The current study measured the quality of life levels for Saudi families during COVID-19 pandemic include four categories: A; health & physical, B; emotional & psychological, C; Family & social relations & D; Education & study of children.
Firstly: the descriptive data analysis
1. Place of residence, spouse's age, family monthly income and number of children
Basically, all the collected data are based on the total number of 274 participants in different variables of parents such as age of spouses, monthly income and number of children as shown in the following table (table 4).
Table (4): sample numbers and percentages distribution according to the place of residence, spouse's age, monthly income and number of children
Participations place of residence
|
Number
|
Percentage (%)
|
City
|
215
|
78.5
|
Governorate
|
59
|
21.5
|
Total
|
274
|
100
|
Age of spouses
|
Under 30 years old
|
24
|
8.7
|
30 to less than 40 years old
|
89
|
32.5
|
40 and above
|
161
|
58.8
|
Total
|
274
|
100
|
Monthly income
|
Less than 5000 thousand Saudi riyals
|
25
|
9.1
|
From 5,000 to less than 10,000 thousand Saudi riyals
|
61
|
22.3
|
From 10,000 to less than 15,000 thousand Saudi riyals
|
91
|
33.2
|
From 15,000 to 20,000 thousand Saudi riyals
|
44
|
16.1
|
20.000 thousand Saudi riyals and more
|
53
|
19.3
|
Total
|
274
|
100
|
Number of children
|
1-3 children
|
111
|
40.5
|
4-6 children
|
124
|
45.3
|
More than 6 children
|
39
|
14.2
|
Total
|
274
|
100
|
Regarding the participant place, it can be seen from table (4) that 215 participants with 78.5% of the research sample have the place of home-based of the family in a city, while the proportion of those individuals in area of living mainly a governorate is at 59 numbers (21.5%). Additionally, data collected for age of spouses are presented in the same table (table 4) that illustrated that most of the research samples are more the husbands at 40 years old and above with the percentage of 58.8% (161samples) while 24sampl size at 8.7% only are for the percentage of spouses under 30 years old that was followed by 89 spouses that is at 32.5% for the age ranged from 30 to less than 40 years old.
Furthermore, monthly family income recorded again in table (4) shown the maximum income levels of families income earned more than ten-thousands Saudi Riyals per month (10.000/Month) for about 68% of the study sample; from ten-less than fifteen thousand Saudi Riyals (10,000 to less than 15,000/month) additionally to the numbers earning from fifteen- twenty thousand Saudi Riyals (15,000 - 20,000/month). However, the lowest income levels were seen with the families at the percentage of about 9% and that with less than 5000 (five-thousands Saudi Riyals/month), while the rest of the participated families shown about 22% of families whose income ranged from five- thousands to less than ten- thousands Saudi Riyals (5,000 - less than 10,000/month).
Finally, table (4) also indicated number of children within the collected study samples. It shown that 40.5% of the study sample have children from 1 to 3 child, while the percentage of families who have 4-6 children is 45.3% and families with more than 6 children reached about 14 % so most of the families have 4-6 child.
- Education level of the spouses and couple's job:
The descriptive data in table (5) demonstrated firstly the educational levels of the study samples in two different categories based on the educational level s for wives and Husbands. Table (5) indicated that most of the study samples have a university qualification and above that in total presented with a percentage of 72.6% (199) for wives, and 62.4% (171) for husbands. The results also show that about 27.0% of husbands (74 men) have a secondary qualification compared to 20.1% of the wives at 55 ladies. A small percentage of the wives read and write at a rate of 1.1% that only counted 3 wives, while the lowest qualification among husbands is primary, with a percentage of 1.5% that presented 4 husbands only (table 5).
Table (5): Description of the study sample according to the educational level variable of the spouses and the spouse's job variable
Education levels
|
Wife
|
Husband
|
Number
|
Percentage (%)
|
Number
|
Percentage (%)
|
Literate
|
3
|
1.1
|
0
|
0
|
Primary
|
6
|
2.2
|
4
|
1.5
|
Middle
|
11
|
4.0
|
25
|
9.1
|
Secondary
|
55
|
20.1
|
74
|
27.0
|
University
|
177
|
64.6
|
131
|
47.8
|
Overachievers
|
22
|
8.0
|
40
|
14.6
|
Total
|
274
|
100
|
274
|
100
|
Jobs
|
Government
|
111
|
40.5
|
158
|
57.7
|
Private sector
|
19
|
6.9
|
28
|
10.2
|
Self-employed
|
5
|
1.8
|
26
|
9.5
|
Retired
|
36
|
13.1
|
54
|
19.7
|
None
|
103
|
37.6
|
8
|
2.9
|
Total
|
274
|
100
|
274
|
100
|
Regarding the jobs achieved between the wives and husbands participated in the current study; collected results in table (5) show that more than half (158) of the husbands work in a government job at a rate by 57.7%, while 111 participated females with percentage of 40.5% work in a government job. Again, the results demonstrated that wives who work in the private zone are less than the percentage of husbands who work in similar private area by 19 to 28 numbers respectively and both with 6.9% for wives, and 10.2% for husbands. Finally, data indicated that more than a third of wives have no job (103 females; 37.6%), compared to 8 males with 2.9%.
Secondly: the analytical data analysis in association to the four used dimension (A, B, C and D) in light of the COVID-19 pandemic:
Regarding measured used categories for the quality of life levels for Saudi families during COVID-19 pandemic in association to the four dimension using table (1 & 2) questioners included A; health & physical, B; emotional & psychological, C; Family & social relations & D; Education & study of children with different question as following.
a. The quality of life for Saudi participated families
The arithmetic averages with the standard deviations of the scores of the sample members were calculated in the quality of life scale, for the scale as a whole, and in its four dimensions mentioned above. The following table (table 6) shows collected results.
Table (6): Arithmetic averages and standard deviations of the scores of the samples in the quality of life scale for the scale as whole and in its four dimensions
Dimensions of the quality of life scale
|
* Arithmetic mean
|
SD
|
Level of the quality
|
Rank
|
A; health & physical,
|
3.46
|
0.476
|
High
|
1
|
B; emotional & psychological
|
3.32
|
0.973
|
Medium
|
2
|
C; Family & social relations
|
3.21
|
0.564
|
Medium
|
3
|
D; Education & study of children
|
3.04
|
0.867
|
Medium
|
4
|
Averaged quality of life as a whole
|
3.26
|
0.464
|
----
|
*Arithmetic mean the quality of life level at Very poor, Poor, Medium, High and Very high that represented by 1- 1.80, Above 1.80 - 2.60, Above 2.60 - 3.40, Above 3.40 - 4.20 and Above 4.20 to 5.0 respectively.
The results in Table (6) indicate that the quality of life for Saudi families in light of COVID-19 pandemic were average, with a mean of 3.26 Arithmetic levels. The highest quality of life was seen in A; health and physical quality with an arithmetic average of 3.46 Arithmetic levels with a level of High. This was followed by B; the emotional and psychological with a mean of 3.32 Arithmetic levels and a Medium quality of life. The third in order was C; the family and social relations that ranked with an average quality level with an average of 3.21 Arithmetic levels. Comes at the end is the quality of education and study for children with an arithmetic averaged 3.04 at an Average quality level (table 6).
b. Differences between the average scores of life scale due to the area of living:
To verify the extent to which there were statistically significant differences at the level of significance (P≤ 0.05) between the average scores of the sample members in the family quality of life scale for the scale as a whole and in its four dimensions (A, B, C and D) due to the variable of regions (city, governorate). Mann-Whitney test was used because there was a discrepancy in the sample size in the two variable levels (table 7 shows these results).
Table (7): Difference between life scale in total and its four dimensions (A, B, C and D) of samples due to the variable of the area of living (city, governorate).
Dimensions of the quality for life scale
|
Area of living
|
N
|
*Arithmetic mean
|
SD
|
Average rank
|
Rank sum
|
Z-Value
|
Sig.
|
A; health & physical,
|
City
|
215
|
3.47
|
0.47
|
139.89
|
30077.0
|
0.960
|
0.33
|
Governorate
|
59
|
3.40
|
0.47
|
128.78
|
7598.0
|
B; emotional & psychological
|
City
|
215
|
3.32
|
0.95
|
138.56
|
29790.0
|
0.423
|
0.67
|
Governorate
|
59
|
3.31
|
1.04
|
133.64
|
7885.0
|
C; Family & social relations
|
City
|
215
|
3.21
|
0.54
|
137.30
|
29520.0
|
0.079
|
0.93
|
Governorate
|
59
|
3.22
|
0.62
|
138.22
|
8155.0
|
D; Education & study of children
|
City
|
215
|
3.01
|
0.85
|
135.47
|
29126.0
|
0.814
|
0.41
|
Governorate
|
59
|
3.13
|
0.80
|
144.90
|
8549.00
|
Quality of Life Scale
|
City
|
215
|
3.25
|
0.45
|
136.80
|
29413.00
|
0.277
|
0.78
|
Governorate
|
59
|
3.26
|
0.49
|
140.03
|
8262.00
|
*Arithmetic mean the quality of life level at Medium and High that represented by above 2.60 - 3.40, and Above 3.40 - 4.20 respectively.
The results in table (7) showed that the Z-values resulting from the Mann-Whitney test for the family quality of life measure and its four dimensions ranged between 0.079 and 0.960 which were not statistically significant values since the associated significance levels ranged between 0.960 and 0.079, 0.937, and 0.337. These are values greater than the approved significance level (P≤0.05) which indicates that the level of families’ quality of life for the scale as a whole and its dimensions (A, B, C & D) did not differ according to the place of living for the participated families. So, staying place did not affect the quality of life between the study volunteers meaning that families who reside in a city have no different quality of life than families who reside in a governorate.
c. Differences between the average scores of life scale due to the age of parents:
To reveal the extent to which there are statistically significant differences at the level of significance (P≤0.05) between the average scores of the sample members in the family quality of life scale, for the scale as a whole, and in its four dimensions (A, B, C and D) associated to the variable of age of parents (less than 30 years old, between 30 and less than 40 years, and 40 years and over). The Kruskal-Wallis test used and results presents in the following table (table 8); there is a discrepancy in the sample size at each level.
Table (8): Differences between the mean scores of life scale in total and in its four dimensions (A, B, C and D) for the family due to the variable of age of parents
Measure of quality of life and its dimensions
|
Average rank of the parental age (Years)
|
Kruskal Wallis
|
Df.
|
Sign.
|
<30 (n = 24)
|
30-40 (n=89)
|
>40 (n = 161)
|
|
|
|
A; health & physical,
|
112.50
|
132.44
|
144.02
|
3.888
|
2
|
0.143
|
B; emotional & psychological
|
123.40
|
127.78
|
144.98
|
3.548
|
2
|
0.170
|
C; Family & social relations
|
114.56
|
138.24
|
140.51
|
2.276
|
2
|
0.320
|
D; Education & study of children
|
132.42
|
122.04
|
146.80
|
5.761
|
2
|
0.056
|
Quality of Life Scale
|
114.19
|
125.38
|
147.68
|
6.824
|
2
|
0.033
|
Table (8) illustrates that the value of the Kruskal-Wallis test for the quality of life measured due to the age of parents in association to the four categories A, B, C and D for families was (6.824). This is a statistically significant value as the value related was (0.033) which is lower than the significance (P≤0.05). This indicates difference in quality of life according to age. To find out which age has better family life quality, the Mann-Whitney test was used to compare each two groups. Parents of 40 and more had higher family life quality with statistical difference than those between 30 and 40 years old and in the same time higher than the group fewer than 30. The results also showed that the quality of health and physical (A), emotional and psychological quality of life (B), quality of family and social relationships (C), and quality of education and study of children (D) did not differ according to the age of the parents. The differences appeared in the scale as a whole, but when examining at each dimension of the scale, they did not show differences between groups in the quality of family life in every dimension, depending on the age of the parents (table 8).
d. Differences between the average scores of life scale due to the monthly family income:
To verify the extent to which there were statistically significant differences at the level of significance (P≤0.05) between the average scores of the sample members in the family quality of life scale for the scale as a whole and in its four dimensions (A, B, C and D) due to the monthly income variable (less than five thousand riyals, from five- thousand riyals to less than ten-thousand riyals, from ten-thousand riyals to less than fifteen-thousand riyals, and from fifteen-thousand riyals to twenty-thousand riyals, more than twenty-thousand riyals. Kruskal-Wallis test was used because there is a discrepancy in the sample size at each level of the variable. Table (9) presents these results as following.
Table (9): Differences between the mean scores of life scale in total and its four dimensions (A, B, C and D) for the family due to the monthly family income.
Monthly family income
|
N
|
Average rank for each dimension of the quality of life scale and for the scale as a whole
|
A; health & physical,
|
B; emotional & psychological
|
C; Family & social relations
|
D; Education & study of children
|
Quality of life measure
|
<5000
|
25
|
116.04
|
129.58
|
126.88
|
153.96
|
133.68
|
5000- less than 10000
|
61
|
141.27
|
123.48
|
132.76
|
123.70
|
125.00
|
10.000- less than 15000
|
91
|
136.53
|
140.34
|
142.97
|
125.21
|
133.05
|
15000-20000
|
44
|
140.55
|
144.52
|
130.11
|
158.01
|
151.68
|
>20.000
|
53
|
142.42
|
146.67
|
144.71
|
149.70
|
149.56
|
Kruskal Wallis
|
2.281
|
3.345
|
1.942
|
8.418
|
4.504
|
Df.
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Sign.
|
0.684
|
0.502
|
0.746
|
0.058
|
0.342
|
The results in table (9) showed that the Kruskal-Wallis values of the family quality of life scale and its four dimensions ranged between (8.418) and (1.942), which were not statistically significant because the associated significance levels ranged between (0.746) and (0.058) greater than the approved significance level (0.05). This shows that the level of families’ quality of life for the scale as a whole and its dimensions (B, C and D) did not differ according to the family’s monthly income. Monthly household income, so, did not affect the families' quality of life, meaning that high-income families and low-income families had similar quality of life.
e. Differences between the average scores of life scale due to the number of children:
To verify the extent to which there were statistically significant differences at the level of significance (P≤ 0.05) between the average scores of the sample members in the family quality of life scale for the scale as a whole and in its four dimensions (A, B, C and D) due to the variable of number of children (1-3 children, 4-6 children, and more than 6 children) Kruskal-Wallis test was used because there was a discrepancy in the sample size at each level (table 10).
Table (10): Differences between the mean scores of life scale in total and in its four dimensions (A, B, C and D) for the family due to the number of children.
Dimension
|
The mean-rank of the variable number of children
|
Kruskal Wallis
|
Def.
|
Sign.
|
1-3
(n=111)
|
4-6
(n =124)
|
< 6
(n = 39)
|
A; health & physical,
|
133.52
|
133.28
|
162.26
|
4.491
|
2
|
0.106
|
B; emotional & psychological
|
132.63
|
137.33
|
151.90
|
1.714
|
2
|
0.424
|
C; Family & social relations
|
133.05
|
141.36
|
137.87
|
0.652
|
2
|
0.722
|
D; Education & study of children
|
125.32
|
144.17
|
150.97
|
4.678
|
2
|
0.096
|
Quality of life as a whole
|
126.42
|
140.94
|
158.10
|
5.044
|
2
|
0.08
|
The results in table (10) showed that the Kruskal-Wallis values of the family quality of life scale and its four dimensions ranged between (5.044) and (0.652), which are not statistically significant because the levels of significance associated with them ranged between (0.722) and (0.08); greater than the approved significance level (0.05). This indicates that the level of families’ quality of life for the scale as a whole and its dimensions (A, B, C and D) did not differ according to the number of children, which indicates that the number of children did not affect the quality of life of families.
f. Differences between the average scores of life scale due to the education level of the parents:
To verify the extent to which there were statistically significant differences at the level of significance (P≤ 0.05) between the average scores of the sample members in the family quality of life scale, for the scale as a whole, and in its four dimensions due to the level variable of parents’ education (high school and less, university and higher), T-test was used for two independent samples, and Table (11) presents these results:
Table (11): Differences between the mean scores of life scale in total and in its four dimensions (A, B, C and D) for the family due to the educational level of the parents (Wife's and Husband's education).
Quality of life scale and its dimensions
|
Secondary and lower n (wife=75, husband=103)
|
University and higher n (wife=199, husband=171)
|
T-test
|
Arithmetic mean
|
SD.
|
Arithmetic mean
|
SD.
|
value
|
Sign.
|
Wife's education variable
|
A; health & physical,
|
3.51
|
0.547
|
3.44
|
0.445
|
1.10
|
0.272
|
B; emotional & psychological
|
3.22
|
1.06
|
3.36
|
0.937
|
1.041
|
0.299
|
C; Family & social relations
|
3.21
|
0.625
|
3.22
|
0.540
|
0.017
|
0.986
|
D; Education & study of children
|
3.14
|
0.893
|
3.00
|
0.828
|
1.202
|
0.231
|
Quality of Life Scale
|
3.27
|
0.508
|
3.25
|
0.448
|
0.278
|
0.781
|
Husband's education variable
|
A; health & physical,
|
3.45
|
0.507
|
3.47
|
0.466
|
0.554
|
0.580
|
B; emotional & psychological
|
3.13
|
1.09
|
3.43
|
0.885
|
2.440
|
0.015
|
C; Family & social relations
|
3.27
|
0.517
|
3.18
|
0.589
|
1.341
|
0.181
|
D; Education & study of children
|
2.98
|
0.864
|
3.07
|
0.837
|
0.866
|
0.387
|
Quality of Life Scale
|
3.21
|
0.453
|
3.29
|
0.470
|
1.401
|
0.161
|
The results in Table (11) show that there were no statistically significant differences in the arithmetic averages of the sample response on the quality of life scale as a whole and for each of the dimensions of the scale (health and physical, emotional and psychological, family and social relations, quality of education and study for children) between families whose wife's education was secondary or lower and those whose education was university and higher. This indicates that the wife’s education did not affect the level of the family’s quality of life in light of the Coronavirus pandemic. The results in Table (11) also show that there were no statistically significant differences in the arithmetic averages of the sample response on the quality of life scale as a whole and in the following three dimensions: health and physical, family and social relations, quality of education and study of children, among families whose husband’s education was secondary or less and those who had education at university and higher. This specifies that the husband’s education level did not affect the level of families’ quality of life in the scale as a whole and in the health and physical quality of life, the quality of family and social relationships, and the quality of education and study of children. However, statistically significant differences appeared in the quality of psychological and emotional life in favor of families in which the husband's education was university-level and higher. Again such data directs that the families in which the husband's education was university-educated had a higher psychological and emotional quality of life and a statistically significant difference than the families in which the husband's education was secondary and lower.
g. Differences between the average scores of life scale due to the job of parents (wife’s and husband's work):
To verify the extent to which there were statistically significant differences at the level of significance (P≤ 0.05) between the average scores of the sample members in the family quality of life scale, for the scale as a whole, and in its four dimensions (A, B, C and D) due to the work variable of parents' work (government job, job in the private sector, retired, self-employed, no work). Kruskal-Wallis test has been used in the current study because there is a discrepancy in the sample size at each level. Table (12) presents the results of differences according to the wife’s work, and husband's work.
Table (12): Differences between the mean scores of life scale in total and in its four dimensions (A, B, C and D) for the family due to the wife’s and husband's work.
Measure of quality of life and its dimensions
|
The average ranks according to the wife's work variable
|
Kruskal Wallis
|
Df.
|
Sig.
|
Government
n=111
|
Private
sector (n=19)
|
Self-employed
(n=5)
|
Retired
(n=36)
|
None
n=103
|
A; health & physical,
|
137.73
|
125.66
|
191.40
|
141.82
|
135.31
|
2,958
|
4
|
0.56
|
B; emotional & psychological
|
140.96
|
116.97
|
162.70
|
124.38
|
140.92
|
3.184
|
4
|
0.52
|
C; Family & social relations
|
130.80
|
139.26
|
142.30
|
150.64
|
139.57
|
1.903
|
4
|
0.75
|
D; Education & study of children
|
143.46
|
105.03
|
117.80
|
151.79
|
5.686
|
133.02
|
4
|
0.22
|
Quality of Life Scale
|
139.72
|
112.68
|
143.30
|
140.24
|
138.45
|
2.037
|
4
|
0.729
|
|
The average ranks according to the spouse's work variable
|
|
|
|
Government n= 158
|
Private
sector (n= 28)
|
Self-employed (n= 26)
|
Retired
(n= 54)
|
None
(n= 8)
|
A; health & physical,
|
141.24
|
135.11
|
114.25
|
141.32
|
121.75
|
3.093
|
4
|
0.54
|
B; emotional & psychological
|
141.75
|
99.89
|
155.77
|
135.02
|
142.63
|
8,260
|
4
|
0.08
|
C; Family & social relations
|
133.71
|
140.00
|
139.44
|
145.09
|
146.00
|
1.003
|
4
|
0.90
|
D; Education & study of children
|
135.43
|
136.11
|
128.29
|
152.35
|
112.88
|
3.169
|
4
|
0.53
|
Table (12) illustrates that there were no statistically significant differences in the arithmetic averages of the sample response on the quality of life scale as a whole and for each of the dimensions (A, B, C and D) of the scale due to the variable of the husband’s job, indicating that quality of life of families did not differ, whether on the scale as a whole or for each of the dimensions of the scale, depending on the husband's work, and that the quality of families' life was not affected by the husband's work.
Additionally, table (12) illustrates that there were no statistically significant differences in the arithmetic averages of the sample response on the quality of life scale as a whole and for each of the dimensions of the scale (health and physical, emotional and psychological, family and social relations, quality of education and study for children) due to the wife’s work variable. This indicates that quality of life of families, whether on the scale as a whole or for each of the dimensions of the scale, did not differ according to the wife's work and the quality of life of families was not affected by the wife's work.