key: cord-0769865-rs1gef5o
authors: Kristoffersen, Agnete E.; van der Werf, Esther T.; Stub, Trine; Musial, Frauke; Wider, Barbara; Jong, Miek C.; Wode, Kathrin; Danell, Jenny-Ann B.; Busch, Martine; Hoenders, H.J. Rogier; Nordberg, Johanna H.
title: Consultations with Health Care Providers and use of Self-management Strategies for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 related Symptoms. A Population Based Cross-sectional Study in Norway, Sweden and the Netherlands
date: 2021-11-23
journal: Complement Ther Med
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctim.2021.102792
sha: 63713cff6a854e2baca79a987044d8d4a3567de9
doc_id: 769865
cord_uid: rs1gef5o

OBJECTIVES: The present study was initiated to determine consultations with health care providers and use of self-management strategies for prevention or treatment of COVID-19 related symptoms in countries with a full lockdown (Norway), a partial lockdown (the Netherlands) and no lockdown (Sweden) during the first three months of the COVID-19 pandemic, and if such use correlates with worries of being infected by COVID-19 disease. DESIGN: Data were collected in collaboration with Ipsos A/S in April-June 2020. An adapted version of the I-CAM-Q was used with the categories “for prevention of COVID-19” and “to treat COVID-19-related symptoms” added. Data were collected among a representative sample in Norway, Sweden and the Netherlands using data assisted telephone interviews (Norway, n=990 and Sweden, n=500), and an online survey (the Netherlands, n=1004). Total response rate was 30%. RESULTS: Very few consulted a health care provider with the intention to treat or prevent COVID-19 (1.2% and 1.0% respectively) with medical doctors mostly visited (1.0% and 0.9%). Similarly, the use of self-management strategies to prevent or treat COVID-19 was low (3.4% and 0.2% respectively); most commonly used were vitamins and minerals (2.8%) for prevention of COVID-19. Consultations with health care providers and use of self-management strategies for prevention of COVID-19 were positively associated with worries of being infected with COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic does not seem to have evoked a large-scale difference in behaviour related to consultations with health care providers or the use of self-management strategies in any of the three countries.

During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic countries have implemented control measures that include different combinations of containment and mitigation measures. In Norway, a nationwide lockdown was implemented on March 12, 2020 (1), based on a rhetoric that appealed to citizens' own responsibility, voluntary working and herd mentality (2) . The lockdown included closure of kindergartens, schools and restaurants. Citizens were instructed to work from home, to minimize the use of public transport, refrain from nonessential traveling, and borders were closed to travellers from outside Norway.

In Sweden, there was no lockdown of society comparable to other European countries. Most pre-schools and schools, except high-schools, were kept open but with restrictions. Universities re-directed all education to web-based resources and people were asked to work from home wherever possible. A general recommendation to keep a 2-meter interpersonal distance was re-iterated in public announcements and home isolation was recommended to all persons with cold-or influenza-like symptoms and to people in risk-groups such as people aged 70 or more. Restaurants, bars and shops remained open with certain capacity limits. The strategy was described by authorities as aimed at minimizing mortality and morbidity in the entire population and at the same time minimizing other negative consequences for individuals and society (3) .

J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f 5 In the Netherlands, the first control measures were enforced on March 15, 2020, and lead to a partial, so-called 'intelligent' lockdown of the country (4) . The Dutch Government aimed to appeal to citizens' own responsibility and self-discipline to stay at home as much as possible, to practice 1.5 meters interpersonal distance, take hygiene measurements and to maintain home isolation after being in contact with someone who was tested positive or when showing cold-or influenza-like symptoms.

However, additional measures enforced by law were introduced over the course of several weeks in March and April 2020. These measures included closure of schools, restaurants, certain beaches and parks, and prohibition of spontaneous gathering of people in public areas.

The country-specific containment and mitigation measures during the COVID-19 pandemic have strongly affected citizens' daily lives. A large international study demonstrated that COVID-19 home confinement negatively affects physical activity intensity levels and lead to a more unhealthy food consumption (5) . Furthermore, it has been reported that general mental health has deteriorated during the pandemic (6) , and fear, panic, anxiety and xenophobia has increased (7) . Authorities and health care professionals' recommendations for staying healthy during the pandemic are mainly related to healthy lifestyle measures such as ensuring sufficient sleep, eating fresh fruits and vegetables, reducing stress and social isolation, staying active and taking appropriate hygiene measures (8) .

J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f 6 Several reports have appeared in the media stating that people are looking for selfmanagement strategies to prevent COVID-19 infection or to treat possible COVID-19 infection-related symptoms (9) . The look for such strategies has shown to increases with stress and/or high levels of anxiety (10) . Examples of claims circulating on the Internet include that high doses of vitamin C (11) can prevent COVID-19, and antiviral-essential oils (e.g. oregano), or diet modifications are effective against the coronavirus (12) . Several papers have appeared in the scientific literature claiming that Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) may be effective in the treatment of COVID-19 (11, 13) . Furthermore, the World Health Organization (WHO) encouraged studies on the efficacy and safety of traditional medicinal plants such as Artemisia for the treatment of COVID- 19 (14) . Although the effectiveness of high-dose vitamin C in the treatment of COVID-19-related pneumonia is currently being investigated (15), to date, there is no scientific evidence that vitamin C or any other dietary supplement can prevent or cure COVID-19 (16) . It is therefore of great importance to investigate people's consultations with health care providers and use of selfmanagement strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic. This will provide valuable insights for health care professionals, authorities and scientists in order to guide future communication and research, and to support rational decision-making in pandemic times.

The present study was initiated to determine the prevalence of consultations with health care providers and use of self-management strategies such as herbal remedies, J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f 7 dietary supplements and self-help techniques for prevention and treatment of COVID-19 related symptoms in countries with a full lockdown (Norway), a partial ('intelligent') lockdown (the Netherlands) and no lockdown (Sweden) during the first three months of the COVID-19 pandemic, and to explore if such use correlates with worries of being infected by COVID-19.

Data were collected in April-June 2020 during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic on the initiative of the National Research Center in Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NAFKAM) in Norway. Although we strived for similar samples and sampling methods in all three countries, different prerequisites in time and resources resulted in methodological differences as described below.

A national survey based on computer-assisted telephone interviews was conducted between April 28 and May 5, 2020, in collaboration with the marketing research company Ipsos A/S. The target sample size was 1,000 people out of a total population of 5.4 million (17). The sample was drawn from Norwegian residents aged 18 and above living in private households with a landline telephone or a cell phone using random quota sampling. Quotas by age, sex, and region of residence were established to obtain a sample representative of the adult population of Norway.

When calling a landline number, the interviewer asked for the person in the J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f 8 household who was 18 years of age or older with the most recent birthday. When calling a cell phone number, the person answering the phone was interviewed directly. Up to 7 attempts were made to reach the selected person. N=4,337 were unreachable after 7 calling attempts. Individuals who were reached and refused participation (n=1,881) were considered non-respondents, leading to a response rate of 34.5%. The final sample contained 990 individuals (figure 1), 55 recruited on the basis of landline numbers and 935 on the basis of cell phone numbers.

In Sweden, the data collection was conducted in the same way as in Norway between June 15 and June 23, 2020, also in collaboration with Ipsos A/S. In Sweden the target sample size was 500 people representing the total population of 10.1 million inhabitants (17). As in Norway up to seven attempts were made to reach the selected person. N=5,571 were unreachable after seven calling attempts. Individuals who were reached and refused participation (n=429) were considered non-respondents, leading to a response rate of 53.8 %. The final sample contained 500 individuals table 2 for complete list of providers) and self-management strategies such as use of natural remedies (see table 3 for complete list of natural remedies), and self-help techniques (see table 4 for complete list of self-help techniques) used within the last three months. The questions regarding specific therapies were adapted to the different countries studied (see table 2-4 for complete list of modalities asked for in each country).

Other data collected were gender, region of residence, age, household income, and highest completed level of education. In addition, three questions regarding the respondents' views on COVID-19 were added (see further below).

Yearly household income was categorised as low (<NOK400,000 in Norway, <SEK300,000 in Sweden, and <EUR 25,000 in the Netherlands), middle (NOK 400,000-799,000 in Norway, SEK 300,000-599,000 in Sweden, and EUR 25,000 -74,999 in the Netherlands), or high (≥ NOK 800,000 in Norway, ≥ SEK 600,000 in Sweden, and ≥ EUR 75,000 in the Netherlands).

Level of education was grouped in three categories (1. primary school; 2. secondary school; 3. college/university). The following values were collapsed into these three categories a) Norway: 1. primary school up to 8 years; 1. primary school up to 10 years; 2. secondary school; 3. college/university less than 4 years; and 3.

college/university 4 years or more, b) Sweden: 1. primary school; 2. secondary school;

3. college/university less than 4 years; and 3. college/university 4 years or more, and c) the Netherlands: 1. primary school only; 1. lower secondary school; 2. middle and higher secondary education; and 3. higher education (applied) university/ postdoctoral level.

Age was obtained as an open question and either assessed as a continuous variable, or as three categories (18-29 years; 30-59 years; and 60 years or over).

Since attitudes about COVID-19 might influence people's health care behaviours, three questions related to COVID-19 were asked.

On a scale from 1-5, where 1 is the lowest and 5 the highest: 1) How worried are you of becoming infected with the virus causing COVID-19 disease? 2) How worried are you that some of your friends and family could become infected with the virus causing COVID-19 disease, and 3) COVID-19 is more dangerous than ordinary influenza. The continuous variables 1-5 were in the analyses merged into three categorical variables: Not (1-2), somewhat (3) and very (4) (5) .

In order to generalize from a random sample and avoid sampling errors or biases, a random sample needs to be of adequate size (19) . With a margin of error of 5%, a confidence level of 95%, and a heterogeneity of 50%, we needed a minimum sample of n=384 to represent the Norwegian population of 5.4 million inhabitants, n=384 to represent the Swedish population of 10.1 million, and n=384 to represent the Dutch population of 17.1 million inhabitants for adequate study power (20) . As increased sample size is associated with decreased sampling error and is more likely to represent the population (21), the sample size was set to n=1000 in Norway, n=500 in Sweden, and n=1000 in the Netherlands.

Data were presented descriptively as frequencies (% (n)) for nominal data and as means (+ SD) for summarized data. Statistical testing (inference statistics) was performed by Pearson chi-square tests for ordinal data and by T-test or ANOVA test for the comparison of means using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) v.

26.0. The significance level was set to p< 0.05.

Norway: Approval of the Norwegian arm of the study was applied for at the Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics (REK 2020/133217).

They concluded that the project did not fall under the definition of projects to be assessed under the Health Research Act and therefore did not need approval.

Informed consent was obtained from all study participates.

The Swedish part of the study was approved by the Ethical committee, Etikprövningsmyndigheten (Dnr 2020-03026). Informed consent was obtained from all study participates.

Reviewing Committee of Wageningen University. They decided that this study did 

The typical respondent was middle aged (49.2%) with university education (50.8%) and middle income (45.7%), however with rather large differences between the three countries. In all countries, men and women were similarly represented with a slightly younger population in Norway (mean age of 46.98 years) compared to Sweden (49.25 years) and the Netherlands (48.85 years, p<0.001, table 1).

Furthermore, level of education and income varied between the countries with highest income and education in the Norwegian population (p<0.001, table 1).

As shown in table 2, almost half of the respondents (45.1%) had seen a health care provider during the first three months of the COVID-19 pandemic, 51.2% in Norway, 42.8% in Sweden and 40.3% in the Netherlands (p<0.001). Most of the respondents had seen a medical doctor (36.8%), a massage therapist (4.9%), or a chiropractor (2.9%).

Hardly any of the respondents (1.2%) had seen health care providers for the purpose of preventing COVID-19. Similar low numbers were found in Norway (1.7%), Sweden (1.6%) and in the Netherlands (0.6%, p=0.057). The few who sought help J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f 14 from providers for this purpose mainly saw a medical doctor (0.9%, table 2). Very few sought also help from health care providers to treat COVID-19-related symptoms (1.0%). Those who did saw a medical doctor.

The majority of the respondents (62.8%) used natural remedies, vitamins, minerals or dietary supplements during the first three months of the COVID-19 pandemic, 72.8%

in Norway, 50.0% in Sweden and 59.4% in the Netherlands (p<0.001). As shown in 

Despite rather high use of dietary supplements (including natural remedies, vitamins and minerals), and self-help techniques, few respondents used this specifically for prevention (4.4%) or treatment (0.4%) of COVID-19. When used for prevention, vitamins and minerals were most used (2.8%), with vitamin C (1.7%) being most frequently used followed by vitamin D (0.9%), and multivitamins (0.5%, table 3).

Most use of vitamins and minerals for prevention of COVID-19 was found in the Netherlands (4.1%), followed by Sweden (3.2%) and Norway (1.2%, table 3, p<0.001).

Also prayer was to some extent used for prevention (0.5%).

Only nine respondents had used self-management strategies to treat COVID-19 related symptoms. The strategies they used were: Vitamin C (n=3), prayer for own health (n=3), vitamin D (n=2), Omega 3, 6, 9 fatty acids (n=2), relaxation exercise (n=2), unspecified vitamins and minerals (n=2), ginger (n=1), garlic (n=1), ginkgo biloba (n=1), magnesium (n=1), zinc (n=1), breathing exercise (n=1), unspecified herb (n=1), and unspecified self-help technique (n=1, tables 3 and 4). These respondents (n=9) were equally distributed between the three countries with 2 from Norway, 4 from Sweden and 3 from the Netherlands (tables 3 and 4, p=0.941) and had used a mean of 2.4 therapies each to treat COVID-19.

The worry of being infected with COVID-19 varied greatly across the three countries studied (table 5, p<001). While most respondents from Norway and Sweden reported no worries about being infected by COVID-19 themselves (66% and 57% respectively), only 38.8% in the Netherlands felt the same way. They were more likely to be somewhat worried (42%). Few across all countries (15.4%) were very worried of being infected ranging from 11.2% to 19.1% between the countries (table   5) . When it came to worries for loved ones, people were in general somewhat (34.8%) or very (43.2%) worried. While half of the respondents in Norway and Sweden were very worried, respondents in the Netherlands were most likely to be somewhat worried (47%) that loved ones could be infected with COVID-19 (table 5) .

The users of health care providers and self-management strategies for prevention of COVID-19 were more likely to be very worried (24.4%) of being infected by COVID-19 than respondents who did not use this for prevention (14.4%, p=0.008, table 5).

This was also the tendency regarding worries for loved ones and the impression that COVID-19 is more dangerous than ordinary influenza, however, not at a significant level (p=0.092 and p=0.686 respectively, table 5). The number of people who had consulted health care providers was however somewhat lower than previously reported (22, 23) . This may partly be due to the shorter time frame in the current study (3 months vs. 12 months) and partly due to restrictions regarding physical contact, though many health care providers reorganized their clinical practice to be able to offer support to their patients (24). J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f 18 Overall, these findings support previous research suggesting that people's consultations with health care providers and use of self-management strategies are not associated with unrealistic hopes and expectations, or an irrational behaviour to treat and prevent acute medical illness. People rather use these strategies to cope with long-term conditions (23, 25, 26) . The low number of respondents using selfmanagement strategies to prevent or treat COVID-19 in all three countries further suggests that the phenomenon of self-management strategies is deeply rooted in culture, context and behaviour and is rather independent of health care system.

Despite similarities in the use of self-management strategies in relation to COVID-19 across the three countries, it is interesting to note that the popularity of certain dietary supplements seems to differ, as other international surveys have proposed (e.g. (27) ). The most obvious example is an extensive use of omega 3, 6, 9 and cod liver oil in Norway (44%) compared to 12% in Sweden and 5.3% in the Netherlands.

Also the use of vitamins and minerals (especially vitamin D, vitamin C and multivitamins) seems more prominent in Norway and in the Netherlands compared to Sweden. While homeopathic remedies were rarely used in both Sweden and Norway, they were used by almost 10% of the respondents in the Netherlands, however, not for treatment nor prevention of COVID-19.

Although there have been concerns that the COVID-19 pandemic might trigger a surge in the use of dietary supplements associated with fraudulent claims, the results from this study suggest that the large majority of users in Norway, Sweden, and the Netherlands did not use these products to prevent or treat COVID-19. Interestingly, two of the most frequently used vitamins during this period, vitamin C and vitamin D, have been marketed with fraudulent claims for the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 (28) , and were at an early stage of the pandemic investigated in a number of clinical trials for the treatment and prevention of COVID-19. While these fraudulent claims and ongoing research projects may have had an influence on the usage reported here, our findings support previous findings that such use is not associated with unrealistic expectations (29) .

Regarding self-help techniques were yoga, meditation/mindfulness and relaxation techniques the most popular techniques in all three countries. These findings are indeed interesting from a public health perspective, given the clinical potential of some of these techniques, e.g. mindfulness/meditation for improving depression and other mental health problems (30), problems which have been particularly prominent during the pandemic. The potential of these techniques is confirmed both in current practice within the formal health care systems (31) and ongoing research to provide support during the pandemic (e. g. (32)).

Although a minority, some respondents in this study did report consulting health care providers and using self-management strategies to prevent or treat COVID-19.

These respondents were also more likely to be worried of being infected by COVID-19 than respondents who did not use this for prevention (24.4% vs 14.4%, p=0.008). Being an international study involving three countries with different containment strategies we also expected to cover possible effects that these strategies might have on health care provider consultation and the use of self-management strategies. A limitation of the study is that we do not know how many of the respondents were actually infected with COVID-19. Due to limitations in the testing capacity during the first months of the pandemic, people were not tested for COVID-19 unless they had very severe symptoms or had been in direct contact with a person with a confirmed infection. Respondents reporting to have treated COVID-19 related symptoms with one or more of the listed therapies might therefore be self-diagnosed and not confirmed infected with COVID-19. Due to word limitations were data on self-reported effect of the therapies, possible side effects and source of information not reported in this paper, but will be explored in future articles.

The response rate varied between the countries (Norway 34.5%, Sweden 53.8% and the Netherlands 22%). Although the total number of included individuals is rather high (n= 2,494), and quotas by age, sex and region of residence were used to ensure J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f 21 representability of the populations among the respondents, the rather low response rate limits the strength of conclusions that can be drawn from this study.

To meet questions related to the use of self-management strategies including dietary supplements in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, health care professionals are advised to rely on evidence-based information sources that include regular updates on on-going research and warnings regarding fraudulent claims and to advice their patients in a personalized manner depending on their specific circumstances. The findings from this study will therefore provide health care providers, authorities and scientists with valuable insights in order to guide future communication and research, and to support rational decision-making in pandemic times.

According to our findings, the COVID-19 pandemic does not seem to have evoked a large-scale difference in behaviour related to consultations with health care providers or the use of self-management strategies such as dietary supplements and self-help techniques in any of the three countries. The majority use natural remedies, dietary supplements and/or self-management strategies but not with the intention to prevent or treat COVID-19. Give the source of funding and the role of the funders for the present study and, if applicable, for the original study on which the present article is based 22 *Give information separately for exposed and unexposed groups.

J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f

Helsedirektoratet har vedtatt omfattende tiltak for å hindre spredning av Covid-19. In English: The Directorate of Health has adopted comprehensive measures to prevent the transmission of Covid-19 Oslo: The Norwegian Directorate of health

Retorikkprofessor roser norske myndigheter: -Mindre fryktpreget enn det vi har sett i Danmark og Sverige

The Public Health Agency of Sweden's work with COVID-19 Stockholm: The Public Health Agency of Sweden

The intelligent lockdown: Compliance with COVID-19 mitigation measures in the Netherlands. Available at SSRN 3598215

Home Confinement on Eating Behaviour and Physical Activity: Results of the ECLB-COVID19 International Online Survey

Mental health before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal probability sample survey of the UK population

The psychological impact of COVID-19 on the mental health in the general population

World Health Organization

the News: Coronavirus and "Alternative" Treatments

Self-management of stress with complementary and alternative medicine: factors that influence and inform decision Making-a systematic review of the literature. Alternative and Complementary Therapies

Integrative considerations during the COVID-19 pandemic

Fears Of The COVID-19 Coronavirus Provide More Opportunity For Misinformation About 'Miracle Cures' Jersey City, NJ, USA: Forbes media

alternative and integrative medicine (CAM) for the treatment of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): an overview. 14. Boakye-Agyemang C. WHO supports scientifically-proven traditional medicine Genever: The World Health Organization (WHO)

Complementary, alternative and integrative medicine (CAM) for the treatment of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): an overview. Creative Commons Attribution 40 International License. 2020. 17. Countries in the world by population (2020)

Development of an international questionnaire to measure use of complementary and alternative medicine (I-CAM-Q)

Determining sample size; how to calculate survey sample size

Sample Size Calculator: The Survey System

A review of software for sample size determination. Evaluation & the health professions

Two-Thirds of Survey Respondents in Southern Sweden Used Complementary or Alternative Medicine in 2015

Use of complementary and alternative medicine in Norway: a cross-sectional survey with a modified Norwegian version of the International Questionnaire to Measure Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (I-CAM-QN)

The impact of COVID-19 on complementary and alternative medicine providers: a cross-sectional survey in Norway

Hok Nordberg J. Cancer patients' use of complementary and alternative medicine in Sweden: a cross-sectional study

Integration of complementary and alternative medicine in primary care: what do patients want?

Use of complementary and alternative medicine in cancer patients: a European survey

COVID-19) Products Silver Spring: U.S. Food and Drug Administration

The experience of using complementary therapies after a diagnosis of cancer: a qualitative synthesis

Mindfulness-based interventions for psychiatric disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) in Psychiatric Units in Sweden

Rapid deployment of virtual mind-body interventions during the COVID-19 outbreak: feasibility, acceptability, and implications for future care

Complementary and alternative medicine contacts by persons with mental disorders in 25 countries: results from the World Mental Health Surveys

The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Nordberg drafted the initial version of the paper. All authors reviewed the initial version of the paper, made substantial contributions to subsequent versions, and read and approved the final manuscript.