| Literature DB >> 36078733 |
Bethy Merchán-Sanmartín1,2,3, Mayra Brocel-Bajaña2, Johny Pambabay-Calero4, Sergio Bauz-Olvera4, Néstor Montalván-Burbano1,5,6, Maribel Aguilar-Aguilar1, Paúl Carrión-Mero1,2.
Abstract
Confinement as a result of COVID-19 had a strong impact around the world and restricted mobility. The university community started to take routine classes in a virtual and sedentary way, causing negative effects on their health and habits. The objective of this research is to analyze the impact of confinement through surveys of students and interviews with university professors, in order to study the effects of confinement on physical activity, emotional state, and health. The methodology was as follows: (i) preliminary data; (ii) survey development, interviews, and information collection; (iii) data processing and multivariate presentation of the results, using multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) and multiple factor analysis (MFA). The results of 375 respondents show that there is a low level of physical activity (<300 METs, 49.6%), where women register sedentary behavior (73%). Emotionally, most of them show feeling bored. Some express anxiety, depression, discomfort, and frustration. In terms of health, there are rheumatic, circulatory, respiratory, and other diseases related to obesity. It is essential to create programs that promote physical exercise to reduce the consequences of sedentary lifestyles on the physical, social, and mental health of university students, especially engineering students, who experienced greater effects of confinement than those studying nutrition and social sciences.Entities:
Keywords: anxiety; depression; pandemic; physical exercise; sedentarism; undergraduates
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36078733 PMCID: PMC9518169 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191711016
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Figure 1Geographical location of the ESPOL university campus.
Figure 2Data science diagram.
Figure 3Process for obtaining a word cloud.
Eigenvalues and cumulative variance percentage.
| Dimensions | Eigenvalue | Percentage of Variance | Cumulative Percentage of Variance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dim 1 | 1.9885 | 9.0737 | 9.0737 |
| Dim 2 | 1.5243 | 6.9555 | 16.0292 |
Figure 4Data processing and multivariate presentation.
Demographic characteristics of respondents.
| Variable | Frequency | Percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | ||
| Female | 192 | 51.1 |
| Age | ||
| 16–18 years | 16 | 4.3 |
| Nationality | ||
| Ecuadorian | 373 | 99.4 |
| Venezuelan | 1 | 0.3 |
| Peruvian | 1 | 0.3 |
| Marital status | ||
| Single | 366 | 97.6 |
| Married | 6 | 1.6 |
| Free union | 3 | 0.8 |
| Employment status | ||
| Employed | 89 | 23.7 |
| Unemployed | 286 | 76.3 |
| Faculty | ||
| FADCOM 1 | 104 | 27.7 |
| FCNM 2 | 98 | 26.1 |
| FCSH 3 | 52 | 13.8 |
| FICT 4 | 1 | 0.3 |
| FCV 5 | 1 | 0.3 |
| FIEC 6 | 4 | 1.1 |
| FIMCP 7 | 2 | 0.5 |
| Not defined | 113 | 30.3 |
1 Faculty of Art, Design, and Audio-visual Communication (FADCOM), 2 Faculty of Natural Sciences and Mathematics (FCNM), 3 Faculty of Social and Humanistic Sciences (FCSH), 4 Faculty of Earth Sciences Engineering (FICT), 5 Faculty of Life Sciences (FCV), 6 Faculty of Electrical and Computer Engineering (FIEC), 7 Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Production Sciences (FIMCP).
Figure 5Multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) of the variables of faculty, Q3, and Q7.
Figure 6Multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) of the variables of faculty, Q4, and Q5.
Figure 7Multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) of the variables of faculty, Q2, and Q3.
Figure 8Multiple factor analysis (MFA) of the variables Q2, Q4, and Q5.
Figure 9Multiple factor analysis (MFA) of the variables of faculty, Q6, Q7.
χ2 test (chi square) of stochastic independence.
| Categories Evaluated | Result | |
|---|---|---|
| Gender vs. PA before the pandemic | Not independent | <0.01 |
| Gender vs. PA during the pandemic | Not independent | <0.01 |
| Gender vs. lifestyle | Not independent | <0.01 |
| Gender vs. emotional state | Not independent | <0.01 |
| Faculty vs. PA before the pandemic | Not independent | <0.01 |
| University vs. PA during the pandemic | Not independent | <0.01 |
| Habits vs. PA during the pandemic | Not independent | <0.01 |
| Emotional state vs. PA during the pandemic | Not independent | <0.01 |
| Illnesses during the pandemic vs. emotional state | Not independent | <0.01 |
Physical activity levels and sedentary lifestyles in university students.
| Variable | Frequency (Percentage %) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Activity Level | Avg. MET * | All | Women | Men |
| Low | 68 (0–300) | 186 (49.6%) | 106 (55.2%) | 80 (43.7%) |
| Behaviour | All | Women | Men | |
| Sedentary | >6 h sitting | 250 (66.7%) | 140 (72.9%) | 110 (60.1%) |
| Total | 375 (100%) | |||
* Here, Avg. MET—average MET.
Physical activity before and during the pandemic.
| Physical Activities | Men | Women | Total | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before | During | Before | During | Before | During | |
| Daily activities (climbing stairs, doing housework) | 11% | 20% | 27% | 36% | 19% | 29% |
| Sports (soccer, basketball, tennis, etc.) | 45% | 15% | 18% | 5% | 31% | 10% |
| Aerobic exercise (jogging, walking, cycling) | 26% | 23% | 34% | 28% | 30% | 26% |
| Coordination exercise (dancing) | 0% | 1% | 8% | 10% | 4% | 6% |
| None of the above | 8% | 22% | 7% | 16% | 8% | 19% |
| Passive recreation (board game, playing an instrument, attending language academies) | 3% | 5% | 2% | 2% | 2% | 3% |
| Muscular endurance (lifting loads). | 8% | 14% | 5% | 3% | 6% | 8% |
| Total | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |
Emotional state and health status.
| Emotional State | Men | Women | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Boredom | 53.6% | 42.7% | 48.0% |
| Anxiety or stress | 24.0% | 30.7% | 27.5% |
| Tranquility | 10.4% | 15.6% | 13.1% |
| Happy to be home | 2.7% | 5.7% | 4.3% |
| Loneliness | 4.9% | 2.6% | 3.7% |
| Frustration and annoyance | 4.4% | 2.6% | 3.5% |
| Total | 100% | 100% | 100% |
| Health status | |||
| My illness has worsened | 16% | 19% | 17% |
| My health has improved | 10% | 13% | 11% |
| New diseases have appeared | 10% | 12% | 11% |
| My health remains stable before and during confinement | 64% | 56% | 60% |
| Total | 100% | 100% | 100% |
Perception of pre-existing diseases during confinement.
| Pre-Existing Diseases | My Illness Has Worsened | My Health Has Improved | New Diseases Have Appeared | My Health Remains Stable before and during Confinement | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| None | 2% | 6% | 7% | 85% | 45% |
| Depression and anxiety | 30% | 20% | 11% | 39% | 18% |
| Other | 17% | 10% | 24% | 50% | 11% |
| Obesity | 49% | 5% | 13% | 33% | 10% |
| Respiratory problems | 14% | 19% | 14% | 52% | 6.0% |
| High cholesterol | 35% | 29% | 12% | 24% | 5.0% |
| Rheumatic diseases | 40% | 20% | 40% | 0% | 1.3% |
| Circulation problems | 60% | 0% | 20% | 20% | 1.3% |
| Diabetes | 0% | 67% | 0% | 33% | 0.8% |
| Neurological problems | 33% | 33% | 0% | 33% | 0.8% |
| Cancer | 0% | 0% | 0% | 100% | 0.5% |
| Hypertension | 50% | 50% | 0% | 0% | 0.5% |
Figure 10Word cloud of affect factors in college students.