Worries about COVID-19 infection and psychological distress at work and while commuting

Introduction

Mental health problems associated with the COVID-19 pandemic are an emerging public health issue¹. Outbreaks increase generalized fear, community anxiety, and panic symptoms^2,3. Previous studies have reported a higher prevalence of psychological symptoms such as depression and anxiety among individuals who experienced lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic ^1,4–7

Containment measures against pandemics like COVID-19 have a strong impact on individuals’ daily lives and psychological well-being⁸. “A new normal” of avoiding the “three Cs” (crowded places, close-contact settings, and confined and enclosed spaces) has been recommended as an effective countermeasure against infection⁸. However, such measures also distance people from each other, which can lead to decreased communication and socializing. In addition, COVID-19 has also brought about economic recession and job insecurity. Together, these effects are thought to have contributed to an increase in loneliness, worry, fear, anxiety, and stress among individuals.

In situations like the current pandemic, worry of infection is a common feeling among the majority of the population, given that various aspects of daily life pose potential risk of infection. An increase in infections can trigger psychological symptoms such as generalized fear and widespread community anxiety^2,3. Psychological symptoms such as persistent worrying, feeling overwhelmed by emotions, restlessness and irritability emerge within the population in the form of anxiety, panic attacks, depression and suicide^9,10. Worry of infection is an early sign of psychological distress.

For workers, the workplace and commuting^11–14 are considered particularly risky opportunities for infection. For this reason, most workplaces are taking various infection control measures, including limiting the number of visitors, restricting business trips, encouraging telecommuting, ensuring sufficient office ventilation, and installing partitions in customer-facing spaces.^15,16 However, some workplaces are not taking sufficient recommended measures for business reasons or due to cost.^17,18 Naturally, infection control efforts in the workplace influence workers’ worry of infection. When infection control does not meet expectations, workers’ anxiety and depression are high.¹⁹ In contrast, intensive workplace measures against COVID-19 are associated with lower psychological distress among employees.^15,19 In addition, anxiety and depression are higher among workers who do not telecommute and those with interpersonal tasks.¹⁹

Therefore, we hypothesized that worry of infection in the workplace and while commuting affect the psychological distress of workers. In this study, we examined the relationship between workers’ worry about infection and psychological distress in the midst of a rapid outbreak of COVID-19 in Japan.

Method

Results

Table 1 shows the characteristics of the subjects according to their worries about infection. A total of 75% of the participants were worried about infection. While 50% of participants were worried about being infected in the workplace, 32% were worried about being infected while commuting to work. Women were more worried about infection than men. There were no substantial differences in income, educational background, or lifestyle by worry about COVID-19 infection in general, while at work, or while commuting. Participants who indicated that they worried about infection in the workplace and while commuting shared similar characteristics.

Table 2 shows the ORs of psychological distress. In the age-adjusted model for moderate psychological distress defined by a K6 score of 5 or higher, general worry about COVID-19 infection (OR=1.29, 95%CI 1.22–1.37), worry about infection at work (OR=1.79, 95%CI 1.70–1.88), and worry about infection while commuting (OR=1.64, 95%CI 1.55–1.73) all showed significant associations with psychological distress. Multivariate analysis showed that the OR of moderate psychological distress associated with general worry about COVID-19 infection was 0.97 (95% CI 0.91–1.04). The ORs were significantly higher in association with worry about infection in the workplace at 1.57 (95%CI 1.57–1.48) and worry about infection while commuting at 1.49 (95%CI 1.38–1.60).

The sex- and age-adjusted OR of severe psychological distress, defined by a K6 score of 13 or higher, associated with general worry about COVID-19 infection was 1.05 (95%CI 0.95–1.15). ORs were significantly higher in association with worry about infection in the workplace (OR=1.76, 95%CI 1.61–1.92) and worry about infection while commuting (OR=1.65, 95%CI 1.51–1.80). Multivariate analysis of severe psychological distress showed similar results.

We also examined situations we predicted could enhance worry. Being in close contact with an infected person increased the ORs of severe psychological distress; however, having acquaintances who had been infected was not significantly associated with severe psychological distress. The OR of severe psychological distress associated with using public transportation for commuting to work was 1.25 (95%CI 1.25–1.39).

Discussion

This study showed that while general worry about COVID-19 infection was not associated with psychological distress, worry about infection at work and while commuting were associated with moderate and severe psychological distress.

The spread of COVID-19 infection is causing people to worry about infection in a number of everyday situations. In the present study, 75% of participants were worried about infection, suggesting that COVID-19 infection is a major source of public stress. However, in this situation, worrying about infection is not unhealthy, but rather, a natural reaction to current events. Such worry about infection may lead to preventive behaviors^23–25. In this situation, we found that having general worry about COVID-19 infection did not lead to psychological distress.

However, our study indicates that certain everyday situations, such as working in the workplace and commuting to work, are particularly worrisome in relation to infection. We found that worry about infection at work was associated with moderate and severe psychological distress. There are many opportunities in the workplace for direct contact with others, such as while communicating with colleagues and providing services to customers, and for indirect contact with people through objects. Previous studies have also reported an increase in anxiety and depression in interpersonal work.¹⁹ Additionally, in places like offices, workers share a relatively small space. Thus, the fact that individuals have limited control over maintaining the recommended three Cs strategy for infection prevention at work can be a major cause of stress. A sense of security and trust that workplaces can be made safe in the event of a pandemic may counteract any negative feelings.¹⁸

The present study also showed that worry about infection during commuting was associated with moderate and severe psychological distress. This result is consistent with previous studies that found a higher prevalence of anxiety and depressive symptoms among workers who have to commute to work.^18,19 Commuting to work is considered one way in which risk of infection can increase²⁶, because individuals come into contact with an unspecified number of people, are unable to maintain social distancing, and are present in a space that feels relatively enclosed, such as a bus or train. In fact, 47% of participants who were worried about infection while commuting experienced moderate psychological distress, and 23% experienced severe psychological distress. These results suggest that reducing worries about infection in the workplace and during commuting is important for reducing public mental health issues caused by COVID-19²⁷.

However, our findings also suggest the difficulty of reducing psychological distress due to worry about infection. We found that worries about infection in the workplace and while commuting to work were associated with psychological distress even after adjusting for assessment of adequate infection control measures in the workplace and use of public transportation. This result is consistent with a previous study that showed that workers’ anxiety about infection differs in different workplaces, and cannot be explained by workplace-related COVID-19 risk management strategies.¹⁸ These results suggest that workers worry regardless of whether or not they use public transportation to commute to work or have adequate infection prevention measures installed in their workplace, and that these worries are related to psychological distress. In fact, 38% of those who were worried about their commute did not use public transportation. While we found that public transportation use was associated with psychological distress, this association disappeared after adjusting for general worry about COVID-19 infection. This finding supports the idea that worry, rather than facts, is associated with psychological distress. Worry about infection is not only based on rational judgment, but is also an intuitive feeling. Therefore, to reduce excessive worry about infection and the resulting psychological distress, it is necessary to both promote infection prevention measures and adjust individuals’ perception of their worries.

Recent studies have provided useful suggestions for reducing anxiety about COVID-19 infection. Establishing infection control policies and implementing infection control measures in the workplace can be beneficial for the mental health of workers, and a sense of trust and security that infection control measures in the workplace are adequate will alleviate anxiety.^15,18,19 Use of personal protective equipment when conducting interpersonal tasks and access to testing in case of suspected infectious contact can also ease anxiety.^18,19 Additionally, public awareness, such as through access to correct information and avoiding excessive exposure to the media, may be useful for reducing anxiety.^28–30 Cognitive-behavioral therapy is also considered an effective method for such a purpose³¹.

Limitations of this study warrant mention. First, the generalizability of the results is uncertain because this study was conducted through internet monitors. However, we attempted to reduce as much bias in the target population as possible by sampling according to region, job type, and prefecture based on the infection incidence rate. Second, the study asked simple questions about individuals’ worries about infection. Dichotomous yes/no responses can prevent a nuanced understanding of the real sensations experienced by individuals. However, the questions were not intended to diagnose psychiatric symptoms or psychiatric illnesses. Participants who indicated that they were worried may also exhibit psychiatric symptoms, such as anxiety, depression, and panic; however, distinguishing these symptoms was outside the scope of this study. Third, worry about infection in the workplace is thought to be greatly influenced by the type of job and the environment in which one works. Health care workers are a typical example of a population that is at high risk of infection and are more likely to experience psychological distress¹⁰. In this study, we only adjusted for simple variables such as job type (desk work and physical work) and the number of employees in the workplace. Fourth, because this was a cross-sectional study, the temporal relationship between worry about infection and psychological distress is unclear. Excessive anxiety and depression may be symptoms of psychological distress. Previous studies have shown that people with a history of psychiatric disorders are more anxious and show greater psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic³². However, because it is easier to confirm feelings of worry than to make a psychiatric diagnosis, we believe that it is useful to identify the presence of worry among workers for determining health status.

In conclusion, while general worry about infection was not associated with psychological distress, worry about infection in specific situations such as in the workplace and while commuting was associated with moderate and severe psychological distress. These worries and the associated psychological and emotional responses may not be mediated by actual infection control measures taken in the workplace or use of public transportation. Thus, despite the continued spread of COVID-19 infection and an increase in anxiety in the population, situational fear, but not generic fear, is correlated with poor mental health. Such knowledge will be useful for designing future policies to manage mental health. The results of this study suggest the need for psychological approaches to reduce worries about infection in response to the mental health challenges associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.