Dataset Information

Health and safety risk perceptions and needs of app-based drivers during COVID-19.

ABSTRACT:

Background

App-based drivers face work disruptions and infection risk during a pandemic due to the nature of their work, interactions with the public, and lack of workplace protections. Limited occupational health research has focused on their experiences.

Methods

We surveyed 100 app-based drivers in Seattle, WA to assess risk perceptions, supports, and controls received from the company that employs them, sources of trust, stress, job satisfaction, COVID-19 infection status, and how the pandemic had changed their work hours. Data were summarized descriptively and with simple regression models. We complemented this with qualitative interviews to better understand controls and policies enacted during COVID-19, and barriers and facilitators to their implementation.

Results

Drivers expressed very high levels of concern for exposure and infection (86%-97% were "very concerned" for all scenarios). Only 31% of drivers reported receiving an appropriate mask from the company for which they drive. Stress (assessed via PSS-4) was significantly higher in drivers who reported having had COVID-19, and also significantly higher in respondents with lower reported job satisfaction. Informants frequently identified supports such as unemployment benefits and peer outreach among the driver community as ways to ensure that drivers could access available benefits during COVID-19.

Conclusions

App-based drivers received few protections from the company that employed them, and had high fear of exposure and infection at work. There is increased need for health-supportive policies and protections for app-based drivers. The most effective occupational and public health regulations would cover employees who may not have a traditional employer-employee relationship.

SUBMITTER: Beckman KL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8653178 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesThis study examined the impact of hospital readiness on patient safety from the healthcare workers' perspective.DesignThe study employed a mixed-methods explanatory sequential design, with the quantitative phase taking precedence. We conducted an online survey of 235 healthcare workers at COVID-19 referral hospitals, followed by an interview with 11 participants from various hospital types.SettingCOVID-19 referral hospitals in Indonesia.ParticipantsHealth workers working at COVID-19 referral hospitals.MeasuresHospital ownership; hospital accreditation status; hospital readiness including incident management system, surge capacity, infection control and prevention, and human resource management; patient safety incident.ResultsAccording to the survey, 66.4% of the participants worked at a hospital owned by the provincial or district government, and 69.4% worked at a hospital which had received an excellent status accreditation. More than 80% of the hospitals scored well in the categories of the incident management system (86%), surge capacity (80.9%), infection control and prevention (97.9%), and human resource management (84.7%). However, only 50.6% of the hospitals scored well in managing patient safety incidents. Hospital ownership, accreditation status and hospital readiness all have an impact on patient safety incidents, which were reported in all types of hospitals by both studies.ConclusionsThis study provides significant results for Indonesia in terms of hospital preparedness and patient safety for the COVID-19 pandemic. The accreditation and ownership status of the hospital have aided hospital readiness. Despite the fact that no hospital in the world was prepared for the COVID-19 pandemic, hospital readiness has improved a year later; however, patient safety has not improved. Patient safety incidents occurred regardless of hospital status, with the most common occurrence being delayed treatment. Administrative errors were also recorded in COVID-19 field hospitals that were not accredited. Future research should focus on improving pandemic care quality and implementing initiatives that are applicable to all types of hospitals.

Project description:BackgroundMental health has worsened, and substance use has increased for some people during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Some cross-sectional studies suggest that higher COVID-19 risk perceptions are related to poorer mental health and greater risk behaviours (e.g., substance use). However, longitudinal and genetic data are needed to help to reduce the likelihood of reverse causality.MethodsWe used cross-sectional, longitudinal, and polygenic risk score (PRS; for anxiety, depression, wellbeing) data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC). We examined cross-sectional and prospective longitudinal associations between COVID-19 risk perceptions (i.e., cognitive, affective, self, other, and a combined 'holistic' measure) and mental health (i.e., anxiety, depression), wellbeing, and risk behaviours. Pandemic (April-July 2020) and pre-pandemic (2003-2017) data (ns = 233-5,115) were included.ResultsHigher COVID-19 risk perceptions (holistic) were associated with anxiety (OR 2.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.20 to 3.52), depression (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.24 to 2.18), low wellbeing (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.45 to 2.13), and increased alcohol use (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.72). Higher COVID-19 risk perceptions were also associated with self-isolating given a suspected COVID-19 infection (OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.68), and less face-to-face contact (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.98) and physical contact (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.00). Pre-pandemic anxiety (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.09) and low wellbeing (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.74) were associated with higher COVID-19 risk perceptions. The depression PRS (b 0.21, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.40) and wellbeing PRS (b -0.29, 95% CI -0.48 to -0.09) were associated with higher and lower COVID-19 risk perceptions, respectively.ConclusionsPoorer mental health and wellbeing are associated with higher COVID-19 risk perceptions, and longitudinal and genetic data suggest that they may play a causal role in COVID-19 risk perceptions.