COVID-19 Pandemic: What Has Work Got to Do With It?

Evidence is emerging of the pandemic disproportionately impacting communities of color. This study investigates mental health distress among essential workers during the coronavirus pandemic across race and ethnicity. We evaluate individual responses to the patient health questionnaire and general anxiety disorder questionnaire using a unique, nationally representative data set. Our findings suggest that essential healthcare workers reported the highest rates of mental health distress at the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic. However, when evaluated across race and ethnicity, we find that Black essential healthcare workers disproportionately report symptoms of anxiety; while, Hispanic essential healthcare workers disproportionately report symptoms of depression. Additionally, we find that being a Black or Hispanic essential nonhealthcare worker is associated with higher levels of distress related to anxiety and depression. These findings highlight the additional dimensions to which Black and Hispanic Americans may be disproportionately affected by the coronavirus pandemic. Furthermore, it calls into question how the essential worker classification, compounded by US unemployment policies, is potentially amplifying the mental health distress experienced by workers.

BackgroundCOVID-19 has created serious mental health consequences for essential workers or people who have become unemployed as a result of the pandemic. Digital mental health tools have the potential to address this problem in a timely and efficient manner.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to document the extent of digital mental health tool (DMHT) use by essential workers and those unemployed due to COVID-19, including asking participants to rate the usability and user burden of the DMHT they used most to cope. We also explored which aspects and features of DMHTs were seen as necessary for managing stress during a pandemic by having participants design their own ideal DMHT.MethodsA total of 2000 people were recruited from an online research community (Prolific) to complete a one-time survey about mental health symptoms, DMHT use, and preferred digital mental health features.ResultsThe final sample included 1987 US residents that identified as either an essential worker or someone who was unemployed due to COVID-19. Almost three-quarters of the sample (1479/1987, 74.8%) reported clinically significant emotional distress. Only 14.2% (277/1957) of the sample used a DMHT to cope with stress associated with COVID-19. Of those who used DMHTs to cope with COVID-19, meditation apps were the most common (119/261, 45.6%). Usability was broadly in the acceptable range, although participants unemployed due to COVID-19 were less likely to report user burden with DMHTs than essential workers (t198.1=–3.89, P<.001). Individuals with emotional distress reported higher financial burden for their DMHT than nondistressed individuals (t69.0=–3.21, P=.01). When the sample was provided the option to build their own DMHT, the most desired features were a combination of mindfulness/meditation (1271/1987, 64.0%), information or education (1254/1987, 63.1%), distraction tools (1170/1987, 58.9%), symptom tracking for mood and sleep (1160/1987, 58.4%), link to mental health resources (1140/1987, 57.4%), and positive psychology (1131/1986, 56.9%). Subgroups by employment, distress, and previous DMHT use status had varied preferences. Of those who did not use a DMHT to cope with COVID-19, most indicated that they did not consider looking for such a tool to help with coping (1179/1710, 68.9%).ConclusionsDespite the potential need for DMHTs, this study found that the use of such tools remains similar to prepandemic levels. This study also found that regardless of the level of distress or even past experience using an app to cope with COVID-19, it is possible to develop a COVID-19 coping app that would appeal to a majority of essential workers and unemployed persons.

Occupational exposure to SARS-CoV-2 varies by profession, but “essential workers” are often considered in aggregate in COVID-19 models. This aggregation complicates efforts to understand risks to specific types of workers or industries and target interventions, specifically towards non-healthcare workers. We used census tract-resolution American Community Survey data to develop novel essential worker categories among the occupations designated as COVID-19 Essential Services in Massachusetts. Census tract-resolution COVID-19 cases and deaths were provided by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health. We evaluated the association between essential worker categories and cases and deaths over two phases of the pandemic from March 2020 to February 2021 using adjusted mixed-effects negative binomial regression, controlling for other sociodemographic risk factors. We observed elevated COVID-19 case incidence in census tracts in the highest tertile of workers in construction/transportation/buildings maintenance (Phase 1: IRR 1.32 [95% CI 1.22, 1.42]; Phase 2: IRR: 1.19 [1.13, 1.25]), production (Phase 1: IRR: 1.23 [1.15, 1.33]; Phase 2: 1.18 [1.12, 1.24]), and public-facing sales and services occupations (Phase 1: IRR: 1.14 [1.07, 1.21]; Phase 2: IRR: 1.10 [1.06, 1.15]). We found reduced case incidence associated with greater percentage of essential workers able to work from home (Phase 1: IRR: 0.85 [0.78, 0.94]; Phase 2: IRR: 0.83 [0.77, 0.88]). Similar trends exist in the associations between essential worker categories and deaths, though attenuated. Estimating industry-specific risk for essential workers is important in targeting interventions for COVID-19 and other diseases and our categories provide a reproducible and straightforward way to support such efforts.

Essential workers during the COVID-19 pandemic face heightened levels of anxiety and depression due to increased work demands, lack of adequate personal protective equipment, fear of contracting the virus, and fear of spreading it to loved ones. This is a time of urgent need for mental health support for workers affected by the pandemic crisis. Clinicians may employ empirically supported interventions derived from cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and related therapies. Psychological First Aid, an evidence-based crisis intervention, may be utilized to emphasize basic needs and support, but is intended as an acute disaster intervention. Given that a pandemic is an ongoing and prolonged stressor, additional CBT-informed interventions are likely needed to fully support essential workers during these times. It is recommended that clinicians help essential worker clients meet their basic needs by modifying health and sleep habits where possible and helping them advocate for their needs using interpersonal effectiveness skills. Empathic listening, validation of the crisis at hand, and values clarification can aid the therapeutic relationship, help them feel a renewed sense of purpose and meaning in their careers and with their families, and facilitate behavior change consistent with chosen values. Self-monitoring through a daily diary can help clients focus their thoughts and recognize maladaptive patterns in their thoughts and behaviors. In tandem with these techniques, behavioral activation and coping strategies including relaxation, distress tolerance, and acceptance promote engaging in positive and adaptive activities. Finally, therapists can help clients reduce anxiety related to the pandemic by helping them limit information intake.

BackgroundPlanning occupational health and wellness services and support directed toward low-wage, essential workers in the COVID-19 pandemic has posed a number of challenges across work settings. This article explores the concerns and needs of low-wage essential workers as understood by experts in the field.MethodsLeading experts in the areas of occupational health and safety, risk management, insurance, and professional education/training were identified and invited to participate in a Round Table discussion. Questions posed to experts were based on literature that addressed COVID-19, essential workers, low-wage workers, infection transmission, education/training, and social justice.FindingsExperts agreed that special considerations must be in place to address the concerns and needs of the low-wage essential worker. These special considerations should address not only the worker’s occupational experience but their family and home environment, fears and anxieties, and the economic impact of the COVID-19 restrictions and requirements.Conclusion/Application to practiceThe occupational health professional is a key resource to employers charged with addressing the concerns and needs of low-wage, essential workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Research suggests that racial/ethnic disparities in COVID-19 in the US are largely driven by higher rates of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 among Hispanic/Latino and Black populations. Occupational exposures play a large role in structuring risk of exposure, and essential workers are at elevated risk of COVID-19 infection. At a national-level, workers categorized as “essential” and “high-risk” are disproportionately Hispanic/Latino, but we lack analysis examining local-level racial/ethnic disparities in potential occupational exposures. Using the 2015–2019 5-year American Community Survey, we estimated disparities between the proportion of US Born Hispanic/Latino, foreign-born Hispanic/Latino, and non-Hispanic white (NHW) essential or high-risk workers in 27 of the largest metropolitan areas in the country. We found that, on average, 66.3%, 69.9%, and 62.6% of US-born Hispanics, foreign-born Hispanics, and NHW, respectively, are essential workers, while 50.7%, 49.9%, 49.5% are high exposure risk workers, respectively. The median absolute difference in proportions of US born Hispanic/Latino and NHW essential workers was 4.2%, and between foreign-born Hispanic/Latino and NHW essential workers was 7.5%, but these disparities varied widely by city. High likelihood of occupational transmission may help explain disparities in COVID-19 infection and mortality for Hispanic/Latino populations, especially foreign-born, and may also help explain heterogeneity in the magnitude of these disparities, with relevance for other acute infectious respiratory illnesses spread in the workplace.

An immediate research priority is to investigate and monitor the psychological well-being among high-risk groups during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. To examine levels of severity of depressive symptoms over time among individuals with high risk in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic. This cohort study is part of an ongoing large panel study of adults aged 18 years and older residing in the UK, the COVID-19 Social Study, established on March 21, 2020. Data analysis was conducted in May 2020. Sociodemographic risk factors included belonging to the Black, Asian, and minority racial/ethnic communities, low socioeconomic position (SEP), and essential worker roles (eg, workers in health and social care, education, childcare, or key public services). Health-related and psychosocial risk factors included preexisting physical and mental health conditions, experience of psychological or physical abuse, and low social support. Depressive symptoms were measured on 7 occasions from March 21 to April 2, 2020, using the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). Group-based depressive symptom trajectories were derived using latent growth mixture modeling. The analytical sample comprised 51 417 adults aged 18 years and older (mean [SD] age, 48.8 [16.8] years; 26 276 [51.1%] women; 6145 members [12.0%] of Black, Asian, and minority racial/ethnic communities). Among these, 17 143 participants (33.3%) were in the lowest SEP quartile, and 11 342 participants (22.1%) were classified as essential workers. Three levels of severity of depressive symptoms were identified: low (30 850 participants [60.0%]), moderate (14 911 participants [29.0%]), and severe (5656 participants [11.0%]). After adjusting for covariates, experiences of physical or psychological abuse (odds ratio [OR], 13.16; 95% CI, 12.95-13.37; P < .001), preexisting mental health conditions (OR, 12.99; 95% CI, 12.87-13.11; P < .001), preexisting physical health conditions (OR, 3.41; 95% CI, 3.29-3.54; P < .001), low social support (OR, 12.72; 95% CI, 12.57-12.86; P < .001), and low SEP (OR, 5.22; 95% CI, 5.08-5.36; P < .001) were significantly associated with severe depressive symptoms. No significant association was found for race/ethnicity (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.85-1.28; P = .56). Participants with essential worker roles were less likely to experience severe depressive symptoms (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.53-0.80; P < .001). Similar patterns of associations were found for the group of participants with moderate depressive symptoms (abuse: OR, 5.34; 95% CI, 5.15-5.54; P < .001; mental health condition: OR, 4.24; 95% CI, 4.24-4.24; P < .001; physical health condition: OR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.80-1.98; P < .001; low social support: OR, 4.71; 95% CI, 4.60-4.82; P < .001; low SEP: OR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.87-2.08; P < .001). In this cohort study of UK adults participating in the COVID-19 Social Study, people with psychosocial and health-related risk factors, as well as those with low SEP, were at the most risk of experiencing moderate or severe depressive symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Ontario’s initial mass COVID-19 vaccination strategy in place until April 8, 2021 was based on per-capita regional allocation of vaccines with subsequent distribution – in order of relative priority – by age, chronic health conditions and high-risk congregate care settings, COVID-19 hotspots, and essential worker status. Early analysis of Ontario’s COVID-19 vaccine rollout reveals inequities in vaccine coverage across the province, with residents of higher risk neighbourhoods being least likely get vaccinated. Accelerating the vaccination of COVID-19 hotspots and essential workers will prevent considerably more SARS-CoV-2 infections and COVID-19 hospitalizations, ICU admissions and deaths as compared with Ontario’s initial mass vaccination strategy (Figure 1).

Background Hospital workers have borne a large burden of the COVID-19 pandemic, exposed to risks of infection, while enduring elevated workloads, increased workplace stress, prolonged hours in uncomfortable working conditions, and public stigmatisation. Objectives In this cross-sectional study, we examined the psychological stressors of COVID-19 on hospital essential services workers and their needs at a tertiary hospital in Singapore. Methods: We conducted a study of 246 outsourced essential workers comprising housekeeping, maintenance staff, and porting staff. Psychological distress was measured by the Kessler-6 scale. We also surveyed respondents through a questionnaire on the main concerns that worried them, supportive resources available, and additional resources that would most help them. Results Among the survey respondents, concerns related to employment, finances, accommodation, transportation, and likelihood of receiving medical attention for COVID-19 were significantly associated with moderate to severe psychological distress ( p&lt;0.05). Stress from isolation and fear of COVID-19 infection constituted the greatest psychosocial burdens. Respondents felt that main supportive resources came from their employers and social circles. They also listed enhanced individual ability to cope, and additional financial aid from their employers and the government would help them the most. Conclusions Financial and accommodation-related stressors reflect structural factors that exacerbated the psychosocial burdens faced by non-medical hospital workers. Most respondents tended to individualise their coping strategies, which point towards the need for stronger social protections and mental health provisions for hospital essential services workers.

Clinical Prioritization of Antispike Monoclonal Antibody Treatment of Mild to Moderate COVID-19

Essential food workers experience elevated risks of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection due to prolonged occupational exposures in food production and processing areas, shared transportation (car or bus), and employer-provided shared housing. Our goal was to quantify the daily cumulative risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection for healthy susceptible produce workers and to evaluate the relative reduction in risk attributable to food industry interventions and vaccination. We simulated daily SARS-CoV-2 exposures of indoor and outdoor produce workers through six linked quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA) model scenarios. For each scenario, the infectious viral dose emitted by a symptomatic worker was calculated across aerosol, droplet, and fomite-mediated transmission pathways. Standard industry interventions (2-m physical distancing, handwashing, surface disinfection, universal masking, ventilation) were simulated to assess relative risk reductions from baseline risk (no interventions, 1-m distance). Implementation of industry interventions reduced an indoor worker's relative infection risk by 98.0% (0.020; 95% uncertainty interval [UI], 0.005 to 0.104) from baseline risk (1.00; 95% UI, 0.995 to 1.00) and an outdoor worker's relative infection risk by 94.5% (0.027; 95% UI, 0.013 to 0.055) from baseline risk (0.487; 95% UI, 0.257 to 0.825). Integrating these interventions with two-dose mRNA vaccinations (86 to 99% efficacy), representing a worker's protective immunity to infection, reduced the relative infection risk from baseline for indoor workers by 99.9% (0.001; 95% UI, 0.0002 to 0.005) and outdoor workers by 99.6% (0.002; 95% UI, 0.0003 to 0.005). Consistent implementation of combined industry interventions, paired with vaccination, effectively mitigates the elevated risks from occupationally acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection faced by produce workers. IMPORTANCE This is the first study to estimate the daily risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection across a variety of indoor and outdoor environmental settings relevant to food workers (e.g., shared transportation [car or bus], enclosed produce processing facility and accompanying breakroom, outdoor produce harvesting field, shared housing facility) through a linked quantitative microbial risk assessment framework. Our model has demonstrated that the elevated daily SARS-CoV-2 infection risk experienced by indoor and outdoor produce workers can be reduced below 1% when vaccinations (optimal vaccine efficacy, 86 to 99%) are implemented with recommended infection control strategies (e.g., handwashing, surface disinfection, universal masking, physical distancing, and increased ventilation). Our novel findings provide scenario-specific infection risk estimates that can be utilized by food industry managers to target high-risk scenarios with effective infection mitigation strategies, which was informed through more realistic and context-driven modeling estimates of the infection risk faced by essential food workers daily. Bundled interventions, particularly if they include vaccination, yield significant reductions (>99%) in daily SARS-CoV-2 infection risk for essential food workers in enclosed and open-air environments.

BackgroundEliminating disparities in the burden of COVID-19 requires equitable access to control measures across socio-economic groups. Limited research on socio-economic differences in mobility hampers our ability to understand whether inequalities in social distancing are occurring during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.ObjectiveWe aimed to assess how mobility patterns have varied across the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic and to identify associations with socioeconomic factors of populations.MethodsWe used anonymized mobility data from tens of millions of devices to measure the speed and depth of social distancing at the county level in the United States between February and May 2020, the period during which social distancing was widespread in this country. Using linear mixed models, we assessed the associations between social distancing and socioeconomic variables, including the proportion of people in the population below the poverty level, the proportion of Black people, the proportion of essential workers, and the population density.ResultsWe found that the speed, depth, and duration of social distancing in the United States are heterogeneous. We particularly show that social distancing is slower and less intense in counties with higher proportions of people below the poverty level and essential workers; in contrast, we show that social distancing is intensely adopted in counties with higher population densities and larger Black populations.ConclusionsSocioeconomic inequalities appear to be associated with the levels of adoption of social distancing, potentially resulting in wide-ranging differences in the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in communities across the United States. These inequalities are likely to amplify existing health disparities and must be addressed to ensure the success of ongoing pandemic mitigation efforts.

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in new postpandemic travel patterns as a result of the stay-at-home policies and restricted movement orders imposed by the Malaysian government. The purpose of this study was to investigate the changes in individual travel behavior after the government imposed a series of lockdowns, also known as movement control orders (MCO). From March to April 2021, a questionnaire survey was distributed throughout Malaysia, and 435 complete responses were collected. Results indicated that the respondents predominantly chose private cars for various traveling purposes during the pandemic. When choosing a travel mode during the pandemic, married respondents and essential workers placed a significantly higher priority on pandemic-related - items such as cleanliness, infection concern, social distance, and wearing face masks, compared to single respondents and nonessential workers. Binary logistic regression models were developed to estimate individuals’ propensity to make trips for different purposes, i.e., work/study, social activities, recreational activities, and religious activities. Results indicated that essential workers were nearly three times more likely than the general population to make a work trip during the pandemic. Regarding social and recreational trips, males were more likely to make such types of trips as compared to females. Furthermore, those who perceived a higher risk of infection were less likely to make social and recreational trips. Regarding religious trips, males were significantly more likely to make such trips during the pandemic as compared to females. In addition, Muslims had significantly higher odds of making a trip for religious purposes during the pandemic. The findings of this study could be useful in transportation planning when considering travel restrictions during pandemics based on peoples’ travel purposes and mode choices.

Feminist scholars and activists have long fought to make visible the fundamental but overlooked social reproduction work performed primarily by women, often in households. Taking on black feminist criticisms of the initial prioritization of the experience of white, middle-class women, these debates have developed into a broader social reproduction theory, which emphasizes the relationality of multiple forms of oppression under capitalism. The COVID-19 pandemic, with its lockdowns, temporarily turned the traditional distribution between visible and invisible work on its head when many so-called productive workers were ushered into their homes, leaving only the most essential workers publicly visible in the streets and valorized in online spaces. The sudden visibility of these generally low-paid, often racialized and marginalized workers now coded as ‘essential’ highlighted the importance of the work of social reproduction. However, the category of essential workers was ambivalent, in that by making visible some forms of social reproduction it continued to obscure others, especially familial care work and housework. In this article we analyse the ambivalent category of the essential worker and argue that it exemplifies, as social reproduction theory attests, that the capitalist production process always requires invisible labour, even as some previously invisible forms become increasingly visible.

ObjectivesSome of cardiovascular diseases, like stroke and acute coronary syndrome (ACS), are compensable diseases in Taiwan as well as Japan and Korea. The number of compensated cases in the disease...