Job satisfaction and its related factors among emergency department physicians in China

Objective The mental health toll of COVID-19 on healthcare workers (HCW) is not yet fully described. We characterized distress, coping, and preferences for support among NYC HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods This was a cross-sectional web survey of physicians, advanced practice providers, residents/fellows, and nurses, conducted during a peak of inpatient admissions for COVID-19 in NYC (April 9th–April 24th 2020) at a large medical center in NYC (n = 657). Results Positive screens for psychological symptoms were common; 57% for acute stress, 48% for depressive, and 33% for anxiety symptoms. For each, a higher percent of nurses/advanced practice providers screened positive vs. attending physicians, though housestaff's rates for acute stress and depression did not differ from either. Sixty-one percent of participants reported increased sense of meaning/purpose since the COVID-19 outbreak. Physical activity/exercise was the most common coping behavior (59%), and access to an individual therapist with online self-guided counseling (33%) garnered the most interest. Conclusions NYC HCWs, especially nurses and advanced practice providers, are experiencing COVID-19-related psychological distress. Participants reported using empirically-supported coping behaviors, and endorsed indicators of resilience, but they also reported interest in additional wellness resources. Programs developed to mitigate stress among HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic should integrate HCW preferences.

Using comparative data from five countries, this study investigates the psychometric properties of the effort-reward imbalance (ERI) at work model. In this model, chronic work-related stress is identified as non-reciprocity or imbalance between high efforts spent and low rewards received. Health-adverse effects of this imbalance were documented in several prospective and cross-sectional investigations. The internal consistency, discriminant validity and factorial structure of 'effort', 'reward', and 'overcommitment' scales are evaluated, using confirmatory factor analysis. Moreover, content (or external) validity is explored with respect to a measure of self-reported health. Data for the analysis is derived from epidemiologic studies conducted in five European countries: the Somstress Study (Belgium; n = 3796), the GAZEL-Cohort Study (France; n = 10,174), the WOLF-Norrland Study (Sweden; n = 960), the Whitehall II Study (UK; n = 3697) and the Public Transport Employees Study (Germany; n = 316). Internal consistency of the scales was satisfactory in all samples, and the factorial structure of the scales was consistently confirmed (all goodness of fit measures were > 0.92). Moreover, in 12 of 14 analyses, significantly elevated odds ratios of poor health were observed in employees scoring high on the ERI scales. In conclusion, a psychometrically well-justified measure of work-related stress (ERI) grounded in sociological theory is available for comparative socioepidemiologic investigations. In the light of the importance of work for adult health such investigations are crucial in advanced societies within and beyond Europe.