Healthcare is a Team Sport: Stress, Resilience, and Correlates of Well-Being Among Health System Employees in a Crisis.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: While the COVID-19 pandemic has added stressors to the lives of healthcare workers, it is unclear which factors represent the most useful targets for interventions to mitigate employee distress across the entire healthcare team. A survey was distributed to employees of a large healthcare system in the Southeastern United States, and 1,130 respondents participated. The survey measured overall distress using the 9-item Well-Being Index (WBI), work-related factors, moral distress, resilience, and organizational-level factors. Respondents were also asked to identify major work, clinical, and nonwork stressors. Multivariate regression was used to evaluate associations between employee characteristics and WBI distress score. Overall, 82% of employees reported high distress (WBI ≥ 2), with nurses, clinical support staff, and advanced practice providers reporting the highest average scores. Factors associated with higher distress included increased job demands or responsibilities, heavy workload or long hours, higher frequency of moral distress, and loneliness or social isolation. Factors associated with lower distress were perceived organizational support, work control, perceived fairness of salary cuts, and resilience. Most factors significantly associated with distress-heavy workloads and long hours, increased job demands, and moral distress, in particular-were work-related, indicating that efforts can be made to mitigate them. Resilience explained a small portion of the variance in distress relative to other work-related factors. Ensuring appropriate staffing levels may represent the single largest opportunity to significantly move the needle on distress. However, the financial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the healthcare system may represent a barrier to addressing these stressors.

20th Century Puerto Rico and Later-Life Health: The Association Between Multigenerational Education and Chronic Conditions in Island-Dwelling Older Adults.

OBJECTIVES: Previous research on the association between education and older adult health in the U.S. has not included Puerto Rico. We investigated the effects of multigenerational educational attainment and chronic conditions among older Puerto Ricans residing on the archipelago's main island. METHODS: Data were from the longitudinal Puerto Rican Elderly Health Conditions Project. Generalized Poisson regression models were used to examine if multigenerational educational attainment was associated with chronic disease. RESULTS: Findings show that parental educational attainment was associated with fewer chronic conditions among females at baseline but not at follow-up, suggesting that the effects of parental education on health over time are less pronounced. For males, educational attainment across the three generations was not significantly associated with chronic disease at baseline or follow-up. DISCUSSION: Multigenerational education is an important determinant of older adult health that continues to be relevant in Puerto Rico and the Latin American and Hispanic-Caribbean region.

An Investigation of Organizational Correlates of Distress in Non-Clinician Biomedical Researchers in the United States.

Purpose: Challenges ushered by the COVID-19 pandemic led to an increased focus on the mental well-being of the healthcare workforce. Despite the important contribution non-clinician biomedical researchers make to the mission of academic medical centers, the well-being of this unique population remains understudied in the United States. The purpose of this study was to examine the individual and organizational correlates of distress among non-clinician biomedical researchers. Methods: A survey was delivered to employees of a large academic medical center in the southeastern United States, including non-clinician biomedical researchers. Participants were asked to assess their own well-being using the validated Well-Being Index (WBI) tool, resilience, work and nonwork-related stressors and demographic descriptors. Descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses were conducted, and binary logistic regression was used to examine predictors of increased odds of overall distress. Results: Nearly 44% of surveyed non-clinician biomedical researchers met the threshold for high distress which indicates an increased risk of suicidal ideation, turnover intention, and burnout. The major correlates of distress were at the organizational level, including perceived organizational support (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.70-0.90), heavy workload and long hours (OR 3.25, 95% CI 1.53-6.88), inability or lack of support to take time off (OR 2.80, 95% CI 1.03-7.66) and conflict with supervisor (OR 5.03, 95% CI 1.13-22.1). While lower individual resilience (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.54-0.88) was statistically significantly associated with greater distress, it accounted for less than 10% of the overall variance when controlling for other work-related factors. Conclusion: These findings suggest that developing organizational interventions that address institutional support for non-clinician biomedical researchers within academic medical centers represents an important opportunity to reduce distress within this population. While emphasizing individual resiliency as an important in the pursuit of well-being, it is also the responsibility of the organization to create and foster an environment in which employees can access their own resilience.

Feeling safe versus being safe: Perceptions of safety versus actual disease exposure across the entire health care team.

As supply chains experienced disruptions early in the COVID-19 pandemic, personal protective equipment (PPE) quickly became scarce. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of perceptions of inadequate PPE, fear of COVID-19 infection, and self-reported direct COVID-19 exposure on health care workers. Data to assess distress, resilience, social-ecological factors, and work and nonwork-related stressors were collected from June to July 2020 at a large medical center. Stressors were analyzed by role using descriptive statistics and multivariate regression analysis. Our data indicate that job role influenced fear of infection and perceptions of inadequate PPE in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Perceived organizational support was also related to perceptions of inadequate PPE supply. Interestingly, work location, rather than job role, was predictive of direct COVID-19 exposure. Our data highlight a disconnect between the perception of safety in the health care setting with real risk of exposure to infectious disease. This study suggests that leaders in health care should focus on cultivating supportive organizational cultures, assessing both perceived and actual safety, and provide adequate training in safety practices may improve preparedness and organizational trust during times of both certainty and crisis particularly for clinical workers with less education and training.

Maternal gender discrimination and child emotional and behavioural problems: A population-based, longitudinal cohort study in the Czech Republic.

Background: Gender discrimination may be a novel mechanism through which gender inequality negatively affects the health of women and girls. We investigated whether children's mental health varied with maternal exposure to perceived gender discrimination. Methods: Complete longitudinal data was available on 2,567 mother-child dyads who were enrolled between March 1, 1991 and June 30, 1992 in the European Longitudinal Cohort Study of Pregnancy and Childhood-Czech cohort and were surveyed at multiple time points between pregnancy and child age up to 15 years. The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) was administered at child age 7, 11, and 15 years to assess child emotional/behavioural difficulties. Perceived gender discrimination was self-reported in mid-pregnancy and child age 7 and 11 years. Multilevel mixed-effects linear regression of SDQ scores were estimated. Mediation was tested using structural equation models. Findings: Perceived gender discrimination, reported by 11.2% of mothers in mid-pregnancy, was related to increased emotional/behavioural difficulties among children in bivariate analysis (slope = 0.24 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.15, 0.32], p<0.0001) and in the fully adjusted model (slope = 0.18 [95% CI: 0.09, 0.27], p<0.0001). Increased difficulties were evident among children of mothers with more depressive symptoms (slope = 0.04 [95% CI: 0.03, 0.05], p<0.0001), boys (slope = 0.26 [95% CI: 0.19, 0.34], p<0.0001), first children (slope = 0.16 [95% CI: 0.09, 0.23], p<0.0001), and families under financial hardship (slope = 0.09 [95% CI: 0.04, 0.14], p<0.0001). Effects were attenuated for married mothers (slope-0.12 [95% CI: -0.22, -0.01], p<0.05]. Maternal depressive symptoms and financial hardship mediated about 37% and 13%, respectively, of the total effect of perceived gender discrimination on SDQ scores. Interpretation: Perceived gender discrimination among child-bearing women in family contexts was associated with more mental health problems among their children and adolescents, extending prior research showing associations with maternal mental health problems. Maternal depressive symptoms and, to a lesser extent, financial hardship both partially mediated the positive relationship between perceived gender discrimination and child emotional/behavioural problems. This should be taken into consideration when measuring the societal burden of gender inequality and gender-based discrimination. Moreover, gender-based discrimination affects more than one gender and more than one generation, extending to boys in the household even moreso than girls, highlighting that gender discrimination is everyone's issue. Further research is required on the intergenerational mechanisms whereby gender discrimination may lead to maternal and child mental health consequences. Funding: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports, Czech Republic and European Structural and Investment Funds.

Physician, Nurse, and Advanced Practice Provider Perspectives on the Rapid Transition to Inpatient and Outpatient Telemedicine.

Background: Many health systems transitioned rapidly to using inpatient and outpatient telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic. Prior research has examined clinician satisfaction and experiences with telemedicine in a siloed approach for specific provider types. Less is known about how experiences with the rapid transition to telemedicine affected the entire clinical team, and how this contributed to their overall distress. Methods: A survey was conducted within a large academic medical center in the Southeastern United States during June of 2020. The survey asked about experiences with inpatient and outpatient telemedicine and overall distress. Analysis of variance was calculated to examine differences in experiences among physicians, nurses, and advanced practice providers (APPs) with both inpatient and outpatient telemedicine. Multivariate regression analysis was conducted to determine whether reported telemedicine stressors were associated with changes in overall distress scores. Qualitative comments provided during the survey were included to illustrate the quantitative findings. Results: Of the 1130 survey respondents, 237 indicated that they used telemedicine. Telemedicine use was not statistically significantly associated with overall distress scores. The APPs indicated the greatest satisfaction with telemedicine, followed by physicians and then nurses. Team members differed on their perceptions of quality of care and safety for inpatient and outpatient telemedicine. Physicians (70%) and APPs (64%) felt safer having the option to use inpatient telemedicine, whereas only 26% of nurses reported the same. Overall, >70% of physicians and APPs would like to continue having the option to use inpatient and outpatient telemedicine in the future, whereas <50% of nurses reported the same. Discussion: These results suggest that telemedicine holds promise for providing care beyond the pandemic, and it may be a mechanism to improve flexibility, autonomy, and expand patient access. Implementation of new technologies must consider the experiences of the entire team, rather than a siloed approach to determining satisfaction with the changes.

How Families Matter for Health Inequality during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

We theorize that social conditions surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic have the potential to increase the importance of families for health and widen existing inequalities. We suggest three primary tenets important for understanding families and health during COVID-19. First, risks of specific COVID-19 outcomes and other health problems are unevenly distributed across families. Second, how families impact health during the COVID-19 pandemic is conditional on public policies, organizational decisions, and concurrent events. Third, many health inequalities driven by racism, sexism, classism, and other oppressive societal force are amplified during COVID-19, but the extent to which this is occurring is shaped by families and by the public policies, organizational decisions, and concurrent events that also impact families and health. As health disparities continue to emerge from this pandemic, we call on researchers and policy-makers to pay attention to the multiple ways that families matter.