心理弹性在疾控人员职业紧张与抑郁关系中的中介作用

Mediating role of resilience in relationship between occupational stress and depression of staff of centers for disease control and prevention

  • 摘要:
    背景 新冠肺炎疫情发生以来疾控人员一直承担着繁重的防疫工作,过度职业紧张会引发抑郁等心理问题。
    目的 探讨疾控人员职业紧张、心理弹性、抑郁的状况及其关系。
    方法 2020年12月—2021年4月,以河北省省、市、县(区)三级疾控中心在职员工为研究对象,对省、市两级进行普查,对县(区)级采用分层整群抽样的方法,共抽取样本3514人。选用中文版付出−回报失衡量表、中文版心理弹性量表、抑郁症状筛查量表调查疾控人员职业紧张、心理弹性和抑郁现状。分别进行独立样本t检验、方差分析、χ2检验、Pearson相关分析及中介作用检验(结构方程模型)。
    结果 疾控人员职业紧张检出率为34.29%,心理弹性得分为(66.28±15.32)分,抑郁检出率为48.58%。不同性别、年龄、学历、婚姻状况、行政职务、每周运动次数、慢性病患病情况、参与疫情处置情况的疾控人员职业紧张检出率比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);不同性别、年龄、行政职务、每周运动次数、慢性病患病情况、参与疫情处置情况的疾控人员心理弹性得分比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);不同性别、年龄、学历、个人月收入、每周运动次数、慢性病患病情况、参与疫情处置情况的疾控人员抑郁检出率比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。疾控人员的职业紧张与心理弹性呈负相关(r=−0.165,P<0.01),心理弹性与抑郁呈负相关(r=−0.383,P<0.01),职业紧张与抑郁呈正相关(r=0.343,P<0.01)。疾控人员心理弹性在职业紧张和抑郁之间的部分中介作用结构方程模型成立,中介效应为0.039,占总效应的10.46%。
    结论 新冠肺炎疫情背景下疾控人员出现职业紧张、心理弹性水平降低和抑郁问题的比例较高,心理弹性在职业紧张对抑郁的影响中存在部分中介作用。本研究结果提示,提高疾控人员心理弹性水平有助于降低其职业紧张和抑郁状况。

     

    Abstract:
    Background Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 epidemic, staff of the centers for disease control and prevention (CDC) have been burdened with heavy epidemic prevention control, and excessive occupational stress can cause depression and other psychological problems.
    Objective To explore the status of occupational stress, resilience, and depression of CDC staff and potential relationships between them.
    Methods From December 2020 to April 2021, a survey was conducted at provincial and municipal levels, and the stratified cluster sampling method was used at county (district) level to select a total of 3514 samples. Their occupational stress, resilience, and depression status were evaluated using the Chinese Effort-Reward Imbalance Scale (ERI), the Chinese Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC), and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). Independent sample t test, analysis of variance, χ2 test, Pearson correlation analysis, and mediation test (structural equation model) were conducted.
    Results The positive rate of occupational stress was 34.29% in the CDC staff, the resilience score was 66.28±15.32, and the positive rate of depression was 48.58%. Significant differences were found in the positive rates of occupational stress among different groups of gender, age, education background, marital status, administrative duty, weekly exercise frequency, chronic disease prevalence, and participation in epidemic control (P<0.05); in the resilience scores among different groups of gender, age, administrative duty, weekly exercise frequency, chronic disease prevalence, and participation in epidemic control (P<0.05); in the positive rates of depression among different groups of gender, age, educational background, personal monthly income, weekly exercise frequency, chronic disease prevalence, and participation in epidemic control (P<0.05). Occupational stress was negatively correlated with resilience (r=−0.165, P<0.01). Resilience was negatively correlated with depression (r=−0.383, P<0.01). Occupational stress was positively correlated with depression (r=0.343, P<0.01). The structural equation embracing a partial mediating effect of resilience on the relationship occupational stress and depression was established, and the partial mediating effect was 0.039, accounting for 10.46% of the total effect.
    Conclusion High positive rates of occupational stress, reduced resilience, and depression are shown among CDC staff in the context of the COVID-19 epidemic, and resilience partially mediates the effect of occupational stress on depression. The study findings suggest that improving resilience may reduce occupational stress and depression in CDC staff.

     

/

返回文章
返回