Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To identify the factors associated with low psychological resilience among university students in the Grand Est region of France at the end of the first national COVID-19 lockdown. DESIGN: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted (May 2020) among students at the University of Lorraine using the LimeSurvey platform and institutional mailing lists. SETTING: Higher education setting in north-eastern France, involving students from the University of Lorraine (multicampus public university) and Sciences Po Nancy, a political science institute in the same region. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 3708 students fully completed the online questionnaire, including the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS), resulting in an estimated response rate of 7.1%. All students enrolled at the University of Lorraine and Sciences Po Nancy during the 2019-2020 academic year were eligible to participate. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was psychological resilience, measured using the BRS. Secondary measures included perceived social support assessed with the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support, quality of interpersonal relationships evaluated using the Quality of Interpersonal Relationships Scale (Échelle de la Qualité des Relations Interpersonnelles, EQRI) and frequency of positive and negative thoughts measured with the Thermometer of Thoughts Tool. Factors associated with low resilience were analysed using bivariable and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 3708 students included in the sample, corresponding to a response rate of approximately 7.1%, 50.6% had normal resilience, while 37.3% reported low resilience. Female gender (OR=2.1, 95% CI: 1.8 to 2.6) and low social support (OR=1.7, 95% CI: 1.1 to 2.6) were the factors associated most strongly with low resilience. Negative thoughts (OR=1.4, 95% CI: 1.4 to 1.5), lower quality of relationships with people in general (OR=1.5, 95% CI: 1.3 to 1.8) and studying arts, humanities or languages (OR=1.4, 95% CI: 1.0 to 1.8) were identified as factors associated with low resilience. Increased age (OR=0.9, 95% CI: 0.9 to 1.0) and flat sharing (OR=0.6, 95% CI: 0.4 to 0.9) were inversely associated with low resilience levels. CONCLUSIONS: Resilience seems to be impacted primarily by internal and micro-environmental factors. Consolidating levels of individual resilience of at-risk populations by acting on these factors could be the key to improving their mental health.