Exploring University and Healthcare Workers' Physical Activity, Diet, and Well-Being During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic affected well-being and health behaviors, especially among healthcare workers and employees in other fields. This is of public health concern because health behaviors and well-being influence long-term negative health outcomes. The purpose of this study was to explore health behaviors and well-being among university and medical center staff during COVID-19. METHODS: EMPOWER (Employee Well-being during Epidemic Response) was a three-wave observational study (wave 1: 1,994; wave 2: 1,426; wave 3: 1,363) measuring health behaviors and well-being of university and medical center staff. Surveys were disseminated online to all employees between April and September 2020. Descriptive statistics explored trends across waves for health behaviors (physical activity [PA], diet), and well-being (mental well-being [MWB], depression, anxiety, and stress). Logistic regressions explored associations between health behaviors and well-being factors adjusting for demographics and clinical role. Interactions explored moderation by clinical role. RESULTS: Most participants reported same/healthier changes in PA (54-65%) and diet (57-73%) and decreased MWB across waves (62%-69%). Nonclinical workers were less likely than clinical workers to experience worse MWB and moderate/severe anxiety and stress (odds ratios [ORs] ranged from 0.38 to 0.58 across waves and well-being outcomes). Participants who maintained/increased PA and diet were less likely to experience worse well-being (ORs ranged from 0.44 to 0.69 across waves and well-being outcomes). Interactions by clinical role were not significant. CONCLUSION/APPLICATION TO PRACTICE: Maintaining/increasing health behaviors during COVID-19 may be protective of mental health/well-being in some healthcare workers. These findings support health promotion efforts focused on maintaining or improving diet and PA.

Work Organization Factors Associated with Health and Work Outcomes among Apprentice Construction Workers: Comparison between the Residential and Commercial Sectors.

There are substantial differences in work organization between residential and commercial construction sectors. This paper examined differences in work factors between construction sectors and examined the association between sector and health behaviors, health outcomes, and work outcomes. We surveyed 929 male construction apprentices (44% residential and 56% commercial) and found that residential apprentices reported fewer workplace safety policies, higher frequency of heavy lifting, and greater likelihood of reporting musculoskeletal pain compared to apprentices in commercial work. Residential apprentices reported higher job strain, lower supervisor support, more lost workdays due to pain or injury, and lower productivity related to health than commercial apprentices. Multivariate Poisson regression models controlling for multiple work factors showed that residential construction work, high job strain, heavy lifting, low coworker support, and low supervisor support were each independently associated with one or more work or health outcomes. These findings suggest that interventions should seek to improve coworker and supervisory supportive behaviors, decrease job strain, and reduce organizational stressors, such as mandatory overtime work. Our study shows disparities in health and safety between construction sectors and highlights the need for interventions tailored to the residential sector.

Correction: Work-Related and Personal Factors Associated With Mental Well-Being During the COVID-19 Response: Survey of Health Care and Other Workers.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/21366.].

Work-Related and Personal Factors Associated With Mental Well-Being During the COVID-19 Response: Survey of Health Care and Other Workers.

BACKGROUND: The response to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has created an unprecedented disruption in work conditions. This study describes the mental health and well-being of workers both with and without clinical exposure to patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to measure the prevalence of stress, anxiety, depression, work exhaustion, burnout, and decreased well-being among faculty and staff at a university and academic medical center during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and describe work-related and personal factors associated with their mental health and well-being. METHODS: All faculty, staff, and postdoctoral fellows of a university, including its medical school, were invited in April 2020 to complete an online questionnaire measuring stress, anxiety, depression, work exhaustion, burnout, and decreased well-being. We examined associations between these outcomes and factors including work in high-risk clinical settings and family/home stressors. RESULTS: There were 5550 respondents (overall response rate of 34.3%). Overall, 34% of faculty and 14% of staff (n=915) were providing clinical care, while 61% of faculty and 77% of staff were working from home. Among all workers, anxiety (prevalence ratio 1.37, 95% CI 1.09-1.73), depression (prevalence ratio 1.28, 95% CI 1.03-1.59), and high work exhaustion (prevalence ratio 1.24, 95% CI 1.13-1.36) were independently associated with community or clinical exposure to COVID-19. Poor family-supportive behaviors by supervisors were also associated with these outcomes (prevalence ratio 1.40, 95% CI 1.21-1.62; prevalence ratio 1.69, 95% CI 1.48-1.92; and prevalence ratio 1.54, 95% CI 1.44-1.64, respectively). Age <40 years and a greater number of family/home stressors were also associated with these poorer outcomes. Among the subset of clinicians, caring for patients with COVID-19 and working in high-risk clinical settings were additional risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the pandemic has had negative effects on the mental health and well-being of both clinical and nonclinical employees. Mitigating exposure to COVID-19 and increasing supervisor support are modifiable risk factors that may protect mental health and well-being for all workers.

Association of binge drinking in adolescence and early adulthood with high blood pressure: findings from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (1994-2008).

BACKGROUND: An investigation of the risk of high blood pressure (HBP) associated with heavy alcohol consumption in adolescence and early adulthood is lacking. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the association between binge drinking from adolescence to early adulthood and the risk of HBP in early adulthood. METHODS: We applied logistic regression to publicly available, population-representative data from waves I (1994-1995; ages 12-18) and IV (2007-2008; ages 24-32) of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (n=5114) to determine whether past 12-month binge drinking in adolescence (wave I) and early adulthood (wave IV) was associated with HBP in early adulthood after adjusting for covariates, including smoking and body mass index. HBP was defined according to both the former and new classifications. RESULTS: HBP was significantly, positively associated with infrequent binge drinking (less than once a week) in adolescence based on the new classification (overall: OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.49; male: OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.81) and frequent binge drinking (heavy consumption) in adolescence based on the former classification (overall: OR= 1.64, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.22; male: OR= 1.79, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.60). The risk of HBP was high when participants engaged in frequent binge drinking in both adolescence and early adulthood, especially based on the former classification (overall: OR 2.43, 95% CI 1.13 to 5.20; female: OR 5.81, 95% CI 2.26 to 14.93). CONCLUSION: Binge drinking in adolescence may increase risk of HBP in early adulthood. This association is independent of other important risk factors for HPB, such as smoking and obesity.