Abstract: Objectives: The Japanese government launched a new occupational health policy called the Stress Check Program. This program mandates that all workplaces with 50 or more employees conduct ...the Stress Check Program for workers at least once a year. This article gives a brief overview and critical review of the program. Methods: We reviewed relevant laws, guidelines, and manuals, as well as the policy development process. The policy and the components of the program were compared using available scientific evidence and trends in the management of psychosocial factors at work according to the policies and guidelines of international bodies and European countries. Results: The process of program policy development was based on a discussion among employer and employee representatives, occupational health professionals, and mental health experts. Scientific evidence shows that mandated components of the program (i.e., feedback of stress survey results and physician's interview) may be ineffective. However, additional components recommended to employers, such as stress management skill provision and work environment improvement, in conjunction with the program may be effective in improving psychosocial stress at work. The Stress Check Program is unique compared with the global trend for psychosocial risk management because it focuses on the assessment of stress among individual workers. Conclusion: The new program may be effective in improving worker mental health by facilitating the psychosocial risk management approach in Japan. Concerns regarding the program include mass leakage of collected information, and possible disadvantages for workers labeled as having high stress.
Objectives
The study investigated the links between workplace measures implemented in response to COVID‐19 with mental health and work performance of employees in Japan.
Methods
This was a ...cross‐sectional study of a sample from a cohort study of full‐time employees. Participants (n = 1448) completed an online self‐report questionnaire on March 19‐22, 2020. Multiple linear regression was conducted to ascertain their fear of and worry associated with COVID‐19, psychological distress, and work performance.
Results
The number of workplace measures correlated positively with respondents' fear of and worry associated with COVID‐19 (adjusted standardized β = 0.123, P < .001), negatively with psychological distress and positively with work performance (adjusted standardized β = −0.068, P = .032; adjusted standardized β = 0.101, P = .002; respectively).
Conclusions
Workplace measures may promote and maintain the mental health and work performance of employees during the COVID‐19 epidemic. The positive association between the number of measures and fear and worry about COVID‐19 may reflect increased awareness about COVID‐19 among employees resulted from taking the measures.
A high disease burden of mental disorders has been noted worldwide, including Japan. It is important to monitor mental disorder prevalence trends and the use of mental health services over time using ...epidemiological data and to plan appropriate policies and measures that consider mental health in each country. This review outlines the prevalence trends of common mental disorders (CMD) and the use of mental health services in Japan from the 2000s to the 2010s and compares them with those in other countries. This review clarifies that the prevalence of CMD in Japan has been relatively stable in the past decade. The 12‐month prevalence of mental health service use has increased about 1.2 times to 1.6 times in the past 10–15 years. Thus, it is very likely that the rise in mental health service use contributes to increased patient numbers. Regarding cross‐national comparison, the prevalence rate of CMD in Japan is much lower compared to rates in the USA and Europe. The 12‐month prevalence of mental health service use was also lower in Japan compared to prevalence rates in other high‐income countries. Mental health epidemiology has clarified that the prevalence of CMD worldwide has remained unchanged, even though mental health service use has increased in high‐income countries. Thus, the gap in treatment quality and prevention should be addressed in the future.
Objectives This study compared the longitudinal change in the mental health of healthcare and non-healthcare workers during two months of the COVID-19 outbreak in Japan. Methods Data were derived ...from a prospective online cohort study of 1448 full-time employees in Japan. Participants were surveyed at baseline from 19-22 March 2020 (T1) and at follow-up from 22-26 May 2020 (T2). A self-administered online questionnaire was used to assess participants' fear and worry of COVID-19, psychological distress, and physical symptoms at T1 and T2. A series of generalized linear models were created to assess changes in outcomes between healthcare and non-healthcare workers. Demographic variables (ie, sex, age, marital status, children, education, and residential area) were included in the models as covariates. Results A total of 1032 participants completed the follow-up questionnaire at T2 (follow-up rate, 72.6%). After excluding unemployed respondents (N=17), the final sample comprised 1015 full-time employees (111 healthcare and 904 non-healthcare workers). After adjusting for the covariates, psychological distress (and subscales of fatigue, anxiety, and depression) as well as fear and worry of COVID-19 increased statistically significantly more among healthcare than non-healthcare workers from T1 to T2. Conclusions Psychological distress, together with fear and worry of COVID-19, increased more among healthcare compared to non-healthcare workers during the COVID-19 outbreak. The study confirmed that healthcare workers are an important target for mental healthcare during the COVID-19 outbreak.
Abstract: Objectives: On December 1, 2015, the Japanese government launched the Stress Check Program, a new occupational health policy to screen employees for high psychosocial stress in the ...workplace. As only weak evidence exists for the effectiveness of the program, we sought to estimate the risk of stress-associated long-term sickness absence as defined in the program manual. Methods: Participants were 7356 male and 7362 female employees in a financial service company who completed the Brief Job Stress Questionnaire (BJSQ). We followed them for 1 year and used company records to identify employees with sickness absence of 1 month or longer. We defined high-risk employees using the BJSQ and criteria recommended by the program manual. We used the Cox proportional regression model to evaluate the prospective association between stress and long-term sickness absence. Results: During the follow-up period, we identified 34 male and 35 female employees who took long-term sickness absence. After adjustment for age, length of service, job type, position, and post-examination interview, hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for incident long-term sickness absence in high-stress employees were 6.59 (3.04-14.25) for men and 2.77 (1.32-5.83) for women. The corresponding population attributable risks for high stress were 23.8% (10.3-42.6) for men and 21.0% (4.6-42.1) for women. Conclusions: During the 1-year follow-up, employees identified as high stress (as defined by the Stress Check Program manual) had significantly elevated risks for long-term sickness absence.
Aims: This study aimed to establish the screening performance and optimal cut‐off points for the Japanese version of Kessler (K)6, K10 and the Depression and Suicide Screen (DSS).
Methods: A ...self‐report questionnaire including K6, K10 and DSS, as well as the Center for Epidemiologic Studies – Depression Scale (CES‐D), was administered to a random sample of community residents in Japan (non‐cases, n = 147) and psychiatric outpatients diagnosed with mood or anxiety disorders according to DSM‐IV (cases, n = 17). A receiver–operator characteristics (ROC) curve was drawn to estimate the area under the curve (AUC), the sensitivity, and specificity with the optimal cut‐off points for K6, K10, and DSS, which were then compared with those of CES‐D. The community sample was also asked to rate each measure on a scale from ‘very easy’ to ‘very hard’ to use.
Results: K6 and K10 showed a high AUC (0.93–0.94), which was comparable to that of CES‐D (0.95), but DSS showed a significantly smaller AUC (0.89) than CES‐D (P < 0.05). The optimal cut‐off points were estimated as 4/5 for K6, 9/10 for K10, and 1/2 for DSS. The sensitivity of these three scales was similar, but the specificity was lower for DSS than for the other two. K6, K10 and DSS were rated as being ‘very easy’ or ‘easy to use’ significantly more than CES‐D (P < 0.01).
Conclusion: The screening performance of the Japanese versions of K6 and K10 was comparable with that of CES‐D, and better than that of DDS. K6/K10, particularly K6, might have an advantage, even over the CES‐D, because of its similar screening performance and better acceptability.
Objectives
This study aimed to compare the longitudinal change of the psychological distress of healthcare workers (HCWs) with non‐HCWs during the repeated outbreaks of the COVID‐19 in Japan.
Methods
...The data were retrieved from the Employee Cohort Study in the Covid‐19 pandemic in Japan study. An online survey was conducted on March 2020 (T1), on May 2020 (T2), on August 2020 (T3), and on November 2020 (T4). Psychological distress was measured by the Brief Job Stress Questionnaire. A mixed‐model repeated‐measures ANOVA was conducted as an indicator of the group differences.
Results
A total sample of analysis was n = 996 (HCWs, n = 111; non‐HCWs, n = 885). HCWs consisted of physicians/nurses/midwives and other HCWs (eg, pharmacists, clinical laboratory technicians) in the clinical settings (n = 19; 17% and n = 61; 55%, respectively), and HCWs not working in the clinical settings (n = 31; 28%). Being HCWs were associated with a significant increase in psychological distress from T1 to T2, T3 and T4 (P = .001, P = .002, P < .001; respectively).
Conclusions
The mental health of HCWs deteriorated through the COVID‐19 outbreaks compared with non‐HCWs. HCWs are continuously the important targets to provide mental health support.
Compared to the numerous reports on mental health outcomes of workplace bullying victims, research on organizational outcomes of witnesses and physical health outcomes of victims and witnesses is ...scarce. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between bullying victimization and witnessing and various physical and mental health outcomes and organizational outcomes such as sickness absence, work performance, and job satisfaction. This study used cross-sectional data from a nationally representative, community-based sample of 5,000 Japanese residents aged 20-60. We analyzed data from 1,496 respondents after excluding those not working at the time of the survey and those with missing values. Workplace bullying, psychological distress, physical complaints, and job satisfaction were assessed with the New Brief Job Stress Questionnaire and work performance with the World Health Organization's Health and Work Performance Questionnaire. In addition, subjective health status, physician-diagnosed mental or physical illness, and sickness absence were asked as one item. Hierarchical multiple regression analysis or Poisson regression analysis was conducted to assess the association between victimization/witnessing workplace bullying and health and organizational outcomes. Both victimization and witnessing workplace bullying were significantly associated with psychological distress, physical complaints, subjective poor health, physician-diagnosed mental disorders, and job dissatisfaction. Victimization of workplace bullying was further associated with physician-diagnosed respiratory diseases, sickness absence (greater than or equal to7 days), and poor work performance. Victims were absent from work for 4.5 more sick days and had 11.2% lower work performance than non-victims. The results showed that both victimization and witnessing workplace bullying were significantly associated with physical and mental outcomes and various organizational outcomes. Organizations should implement further measures to prevent personal and organizational losses due to workplace bullying.
PDF
