Background: In Belgium, confinement measures were introduced on the 13th of March 2020 to curb the spread of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19). These measures may affect health behaviours of the population such as eating habits, physical activity and alcohol consumption, which in turn can lead to weight gain resulting in overweight and obesity, increasing the risk of several chronic diseases, but also of severe COVID-19. The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of confinement measures on health behaviours and their associations with weight gain. Methods: Data were derived from the second national COVID-19 health survey. Data were collected between the 16th and the 23rd of April 2020. The recruitment of participants was based on snowball sampling via Sciensano’s website, invitations via e-mail and social media. The study sample includes participants aged 18 years and over with no missing data on the variables of interest (n = 28,029). The association between self-reported weight gain and health behaviour changes, adjusted for gender, age group and household composition was assessed through OR’s (95% CI) calculated with logistic regression models, using post-stratification weights. Results: Overall, 28.6% reported weight gain after 6 weeks of confinement. Higher odds of weight gain were observed among participants who increased or decreased their consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (OR = 1.39 (1.15–1.68) and 1.29 (1.04–1.60), respectively), among those who increased their consumption of sweet or salty snacks (OR = 3.65 (3.27–4.07)), among those who became less physically active (OR = 1.91 (1.71–2.13)), and among those who increased their alcohol consumption (OR = 1.86 (1.66–2.08)). Conclusions: The most important correlates of weight gain during confinement were an increased consumption of sweet or salty snacks and being less physically active. These findings confirm the impact of diet and exercise on short term weight gain and plead to take more action, in supporting people to achieve healthier behaviours in order to tackle overweight and obesity, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: Potential is seen in web data collection for population health surveys due to its combined cost-effectiveness, implementation ease, and increased internet penetration. Nonetheless, web modes may lead to lower and more selective unit response than traditional modes, and this may increase bias in the measured indicators.Objective: This research assesses the unit response and costs of a web study versus face-to-face (F2F) study.Methods: Alongside the Belgian Health Interview Survey by F2F edition 2018 (BHISF2F; net sample used: 3316), a web survey (Belgian Health Interview Survey by Web [BHISWEB]; net sample used: 1010) was organized. Sociodemographic data on invited individuals was obtained from the national register and census linkages. Unit response rates considering the different sampling probabilities of both surveys were calculated. Logistic regression analyses examined the association between mode system and sociodemographic characteristics for unit nonresponse. The costs per completed web questionnaire were compared with the costs for a completed F2F questionnaire.Results: The unit response rate is lower in BHISWEB (18.0%) versus BHISF2F (43.1%). A lower response rate was observed for the web survey among all sociodemographic groups, but the difference was higher among people aged 65 years and older (15.4% vs 45.1%), lower educated people (10.9% vs 38.0%), people with a non-Belgian European nationality (11.4% vs 40.7%), people with a non-European nationality (7.2% vs 38.0%), people living alone (12.6% vs 40.5%), and people living in the Brussels-Capital (12.2% vs 41.8%) region. The sociodemographic characteristics associated with nonresponse are not the same in the 2 studies. Having another European (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.20-2.13) or non-European nationality (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.79-3.70) compared to a Belgian nationality and living in the Brussels-Capital (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.41-2.10) or Walloon (OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.15-1.87) regions compared to the Flemish region are associated with a higher nonresponse only in the BHISWEB study. In BHISF2F, younger people (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.11-1.54) are more likely to be nonrespondents than older people, and this was not the case in BHISWEB. In both studies, lower educated people have a higher probability of being nonrespondent, but this effect is more pronounced in BHISWEB (low vs high education level: Web, OR 2.71, 95% CI 2.21-3.39 and F2F OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.48-1.95). The BHISWEB study had a considerable advantage; the cost per completed questionnaire was almost 3 times lower (€41 [US $48]) compared with F2F data collection (€111 [US $131]).Conclusions: The F2F unit response rate was generally higher, yet for certain groups the difference between web and F2F was more limited. Web data collection has a considerable cost advantage. It is therefore worth experimenting with adaptive mixed-mode designs to optimize financial resources without increasing selection bias (eg, only inviting sociodemographic groups who are keener to participate online for web surveys while continuing to focus on increasing F2F response rates for other groups).

The COVID-19 pandemic and policy measures enacted to contain the spread of the coronavirus have had nationwide psychological effects. This study aimed to assess the impact of the first 15 months of the COVID-19 pandemic on the level of anxiety (GAD-7 scale) and depression (PHQ-9 scale) of the Belgian adult population. A longitudinal study was conducted from April 2020 to June 2021, with 1838 respondents participating in 6 online surveys. Linear mixed models were used to model the associations between the predictor variables and the mental health outcomes. Results showed that the prevalence of symptoms of anxiety and depression was higher in times of stricter policy measures. Furthermore, after the initial stress from the outbreak, coping and adjustment were observed in participants, as symptoms of anxiety and depression decreased during times of lower policy restrictions to almost the same level as in pre-COVID times (2018). Though time trends were similar for all population subgroups, higher levels of both anxiety and depression were generally found among women, young people, people with poor social support, extraverts, people having pre-existing psychological problems, and people who were infected/exposed to the COVID-19 virus. Therefore, investment in mental health treatment programs and supports, especially for those risk groups, is crucial.

Background: Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, most research has focused on the acute phase of COVID-19, yet some people experience symptoms beyond, referred to as post COVID-19 conditions (PCC). However, evidence on PCC and its impacts on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is still scarce. This study aimed to assess the impact of COVID-19 and PCC on HRQoL. Methods: This is a longitudinal cohort study of the Belgian adult population with recent SARS-CoV-2 infection. In total, 5,727 people were followed up between the time of their infection and three months later. HRQoL was measured with the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire before and during the infection and three months later. Linear mixed regression models were built to assess the longitudinal association between participants’ characteristics and the evolution of their HRQoL. Results: This study found a significant decline in HRQoL during the SARS-CoV-2 infection in comparison to the situation before (β=-9.91, 95%CI=-10.13;-9.85), but no clinically important difference three months after the infection compared to the situation before, except among people reporting PCC (β=-11.15, 95%CI=-11.72;-10.51). The main symptoms of PCC with a significant negative impact on the different dimensions of HRQoL were fatigue/exhaustion (21%), headache (11%), memory problems (10%), shortness of breath (9%), and joint (7%) or muscle pain (6%). The dimension of HRQoL most negatively affected by several PCC symptoms was pain/discomfort. Conclusions: With the growing number of people infected with SARS-CoV-2, PCC and its impact on HRQoL are becoming important public health issues. To allow people with PCC to recover and to limit its detrimental impact on HRQoL, it is essential to manage its various heterogeneous symptoms using a multidisciplinary approach.

Background: Since March 13th 2020, confinement measures have been introduced in Belgium to curb the spread of the coronavirus (COVID-19). These measures also have an impact on people’s daily life (closure of school/businesses, teleworking, recommendation to stay at home). This can cause stress on social, economic and psychological levels and thereby can trigger domestic violence. Besides, confinement also fosters social isolation, which can complicate help seeking behaviour. The aim of this study is to determine the prevalence of domestic violence during the coronavirus crisis and to assess whether there is an association between domestic violence and social isolation. Methods: Several online COVID-19 Health Surveys were organised among Belgian residents aged 18+ via snowball sampling. This study is based on the second (April 2020) and the sixth survey (March 2021). After excluding 1-person households and missing data, the sample size was respectively 25,251 and 12,589. Weighted prevalence of domestic violence was evaluated for the two surveys. The association (OR; 95% CI; p-value) between domestic violence and subjective social isolation was assessed with logistic regression stratified by survey and adjusted for covariates. Results: In April 2020, 4.0% of the adult population reported being a victim of domestic violence (1.2% in the Health Interview Survey 2018); in March 2021, this was 6.2%. In April 2020, victims of domestic violence had higher odds of being unsatisfied with their social contacts (OR = 1.25; 95% CI: 1.08–1.44; p < .05), weak social support (OR = 2.26; 95% CI: 1.97–2.58; p < .0001) and having less confidence in health care services (OR = 1.38; 95% CI: 1.13–1.71; p < .05). In March 2021, victims had higher odds of being unsatisfied with their social contacts (OR = 1.30; 95% CI: 1.08–1.56; p < .05) and weak social support (OR = 2.41; 95% CI: 2.04–2.84; p < .0001), and social (OR = 2.64; 95% CI: 2.23–3.13; p < .0001) and emotional loneliness (OR = 2.22; 95% CI: 1.80–2.73; p < .0001). Conclusions: More people have reported domestic violence since the start of the coronavirus crisis than did in 2018. An association between domestic violence and social isolation was determined. Although confinement is needed to counteract the virus, it can put people in a dangerous situation since they do not get the help they need. Therefore, adequate support is essential.

Background: Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, most research has focused on the pathophysiology and management of the acute symptoms of COVID-19, yet some people tend to experience symptoms beyond the acute phase of infection, that is, Post COVID-19 condition (PCC). However, evidence on the long-term health impacts of a COVID-19 infection are still scarce. The purpose of this paper is to describe the COVIMPACT study, which aims to set up a cohort of people who have been tested positive for COVID-19 and study the evolution of their physical, mental and social health over the medium (3 months) and long term (two years), and the factors associated with an (un)favorable evolution. Methods: COVIMPACT is a longitudinal cohort study organised over a two-years period between April 2021 and April 2023. The eligible population is all people aged 18 years and older, living in Belgium, with a recent COVID-19 infection and contacted by the health authorities for contact tracing. Two questionnaires are used: a baseline questionnaire that aims to assess the initial health status of the participants and their status during the acute phase of the illness, and a follow-up questionnaire that is sent every three months after participants enter into the cohort. A matched non-COVID-19 control group was also selected. As of November 1, 2021, 10,708 people completed the baseline questionnaire (5% of the eligible population) and the follow-up participation rate was 79%. In total, 48% of the cohort participants appeared to fit the proposed case definition of PCC (i.e. report at least one symptom related to their COVID-19 infection three months afterwards). Discussion: This study was designed to provide timely information on the short and long term impact of a COVID-19 infection, to stakeholders such as policymakers, health practitioners and people with PCC. Although the follow-up participation rate was good (79%), the participation rate of the eligible population was low (5%). Compared to other studies, this study has a large sample, of non-hospitalised and hospitalised people, who will be followed over a long period of 3 months to two years post infection, and with a global approach to their health.