Abstract
Background Impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic and its public health measures go beyond physical and mental health and incorporate wider well-being impacts in terms of what people are free to do or be. We explored these capability impacts of the Covid-19 lockdown in association with people’s mental well-being, social support and existing vulnerabilities in Austria.
Methods Adult Austrian residents (n=560) provided responses to a cross-sectional online survey about their experiences during Covid-19 lockdown (15 March-15 April 2020). Instruments measuring capabilities (OxCAP-MH), depression and anxiety (HADS), social support (MSPSS) and mental well-being (WHO-5) were used in association with six pre-defined vulnerabilities using multivariable linear regression.
Results 31% of the participants reported low mental well-being and only 30% of those with a history of mental health treatment received treatment during lockdown. Past mental health treatment had a significant negative effect across all outcome measures with an associated capability well-being score reduction of -6.54 (95%CI: -9.26,-3.82). Direct Covid-19 experience and being ‘at risk’ due to age and/or physical health conditions were also associated with significant capability deprivations. When adjusted for vulnerabilities, significant capability reductions were observed in association with increased levels of depression (−1.79) and anxiety (−1.50), and significantly higher capability levels (+3.77) were associated with higher levels of social support. Compared to the cohort average, individual capability impacts varied between -9% for those reporting past mental health treatment and +5% for those reporting one score higher on the social support scale.
Conclusions Our study is the first to assess the capability limiting aspects of a lockdown in association with specific vulnerabilities. The negative impacts of the Covid-19 lockdown were strongest for people with a history of mental health treatment. In future public health policies, special attention should be also paid to improving social support levels to increase public resilience.
Competing Interest Statement
Judit Simon has led the development of the OxCAP-MH measure. The remaining authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Funding Statement
The study received no funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethics Commission of the Medical University of Vienna (Vote: EK 1529/2020)
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The dataset generated during the current study is available from the corresponding author on a reasonable request.
List of abbreviations
- HADS
- The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale
- MSPSS
- The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support
- OxCAP-MH
- The Oxford CAPabilities questionnaire-Mental Health
- WHO
- World Health Organisation
- WHO-5
- The World Health Organisation-Five Well-being Index
