Objective: During the COVID-19 pandemic, teleworking became the new workplace norm, creating a new challenge for workplace communication. This study investigated the association between source-specific workplace social support and psychological distress among Japanese teleworkers and nonteleworkers. Methods: A total of 15,045 workers were extracted from a cross-sectional web-based survey that assessed psychological distress, workplace social support from supervisors and coworkers. After grouping participants into four groups based on their positions (managers, staff members) and teleworking arrangements (teleworking, nonteleworking), multiple logistic regression analyses were performed separately. Results: Teleworkers with less supervisor support demonstrated the highest risk of psychological distress (adjusted odds ratio = 2.55, P = 0.024). Conclusions: Insufficient supervisor support for teleworking staff members may be a key occupational risk factor for psychological distress in the postpandemic future.

Background: To prevent the spread of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), it is important to avoid 3Cs (closed spaces, crowded places, and close-contact settings). However, the risk of contact with an unspecified number of people is inevitable while commuting to and from work. In this study, we investigated the relationship between commuting, and the risk of COVID-19 and COVID-19-induced anxiety. Methods: An internet-based questionnaire survey was conducted to obtain a dataset from 27,036 respondents. One-way commuting time was evaluated using a five-case method. The commuting distance was estimated using zip codes of the home and workplace. Logistic regression analysis was performed with the following outcomes: COVID-19 risk, close contact, infection anxiety, and infection anxiety due to commuting. Commuting distance and commuting time were analyzed separately in the model. We excluded participants with incalculable commuting distance, commuting distance exceeding 300 km, commuting distance of 0 km, or who telecommuted at least once a week. Results: The total number of participants included in the analysis was 14,038. The adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of using public transportation for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection were 4.17 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.51–6.93) (commuting time) and 5.18 (95% CI: 3.06–8.78) (commuting distance). The aOR of COVID-19 diagnosis decreased significantly with increasing commuting distance. The aORs of using public transportation to infection anxiety were 1.44 (95% CI: 1.31–1.59) (commuting time) and 1.45 (95% CI: 1.32–1.60) (commuting distance). The longer the commuting time, the more the aOR increased. Conclusions: COVID-19 risk, close contact, and infection anxiety were all associated with the use of public transportation during commuting. Both commuting distance and time were associated with infection anxiety due to commuting, and the strength of the association increased with increase in commuting time distance. Since transportation by commuting is associated with COVID-19 risk and anxiety, we recommend the use of telecommuting and other means of work.

Objectives: Although musculoskeletal pain is considered to be a major contributor to chronic pain in Japan, there are few epidemiological studies on chronic musculoskeletal pain in workers. Presenteeism, defined as attendance at work in spite of the need to rest due to poor health, related to chronic pain causes a decrease in labor productivity, and its economic loss is said to be four times greater than that of Absenteeism. In this study, we examined the relationship between the actual state of musculoskeletal pain in workers and chronic musculoskeletal pain and labor productivity, with the goal of obtaining useful information to improve labor productivity. Methods: A questionnaire was distributed to 3,406 workers, of whom 2,055 were analyzed to determine the prevalence of chronic musculoskeletal pain and the affected body parts, and the influence of work-related factors and the degree of labor productivity loss due to chronic musculoskeletal pain. Results: 34.0% of subjects had chronic musculoskeletal pain. The most commonly reported pain site was "neck and shoulder". Chronic musculoskeletal pain was significantly more common in people working overtime and in physical workers. Labor productivity was significantly lower in the group with chronic musculoskeletal pain than in the group without musculoskeletal pain, and it was significantly lower in the "neck and shoulder" and "lower back" groups than in the group without chronic musculoskeletal pain. Conclusions: Thirty-four percent of workers were engaged in work while experiencing chronic musculoskeletal pain. These workers had significantly decreased labor productivity. Efforts to improve conditions for workers with chronic musculoskeletal pain in each work type and working condition may improve labor productivity.

Objectives: The work system reform and the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan have prompted efforts toward telecommuting in Japan. However, only a few studies have investigated the stress and health effects of telecommuting. Therefore, this study aimed to clarify the relationship between telecommuting...

Encouraging the implementation of infection prevention and control (IPC) measures has been necessary to prevent workplace infections caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the effectiveness of these measures in reducing infections has not been thoroughly evaluated. We evaluated employees’ COVID-19 infection rates in relation to the implementation of IPC measures at their workplaces to identify effective workplace measures. This prospective cohort study was conducted between December 2020 and December 2021 using Internet-based self-assessment questionnaires, with 11,982 participants included from the baseline. To estimate whether implementing workplace IPC measures was associated with COVID-19 incidence rates among participants, we estimated multivariate-adjusted relative risk (RR) using a log-binomial model. After adjusting for sex, age, education, household members, occupation-related factors, and personal preventive behaviors, requesting ill employees to refrain from going to work showed significantly lower COVID-19 infection rates than not requesting it (RR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.34–0.91, p = 0.019). Employees restricted from reporting to work when ill had significantly lower COVID-19 infection rates than those who did not follow this measure. The results indicated that not coming to work when ill was effective in reducing COVID-19 infections at the workplace. We suggest that companies proactively adopt this policy and encourage their employees to comply with it.