The health crisis triggered by COVID-19 and the preventive measures taken to control it have caused a strong psychological impact on the population, especially on healthcare professionals. Risk exposure, uncertainty about how to approach the disease, care and emotional overburden, lack of resources, or unclear ever-changing protocols are, among others, psychological distress risk factors for the healthcare professionals who have faced this dramatic scenario on the front line. On the other hand, the Sense of Coherence (SOC) is a competence that could help these professionals perceive the situation as understandable, manageable, and meaningful, facilitating the activation of their resilience. This work aims to describe the levels of psychological distress and SOC of healthcare professionals during the crisis caused by COVID-19, the relationship between both variables, and their health status. A cross-sectional descriptive study with a sample of 1459 currently active healthcare workers was developed. GHQ-12 and SOC-13 were used for data collection. Bivariate analyses were performed, including Chi-Squared Test, Student’s T-Test, Analysis of Variance—ANOVA (with Bonferroni test for multiple comparisons), and correlations. Cohen’s d or Cramer’s V effect size measurements were also provided. The results showed that 80.6% of healthcare professionals had psychological distress, and the mean score on the SOC-13 scale was 62.8 points (SD = 12.02). Both psychological distress and SOC were related to the presence of COVID-19 symptoms, as well as with contact history. Professionals with psychological distress showed a lower SOC. Taking care of the mental health of healthcare professionals is essential to effectively cope with the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the psychological impact of working in the current menacing scenario, people on the front line against the disease should be protected, minimizing risks, providing them with resources and support, and fostering their coping skills.

Methods by which the population should be informed when going through a pandemic such as COVID-19 have been questioned because of its influence on the adoption of preventive measures and its effects on mental health. Non-health workers are at risk of psychological distress from exposure to contaminated people or materials or by having to stay at home and adapt their activity to telework. The objective of the study is to analyze information the public receives about COVID-19 and its influence on their level of distress. For this, 1089 questionnaires from non-health workers were collected online between 26 March and 26 April 2020 in Spain, and analysed and distributed by snowball effect. 492 participants carried out essential activities away from home, and 597 did so from home. They were surveyed about information received about COVID-19 regarding its source, time, assessment, or the beliefs expressed in it. Mental health was also measured with Goldberg’s General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). The classification and regression tree (CART) method was used to design a binary tree with sample cases. It has been found that the time spent learning about COVID-19 and the level of knowledge about symptoms, pathways, prevention, treatment, or prognosis are associated with the level of distress, where 25% of participants were found to have spent more than 3 h daily on this activity. Social media and television are the most widely used sources, but they are considered to be of lower quality and usefulness than official sources. There is greater confidence in healthcare professionals than in the health system, and the main concern of those working away from home is spreading the virus to family members. It has been concluded that there is a need to enhance quality and truthful information on the Internet for non-health workers due to its accessibility, which should be constantly updated, a fact which international and national public bodies, research centers, and journal publishers have begun to understand during the current pandemic. Such quality information is needed to combat distress.

This pandemic has been classified as a “psychological pandemic” that produces anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and sleep disorders. As the mental health effects of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by SARS-CoV-2, continue to unfold, there are still large knowledge gaps about the variables that predispose individuals to, or protect individuals against the disease. However, there are few publications on the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of citizens in Latin American countries. In this study, the effects that COVID-19 had on citizens of Peru have been described. For this, 1699 questionnaires, collected between 2 April and 2 September 2020, were analyzed. Descriptive, bivariate analysis was performed with odds ratio (OR) calculations and a data mining methodology. Sociodemographic variables (from the General Health Questionnaire), health conditions and perception, symptoms, and variables related to contact and preventive measures regarding COVID-19 were analyzed. As compared to other countries, less affectation of mental health and increased use of preventive measures were observed. It has been suggested that the country’s precarious health system and poverty rates prior to the pandemic may justify higher mortality figures in Peru than in other Latin American countries, despite prompt action for its containment and compliance with the protective measures. Psychological distress had a greater incidence in women, young people, people without a partner, and people without university studies. The most significant conditioning variables were self-perceived health status, headache or muscle pain over the past 14 days, level of studies, and age. The extensive use of preventive measures against COVID-19 is in line with the strict legislative measures taken, and this is, in turn, in line with other countries when looking at the lower effect on mental health, but contrary when focusing on the high lethality identified. The need to include the economy or availability and quality of healthcare in future studies arises, as well as the suitability to analyze the cause for differences between countries.

Night work has been highlighted by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as a likely carcinogenic factor for humans, associated with breast cancer and professions that require continuity of work. Knowing the impact that short and long-term night work has on the nurses’ collective seems a priority, therefore, this study aims to analyse the relationship between night work and the development of breast cancer risk factors in nurses. For this, a cross-sectional study through an online questionnaire on breast cancer risk variables and working life was designed. The study was conducted in Spain and the sample consisted of 966 nurses, of whom 502 were healthy participants and 56 were breast cancer patients. These two groups were compared in the analyses. A descriptive analysis was performed, and the relationship was tested using χ2 independence test and OR calculation. The CHAID (Chi Square Automatic Interaction Detection) data mining method allowed for the creation of a segmentation tree for the main risk variables. The most significant risk variables related to working life have been the number of years worked, nights worked throughout life, and years working more than 3 nights per month. Exceeding 16 years of work has been significant for women and men. When the time worked is less than 16 years, the number of cases increases if there is a family history of cancer and if there have been more than 500 nights of work. High-intensity night work seems more harmful at an early age. The accumulation of years and nights worked increase the risk of breast cancer when factors such as sleep disturbance, physical stress, or family responsibilities come together.

Work environments can interfere with the mental health of workers as generators or reducers of psychological distress. Work engagement is a concept related to quality of life and efficiency at work. The aim of this study was to find the relationship between work environment factors and work engagement among the Ecuadorian general population during the first phase of the COVID-19 pandemic to assess their levels of psychological distress. For this purpose, a cross-sectional, descriptive study using a set of questionnaires was performed. Sociodemographic and work environment data, work engagement (UWES-9 scale) scores, and General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) scores were collected. The variables that predicted 70.2% of psychological distress during the first phase of the pandemic were being female, with a low level of vigour (work engagement dimension), being stressed at work, and low job satisfaction. The sample showed an intermediate level of engagement in both the global assessment and the three dimensions, being higher in those without psychological distress. With effective actions on work environment factors, mental health effects may be efficiently prevented, and work engagement may be benefited. Companies can reduce workers’ psychological distress by providing safe and effective means to prevent the risk of contagion; reducing the levels of work conflict, work stress, or workload; and supporting their employees with psychological measures in order to maintain ideal working conditions.