4.2 Article

Prepandemic Mental Health and Well-being Differences Within the Health Care Workforce and the Need for Targeted Resources

Journal

JOURNAL OF OCCUPATIONAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEDICINE
Volume 64, Issue 12, Pages 1025-1035

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000002630

Keywords

mental health; well-being; health care workforce; health care support workers; counselors; depression; insufficient sleep; occupation; industry

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Research has found that healthcare workers, especially counselors and health care support workers, have high prevalence of mental health problems such as insomnia and depression. It is important to implement occupation-specific strategies to address these adverse conditions and ensure a strong healthcare workforce.
BackgroundOccupational stress and diminished well-being among health care workers were concerning even before the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic exacerbated existing stressors and created new challenges for this workforce. Research on the mental health of health care workers has focused on physicians and nurses, with less attention to other occupations.MethodsTo assess pre-coronavirus disease mental health and well-being among workers in multiple health care occupations, we used 2017 to 2019 data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.ResultsAcross the health care workforce, insufficient sleep (41.0%) and diagnosed depression (18.9%) were the most common conditions reported. Counselors had the highest prevalence of diagnosed depression. Health care support workers had elevated prevalences for most adverse health conditions.ConclusionsEnsuring a robust health care workforce necessitates identifying and implementing effective occupation-specific prevention, intervention, and mitigation strategies that address organizational and personal conditions adversely affecting mental health.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available