| Literature DB >> 34831806 |
Silvia Gallegati1, Luca Aquilanti2, Valerio Temperini1, Gloria Polinesi3, Giorgio Rappelli2,4.
Abstract
Health information-seeking behavior provides a variety of benefits, such as reducing knowledge gaps and educating individuals outside the medical office. This study aimed at evaluating if different sources used to gather information on COVID-19 could affect the willingness to undergo dental appointments. An anonymous survey was posted on social media. The 1003 respondents used several channels of communication, clearly distinguishing reliable from unreliable ones. Multiple logistic regression estimated the effect of different information channels on the probability of being strongly influenced by COVID-19 in accessing upcoming dental appointments. Newspapers were the most-used channel of information (61.2%), blogs and forums the least used (11.2%). Overall, the more an individual was informed, the higher was the risk of missing upcoming dental care appointments (OR 2.05, CI 1.45-2.90, p < 0.001). The two most reliable channels of communication were identified in journals/websites of medicine and healthcare professionals. Women proved to be more active in gathering information and relying on less secure but more personal channels, such as social media and friends and family, thus having an increased risk of being influenced by COVID-19 information regarding upcoming dental care appointments (OR 3.62, CI 0.85-15.52, p < 0.1 and OR 1.60, CI 1.00-2.58, p < 0.1, respectively). Social media should have a greater presence on the side of medical service providers to avoid distortions of information and fake news that ultimately cause fear among citizens and compromise their health. Healthcare professionals and institutions should adapt their communication channels based on the audience they want to address to optimize the education and information of the final users.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; consumer perception; dental care access; gender differences; mass media; survey
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34831806 PMCID: PMC8622317 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182212050
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Demographic information of the respondents to the questionnaire (n = 1003).
Figure 2Information channels used by the respondents to the questionnaire (n = 854). Light grey refers to the % of individuals who obtain information using that information channel. Dark grey refers to the % of who use the information channel and consider it reliable.
Odds ratio estimates of variables associated with influence of COVID-19 on upcoming dentist appointments (* p-value < 0.10, ** p-value < 0.05, *** p-value < 0.01, **** p-value < 0.001).
| Independent Variables | All | Females | Males |
|---|---|---|---|
| Look for further info on COVID-19 | 1.44 (0.90–2.31) | 1.81 (0.99–3.31) * | 0.85 (0.38–1.90) |
| Feeling informed | 0.70 (0.45–1.10) | 0.66 (0.37–1.19) | 0.83 (0.39–1.74) |
| Look for further info about oral care | 2.05 (1.45–2.90) **** | 2.22 (1.36–3.63) *** | 1.91 (1.12–3.24) ** |
| Information by dentist sanitization procedures | 0.64 (0.46–0.88) *** | 0.71 (0.46–1.10) | 0.52 (0.31–0.88) ** |
| Feeling informed + be graduated | 1.66 (1.08–2.56) ** | 1.25 (0.70–2.23) | 2.42 (1.21–4.85) ** |
| TV/radio | 0.77 (0.53–1.13) | 0.76 (0.46–1.24) | 0.79 (0.42–1.50) |
| Newspapers/online newspapers | 1.68 (1.14–2.50) *** | 1.70 (1.02–2.84) ** | 1.80 (0.95–3.40) * |
| Friends and relatives | 1.25 (0.86–1.82) | 1.60 (1.00–2.58) * | 0.98 (0.50–1.91) |
| Social media (Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, etc.) | 0.98 (0.69–1.40) | 0.86 (0.54–1.35) | 1.18 (0.65–2.14) |
| Blog/forum | 0.74 (0.41–1.34) | 0.69 (0.32–1.48) | 0.74 (0.28–1.98) |
| Journals or websites of medicine, health, wellness | 1.11 (0.70–1.75) | 1.32 (0.73–2.39) | 1.07 (0.49–2.35) |
| Family doctor/other doctors/chemist | 1.28 (0.80–2.06) | 1.03 (0.55–1.92) | 1.93 (0.87–4.24) |
| Social Media + reliability | 1.70 (0.60–4.84) | 3.62 (0.85–15.52) * | 0.90 (0.16–5.03) |
| TV/radio + reliability | 0.90 (0.52–1.57) | 1.05 (0.52–2.13) | 0.77 (0.30–1.96) |
| Newspapers + reliability | 1.11 (0.68–1.83) | 0.88 (0.46–1.66) | 1.65 (0.70–3.89) |
| Blogs + reliability | 2.40 (0.76–7.61) | 1.59 (0.26–9.61) | 2.18 (0.40–11.80) |
| Journals/websites of medicine + reliability | 1.27 (0.79–2.04) | 1.14 (0.62–2.10) | 1.36 (0.61–2.99) |
| Family doctor + reliability | 0.76 (0.43–1.36) | 1.09 (0.51–2.29) | 0.43 (0.17–1.12) * |
| Friends + reliability | 1.74 (0.68–4.49) | 1.07 (0.31–3.63) | 3.85 (0.73–20.41) |