going out (β = 0.014), keeping home ventilation (β = 0.061), other marital status (β = − 0.011), worry about the epidemic (β = − 0.005) and having a centralized or home quarantine (β = − 0.005) in Taizhou. Conclusions The quality of life for returning enterprise workers in areas with different risks of COVID-19 was affected by different factors. Associated factors identified from this study would help develop proper intervention measures for enterprise workers to reduce the impact of large-scale public health events like the COVID-19 on their quality of life.

Academic stress, COVID‐19 anxiety, and quality of life among nursing students: The mediating role of resilience

“…( 2021 ), who found a minor psychological influence of COVID‐19 anxiety on mental health and QoL. Furthermore, Chinese workers who were anxious about the pandemic had a negative relationship with QoL (Chen et al., 2021 ). Social support, adequate knowledge, and accurate information regarding the COVID‐19 pandemic have lessened anxiety, resulting in higher QoL among residents in Wuhan, China, where the novel coronavirus was first discovered (Liu et al., 2021 ).…”

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Health-Related Quality of Life and Physical Activity of Patients in Hemodialysis

“…Low HRQoL is associated with clinical outcomes, increased chance of hospitalization, and decreased survival in subjects undertaking dialysis [ 8 ]. HRQoL was negatively impacted by the pandemic in the general population [ 9 ], but also in people suffering from CKD [ 10 ].…”

Health Related Quality of Life among Patients’ Family Members Visiting Hospital during COVID-19

“…[2] A contrast finding revealed in a study of China where the majority of respondents (93.8%) had a perfect score of "1.000" for QOL (EQ-5D). [16] Regarding four domains, the higher mean score (13.92±2.54) was found on social relation, followed by psychological health (13.68±1.74), physical health (13.14±1.54), and environmental health (12.53±1.74). During the period of the study, there was no lockdown in Kathmandu valley but Nepal Government set rules to prevent big gatherings.…”

“…[6] But no gender or age difference was observed in total QOL (EQ-5D) score and five domains of QOL among enterprise workers of China. [16]…”

“…[12] The Nepali version of the WHOQOL-BREF was used to assess QOL in this study. [13] Nepali version of the WHOQOL-BREF was used in Nepal as well [14] It is a 26 items self-rating questionnaire, giving scores to overall QOL (item 1, 2) and its four dimensions: physical health (e.g., sleep quality, energy and tiredness) (item 3,10,16,15,17,4,18) , psychological health (e.g., positive emotion, self-esteem, personal beliefs) (item 5,7,19,11,26,6), social relationships (e.g., social support and sexual activity) (item 20,22,21), and environmental health (e.g., climate, transportation, and healthcare assistance) (Item 8, 23, 12, 24, 13, 14, 9, 25). Items ask participants to rate their QOL during the last two weeks and each of them are rated on a 5-point Likert scale.…”