Pain, And Mental Health Features Before and During
COVID-19 Pandemic Social Isolation in Brazil
Emotional support, to participate in social activities, and
satisfaction are inherent to human beings [10] and negative social
experiences can induce profound effect on our emotional wellbeing
[12]; loneliness on a daily basis, shows an up regulation of
pro-inflammatory response genes, which may contribute to the risk
of inflammatory diseases in individuals who experience chronically
high levels of subjective SI [13]. The degree of SI can induce a
higher or lower prevalence of physical or mental health problems
[12]. Considering that the first wave of COVID-19 caused great
public concern, because the population experienced the fear of the
unknown, the fear of death and the amount of daily information
about the pandemic “numbers”, the aim of this study was to use
the validated questionnaire “Physical exercise level before and
during social isolation” (PEF-COVID19) [14], to identify in Brazil
and its mains macro-regions, the changes in the level of pain and
psychological impact as stress and anxiety during the first wave of
COVID-19 outbreak. Our hypothesis was that COVID-19 lockdown
will result in major levels of self-related pain, anxiety and stress.
A self-administered questionnaire delivered through the
e-mail and social media was conducted in this observational crosssectional
study. The data collection happened in Brazil from 21st
April until May 3rd 2020. Ethical approval was obtained from of
the Hospital Universitário Pedro Ernesto (HUPE), Universidade do
Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), Plataforma Brasil with the number
CAAE 30649620.1.0000.5259.
Sample
Brazilian population over 18 years old was invited to participate
of this study. The responders who agreed to participate, after an
explanation of the consent form in the beginning of the survey, with
≥18 years old, were included. At any time, the responder could
give up concluding the survey without any penalty or constraints.
Brazilians were divided according to the macro-region where they
lived during the survey application. Survey. The questionnaire PEFCOVID19
was created to assess the levels of physical exercise and
psychological impact of general population before and during the
social isolation due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The psychometric
properties of this instrument were previously described [14], and
it reports the validity indexes and the test-retest reliability and
feasibility, being considered a valid and reliable instrument.
The PEF-COVID19 was divided into four sections,
(I) Subject’s characterization with demographic, anthropometric
and health status questions;
(II) Physical exercise performed or not, pain, anxiety and stress
before COVID-19;
(III) Confinement situation update;
(IV) Physical exercise performed or not, pain, anxiety and stress
during COVID-19 [14].
Data Collection
The questionnaire was distributed using social and network
media (Whatsapp, Facebook, Messenger, Linkedin), and email
inviting people in general to participate and asking them to share
with family and friends through the link: https://docs.google.com/
forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScgnHqfHH5NjLQHv6sLnbtz38eg1hBTu3U
y3jxgIV0Ou7-_gw/viewform?usp=sf_link. Participant responses
were secured where the data was recorded, scaled and scored
in electronic sheets by custom Excel formulas for later statistical
analysis.
Statistical Analysis
All data were exported to an Excel sheet. Nominal data were
coded for statistical purposes. The statistical analyses were
performed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows (version 21.0.,
IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Descriptive statistical analyses (n,
%) were performed and the independent chi-square test. Post
hoc analyses were performed on multiple category data with the
Bonferroni correction. Comparisons between the groups (Brazil
and mains Brazilian macro-regions) for the categorical variables
of pain, stress, anxiety, sex, smoking habits, were made using chi
squared analysis. Age distributions, mass, height, body mass index,
years smoking, between Brazil and mains macro-regions, were
compared using an independent t test.
A total of 1,977 participants filled the survey. Prior to
data analysis, 129 answers were excluded (6.5%) of the initial
respondents because they were from other countries than Brazil or
with age below 18 years-old, leaving a total of 1,848 questionnaires
to be considered in the current study. Brazil has five different macroregions.
Table 1 shows different Brazilian regions population,
the number of respondents and the respondents’ percentage per
millions of people from each region. South (S), Southeast (SE)
and Northeast (NE) are the regions with the higher percentages
of respondents per million of inhabitants. In general, the survey
reached 8.8% of respondents per million of person considering the
Brazilian population. As expected, Midwest and North regions, with
the bigger territories and smaller population, had a little number
of answers and for that reason these answers were analyzed in the
Tables with the Brazilian population as a whole.
Note: *DATASUS (http://tabnet.datasus.gov.br/cgi/tabcgi.exe?ibge/cnv/poptuf.def);
Note: PEx, Physical Exercise; BR, body regions; ᵆ percentages within
the pain cases; *Chi-square statistical significance with Bonferroni
post hoc correction, comparing before and after the COVID-19 pandemic.
Sociodemographic Characteristics and Sample Health
Condition
The majority of the participants were young-adults (53.3%),
followed by adults (23.4%), young (14.7%) and elderly (8.6%).
Comparing Brazil with the mains macro-regions, the age distribution
and sex was similar (P˃0.05). Between the respondents, 70%
was female, 29.8% male and 0.2% did not want to declare. The
mean±SD age was 39.5±13.3 years, body mass 71.4±26.3 kg, height
1.7±0.4 m and Body Mass Index (BMI) 25.4±7.8 kg.m-2. The S and
NE regions presented less mean body mass and consequently less
BMI compared to Brazil in general (24.5±4.3 and 24.8±4.1 kg.m-
2, respectively), (P˂0.05). Considering the marital status of the
sample, 50.8% was married, 38.3% was single and 9.4% and 1.5%
was, respectively divorced and widowed. The majority of the sample
worked in the public (30.1%) or private sectors (28.2%). Students
were 15.5%, retired 7% and unemployed 6.5%. The registered selfrelated
current health condition showed that 56% of the sample had
any disease, 14% respiratory diseases followed by musculoskeletal
(10.7%), cardiac and related conditions (10.2%), mental health
(8.4%) and 0.2% neurological diseases. Smoking habits occur in
4.1% of the total sample. Considering the sociodemographic and
current health condition variables, no differences were found
between Brazil and mains macro-regions (P˃0.05).
Social Isolation Status
Most of the individuals were in social isolation (~80%) at
the time of the survey application and the ones that were not in
social isolation (~15%) were not released from their jobs. Few
respondents (1.5%) do not believe in the importance of social
isolation.
Pain and Psychological Impact
The level of pain and psychological impact of the sample before
and during the COVID-19 pandemic are presented on Table 2.
Considering the pain before and during the COVID-19 pandemic
for the Brazilian general population, the independent chi-square
test showed that the COVID-19 pandemic influenced the pain
perception [X2(1) = 33.2; P<0.0001]; the odds ratio for COVID-19
before/during is 1.477. When analyzing the different regions of
Brazil, SE [X2(1) = 23.951; P<0.0001] e NE [X2(1)= 8.779; P<0.01]
regions showed the same pattern, however, the S region accepted
the null hypothesis [X2(1)= 1.384; P˃0.05]. To verify the body
regions with pain before and during the COVID-19 pandemic for
the Brazilian general population, the independent chi-square test
showed that the COVID-19 pandemic influenced the body regions
with pain [X2(4)= 15.215; P<0.01]; after the Bonferroni post hoc
correction only the pain in head and neck regions were influenced
by the pandemic, with increase in pain (P<0.001).
When analyzing the different regions of Brazil, only the SE
[X2(4)= 11.956; P<0.001] region showed the same pattern for an
increase in head and neck pain during the pandemic; however,
the S and NE regions accepted the null hypothesis [X2(4)= 4.434;
P˃0.05] and [X2(4)= 2.763; P˃0.05], respectively. The level of selfrelated
pain analysis before and during the COVID-19 pandemic
for the Brazilian general population, the independent chi-square
test showed that the COVID-19 pandemic influenced the level
of pain [X2(2)= 11.635; P<0.01]; after the Bonferroni post hoc
correction the pain in the highest levels (8-10) were influenced
by the pandemic, with increase in pain (p=0.001). When analyzing
the different regions of Brazil, only the SE [X2(4)= 7.357; P<0.05]
region showed the same pattern for the highest levels of pain
during the pandemic after the post hoc (P<0.01); however, the S
and NE regions accepted the null hypothesis [X2(2)= 1.823; P˃0.05]
and [X2(2)= 5.146; P˃0.05], respectively.
The level of self-related anxiety before and during the
COVID-19 pandemic for the Brazilian general population showed
with the independent chi-square test that the COVID-19 pandemic
influenced the level of anxiety [X2(2) = 376.904; P<0.0001]; after
the Bonferroni post hoc correction the anxiety in the highest
levels (8-10) were influenced by the pandemic, with increase in
anxiety (P<0.01). When analyzing the different regions of Brazil,
the S region [X2(2)= 92.292; P<0.0001] after the Bonferroni post
hoc correction the anxiety in the smallest levels (0-3) decreased
(P<0.0001) probably due to the increase of the highest levels of
anxiety (8-10), (P<0.0001); the SE [X2(2)= 197.898; P<0.0001] and
NE [X2(2)= 80.534; P<0.0001] regions showed the same pattern for
the smallest and highest levels of anxiety during the pandemic after
the post hoc (p<0.0001).
To verify the stress before and during the COVID-19 pandemic
for the Brazilian general population, the independent chi-square test
showed that the COVID-19 pandemic influenced the stress [X2(2)=
137.857; P<0.0001]; after the Bonferroni post hoc correction all
self-related stress levels were influenced by the pandemic, with an
decrease in the low (0-3) and moderate (4-7) levels and an increase
in the highest stress levels (P<0.0001). When analyzing the different
regions of Brazil, the S region [X2(2)= 29.617; P<0.0001] after the
Bonferroni post hoc correction the anxiety in the highest levels of
stress (8-10) increased during the pandemic (P<0.0001); the SE
[X2(2)= 62.693;P<0.0001] after the post hoc for all stress levels
(P<0.01); and NE [X2(2)= 41.933; P<0.0001] regions showed an
increase for the highest levels of stress (P<0.0001) and a decrease
for the smallest stress levels (P<0.01) during the pandemic.
Discussion
The necessity of being confined at home as a consequence of
the outbreak of COVID-19 caused great involvement and concerns
worldwide, changing drastically people daily life and quality of
life [1], the economy and the nations’ health systems, especially
during the first wave of the pandemic. As a consequence of the
Social Isolation (SI), a negative impact in the general health due
to sedentary behaviors [2-6], pain [6,7] and lead to psychological
conditions, such as anxiety and stress [6,8,9] would be possibly
expected. The study of SI impact has been investigated on pain
conditions and mental health. A longitudinal study about SI in
people seeking treatment for pain management investigated the SI
interference on pain and provided evidence that individuals with
higher levels of SI status presented greater impact on pain levels
and decreased physical function [10]. Another study investigated
whether SI predicts the clinical outcomes of disability, anxiety,
depression and pain in people with low back pain [11].
Emotional support, to participate in social activities, and
satisfaction are inherent to human beings [10] and negative social
experiences can induce profound effect on our emotional wellbeing
[12]; loneliness on a daily basis, shows an up regulation of
pro-inflammatory response genes, which may contribute to the risk
of inflammatory diseases in individuals who experience chronically
high levels of subjective SI [13]. The degree of SI can induce a
higher or lower prevalence of physical or mental health problems
[12]. Considering that the first wave of COVID-19 caused great
public concern, because the population experienced the fear of the
unknown, the fear of death and the amount of daily information
about the pandemic “numbers”, the aim of this study was to use
the validated questionnaire “Physical exercise level before and
during social isolation” (PEF-COVID19) [14], to identify in Brazil
and its mains macro-regions, the changes in the level of pain and
psychological impact as stress and anxiety during the first wave of
COVID-19 outbreak. Our hypothesis was that COVID-19 lockdown
will result in major levels of self-related pain, anxiety and stress.
A self-administered questionnaire delivered through the
e-mail and social media was conducted in this observational crosssectional
study. The data collection happened in Brazil from 21st
April until May 3rd 2020. Ethical approval was obtained from of
the Hospital Universitário Pedro Ernesto (HUPE), Universidade do
Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), Plataforma Brasil with the number
CAAE 30649620.1.0000.5259.
Sample
Brazilian population over 18 years old was invited to participate
of this study. The responders who agreed to participate, after an
explanation of the consent form in the beginning of the survey, with
≥18 years old, were included. At any time, the responder could
give up concluding the survey without any penalty or constraints.
Brazilians were divided according to the macro-region where they
lived during the survey application. Survey. The questionnaire PEFCOVID19
was created to assess the levels of physical exercise and
psychological impact of general population before and during the
social isolation due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The psychometric
properties of this instrument were previously described [14], and
it reports the validity indexes and the test-retest reliability and
feasibility, being considered a valid and reliable instrument.
The PEF-COVID19 was divided into four sections,
(I) Subject’s characterization with demographic, anthropometric
and health status questions;
(II) Physical exercise performed or not, pain, anxiety and stress
before COVID-19;
(III) Confinement situation update;
(IV) Physical exercise performed or not, pain, anxiety and stress
during COVID-19 [14].
Data Collection
The questionnaire was distributed using social and network
media (Whatsapp, Facebook, Messenger, Linkedin), and email
inviting people in general to participate and asking them to share
with family and friends through the link: https://docs.google.com/
forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScgnHqfHH5NjLQHv6sLnbtz38eg1hBTu3U
y3jxgIV0Ou7-_gw/viewform?usp=sf_link. Participant responses
were secured where the data was recorded, scaled and scored
in electronic sheets by custom Excel formulas for later statistical
analysis.
Statistical Analysis
All data were exported to an Excel sheet. Nominal data were
coded for statistical purposes. The statistical analyses were
performed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows (version 21.0.,
IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Descriptive statistical analyses (n,
%) were performed and the independent chi-square test. Post
hoc analyses were performed on multiple category data with the
Bonferroni correction. Comparisons between the groups (Brazil
and mains Brazilian macro-regions) for the categorical variables
of pain, stress, anxiety, sex, smoking habits, were made using chi
squared analysis. Age distributions, mass, height, body mass index,
years smoking, between Brazil and mains macro-regions, were
compared using an independent t test.
A total of 1,977 participants filled the survey. Prior to
data analysis, 129 answers were excluded (6.5%) of the initial
respondents because they were from other countries than Brazil or
with age below 18 years-old, leaving a total of 1,848 questionnaires
to be considered in the current study. Brazil has five different macroregions.
Table 1 shows different Brazilian regions population,
the number of respondents and the respondents’ percentage per
millions of people from each region. South (S), Southeast (SE)
and Northeast (NE) are the regions with the higher percentages
of respondents per million of inhabitants. In general, the survey
reached 8.8% of respondents per million of person considering the
Brazilian population. As expected, Midwest and North regions, with
the bigger territories and smaller population, had a little number
of answers and for that reason these answers were analyzed in the
Tables with the Brazilian population as a whole.
Note: *DATASUS (http://tabnet.datasus.gov.br/cgi/tabcgi.exe?ibge/cnv/poptuf.def);
Note: PEx, Physical Exercise; BR, body regions; ᵆ percentages within
the pain cases; *Chi-square statistical significance with Bonferroni
post hoc correction, comparing before and after the COVID-19 pandemic.
Sociodemographic Characteristics and Sample Health
Condition
The majority of the participants were young-adults (53.3%),
followed by adults (23.4%), young (14.7%) and elderly (8.6%).
Comparing Brazil with the mains macro-regions, the age distribution
and sex was similar (P˃0.05). Between the respondents, 70%
was female, 29.8% male and 0.2% did not want to declare. The
mean±SD age was 39.5±13.3 years, body mass 71.4±26.3 kg, height
1.7±0.4 m and Body Mass Index (BMI) 25.4±7.8 kg.m-2. The S and
NE regions presented less mean body mass and consequently less
BMI compared to Brazil in general (24.5±4.3 and 24.8±4.1 kg.m-
2, respectively), (P˂0.05). Considering the marital status of the
sample, 50.8% was married, 38.3% was single and 9.4% and 1.5%
was, respectively divorced and widowed. The majority of the sample
worked in the public (30.1%) or private sectors (28.2%). Students
were 15.5%, retired 7% and unemployed 6.5%. The registered selfrelated
current health condition showed that 56% of the sample had
any disease, 14% respiratory diseases followed by musculoskeletal
(10.7%), cardiac and related conditions (10.2%), mental health
(8.4%) and 0.2% neurological diseases. Smoking habits occur in
4.1% of the total sample. Considering the sociodemographic and
current health condition variables, no differences were found
between Brazil and mains macro-regions (P˃0.05).
Social Isolation Status
Most of the individuals were in social isolation (~80%) at
the time of the survey application and the ones that were not in
social isolation (~15%) were not released from their jobs. Few
respondents (1.5%) do not believe in the importance of social
isolation.
Pain and Psychological Impact
The level of pain and psychological impact of the sample before
and during the COVID-19 pandemic are presented on Table 2.
Considering the pain before and during the COVID-19 pandemic
for the Brazilian general population, the independent chi-square
test showed that the COVID-19 pandemic influenced the pain
perception [X2(1) = 33.2; P<0.0001]; the odds ratio for COVID-19
before/during is 1.477. When analyzing the different regions of
Brazil, SE [X2(1) = 23.951; P<0.0001] e NE [X2(1)= 8.779; P<0.01]
regions showed the same pattern, however, the S region accepted
the null hypothesis [X2(1)= 1.384; P˃0.05]. To verify the body
regions with pain before and during the COVID-19 pandemic for
the Brazilian general population, the independent chi-square test
showed that the COVID-19 pandemic influenced the body regions
with pain [X2(4)= 15.215; P<0.01]; after the Bonferroni post hoc
correction only the pain in head and neck regions were influenced
by the pandemic, with increase in pain (P<0.001).
When analyzing the different regions of Brazil, only the SE
[X2(4)= 11.956; P<0.001] region showed the same pattern for an
increase in head and neck pain during the pandemic; however,
the S and NE regions accepted the null hypothesis [X2(4)= 4.434;
P˃0.05] and [X2(4)= 2.763; P˃0.05], respectively. The level of selfrelated
pain analysis before and during the COVID-19 pandemic
for the Brazilian general population, the independent chi-square
test showed that the COVID-19 pandemic influenced the level
of pain [X2(2)= 11.635; P<0.01]; after the Bonferroni post hoc
correction the pain in the highest levels (8-10) were influenced
by the pandemic, with increase in pain (p=0.001). When analyzing
the different regions of Brazil, only the SE [X2(4)= 7.357; P<0.05]
region showed the same pattern for the highest levels of pain
during the pandemic after the post hoc (P<0.01); however, the S
and NE regions accepted the null hypothesis [X2(2)= 1.823; P˃0.05]
and [X2(2)= 5.146; P˃0.05], respectively.
The level of self-related anxiety before and during the
COVID-19 pandemic for the Brazilian general population showed
with the independent chi-square test that the COVID-19 pandemic
influenced the level of anxiety [X2(2) = 376.904; P<0.0001]; after
the Bonferroni post hoc correction the anxiety in the highest
levels (8-10) were influenced by the pandemic, with increase in
anxiety (P<0.01). When analyzing the different regions of Brazil,
the S region [X2(2)= 92.292; P<0.0001] after the Bonferroni post
hoc correction the anxiety in the smallest levels (0-3) decreased
(P<0.0001) probably due to the increase of the highest levels of
anxiety (8-10), (P<0.0001); the SE [X2(2)= 197.898; P<0.0001] and
NE [X2(2)= 80.534; P<0.0001] regions showed the same pattern for
the smallest and highest levels of anxiety during the pandemic after
the post hoc (p<0.0001).
To verify the stress before and during the COVID-19 pandemic
for the Brazilian general population, the independent chi-square test
showed that the COVID-19 pandemic influenced the stress [X2(2)=
137.857; P<0.0001]; after the Bonferroni post hoc correction all
self-related stress levels were influenced by the pandemic, with an
decrease in the low (0-3) and moderate (4-7) levels and an increase
in the highest stress levels (P<0.0001). When analyzing the different
regions of Brazil, the S region [X2(2)= 29.617; P<0.0001] after the
Bonferroni post hoc correction the anxiety in the highest levels of
stress (8-10) increased during the pandemic (P<0.0001); the SE
[X2(2)= 62.693;P<0.0001] after the post hoc for all stress levels
(P<0.01); and NE [X2(2)= 41.933; P<0.0001] regions showed an
increase for the highest levels of stress (P<0.0001) and a decrease
for the smallest stress levels (P<0.01) during the pandemic.
Discussion
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate
the level of pain and psychological impact as stress and anxiety
together in Brazilian mains macro-regions during the COVID-19
outbreak. Our hypotheses were confirmed, and COVID-19
lockdown contributed negatively to increase the levels of selfrelated
pain, anxiety and stress. It was observed that the majority
of the respondents were following the social isolation during the
first wave of the pandemic and government restrictions (about
80%) considering that in February 3rd the epidemic was declared
a Public Health Emergency of National Concern [15] following the
notifications of the disease spread and deaths in all continents
[16]. The decrease of exercise and physical activity during the
pandemic and SI can also generate mental health impacts, as stress
or anxiety [17] that many will experience in the face of the feeling
of fear [18] (fear of being sick or dying, possible loss of family and
friends, economic impact) and isolation from common social life
[19,20]. Moreover, this survey shows alarming results considering
the level increase of anxiety and stress, which the highest levels (8-
10) in a scale with a maximum of 10 points increased significantly
comparing before and during the pandemic for Brazil.
A recent study [21] investigated the fear of COVID-19, stress and
anxiety in undergraduate students from Ecuador; they observed
the complex relationships between fear, stress, and anxiety in the
development of depression symptoms and how they can be taken
into account in programs aimed to prevent and alleviate the mental
health disorders. Two other studies presented also the effects of
the pandemic on mental health for general Brazilian population
[6,22] and in both studies anxiety, depression and stress scores
were higher during the pandemic, and mainly the ones that were
not physically active [22]. Also, the self-related pain level increased
significantly mainly in the head and neck regions for Brazilians in
general and SE macro-region inhabitants. Inappropriate posture
watching television, using computers [23,24] and smartphones
[25] or psychosocial stressors [20,26] might be the reason for the
pain increase in such body regions. Furthermore, in a review [27],
the authors verified strong consistent evidence for the relationship
between both psychological distress, and time spent using screens
for leisure and depressive symptomatology.
Moderate evidence supported the relationship between low
self-esteem and screen use. Poorer mental health status was found
among adolescents using screen time more than 2-3h per day,
and gender differences exist. Corroborating with our findings,
considering that SI can favor chronic stress and pain, Majumdar
et al, 2020 [28] reported that the chronic stress of living through
a pandemic led to a host of physical symptoms, like headaches,
insomnia, digestive problems, hormonal imbalances, and fatigue.
The southeastern region is the most populated and industrialized
region of Brazil and probably suffered most an economic imbalance
due to the pandemic. Since the outbreak of the novel coronavirus
was first detected, the world has been challenged since the health
systems were overloaded in large large-scale, economy income
decreased and market volatility, unemployment, mental health
issues and lifestyle changes with sedentary behavior increase,
leading, perhaps, to an increase in chronic diseases.
Professions were also reinvented as populations never expected,
mainly the education and heath area professions. Moreover, as it
was pointed out by Zieff, et al. [29], targeting sedentary behavior is
a simple strategy that may help counter physical and mental health
concerns associated with COVID-19-related social restrictions.
During the SI, Brazilians in general decreased the self-related
levels of physical exercise and changed the exercise habits [5]. Of
course, traditional strategies such as achieving optimal exercise
and physical activity levels are also important and should be
recommended. However, even under normal circumstances, the
difficulty in promoting lasting exercise habits at multiple levels (e.g.
individual, environment, policy) are well documented [4,5,29,30],
and chances of maintaining or improving these factors is now
even lower. Thus, relative to other lifestyle behaviors - sedentary
behavior may be more amenable to change.
Moreover, reducing sedentary behavior may be less susceptible
to influence from factors associated with health disparities such
as age, race, and socio-economic status compared to exercise or
physical activity. Sedentary behavior is a feasible health strategy
that should be targeted during COVID-19. The strengths and the
applications of the findings described in this study and considering
the return to the normal life is still unexpected, the results from
the current study can help to create measures to decrease mental
health disturbances, facing the fear of the unknown. Moreover,
as a perspective, it is expected that with the comparison of some
parameters before and during the outbreak, the results can aid in
the definition of policies to help the Brazilian population, in general,
and in specific regions, due to the COVID-19 period post-pandemic.
As a limitation, the number of respondents was different in the
various regions that were investigated. Moreover, in two regions,
North and Midwest, the number of respondents was reduced.
Due to the unknown home-quarantine in each region of
the country, a specific adaptation of the questionnaire was not
possible to be done. In general, the Brazilian regions have specific
characteristics, as nutrition, political approaches, and local
costumes. Also, self-reported instruments can induce bias. The
findings obtained with the PEF-COVID19 showed, in general, that
the Brazilian general population was affected by the pandemic
considering the increased levels of self-related pain, stress and
anxiety. SE macro-region is the economic center of Brazil presented
a significant increase in the levels of self-related pain compared
to the others mains macro-regions; the higher levels (8-10) of
stress and anxiety increased significantly in all studied macroregions,
with similar results. These results will be valuable to the
establishment of actions to aid the population of Brazil to minimize,
with different approaches, the undesirable commitment due the
social distancing related to the COVID-19.
A recent study [21] investigated the fear of COVID-19, stress and
anxiety in undergraduate students from Ecuador; they observed
the complex relationships between fear, stress, and anxiety in the
development of depression symptoms and how they can be taken
into account in programs aimed to prevent and alleviate the mental
health disorders. Two other studies presented also the effects of
the pandemic on mental health for general Brazilian population
[6,22] and in both studies anxiety, depression and stress scores
were higher during the pandemic, and mainly the ones that were
not physically active [22]. Also, the self-related pain level increased
significantly mainly in the head and neck regions for Brazilians in
general and SE macro-region inhabitants. Inappropriate posture
watching television, using computers [23,24] and smartphones
[25] or psychosocial stressors [20,26] might be the reason for the
pain increase in such body regions. Furthermore, in a review [27],
the authors verified strong consistent evidence for the relationship
between both psychological distress, and time spent using screens
for leisure and depressive symptomatology.
Moderate evidence supported the relationship between low
self-esteem and screen use. Poorer mental health status was found
among adolescents using screen time more than 2-3h per day,
and gender differences exist. Corroborating with our findings,
considering that SI can favor chronic stress and pain, Majumdar
et al, 2020 [28] reported that the chronic stress of living through
a pandemic led to a host of physical symptoms, like headaches,
insomnia, digestive problems, hormonal imbalances, and fatigue.
The southeastern region is the most populated and industrialized
region of Brazil and probably suffered most an economic imbalance
due to the pandemic. Since the outbreak of the novel coronavirus
was first detected, the world has been challenged since the health
systems were overloaded in large large-scale, economy income
decreased and market volatility, unemployment, mental health
issues and lifestyle changes with sedentary behavior increase,
leading, perhaps, to an increase in chronic diseases.
Professions were also reinvented as populations never expected,
mainly the education and heath area professions. Moreover, as it
was pointed out by Zieff, et al. [29], targeting sedentary behavior is
a simple strategy that may help counter physical and mental health
concerns associated with COVID-19-related social restrictions.
During the SI, Brazilians in general decreased the self-related
levels of physical exercise and changed the exercise habits [5]. Of
course, traditional strategies such as achieving optimal exercise
and physical activity levels are also important and should be
recommended. However, even under normal circumstances, the
difficulty in promoting lasting exercise habits at multiple levels (e.g.
individual, environment, policy) are well documented [4,5,29,30],
and chances of maintaining or improving these factors is now
even lower. Thus, relative to other lifestyle behaviors - sedentary
behavior may be more amenable to change.
Moreover, reducing sedentary behavior may be less susceptible
to influence from factors associated with health disparities such
as age, race, and socio-economic status compared to exercise or
physical activity. Sedentary behavior is a feasible health strategy
that should be targeted during COVID-19. The strengths and the
applications of the findings described in this study and considering
the return to the normal life is still unexpected, the results from
the current study can help to create measures to decrease mental
health disturbances, facing the fear of the unknown. Moreover,
as a perspective, it is expected that with the comparison of some
parameters before and during the outbreak, the results can aid in
the definition of policies to help the Brazilian population, in general,
and in specific regions, due to the COVID-19 period post-pandemic.
As a limitation, the number of respondents was different in the
various regions that were investigated. Moreover, in two regions,
North and Midwest, the number of respondents was reduced.
Due to the unknown home-quarantine in each region of
the country, a specific adaptation of the questionnaire was not
possible to be done. In general, the Brazilian regions have specific
characteristics, as nutrition, political approaches, and local
costumes. Also, self-reported instruments can induce bias. The
findings obtained with the PEF-COVID19 showed, in general, that
the Brazilian general population was affected by the pandemic
considering the increased levels of self-related pain, stress and
anxiety. SE macro-region is the economic center of Brazil presented
a significant increase in the levels of self-related pain compared
to the others mains macro-regions; the higher levels (8-10) of
stress and anxiety increased significantly in all studied macroregions,
with similar results. These results will be valuable to the
establishment of actions to aid the population of Brazil to minimize,
with different approaches, the undesirable commitment due the
social distancing related to the COVID-19.
For more
Articles on : https://biomedres01.blogspot.com/