Issue addressed To investigate whether Australians have experienced any positive effects during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods National online longitudinal survey. As part of a June 2020 survey, participants (n = 1370) were asked ‘In your life, have you experienced any positive effects from the COVID-19 pandemic’ (yes/no) and also completed the World Health Organisation-Five well-being index. Differences were explored by demographic variables. Free-text responses were thematically coded. Results Nine hundred sixty participants (70%) reported experiencing at least one positive effect during the COVID-19 pandemic. Living with others (P = .045) and employment situation (P textless .001) at baseline (April) were associated with experiencing positive effects. Individuals working for pay from home were more likely to experience positive effects compared to those who were not working for pay (aOR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.32, 0.63, P textless .001) or who were working for pay outside the home (aOR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.28, 0.58, P textless .001). 54.2% of participants reported a sufficient level of well-being, 23.2% low well-being and a further 22.6% very low well-being. Of those experiencing positive effects, 945/960 (98%) provided an explanation. The three most common themes were ‘Family time’ (33%), ‘Work flexibility’ (29%) and ‘Calmer life’ (19%). Conclusions A large proportion of participants reported positive effects resulting from changes to daily life due to the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia. So what The needs of people living alone, and of those having to work outside the home or who are unemployed, should be considered by health policymakers and employers in future pandemic preparedness efforts.
Issues addressed To establish the views of clinicians on the feasibility and effectiveness of using a novel lifestyle prescription form (LRx) which requires co-signing by clinician and patient and is uniquely based on the design of the standard drug prescription form, in the primary and secondary health care settings. Methods Thirty-six participants were issued with a “prescription” pad, of 20 LRx scripts, for 1 month and requested to issue an LRx prescription to patients they deemed suitable during their consultation, recording their reason for use of the LRx. Each clinician was then asked to complete a comprehensive feedback questionnaire. Results Feedback of the LRx was overwhelmingly positive. The script was viewed as a more effective way to convey and support cardiovascular lifestyle advice, than usual care. Forty per cent (196 of 480) of the LRx scripts that were provided to primary and secondary care clinicians during the study period were issued. In most consultations, the LRx script was issued to reaffirm dietary advice. Nurses and health care assistants were more likely than doctors to use the LRx in response to a request for lifestyle advice from a patient. Conclusions The LRx may be a useful addition to the clinician’s communication toolkit to stimulate lifestyle behaviour changes in their patients. The main barrier to use in the study was lack of consultation time. So what? Issuing the LRx is a method of solidifying lifestyle advice that clinicians could utilise, providing them with another tool in their behaviour change arsenal, particularly with familiarity with the tool.