Search

Abstract Background Teachers experienced increased stressors and stress during the initial onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. While many educators returned to in-person instruction in the 2021–2022 school year, they faced changing job demands and stressors which has important implications for educator well-being. We sought to understand the stressors and health impacts faced by U.S. educators in the 2021–2022 school year, two years following the acute phase of the pandemic. Methods Thirty-four certified educators based in Connecticut, USA participated in four virtual focus groups in February 2022. A semi-structured focus group script, designed by the research team and guided by the job demands-resources model, was administered to understand stressors and stress impacts. Data were transcribed and analyzed using the constant comparative method to identify themes and sub-themes. Themes were summarized based on how many participants mentioned them. Results Analysis of the qualitative data yielded three themes concerning the well-being impacts of stress: physical health and health behaviors, psychological health, and relationships and social well-being behaviors. The majority of educators indicated impacts in these domains with 76% indicating impacts on physical health and health behaviors (e.g. poor sleep, physical exhaustion, lack of exercise, unhealthy eating), 62% indicating impacts on psychological health (e.g. emotional exhaustion, anxiety, negative self-evaluation); and 68% indicating impacts on relationships social well-being behaviors (e.g. connections with family or friends, connections with others, relationships with coworkers). The majority (94%) of educators indicated that stressors from the school or district with the majority (91%) citing stressors related to protocols/expectations (e.g. excessive or increased demands, insufficient or decreased resources) and some (38%) administrators. Over half (62%) indicated personal stressors including personal/home life (41%), high personal expectations (18%), and income (18%). Some (35%) indicated either the pandemic (26%) or safety concerns (9%) were stressors. Some (24%) cited students’ parents as a stressor and a few indicated community (12%), students (12%), and state or national level (9%) stressors. Conclusion Educator well-being continued to be impacted in the post-pandemic era. Targeted interventions are needed to reduce school and district-related demands and to address stress-related educator well-being.

Abstract Background While the link between non-standard work schedules and poor health outcomes is established, few studies have examined how resources both in and outside of work can support the well-being of workers with non-standard work schedules. Methods Using a cross-sectional survey, we assessed the association between one facet of well-being, life satisfaction, and job and personal resources. In 2019, an electronic survey was administered to two unionized, public service populations who work non-standard work schedules: transportation maintainers and correctional supervisors. We assessed life satisfaction with a 10-item scale; a broad set of job resources (reward satisfaction, supervisor support, co-worker support, schedule satisfaction, and working hours fit); and a broad set of personal resources (health status, sleep, physical activity, and finances). We used log-binomial regression models to estimate prevalence ratios and 95% confidence intervals among statistically significant univariate predictors. Results Of the 316 workers surveyed, the majority were male (86%), White (68%), and reported positive life satisfaction (56%). In multivariate models, the prevalence of positive life satisfaction was higher in workers reporting reward satisfaction (PR:1.35, 95% CI: 1.11, 1.65; p = 0.003), good work schedule fit (PR:1.43, 95% CI: 1.12, 1.83; p = 0.004), good health (PR:2.92, 95% CI: 1.70, 4.99; p

Abstract Background Working time characteristics have been used to link work schedule features to health impairment; however, extant working time exposure assessments are narrow in scope. Prominent working time frameworks suggest that a broad range of schedule features should be assessed to best capture non-standard schedules. The purpose of this study was to develop a multi-dimensional scale that assesses working time exposures and test its reliability and validity for full-time workers with non-standard schedules. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted using full-time, blue-collar worker population samples from three industries - transportation (n = 174), corrections (n = 112), and manufacturing (n = 99). Using a multi-phased approach including the review of scientific literature and input from an advisory panel of experts, the WorkTime Scale (WTS) was created and included multiple domains to characterize working time (length, time of day, intensity, control, predictability, and free time). Self-report surveys were distributed to workers at their workplace during company time. Following a comprehensive scale development procedure (Phase 1), exploratory factor analysis (EFA) (Phase 2) and, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) (Phase 3; bivariate correlations were used to identify the core components of the WTS and assess the reliability and validity (Phase 4) in three samples. Results Phase 1 resulted in a preliminary set of 21 items that served as the basis for the quantitative analysis of the WTS. Phase 2 used EFA to yield a 14-item WTS measure with two subscales (“Extended and Irregular Work Days (EIWD)” and “Lack of Control (LOC)”). Phase 3 used CFA to confirm the factor structure of the WTS, and its subscales demonstrated good internal consistency: alpha coefficients were 0.88 for the EIWD factor and 0.76–0.81 for the LOC factor. Phase 4 used bivariate correlations to substantiate convergent, discriminant, and criterion (predictive) validities. Conclusions The 14-item WTS with good reliability and validity is an effective tool for assessing working time exposures in a variety of full-time jobs with non-standard schedules.

Abstract Background Teachers have high rates of daily stress and the majority of available interventions are focused at the teacher-level. Yet, best practices in Total Worker Health® approaches indicate organization-level interventions identified using a participatory approach are most effective. We conducted an exploratory scale-out pilot study to examine the adoption of the Healthy Workplace Participatory Program (HWPP), an evidence-based, Total Worker Health approach to engage employees (e.g., teachers) and supervisory personnel (e.g., administrators) in the design and implementation of workplace well-being interventions within two elementary schools. Methods We evaluated the program both quantitatively and qualitatively collecting implementation outcome data (i.e., fidelity, acceptability, understanding, feasibility, system alignment) as well as data-driven adaptations using the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications-Expanded. Data from the first school informed scale-out adaptation of the HWPP intervention, HWPP-Education, within the second school. We compared implementation outcomes between Pilot Schools 1 and 2 to evaluate improvements in the adapted HWPP. Results Adaptations to HWPP program content and process were suggested to increase feasibility and contextual fit. Acceptability, understanding, and feasibility ratings showed statistically significant improvements comparing School 1 to School 2 which implemented the improved HWPP-Education. Furthermore, users reported adaptations including shorter meeting design and faster process were feasible within their work context. Conclusion This pilot study is the first attempt to scale out the HWPP to educators, and while not intended to confirm efficacy, it showed promising results for scale-out. Results from Pilot Schools 1 and 2 suggest systematic use of quantitative and qualitative implementation data can effectively inform scale-out efforts that increase critical outcomes such as fidelity, acceptability, understanding, feasibility, system alignment, and leader engagement as well as decrease the extent of system resources needed. As such, this scale-out process may be a feasible approach on which to base large-scale implementation efforts of the HWPP among educators.

Abstract Background Non-standard work schedules (NSWSs), occurring outside of regular and predictable daytime hours, may negatively affect worker and family health. This qualitative study sought to understand worker perspectives on the health and well-being impacts of NSWSs among full-time, transportation maintainers, correctional, and manufacturing workers. Methods Forty-nine workers participated in 8 focus groups. Data were transcribed and analyzed with ATLAS.ti, using the constant comparative method to identify themes and sub-themes. Results Workers reported that long work hours and irregular and unpredictable schedules posed the biggest obstacles to their well-being. Workers reported that NSWSs were associated with behavior impacts (poor family and social connections, poor eating, poor sleep, lack of exercise recovery), physical health impacts (exhaustion, weight gain) and extended work exposures (increased stress, increased accidents). Conclusions This highlights the importance of developing and implementing effective workplace interventions to address these barriers to health and health behaviors.