Dataset Information

Working conditions and health status of 6,317 front line public health workers across five provinces in China during the COVID-19 epidemic: a cross-sectional study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Public health workers at the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (China CDC) and primary health care institutes (PHIs) were among the main workers who implemented prevention, control, and containment measures. However, their efforts and health status have not been well documented. We aimed to investigate the working conditions and health status of front line public health workers in China during the COVID-19 epidemic.

Methods

Between 18 February and 1 March 2020, we conducted an online cross-sectional survey of 2,313 CDC workers and 4,004 PHI workers in five provinces across China experiencing different scales of COVID-19 epidemic. We surveyed all participants about their work conditions, roles, burdens, perceptions, mental health, and self-rated health using a self-constructed questionnaire and standardised measurements (i.e., Patient Health Questionnaire and General Anxiety Disorder scale). To examine the independent associations between working conditions and health outcomes, we used multivariate regression models controlling for potential confounders.

Results

The prevalence of depression, anxiety, and poor self-rated health was 21.3, 19.0, and 9.8%, respectively, among public health workers (27.1, 20.6, and 15.0% among CDC workers and 17.5, 17.9, and 6.8% among PHI workers). The majority (71.6%) made immense efforts in both field and non-field work. Nearly 20.0% have worked all night for more than 3 days, and 45.3% had worked throughout the Chinese New Year holiday. Three risk factors and two protective factors were found to be independently associated with all three health outcomes in our final multivariate models: working all night for >3 days (multivariate odds ratio [ORm]=1.67~1.75, p<0.001), concerns about infection at work (ORm=1.46~1.89, p<0.001), perceived troubles at work (ORm=1.10~1.28, p<0.001), initiating COVID-19 prevention work after January 23 (ORm=0.78~0.82, p=0.002~0.008), and ability to persist for > 1 month at the current work intensity (ORm=0.44~0.55, p<0.001).

Conclusions

Chinese public health workers made immense efforts and personal sacrifices to control the COVID-19 epidemic and faced the risk of mental health problems. Efforts are needed to improve the working conditions and health status of public health workers and thus maintain their morale and effectiveness during the fight against COVID-19.

SUBMITTER: Li J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7794632 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of this study is to address the difficulties encountered by public health workers in the early and middle stages of their efforts to combat COVID-19, compare the gaps among different types of institutions, and identify shortcomings in epidemic control.MethodsUsing multi-stage sampling, a survey of public health workers involved in the prevention and control of COVID-19 was conducted from 18 February to 1 March 2020 through a self-administered questionnaire. These public health workers were from the primary health care center (defined as "primary-urban" and "primary-rural" for those in urban and rural areas, respectively) and the center for disease control and prevention (defined as "non-primary") in five provinces including Hubei, Guangdong, Sichuan, Jiangsu and Gansu, China.ResultsA total of 9,475 public health workers were surveyed, of which 40.0 %, 27.0 % and 33.0 % were from the primary-rural, primary-urban and non-primary, respectively. The resources shortage were reported by 27.9 % participants, with the primary-rural being the worst affected (OR = 1.201, 95 %CI: 1.073-1.345). The difficulties in data processing were reported by 31.5 % participants, with no significant differences among institutions. The difficulties in communication and coordination were reported by 29.8 % participants, with the non-primary being the most serious (primary-rural: OR = 0.520, 95 %CI: 0.446-0.606; primary-urban: OR = 0.533, 95 %CI: 0.454-0.625). The difficulties with target audiences were reported by 20.2 % participants, with the primary-urban being the worst (OR = 1.368, 95 %CI: 1.199-1.560). The psychological distress were reported by 48.8 % participants, with no significant differences among institutions.ConclusionsPsychological distress is the most serious problem in the prevention and control of COVID-19. Resources shortage in primary-rural, difficulties in communication and coordination in non-primary, and difficulties with target audiences in the primary-urban deserve attention. This study will provide scientific evidences for improving the national public health emergency management system, especially for reducing the urban-rural differences in emergency response capacity.

Project description:ObjectivesWorkplace violence (WPV) against healthcare workers (HCWs) is a global issue. Our research aimed to elucidate the status and associated factors of WPV among front-line/non-front-line HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic.DesignThis cross-sectional study was conducted among HCWs in Hangzhou City through multistage sampling from December 2020 to January 2021.ParticipantsThis study included 14 909 valid samples (N=3748 front-line HCWs and N=11 161 non-front-line HCWs).Primary and secondary outcome measuresWe assessed the WPV status by Chinese version of WPV questionnaire. Binary logistic regression model was established to examine the associated factors of front-line/non-front-line HCWs experiencing WPV.ResultsThe total WPV prevalence equalled 37.25% for front-line HCWs and 27.73% for non-front-line HCWs. Among front-line HCWs, females were less likely to experience WPV (OR 0.837, 95% CI 0.710 to 0.988), while individuals who were undergraduate (OR 1.251, 95% CI 1.061 to 1.541) and had higher professional title (intermediate: OR 1.475, 95% CI 1.227 to 1.772; advanced: OR 1.693, 95% CI 1.294 to 2.216) were more likely to suffer from WPV; for non-front-line HCWs, individuals who aged over 50 years old (OR 0.721, 95% CI 0.563 to 0.969), had worked between 10 and 19 years (OR 0.847, 95% CI 0.749 to 0.958) and worked in the non-graded hospital (OR 0.714, 95% CI 0.614 to 0.832) had less chance to experience WPV, while individuals who had higher educational level (undergraduate: OR 1.323, 95% CI 1.179 to 1.484; ≥graduate: OR 1.519, 95% CI 1.217 to 1.895), were nurse (OR 1.142, 95% CI 1.031 to 1.265), and had higher professional title (intermediate: OR 1.458, 95% CI 1.297 to 638; advanced: OR 1.928, 95% CI 1.607 to 2.313) were more inclined to suffer from WPV (p all<0.05).ConclusionsThis study indicates that the prevalence of WPV among front-line HCWs is significantly higher than among non-front-line HCWs. Policy-makers should prioritise COVID-19 front-line HCWs, especially those with high educational levels and professional titles.

Project description:More than 11 million Thai people (38%) work in agriculture, but since most are in the informal sector, government enforcement and support are very limited. As a result, working conditions on Thai farms vary greatly, putting the health of many agricultural workers at risk. A cross-sectional study in three Thai provinces collected information on the work activities and conditions of 424 farmers representing five farm types: rice, vegetable, flower, rice/vegetable, and flower/vegetable. The agricultural workers were mainly women (60%); their average age was 53 but ranged from 18 to 87 years. More than 64% worked more than 5 days/week. Seventy-four percent of them had only primary school education. A number of the health and hazardous working conditions surveyed were significantly different by farm type. Rice farmers were found to have the highest prevalence of allergies, nasal congestion, wheezing, and acute symptoms after pesticide use, while flower farmers had the lowest prevalence of these health outcomes. Rice farmers reported the highest prevalence of hazardous working conditions including high noise levels, working on slippery surfaces, sitting or standing on a vibrating machine, spills of chemicals/pesticides, and sharp injuries. The lowest prevalence of these working conditions (except noise) was reported by flower farmers. Vegetable farmers reported the highest prevalence knee problems, while rice farmers had the lowest prevalence. Among these farmers, more than 27 different types of pesticides were reported in use during the past year, with the majority reporting use once a month. The flower/vegetable farming group reported the highest frequency of good exposure prevention practices during pesticide use. They were the most likely to report using cotton or rubber gloves or a disposable paper masks during insecticide spraying. Those farmers who only grew vegetables had the lowest frequency of good exposure prevention practices, including use of personal protective equipment. The economic cost of work-related injuries and illnesses among informal sector agricultural workers in Thailand is unknown and in need of study. Gaps in the regulations covering pesticide sales allow farmers to purchase pesticides without adequate training in their safe use. Training targeted to farm type regarding safe pesticide use and the prevention of accidents and musculoskeletal disorders is needed. Studies of chronic health effects among Thai farmers are needed, with special emphasis on respiratory, metabolic disease and cancer.