Healthcare workers (HCWs) on the frontline of the COVID-19 pandemic exhibit a high prevalence of depression and psychological distress. Moral injury (MI) can lead to such mental health problems. MI occurs when perpetrating, failing to prevent, or bearing witness to acts that transgress deeply held moral beliefs and expectations. Since the start of the pandemic, psychosocial stressors at work (PSWs) might have been exacerbated, which might in turn have led to an increased risk of MI in HCWs. However, research into the associations between PSWs and MI is lacking. Considering these stressors are frequent and most of them are modifiable occupational risk factors, they may constitute promising prevention targets. This study aims to evaluate the associations between a set of PSWs and MI in HCWs during the third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Quebec, Canada. Furthermore, our study aims to explore potential differences between urban and non-urban regions. The sample of this study consisted of 572 HCWs and leaders from the Quebec province. Prevalence ratios (PR) of MI and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were modelled using robust Poisson regressions. Several covariates were considered, including age, sex, gender, socio-economic indicators, and lifestyle factors. Results indicated HCWs exposed to PSWs were 2.22–5.58 times more likely to experience MI. Low ethical culture had the strongest association (PR: 5.58, 95% CI: 1.34–23.27), followed by low reward (PR: 4.43, 95% CI: 2.14–9.16) and high emotional demands (PR: 4.32, 95% CI: 1.89–9.88). Identifying predictors of MI could contribute to the reduction of mental health problems and the implementation of targeted interventions in urban and non-urban areas.

BACKGROUND: Despite the importance of the legislative and insurance systems in the return to work process after an occupational injury, the perspective of the insurer on what influences return to work has rarely been documented. OBJECTIVE: To understand the barriers or facilitators for return to work, from the perspective of the insurer. METHODS: A comprehensive qualitative approach was used. Semi-directed interviews were done with nineteen (19) insurers (claims adjudicator and rehabilitation case manager) from a Canadian workers’ compensation board. A thematic analysis was done using QDA Minor Software. RESULTS: Fourteen themes (e.g. family reaction, quality of work relationship) were classified into four categories representing the main stakeholders: worker with disability, workplace, healthcare system and compensation system. Emotional, cognitive, and adaptive reactions from the worker and his family were identified. We observed that good work relations and support practices, lack of access to medical resources, focus on the employee’s ability, and complexity and consequences of the compensation process are the main barriers and facilitators from the insurers’ perspective. Many of the perceived elements are coherent with the compensation system’s administrative and legal context. CONCLUSIONS: The results enable us to better understand the insurers’ perspective regarding what influences return to work. It reinforces the necessity to consider the administrative and legal context to better understand the insurers’ perspective.