PhD, Associate Professor V.A. Rodionov¹
PhD M.A. Rodionova^1
1Surgut State University, Surgut

Keywords: health-related life quality, academic academic physical education, physical health, mental health, self-isolation, distance learning, COVID-19 pandemic.

Corresponding author: rodionov_va@surgu.ru

Abstract

Objective of the study was to rate and analyze the physical and mental health and life quality variations in the university student communities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods and structure of the study. The study was run at Surgut State University. We sampled for the questionnaire survey the 2-3-year students (n=128) aged 18-20 years, including 66 full-time students sampled in March-April 2014 during public learning period [4]; and 62 students sampled in February-March 2021 in the distance learning period. The sample was qualified with Health Group 1 eligible for elective academic physical education and sports course. We used the Russian version of SF-36 Health Status Survey (SF-36v.2) with its unspecific life quality self-rating surveys and 8 health-related life quality tests. Every test question is scored by 0 to 100 points, with 100 points meaning excellent health [6]. The SF-36 survey form was translated into Russian and tested by the Institute of Clinical and Pharmacological Research in St. Petersburg. Meanings of differences in the test data arrays were rated by the parametric Student t-test.

Results and discussion. The full-time and distance learning groups scored virtually equal on the physical health test scales due to the relatively young age as they tend to consider themselves healthy and see no limitations for their physical state, although the distance learning group was clearly limited in its physical activity during the pandemic. The latter group, however, was found stressed by limitations in the social contacts and activity in the self-isolation period with the associating falls in the mental health self-rates.

Background. The leading world economies give a growing priority to the national health programs for a few last decades [1], and the Russian Federation is no exclusion with its public health and life quality protection policies and practices. As stated by Prime Minister M. Mishustin, the Cabinet of Ministers ranks "... the life quality of every citizen secured by economic and social progress and the national policy objectives approved by the President." among its key values and policies.

Physical inactivity (hypokinesia) is increasingly ranked among the key risks for the population health in addition to the well-known environmental, man-made and sanitary-epidemiological ones. As found by the relevant studies "... physical activity, when it is prudently designed and managed, is highly beneficial for health" [2]. In 2020 the humanity faced one of the greatest pandemics that seriously affected the lifestyles and life quality on the whole and physical activity in particular. The World Health Organization (WHO) announced of the COVID-19 pandemic and recommended self-isolation regimen among the other disease prevention measures. The Russian Federation introduced and kept this regime in March through July 2020.

The Ministry of Science and Higher Education Order of March 14, 2020 No. 398 "On the institutional policies and practices to prevent the spread of the new coronavirus infection in the Russian Federation", required the national universities make transition to distance learning in the self-isolation period. It should be emphasized that the strict isolation and social distancing requirements at the time of pandemic have proved to be detrimental to the mental health standards the world over [5]. Thus, the mental health surveys in France during the pandemic found anxiety peaks at the start of the coronavirus outbreak (Santé Publique France 2020 b). A similar study in the United States found the incidence of depression and anxiety on the rise.

We undertook this study as highly relevant due to the obvious negative impacts of self-isolation on the popular health and life quality standards, since the population groups need to adapt to the new living lifestyles, with special challenges faced by the university students due to distance learning and new communication format that cannot but be detrimental for the physical and mental health.

Objective of the study was to rate and analyze the physical and mental health and life quality variations in the university student communities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods and structure of the study. The study was run at Surgut State University. We sampled for the questionnaire survey the 2-3-year students (n=128) aged 18-20 years, including 66 full-time students sampled in March-April 2014 during public learning period [4]; and 62 students sampled in February-March 2021 in the distance learning period. The sample was qualified with Health Group 1 eligible for elective academic physical education and sports course. We used the Russian version of SF-36 Health Status Survey (SF-36v.2) with its unspecific life quality self-rating surveys and 8 health-related life quality tests. Every test question is scored by 0 to 100 points, with 100 points meaning excellent health [6]. The SF-36 survey form was translated into Russian and tested by the Institute of Clinical and Pharmacological Research in St. Petersburg. Meanings of differences in the test data arrays were rated by the parametric Student t-test.

Results and discussion. The health-related life quality survey is a modern method to self-rate own physical and mental health and social well-being [3]. The survey found the physical activity of the full-time student group on the elective physical education and sports course of 2014 being higher than in the distance learning group: 95±5.89 points versus 93±8.19 points, respectively: see Table 1.

Table 1. Physical and mental health test data of the student groups

The distance learning group rated its physical state impacts on the routine performance (RP) higher than their full-time peers (69.0±9.4 versus 77.42± 4.91, respectively; p≤0.01). This may be due to the limitations of daily duties in need of special physical efforts during the pandemic.

On the whole, both groups self-rated them medium and high on the physical health test scales; and the distance learning group scored higher on the general health scale than the full-time group – probably due to the natural fall in the respiratory viral infections and "dirty hands" related diseases in the period of special hygienic measures.

As far as the mental health test rates are concerned, the groups scored virtually equal on the social functioning scale. The average scores of the distance learning group were meaningfully lower in the other tests. The lower social functioning scores are indicative of the serious restrictions of the group social contacts, communication and, hence, the emotional and mental health. Despite the fact that the intergroup difference in the "Emotionality impacts on the daily lifestyle" (RE) test made up only a few points (60.00±4.48 versus 63.48±5.39), the Student's t-test showed the difference being statistically significant.

Averaged physical health scores (four tests) of the full-time and distance learning groups made up 48.87 and 51.28 points, respectively: see Table 2.

Table 2. Average physical and mental health scores of the groups

Averaged mental health scores (four tests) of the full-time and distance learning groups made up 46.58 and 45.95 points, respectively. It should be mentioned that the distance learning group score in the mental health related life quality test was at the bottom of the "norm" – that may be interpreted as indicative of the depressing effects of the pandemic and isolation on the group emotion health.

Conclusion. The COVID-19 pandemic was found of notable impacts on the students’ health related life quality. The full-time and distance learning groups scored virtually equal on the physical health test scales due to the relatively young age, whilst the mental health self-rates were indicative of an expressed shift in the emotional and mental health domains in the distance learning self-isolated group.

References

1. Iokhvidov V.V. Healthy lifestyle under social quarantine restrictions: results and expectations. Gumanitarnaya paradigma. 2020. No.3 (14). pp. 8–15.
2. Kobyakov Y.P. Concept of norms of human motor activity. Teoriya i praktika fiz. Kultury. 2003. No. 11. pp. 20-23.
3. Kuvaldin V.A. The Influence of Sports Classes on Quality of Life of Students of Tyumen State Agrarian University. Teoriya i praktika fiz. kultury. 2010. No. 10. pp. 19-23.
4. Rodionova M.A., Shutova M.V., Rodionov V.A. The Influence of Physical Education Classes in University on Quality of Life Related to Health in Students of Middle Ob Region. Teoriya i praktika fizicheskoy kultury, 2014, no. 11, pp. 90-92.
5. Alradhawi M., Shubber N., Sheppard J., Ali Y. Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Mental Well-Being amongst Individuals in Society: A Letter to the Editor on ‘The Socio-Economic Implications of the Coronavirus and COVID-19 Pandemic: A Review. International Journal of Surgery. No. 78 (2020). pp. 147–148.
6. Ware J.E., Kosinski M., Keller S.D. SF-36 Physical and Mental Health Summary Scales: A User`s Manual. The Health Institute, New England Medical Center: Boston, 1994. 190 p.