BackgroundLower psychological wellbeing is associated with poor outcomes in a variety of diseases and healthy populations. However, no study has investigated whether psychological wellbeing is associated with the outcomes of COVID-19. This study aimed to determine whether individuals with lower psychological wellbeing are more at risk for poor outcomes of COVID-19.MethodsData were from the Survey of Health, Aging, and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) in 2017 and SHARE's two COVID-19 surveys in June–September 2020 and June–August 2021. Psychological wellbeing was measured using the CASP-12 scale in 2017. The associations of the CASP-12 score with COVID-19 hospitalization and mortality were assessed using logistic models adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, smoking, physical activity, household income, education level, and chronic conditions. Sensitivity analyses were performed by imputing missing data or excluding cases whose diagnosis of COVID-19 was solely based on symptoms. A confirmatory analysis was conducted using data from the English Longitudinal Study of Aging (ELSA). Data analysis took place in October 2022.ResultsIn total, 3,886 individuals of 50 years of age or older with COVID-19 were included from 25 European countries and Israel, with 580 hospitalized (14.9%) and 100 deaths (2.6%). Compared with individuals in tertile 3 (highest) of the CASP-12 score, the adjusted odds ratios (ORs) of COVID-19 hospitalization were 1.81 (95% CI, 1.41–2.31) for those in tertile 1 (lowest) and 1.37 (95% CI, 1.07–1.75) for those in tertile 2. As for COVID-19 mortality, the adjusted ORs were 2.05 (95% CI, 1.12–3.77) for tertile 1 and 1.78 (95% CI, 0.98–3.23) for tertile 2, compared with tertile 3. The results were relatively robust to missing data or the exclusion of cases solely based on symptoms. This inverse association of the CASP-12 score with COVID-19 hospitalization risk was also observed in ELSA.ConclusionThis study shows that lower psychological wellbeing is independently associated with increased risks of COVID-19 hospitalization and mortality in European adults aged 50 years or older. Further study is needed to validate these associations in recent and future waves of the COVID-19 pandemic and other populations.

ObjectiveHealth insurance programs are effective in preventing financial hardship in patients with cancer. However, not much is known about how health insurance policies, especially in Southwest China with a high incidence of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), influence patients’ prognosis. Here, we investigated the association of NPC-specific mortality with health insurance types and self-paying rate, and the joint effect of insurance types and self-paying rate.Materials and methodsThis prospective cohort study was conducted at a regional medical center for cancer in Southwest China and included 1,635 patients with pathologically confirmed NPC from 2017 to 2019. All patients were followed up until May 31, 2022. We determine the cumulative hazard ratio of all-cause and NPC-specific mortality in the groups of various insurance kinds and the self-paying rate using Cox proportional hazard.ResultsDuring a median follow-up period of 3.7 years, 249 deaths were recorded, of which 195 deaths were due to NPC. Higher self-paying rate were associated with a 46.6% reduced risk of NPC-specific mortality compared to patients with insufficient self-paying rate (HR: 0.534, 95% CI: 0.339–0.839, p = 0.007). For patients covered by Urban and Rural Residents Basic Medical Insurance (URRMBI), and for patients covered by Urban Employee Basic Medical Insurance, each 10% increase in the self-paying rate reduced the probability of NPC-specific death by 28.3 and 25%, respectively (UEBMI).ConclusionResults of this study showed that, despite China’s medical security administration improved health insurance coverage, NPC patients need to afford the high out-of-pocket medical costs in order to prolong their survival time.

ObjectivesThis study explores the attitudes of Chinese maternal and child health professionals toward the termination of pregnancy for fetal anomaly (TOPFA) based on four case scenarios and further identifies the factors that influence their attitudes.MethodsThis cross-sectional study, conducted from February 14–21, 2022, aimed to explore the attitudes of maternal and child health professionals toward TOPFA in Hunan Province. We targeted health service institutions across 14 prefecture-level cities and the autonomous prefecture. A questionnaire was made available online and shared via the instant communication platform, WeChat. Participants were recruited through the same platform and completed the survey online. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data, and binary logistic regression was performed to determine factors affecting the health professionals’ attitudes toward TOPFA, expressed as the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).ResultsThe study found that 63.5% of health professionals approved of the birth of a fetus with cleft lip and palate, while 36.5% opposed it. Similarly, 39.7% approved of the birth of a fetus with phenylketonuria, while 60.3% opposed it. The percentages of those in favor of and against the birth of a fetus with precocious heart disease were 45.5 and 54.5%, respectively, and those for and against the birth of a fetus with missing fingers were 50.8 and 49.2%, respectively. The top three factors considered by health professionals when agreeing on TOPFA were “the impact of fetal disease on fetal function and growth,” “the severity of fetal disease,” and “the assessment of indications for fetal disease by professionals and related professional advice.” The majority of health professionals (75–78%) preferred joint decision-making by parents regarding the right to decide TOPFA.ConclusionOur study indicates that the attitudes of health professionals toward TOPFA can differ significantly depending on the specific birth defect under consideration. Notably, the majority of health professionals prioritized “the impact of fetal abnormalities on fetal function and development” when deciding their support for TOPFA, advocating for the decision to be a joint one between the parents. Additionally, factors such as religious beliefs, professional training, age, and job title appeared to influence these attitudes toward TOPFA. Our findings could serve as a reference point in the development of guidelines for the prevention and management of birth defects.