Background: Psychological distress and self-rated health status may create additional complexities in patients already diagnosed with breast cancer. This study aims to assess the association of self-report-based assessment of psychological distress and self-rated health on survival times among women with breast cancer diagnoses. Methods: Seventeen-year data from the Integrated Public Use Microdata Series—National Health Interview Survey (IPUMS-NHIS) were pooled and analyzed. Women who were aged 30 to 64 years old, with breast cancer diagnosis were selected (n = 2,819). The outcome variable was time to death. The independent variables were self-reported assessment of psychological distress and self-rated health. Psychological distress was defined using the Kessler-6 scale while self-rated health was measured on a 3-point Likert scale: Poor, Fair, and Good-to-Excellent (referred to as good for brevity). We computed unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HR) using Cox-Proportional Hazard regression models with sociodemographic characteristics and measures of health care access used as potential confounders. Significance was set at alpha = 0.05. Results: Women with breast cancer assessed as having psychological distress had 46% (Adjusted HR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.02–2.09) increased risks of mortality. Also, women who rated their health as poor or fair had a significantly elevated mortality risk (Poor Health: Adjusted HR: 3.05; 95% CI: 2.61–4.69; Fair Health: Adjusted HR: 1.83; 95% CI: 1.43–2.35) as compared to women with good health status. Conclusions: Self-reported psychological distress and fair and poor self-rated health are associated with reduced survival times among women with breast cancer diagnoses.

Background: Workers in certain occupations may have elevated risks of psychological distress. However, research is limited. For example, researchers often measure distress that may have existed before occupational exposures. We studied occupations and the development of psychological distress using national data from the United States. Methods: We reviewed relevant research to identify occupations with low and high risks of mental health problems. We confirmed those individual low and high risk occupations using 1981–2017 data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (n = 24,789). We measured new cases of distress using the Screening Scale for Psychological Distress (Kessler K6) and compared distress in the low and high risk groups, adjusted for factors associated with occupational selection and non-occupational distress risks. A subset of participants described their jobs (n = 1,484), including factors such as job demands, social support, and control over work. We examined associations of those factors with psychological distress. Results: Workers in high risk occupations had 20% higher adjusted odds of developing distress than those in low risk occupations (odds ratio, OR 1.20, 95% confidence interval, CI 1.13–1.28). Distress increased with time in a high risk occupation: ≥5 years OR 1.38 (CI 1.18–1.62), ≥ 10 years OR 1.46 (CI 1.07–1.99), and ≥ 15 years OR 1.77 (CI 1.08–2.90; p-trend = 0.0145). The most common positive participant descriptions of their jobs indicated social support (34%), sense of accomplishment (17%), and control over work (15%). Participants reporting such descriptions were significantly less likely to have a high risk occupation (OR 0.66, CI 0.46–0.94, p = 0.0195). The most common negative descriptions were excessive job demands (43%), low social support (27%), and lack of control (14%). Participants reporting such descriptions were significantly more likely to have a high risk occupation (OR 1.49, CI 1.03–2.14, p = 0.0331). Conclusion: Certain occupations may have high risks of psychological distress, which may be due to characteristics of the occupations rather than employee characteristics, or in addition to them. Results were consistent with theoretical models of psychosocial work environments. Providers of health care and social services should ask patients or clients about work-related distress.

Despite the consequences of night-shift work, the diet of night-shift workers has not been widely studied. To date, there are no studies related to food intake among emergency healthcare workers (HCWs). We performed a prospective observational study to assess the influence of night work on the diet of emergency HCWs. We monitored 24-h food intake during a day shift and the consecutive night, and during night work and the daytime beforehand. We analyzed 184 emergency HCWs’ food intakes. Emergency HCWs had 14.7% lower (−206 kcal) of their 24-h energy intake during night shifts compared to their day-shift colleagues (1606.7 ± 748.2 vs. 1400.4 ± 708.3 kcal, p = 0.049) and a 16.7% decrease in water consumption (1451.4 ± 496.8 vs. 1208.3 ± 513.9 mL/day, p = 0.010). Compared to day shifts, night-shift had 8.7% lower carbohydrates, 17.6% proteins, and 18.7% lipids. During the night shift the proportion of emergency HCWs who did not drink for 4 h, 8 h and 12 h increased by 20.5%, 17.5%, and 9.1%, respectively. For those who did not eat for 4 h, 8 h and 12 h increased by 46.8%, 27.7%, and 17.7%, respectively. A night shift has a huge negative impact on both the amount and quality of nutrients consumed by emergency healthcare workers.