Influence parental- and child-related factors on the acceptance of SARS-CoV-2 test methods in schools and daycare facilities.

Introduction: Rapid testing for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections was an essential step in reducing the spread of the virus and monitoring pandemic development. Most mandatory standard pandemic testing in Germany has been performed in schools and daycare facilities. We investigated the influence of behavioral and attitudinal characteristics of children and caregivers on their acceptance of (i) antigen-based nasal swab rapid and (ii) oral saliva-based pooled Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) tests. Methods: Conducted through a cross-sectional survey between November and December 2021, with 1962 caregivers and 581 children/adolescents participating, the study evaluated the acceptability of each testing method on a six-point scale. Participants scored one test method conducted on their child at one of six levels with 1 and 6 denoting "excellent" (1) and "inadequate" (6), respectively. We considered demographic variables, vaccination status, child mental health (measured by the SDQ-questionnaire), and facility type (kindergarten, primary school, secondary school) as covariates. Results: Results reveal a preference for saliva-based PCR tests over nasal swabs by about one grade, particularly among parents of unvaccinated children, especially if their child expressed future vaccination reluctance. Testing acceptance was lower among children with mental health issues, primary school-aged, and those with less-educated parents. Perception of test accuracy and convenience influenced attitudes, favoring saliva-based PCR tests. Moreover, children with mental health issues felt less secure during testing. Discussion: To our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate the influence of different testing methods on testing acceptance for SARS-CoV-2 in children and caregivers. Our study identifies predictors of lower acceptance of public health surveillance measures and enables the development of educational programs on testing and vaccination tailored to the needs of specific target groups. Moreover, we demonstrate that test acceptance in vulnerable groups can be enhanced by careful choice of an appropriate testing method.

Mental health and quality of life in children and adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review of longitudinal studies.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted the mental health of children and families, i.e., due to measures like social distancing and remote schooling. While previous research has shown negative effects on mental health and health-related quality of life (HRQoL), most studies have focused on pre-post comparisons in the early pandemic stages. This systematic review aims to examine longitudinal studies to understand the long-term impacts of the pandemic on children and adolescents. Methods: This systematic review adhered to the PRISMA guidelines and was preregistered in the international prospective register of systematic reviews (Record ID: CRD42022336930). We systematically searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, PsycINFO, PSYNDEX, and the WHO-COVID-19 database and included studies published up to August 30, 2022. Based on pre-defined eligibility criteria, longitudinal and prospective studies that assessed the mental health or quality of life of children or adolescents (0-19 years) in the general population over a longer time span (at two or more measurement points) during the COVID-19 pandemic were included in the review. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using an adapted version of the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) checklist. Narrative data synthesis was used to summarize the findings. Results: A total of 5,099 results were obtained from literature searches, with 4,935 excluded during title/abstract screening. After reviewing 163 full-text articles, 24 publications were included in the review. Sample sizes ranged between n = 86 and n = 34,038. The length of the investigated time periods and the number of assessment points, as well as outcomes, varied. The majority of studies were of moderate methodological quality. Mental health outcomes were more frequently studied compared to measures of HRQoL. The findings from these studies mostly suggest that children and adolescents experienced heightened mental health problems, specifically internalizing symptoms like anxiety and depression. Further, there was a decline in their overall HRQoL over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic that did not necessarily subside when lockdowns ended. Conclusion: It is crucial to continue monitoring the mental health and well-being of children and adolescents following the pandemic to identify groups at risks and plan interventions. This should ideally be conducted by large systematic studies, using validated instruments, and encompassing representative samples to obtain reliable and comprehensive insights with the aim of improving youth mental health care.