佐々木 洋平

Abstract Background Past research has suggested a cross-sectional association between COVID-19-related discrimination and PTSD symptom severity. However, no cohort study has examined the longitudinal association that better supports causal interpretation. Also, even if such an association genuinely exists, the specific pathway remains unclear. Methods We conducted a two-year follow-up study, obtaining data from healthcare workers in a hospital setting. We first evaluated how COVID-19-related discrimination in 2021 was associated with subsequent PTSD symptom severity in 2023. Thereafter, we conducted causal mediation analysis to examine how this association was mediated by psychological distress in 2022, accounting for exposure-mediator interaction. Missing data were handled using random forest imputation. Results A total of 660 hospital staff were included. The fully adjusted model showed greater PTSD symptom severity in individuals who experienced any COVID-19-related discrimination compared with those without such experiences (β, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.04–0.90). Regarding each type of discrimination, perceived discrimination was associated with greater PTSD symptom severity (β, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.08–0.96), whereas verbal discrimination did not reach statistical significance. Psychological distress mediated 28.1%–38.8% of the observed associations. Conclusions COVID-19-related discrimination is associated with subsequent PTSD symptom severity in healthcare workers. Psychological distress may serve as an important mediator, underscoring the potential need for interventions targeting this factor.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the association of COVID-19 preventive behavior and job-related stress with sleep quality among healthcare workers (HCWs). We conducted a cross-sectional survey using a questionnaire at the National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry, Tokyo, Japan. METHODS: A total of 586 participants who completed the questionnaire were eligible for the study. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index was used to evaluate sleep quality. We examined the level of engagement between poor sleep and COVID-19-related infection preventive behaviors, such as avoiding closed spaces, crowded places, and close contact (three Cs), a distance of at least one meter from others, wearing a face mask regularly, washing hands regularly, and working remotely, as well as job-related stress in the work environment, exposure to patients, potential risk of infection, fear of infecting others, need for social confinement, and financial instability. We conducted a hierarchical logistic regression analysis to examine the relationship between poor sleep and COVID-19 preventive behavior, job-related stress, and other covariates, including age, sex, and the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6), which was used to measure non-specific psychological distress. RESULTS: Poor sleep was observed in 223 (38.1%) participants. Adherence to COVID-19 preventive measures was relatively high: 84.1% of participants answered "always" for wearing a face mask regularly and 83.4% for washing hands regularly. In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, stress in the work environment (odds ratio [OR] = 2.09, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.37-3.20; p < 0.001), financial instability (OR = 1.73, 95% CI, 1.12-2.67; p < 0.05), and low adherence to working remotely (OR = 1.65, 95% CI, 1.06-2.57; p < 0.05) were independently and significantly associated with poor sleep after controlling for the covariates. CONCLUSIONS: One year into the COVID-19 pandemic, the poor sleep rates of HCWs remained high. These results emphasize the need to protect HCWs from work environment stress and financial concerns.

Background: Coping refers to conscious responses to negative circumstances, with the intention of ameliorating these situations. Few studies have compared the differences between psychotherapy and medication treatment for coping strategies for depression. In this study, we investigated the differences in coping strategies between cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) combined with medication (CBT group) and medication alone (pharmacotherapy group) among outpatients with depression. Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted among 50 patients with major depression (24 and 26 in the CBT and pharmacotherapy groups, respectively). Stress coping strategies (Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations [CISS]) and depression severity (Beck Depression Inventory-Second Edition [BDI-II]) were assessed at baseline and 16 weeks later. Changes in the CISS and BDI-II scores in both groups were tested using repeated analysis of variance. Inverse probability weighting with propensity score analysis was applied to address potential selection bias. Results: At 16 weeks, the CBT group exhibited increased CISS task-oriented coping, distraction, and social diversion scores, which differed from those of the pharmacotherapy group. The CBT group exhibited a significantly greater reduction in depressive symptoms than the pharmacotherapy group. Limitations: This study was not a randomized controlled trial and thus may have selection bias. Conclusion: Gaining adaptive coping skills, including task-oriented coping, distraction, and social diversion skills, by combining CBT with medication may lead to greater improvement in depression symptoms. These findings suggest that clinicians should evaluate coping strategies and facilitate the acquisition of adaptive coping strategies in patients with depression to reduce their symptoms.