No abstract

BackgroundAlthough research has documented factors influencing whether military personnel seek treatment for mental health problems, less research has focused on determinants of treatment-seeking for physical health problems.AimsTo explicitly compare the barriers and facilitators of treatment-seeking for mental and physical health problems.MethodUS soldiers (n = 2048) completed a survey with measures of barriers and facilitators of treatment-seeking for mental and physical health problems as well as measures of somatic symptoms and mental health.ResultsThe top barrier for both mental and physical health treatment-seeking was a preference for handling problems oneself. The top facilitators for both symptom types were related to treatment improving quality of life. Differential endorsement of barriers occurred for treatment of mental versus physical health symptoms. In contrast, facilitators were endorsed more for physical than for mental health treatment. While there were few gender differences, officers reported more barriers and facilitators than did enlisted personnel. Screening positive for mental or physical health problems was associated with greater endorsement of both barriers and facilitators for physical and mental health treatment, respectively.ConclusionsThe leading barriers and facilitators for seeking treatment for mental health and physical problems are relatively similar, suggesting that health education should consider decision-making in seeking both mental and physical healthcare. Interventions should be tailored to reduce barriers for officers and improve facilitators for junior enlisted personnel, and address barriers and facilitators for service members screening positive for a mental or physical health problem.Declaration of interestT.W.B. reports personal fees from TechWerks Corporation during the conduct of the study.

While researchers have begun to investigate theory and methods related to attenuating stress‐related issues at work, one underexplored area is a barrier to reporting stress‐related concerns in the workplace. Research on organizational climate broadly covers psychosocial safety at work. However, the literature has not examined other, more specific factors such as stigma towards reporting stress‐related concerns in the workplace. Using a prospective design, the current study examined the distinction between psychosocial safety climate (PSC) and stigmas surrounding reporting stress that may exist in organizations. Furthermore, we investigated whether PSC would buffer against the effects of such stigmas. The findings of this study indicate that stigma and PSC are distinct and can independently predict psychosocial outcomes. The results also indicate that PSC may play a role in attenuating the effects of these stigmas on some psychosocial outcomes. Implications and potential avenues for future research in this area are discussed.

Objectives: Fatigue is a state of physical and mental exhaustion in which people feel exhausted or drained of energy. Shift workers are highly vulnerable to fatigue, and this is especially true of emergency physicians (EPs). Shift scheduling (shift hours, frequency/length of breaks, time of shift, and number of hours off between shifts) can affect levels of fatigue in EPs. When EPs are fatigued, they experience decrements in cognition, resulting in an increased risk of errors. This study assessed the state of fatigue in EPs in the emergency department of a large, urban hospital using objective measures (sleep metrics and shift scheduling) over multiple months.Methods: Seventeen EPs, nine females, wore wrist-activity monitors called ReadiBands for 2 months. The ReadiBand is an objective actigraphy measure that communicates with a smartphone application to quantify sleep metrics and predict future fatigue.Results: Throughout the 3083 on-shift hours of data, analyses revealed that EPs have poor sleep quality (mean ± SD 7.71 ± 1.84/10) and sleep quantity (mean ± SD 6.77 ± 1.66 h), with sleep efficiency within "normal" ranges (mean ± SD 87.26 ± 9.00).Participants spent 725 h (23.52%) on shifts with fatigue scores indicative of significant impairment (equivalent to BAC of .08%). In addition, results indicated that shift type (day, evening, night) was significantly associated with fatigue score, where night shifts were associated with higher fatigue scores. Conclusions:Fatigue is an issue for many EPs. The present study addressed the percentage of time EPs are in a fatigued state when on shift over an extended duration of time. More research is needed to examine system-level interventions for reducing fatigue in EPs.

No abstract