Association between Long Working Hours and Psychological Distress: The Effect Modification by Request to Stay Home When Sick in the Workplace during the COVID-19 Pandemic

  1. Ayako Hino
  2. Akiomi Inoue
  3. Kosuke Mafune
  4. Mayumi Tsuji
  5. Seiichiro Tateishi
  6. Akira Ogami
  7. Tomohisa Nagata
  8. Keiji Muramatsu
  9. Yoshihisa Fujino
  10. on behalf of The CORoNaWork Project

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The effect of workplace infection control measures required by the COVID-19 pandemic on the association between long working hours and psychological distress has not yet been fully revealed. This study investigated the effect of requesting to stay home when sick (RSH) on the association between long working hours and psychological distress. We conducted a cross-sectional survey in December 2020 among participants who had previously registered with a Japanese web survey company. A total of 27,036 workers completed a self-administered questionnaire which assessed usual daily overtime work hours. RSH was assessed using an original single-item scale, while psychological distress was measured with the K6 scale. After the interaction effect of overtime work hours and RSH on psychological distress was tested, we conducted stratified analyses using RSH. The statistical analysis demonstrated a significant interaction effect (p for interaction < 0.001). When we conducted stratified analyses, the odds ratios increased with longer working hours, both with and without RSH groups; however, the risk of long working hours causing psychological distress was greater in the latter group (odds ratio = 1.95 [95% confidence interval: 1.62–2.36] than in the former group (odds ratio = 1.73 [95% confidence interval: 1.55–1.93]). We found that working without RSH could strengthen the association between long working hours and psychological distress. Our findings contribute to preventing the deterioration of mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.3390/ijerph19073907
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.07.21266036: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsConsent: The purpose and procedures of the study were explained to the participants, and informed consent was obtained through an online website.
    IRB: The Ethics Committee of Medical Research, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Japan, reviewed and approved the study procedures (approval number: R2-079).
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical analyses were performed using IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) Statistics version 22 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).
    Statistical Package for the Social Sciences
    suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)
    SPSS
    suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Some limitations of this study should be considered. First, this was a cross-sectional study; therefore, causality is unclear. Moreover, those with mental health issues may work longer hours because of reduced work efficiency. However, in general, in companies in Japan, occupational health staff is assigned to workplaces to ensure that those with mental health issues usually do not work long hours. Therefore, while it is unlikely that causality will be reversed, future longitudinal studies are needed. Second, since we assessed overtime work hours using self-administered questionnaires, which may have resulted in a bias. However, a previous study revealed that the correlation between self-reported and company records of working hours was quite high19; thus, the effect may not be large. Third, to assess overtime work hours, we examined overtime work hours per day; however, previous studies used the average overtime work hours per month or per week20, 21. Thus, the workload evaluation may not be accurate in the case of occupations with a greater change in daily working hours. Moreover, we adjusted for the job type, but we did not survey the details of the occupation. Fourth, we did not survey “whether the workplace compensates sick pay during absence.” Since sick pay allows employees to take time off from work without worry, a lack of sick pay could worsen mental health8. As the sick leave criteria measured in this study may include those without sick pay during absence, the amp...

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.11.07.21266036v1 on medRxiv