No abstract

ObjectivesSleep disturbance and mental health are challenges for healthcare workers (HCWs). Especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, they experienced more severe sleep and mental health problems. However, the association between sleep disturbance and the mental health of HCWs is still controversial. This study aimed to systematically review the relationship by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodTwo researchers retrieved the literature from Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Psyclnfo, and Cochrane Library from the establishment of the databases until November 20, 2021. We used the New Castle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) to evaluate the risk of bias in prospective research and cross-sectional research, respectively. The major exposure was HCWs’ sleep disturbance, and the major outcome was mental health. The correlation coefficients (r), regression coefficients (β) and odds ratios (OR) of the included studies were integrated.ResultFifty-nine studies were included for qualitative analysis, of which 30 studies could be combined and entered into quantitative analysis. There were 23 studies during the COVID-19 pandemic among the 59 included studies. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the correlation coefficient between sleep disturbance and mental health was 0.43 (95% CI: 0.39–0.47). HCWs with sleep disturbance had a 3.74 (95% CI: 2.76–5.07) times higher risk of mental health problems than those without sleep disturbance. The correlation coefficient during the COVID-19 epidemic was 0.45 (95% CI: 0.37–0.53), while it was 0.40 (95% CI: 0.36–0.44) during the non-epidemic period. Subgroup analysis compared the OR results in epidemic and non-epidemic periods of COVID-19, which were 4.48 (95% CI: 2.75–5.07) and 3.74 (95% CI: 2.74–7.32), respectively.ConclusionSleep disturbance and mental health problems were positively correlated among HCWs. Particularly in the COVID-19 pandemic, more attention should be given to this issue.

ObjectiveEvidence is scarce about the effect of noise exposure on the risk of dementia. We conducted a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis, aiming to explore the association between noise exposure and the risk of dementia.MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library to collect studies on chronic noise exposure and the risk of dementia from database inception to September 18, 2021 without language limitations. Two authors independently screened the literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. A dose-response meta-analysis and subgroup analysis were then conducted to detect the association between noise exposure and the risk of dementia by using Stata 14.0 software. This study is registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021249243).ResultsA total of 11 studies were eligible for qualitative synthesis, and nine were eligible for quantitative data synthesis. All of them showed moderate to high quality scores in the assessment of risk of bias. We found a positive linear association between the noise increment and dementia risk (R2 = 0.58). When noise exposure increased 57 dB, the RR of dementia was 1.47 (95% CI: 1.21–1.78). From the outcome subgroup of AD, AD and dementia, VaD and NAD, we also found a positive association (R2 = 0.68, 0.68, 0.58, respectively). When noise exposure increased by 25 dB, the RRs were 1.18 (95% CI: 1.14–1.23), 1.19 (95% CI: 1.14–1.23) and 1.17 (95% CI: 1.06–1.30), respectively. We found a nonlinear association between the noise increment and dementia risk when only cohort studies were included (R2 = 0.58). When noise exposure increased by 25 dB, the RR of dementia was 1.16 (95% CI: 1.12–1.20). From the subgroup of AD, AD and dementia, VaD and NAD of cohort studies, the regression curve showed a nonlinear positive association (R2 = 0.74, 0.71, 0.43, respectively). When noise exposure increased by 25 dB, the RRs were 1.17 (95% CI: 1.12–1.21), 1.17 (95% CI: 1.12–1.22) and 1.13 (95% CI: 0.99–1.28), respectively.ConclusionBased on the current evidence, exposure to noise may be a specific risk factor for dementia. To better prevent dementia, more rigorously designed studies are needed to explore the etiological mechanism of noise and dementia.

ObjectiveDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, the occupational stress of medical staff has been a major issue. This study aimed to suggest a new strategy to identify high-risk factor sets of occupational stress in medical staff using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fs-QCA) and provide ideas for the prevention and intervention of occupational stress.MethodsA total of 1,928 medical staff members were surveyed and tested using the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II (AAQ-II), Occupational Stress Inventory-Revised edition (OSI-R), and Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised Short Scale (EPQ-RSC). The fs-QCA was used to explore the high-risk factors for occupational stress among medical staff.ResultsThe psychological strain (PSY) score of the medical staff was 26.8 ± 7.13, and the physical strain (PHS) score was 24.3 ± 6.50. Low psychological flexibility score-introversion-high role overload, introversion-neuroticism-high role overload, and low psychological flexibility score-neuroticism were high-risk factor sets for PSY. Low psychological flexibility score-introversion-high role overload, low psychological flexibility score-introversion-neuroticism, low psychological flexibility score-neuroticism-high role overload, low psychological flexibility score-psychoticism-neuroticism, and psychoticism-neuroticism-high role overload were high-risk factor sets for PHS.ConclusionThere are different combinations of high-risk factors for occupational stress among the medical staff. For occupational stress intervention and psychological counseling, targeted and individualized health intervention measures should be implemented according to specific characteristic combinations of different individuals.