Search

We examined parents' COVID-19 vaccination intentions for their children, reasons for not vaccinating, and the potential impact of a school/daycare vaccination requirement or pediatrician's recommendation on vaccination intentions. Two online surveys were conducted in June-July and September-October 2021, before pediatric COVID-19 vaccines were authorized for emergency use in children age

ObjectivesWe examined COVID-19 vaccination status, intention, and hesitancy and the effects of five strategies to increase the willingness of unvaccinated adults (≥18 years) to get a COVID vaccine.MethodsOnline surveys were conducted between October 1-17, 2020 (N = 14,946), December 4-16, 2020 (N = 15,229), April 8-22, 2021 (N = 14,557), June 17-July 6, 2021 (N = 30,857), and September 3-October 4, 2021 (N = 33,088) with an internet-based, non-probability opt-in sample of U.S. adults matching demographic quotas. Respondents were asked about current COVID-19 vaccination status, intention and hesitancy to get vaccinated, and reasons for vaccine hesitancy. Unvaccinated respondents were assigned to treatment groups to test the effect of five strategies (endorsements, changing social restrictions, financial incentives, vaccine requirements for certain activities, and vaccine requirements for work). Chi-square tests of independence were performed to detect differences in the response distributions.ResultsWillingness to be vaccinated (defined as being vaccinated or planning to be) increased over time from 47.6 % in October 2020 to 81.1 % in October 2021. By October 2021, across most demographic groups, over 75 % of survey respondents had been or planned to be vaccinated. In terms of strategies: (1) endorsements had no positive effect, (2) relaxing the need for masks and social distancing increased Intention to Get Vaccinated (IGV) by 6.4 % (p

Background: Workplace safety and health is a major public health concern, but largely absent from the school health curriculum. Little is known about teachers' perceptions of teaching workplace safety and health topics. Methods: We administered a 41-item questionnaire reflecting the theory of planned behavior, modified to measure knowledge, to 242 middle and high school teachers in career and technical education and academic subjects. We conducted confirmatory factor analysis to assess the measures' psychometric properties and factorial ANOVAs to compare differences among participants' knowledge, attitude toward, self-efficacy, and intention (to teach) workplace safety and health by sex, prior work injury, and main subject taught. Results: Confirmatory factor analyses indicated the measures reflected the theory. Factorial ANOVAs suggested female teachers had statistically significantly lower mean self-efficacy scores than did male teachers to teach workplace safety and health. Male occupational career and technical education teachers demonstrated higher mean knowledge scores than male teachers in other subjects. Participants not injured at work had higher knowledge scores than those who had been injured. Conclusion: Self-efficacy (influenced by sex) and knowledge (influenced by subject taught and previous workplace injury) revealed factors that may affect teachers' provision of workplace safety and health education, a critical yet overlooked component of school health.

Background: Research has documented occupational health disparities, including higher rates of work‐related injuries, among temporary workers compared with workers in standard employment arrangements. According to guidance from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), both staffing companies and host employers are responsible for protecting the occupational safety and health (OSH) of temporary workers. To date, there has been little qualitative research on temporary worker OSH in the United States and a lack of evidence‐based OSH programs designed to meet the needs of temporary workers. The aim of this study was to better understand the barriers to and facilitators of temporary worker OSH from the perspective of US staffing companies. Methods: In‐depth interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of representatives from 15 US staffing companies. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed through a three‐step process. Results: Commonly mentioned barriers to temporary worker OSH include differential treatment of temporary workers by host employers; lack of understanding among host employers and staffing companies of joint OSH responsibilities; and workers' fear of job loss or other negative repercussions if they report an injury or illness or voice OSH concerns. Commonly mentioned facilitators of temporary worker OSH include conducting client assessments and site visits and fostering strong communication and relationships with both host employers and temporary workers. Conclusions: These findings can help inform the tailoring of OSH programs to promote health equity in temporary workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Work-related morbidity and mortality are persistent public health problems across all US industrial sectors, including health care. People employed in health care and social services are at high risk for experiencing injuries and illnesses related to their work. Social and behavioral science theories can be useful tools for designing interventions to prevent workplace injuries and illnesses and can provide a roadmap for investigating the multilevel factors that may hinder or promote worker safety and health. Specifically, individual-level behavioral change theories can be useful in evaluating the proximal, person-related antecedents (such as perceived behavioral control) that influence work safety outcomes. This article (1) provides a brief overview of widely used, individual-level behavior change theories and examples of their application to occupational safety and health (OSH)–related interventions that involve the health care community; (2) introduces an integrated theory of behavior change and its application to promoting the OSH of health care workers; and (3) discusses opportunities for application of individual-level behavior change theory to OSH research and practice activities involving health care workers. The use of behavioral science to consider the role of individual behaviors in promoting health and preventing disease and injury provides a necessary complement to structural approaches to protecting workers in the health care industry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Investigating antecedents of behaviors, such as wearing face coverings, is critical for developing strategies to prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission.Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine associations between theory-based behavioral predictors of intention to wear a face covering and actual wearing of a face covering in public.Methods: Data from a cross-sectional panel survey of U.S. adults conducted in May and June 2020 (N = 1,004) were used to test a theory-based behavioral path model. We (a) examined predictors of intention to wear a face covering, (b) reported use of cloth face coverings, and (c) reported use of other face masks (e.g., a surgical mask or N95 respirator) in public.Results: We found that being female, perceived importance of others wanting the respondent to wear a face covering, confidence to wear a face covering, and perceived importance of personal face covering use was positively associated with intention to wear a face covering in public. Intention to wear a face covering was positively associated with self-reported wearing of a cloth face covering if other people were observed wearing cloth face coverings in public at least "rarely" (aOR = 1.43), with stronger associations if they reported "sometimes" (aOR = 1.83), "often" (aOR = 2.32), or "always" (aOR = 2.96). For other types of face masks, a positive association between intention and behavior was only present when observing others wearing face masks "often" (aOR = 1.25) or "always" (aOR = 1.48).Conclusions: Intention to wear face coverings and observing other people wearing them are important behavioral predictors of adherence to the CDC recommendation to wear face coverings in public. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Providing health care during the COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with a high mental health burden for health care providers. This study examined patterns of responses and correlates of class membership across commonly assessed mental health symptoms, psychosocial functioning, and moral injury for providers in the United States in Fall 2022., Method: A convenience sample of 1,504 primary care physicians, pediatricians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants who had been in practice for three or more years ( M age = 46.1 years, SD age = 11.3, 58% male) completed self-report measures in an online, opt-in panel survey from September to November 2022., Results: Using latent class analysis, three classes were identified: No/Low Symptoms (64.8%), High Moral Injury (19.9%), and Elevated Symptoms (15.2%). Several factors were correlated with class membership including age, sex, social support, personal risk of COVID-19, pandemic-related work stressors, proportion of COVID-19 patients seen at the height of the pandemic, and death of a patient due to COVID-19., Conclusions: This study found high levels of mental health symptoms, and problems with psychosocial functioning and moral injury in health care providers well past the pandemic's peak. The results also demonstrated the importance of considering the unique contribution of moral injury to psychosocial functional difficulties experienced by health care providers during the pandemic given their defined role as essential workers. These findings have implications for preventing and managing mental health problems and burnout among providers postpandemic as well as for future pandemics at both the organizational and individual levels. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Recent studies indicate an increase in the percentage of adults who reported clinically relevant symptoms of anxiety and depression during the COVID-19 pandemic (1-3). For example, based on U.S. Census Bureau Household Pulse Survey (HPS) data, CDC reported significant increases in symptoms of anxiety and depressive disorders among adults aged ≥18 years during August 19, 2020-February 1, 2021, with the largest increases among adults aged 18-29 years and among those with less than a high school education (1). To assess more recent national trends, as well as state-specific trends, CDC used HPS data (4) to assess trends in reported anxiety and depression among U.S. adults in all 50 states and the District of Columbia (DC) during August 19, 2020-June 7, 2021 (1). Nationally, the average anxiety severity score increased 13% from August 19-31, 2020, to December 9-21, 2020 (average percent change [APC] per survey wave = 1.5%) and then decreased 26.8% from December 9-21, 2020, to May 26-June 7, 2021 (APC = -3.1%). The average depression severity score increased 14.8% from August 19-31, 2020, to December 9-21, 2020 (APC = 1.7%) and then decreased 24.8% from December 9-21, 2020, to May 26-June 7, 2021 (APC = -2.8%). State-specific trends were generally similar to national trends, with both anxiety and depression scores for most states peaking during the December 9-21, 2020, or January 6-18, 2021, survey waves. Across the entire study period, the frequency of anxiety and depression symptoms was positively correlated with the average number of daily COVID-19 cases. Mental health services and resources, including telehealth behavioral services, are critical during the COVID-19 pandemic., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Adolescents and young adults represent approximately 13% of the U.S. workforce (1). Compared with adult workers, young workers (aged 15-24 years) experience higher rates of job-related injury (2,3). To describe injuries among young workers and inform research and prevention activities, CDC's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) analyzed national data for 2012-2018 from the occupational supplement to the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System* (NEISS-Work) and for 2018 from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses (SOII). † During the 7-year period, an estimated 3.2 million (95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.6-3.7) nonfatal, job-related injuries to young workers were treated in hospital emergency departments (EDs). From 2012 to 2018, annual rates of work-related injuries § treated in the ED (ED-treated injuries) declined overall across all age groups but ranged from 1.2 to 2.3 times higher for workers aged 15-24 years compared with those for adults aged 25-44 years. Workers aged 18-19 years had the highest rate of ED-treated injuries. In 2018, among all age groups, workers in service occupations ¶ had the highest percentage of injuries requiring at least 1 day away from work. Among workers aged 15-17 years, those in the leisure and hospitality industry had the highest percentage of work-related injuries requiring at least 1 day away from work. Occupational injuries can have long-term impacts on health (4). The disproportionate risk of injury among young workers highlights the need for sustained, targeted public health efforts to prepare this population with essential workplace safety and health competencies before they enter the workforce and to provide high-quality safety training and close supervision on the job. NIOSH and its partners developed a free curriculum to teach adolescents workplace safety and health competencies, which includes identification of workplace hazards and methods for addressing them, how to understand their rights and responsibilities as workers, and how to voice concerns about work safety issues (5)., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

On April 3, 2020, the White House Coronavirus Task Force and CDC announced a new behavioral recommendation to help slow the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) by encouraging the use of a cloth face covering when out in public (1). Widespread use of cloth face coverings has not been studied among the U.S. population, and therefore, little is known about encouraging the public to adopt this behavior. Immediately following the recommendation, an Internet survey sampled 503 adults during April 7-9 to assess their use of cloth face coverings and the behavioral and sociodemographic factors that might influence adherence to this recommendation. The same survey was administered 1 month later, during May 11-13, to another sample of 502 adults to assess changes in the prevalence estimates of use of cloth face coverings from April to May. Within days of the release of the first national recommendation for use of cloth face coverings, a majority of persons who reported leaving their home in the previous week reported using a cloth face covering (61.9%). Prevalence of use increased to 76.4% 1 month later, primarily associated with increases in use among non-Hispanic white persons (54.3% to 75.1%), persons aged ≥65 years (36.6% to 79.2%), and persons residing in the Midwest (43.7% to 73.8%). High rates were observed in April and by May, increased further among non-Hispanic black persons (74.4% to 82.3%), Hispanic or Latino persons (77.3% to 76.2%), non-Hispanic persons of other race (70.8% to 77.3%), persons aged 18-29 years (70.1% to 74.9%) and 30-39 years (73.9% to 84.4%), and persons residing in the Northeast (76.9% to 87.0%). The use of a cloth face covering was associated with theory-derived constructs that indicate a favorable attitude toward them, intention to use them, ability to use them, social support for using them, and beliefs that they offered protection for self, others, and the community. Research is needed to understand possible barriers to using cloth face coverings and ways to promote their consistent and correct use among those who have yet to adopt this behavior., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.