San I Rad Covid 19

International Journal of
Environmental Research
and Public Health
Article
Work Performance, Mood and Sleep Alterations in Home Office
Workers during the COVID-19 Pandemic
Chiara Costa 1 , Michele Teodoro 2 , Carmela Mento 3 , Federica Giambò 2 , Carmen Vitello 2 ,
Sebastiano Italia 2, * and Concettina Fenga 2
1 Clinical and Experimental Medicine Department, University of Messina, 98125 Messina, Italy;
ccosta@unime.it
2 Department of Biomedical and Dental Sciences and Morphofunctional Imaging, Occupational Medicine
Section, University of Messina, 98125 Messina, Italy; michele.teodoro@unime.it (M.T.);
federicagiambo@gmail.com (F.G.); carmenvitello821@gmail.com (C.V.); cfenga@unime.it (C.F.)
3 Department of Biomedical and Dental Sciences and Morphofunctional Imaging, Clinical Psychology,
Psychiatric Unit, University of Messina, 98125 Messina, Italy; carmela.mento@unime.it
* Correspondence: sebastos87@hotmail.it; Tel.: +39-090-221-2061
Abstract: The sudden burst of the COVID-19 pandemic has changed the work environment in favor
of remote working, affecting the perception of work quality, satisfaction and performance. This crisis
has also influenced workers’ mood, sleep quality and general perception of everyday life. Our main
purpose in this study was to give empirical contributions about home office workers experiencing
remote working during the pandemic by assessing mood spectrum variations, sleep disturbances
and the general impact of pandemic in everyday life. This cross-sectional study was performed

between November and December 2020 through an online questionnaire. Participants were office
Citation: Costa, C.; Teodoro, M.;
workers performing remote work from workstations settled at home. The questionnaire investigated
Mento, C.; Giambò, F.; Vitello, C.;
sociodemographic characteristics, health factors, perception of remote working, mood spectrum,
Italia, S.; Fenga, C. Work
Performance, Mood and Sleep sleep quality and pandemic context perception. The sample consisted of 94 respondents: 63 women
Alterations in Home Office Workers and 31 men; the mean age was 50.4 years. Study population showed great satisfaction for remote
during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Int. working performance and online services for video connections. Only one third of the participants
J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, reported higher levels of irritability and loneliness and 16% of women complained of nightmares.
1990. https://doi.org/10.3390/ Most of participants stated that the pandemic importantly affected daily life (85.1%). Half of female
ijerph19041990 subjects with children <18 years stated that children’s age influenced their work performance. Since
Academic Editors: Lucian-Ionel the pandemic is still an ongoing issue, the lesson learnt is that local government actions are needed to
Cioca, Diana Popa-Andrei and Paul assist home office workers through tailored programs to support families. Given the central role of
B. Tchounwou women in childcare, female workers would mainly benefit from social support accordingly to their
parental tasks and remote work organization.
Received: 21 December 2021
Accepted: 8 February 2022
Keywords: COVID-19; home office workers; work perception; mood; sleep quality
Published: 10 February 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral

with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil- 1. Introduction
iations.
The sudden burst of the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent preventive measures,
such as quarantine, social isolation, partial or total lockdown, not only have dramatically
transformed everyday life, with a massive impact on physical, mental, social, and financial
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. welfare of the population [1] but they have also changed the work environment, in favor of
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. remote work organization. Subsequently, the perception of work quality, satisfaction and
This article is an open access article performance were all affected [2]. The output obtained by entering the search keywords
distributed under the terms and “remote work” in the main databases showed an exponential increase in the number of
conditions of the Creative Commons scientific surveys in the years 2019–2021.
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// The revolutionary changes faced by people, communities and governments during the
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ COVID-19 pandemic outbreak have totally restructured work organizations [1,2]. Enforced
4.0/).
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 1990. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19041990 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 1990 2 of 12
remote working, staff reduction, temporary assembly stoppage are some events that dis-
turbed work processes, distribution of responsibilities, job pressures and performances [3].
These unforeseen changes have forced workers, whose children were in preschool or re-
mote school-age, to adapt their working schedule in order to accomplish all caregiving
responsibilities in contrast to those workers living alone or without children. Workers
with parental responsibility were suddenly and personally involved in childcare during
the whole day, therefore, the new home workspaces have been characterized by noise,
discomfort and loss of privacy, possibly affecting workers’ performance [4]. Workers and
employers were completely unprepared to handle this psychological, emotional and social
burden which required achieving new organizational skills [5]. It is worthwhile to con-
sider the role of managerial functions, aiming not only to adopt interventions planned in
personnel management (enrolment, training, benefit assignment, information sharing) but
also on workers’ perceptions and performances that are strongly linked to organizational
flexibility [6]. Since human capital is the most valuable investment of the organizations,
this crisis led to very important consequences in the workforce management, by negatively
influencing workers’ perceptions and approaches towards the work environment [7].
Previous researches explored employees’ work perception regarding levels of satis-
faction, enthusiasm, work commitment, perceived structural support and organizational
performances [8–11]. During the COVID-19 pandemic, work organizations have been
required to use unexpected measures, such as implementation of remote working, reduc-
tion of working hours and even dismissals, profoundly impacting workers’ perceived job
insecurity and social isolation [12,13].
Although most studies agreed in assuming that workers have a great responsibility
in determining failure or success within work cycle processes, employees are generally
quite hesitant towards organizational changes [14,15]. In fact, these innovations might be
related to a rise in workloads, new assigned tasks, adjustment in work relationships and
new tactical objectives [16]. Nevertheless, when the organization positively introduces
work changes, employees could perceive this process as an opportunity for personal and
occupational growth, thus establishing constructive attitudes and optimistic effects on
job performance [17,18]. Consequently, workers could be involved in the organizational
transition plans in order to create favorable emotions and mindsets toward these collective
efforts [19].
Under these premises, our main purpose was to give empirical contributions through
the discussion of results coming from an online survey conducted among home office
workers experiencing remote working during the pandemic. In particular, the investiga-
tion evaluated employees’ feelings about remote working, focusing in both quality and
performance, along with sleep disturbances, mood alterations and the general impact of
the pandemic in everyday life.
2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design and Population
This cross-sectional study was performed between November and December 2020,
through an online questionnaire distributed via social networks. The self-administered
questionnaire was composed of thirty-three items and took no more than ten minutes to
be completed. The first section investigated sociodemographic characteristics and health
factors of the sample: age, gender, educational level, marital status, number of children,
chronic physical diseases, chronic medication administration, contacts with SARS-CoV-2
infected subjects and infection risk exposure. The second section consisted in an interview
about work perception, mood alterations, occurrence of sleep disturbances, current and
future perspective of the pandemic.
Participants were office workers employed by an outsource labor provider in different
administrative facilities in Italy; the average annual income level was comprised between
EUR 15,000 and EUR 29,000. All the interviewed subjects worked remotely and they had
settled their workstation at home. The sampling method included the spreading through
internet media of an invitation, including the link to the online survey. The invitation was
emailed to office managers with the request to extend it to their teams. A dedicated online
platform was used to collect the data from recruited subjects.
This study was carried out in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki’s ethi-
cal standards. Participation was voluntary and without compensation. All the subjects
provided informed consent.
2.2. Procedures and Measures

The second section of the self-administered questionnaire investigated different aspects
of the perception of remote working, mood, sleep disturbances and the pandemic impact
on everyday life.
2.2.1. Work Perception and Video Connections

Participants were asked whether they thought that the age of their children affected
their work performance (“Yes” or “No”). Respondents were also asked if they were satisfied
with their work performance despite the pandemic (“Yes” or “No”), how the work had
changed (“the work got worse” or “the work is unchanged” or “the work has improved”)
and if they were differently connected to the internet (“less than before” or “as before”
or “more than before”). The level of satisfaction regarding the online services for video
connections and the sensation of feeling more tired after a video call were measured using
a 5-point Likert-type scale, from 1 (never) to 5 (always).
2.2.2. Mood and Sleep Quality

Multiple aspects were investigated and measured with a 5-point Likert-type scale,
from 1 (never) to 5 (always), such as: irritability (“do you feel irritable?”), loneliness (“do
you feel lonely?”), sleep problems (“are you having problems in falling asleep?” and “do
you wake up in the night and have difficulties in getting back to sleep?”). Participants were
also asked whether they had nightmares.
2.2.3. Pandemic Impact on Everyday Life

Subjects reported their perception of the pandemic on everyday life (“do you think
that the pandemic has affected your life?”). They also rated their fear of contagion and the
will to go out and return to previous life by using a 5-point Likert-type scale, from 1 (not at
all) to 5 (very much).
2.3. Statistical Analysis

Descriptive analyses were performed for all variables. Categorical variables were
expressed as frequency and proportion; continuous variables were expressed as mean and
standard deviation. To evaluate differences between women and men in categorical vari-
ables, we used chi-square tests and Fisher’s exact tests, as appropriate. After verifying the
non-Gaussian distribution in all the continuous variables and outcomes through the appli-
cation of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, differences between genders were evaluated using
the Mann–Whitney U test. Furthermore, possible predictors of the considered outcomes
in the current investigation were assessed by using different models. In particular, the
generalized linear models were used to analyze the answers regarding the changes in work
perception, irritability, loneliness, problems in falling asleep, nocturnal awakenings with
difficulties in getting back to sleep, fear of contagion and willingness to return to previous
life. Whereas binary logistic regression was applied for the assessment of nightmares and
pandemic influence on everyday life. The occurrence of associations between the outcomes
were assessed through a bivariate correlation with Pearson correlation coefficient. p values
< 0.05 were considered statistically significant and reported in bold characters in the tables.
Beta values of the statistical models were reported in tables as “B” and p values as “P”.
Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 23 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY,
USA).
3. Results
A total of 94 respondents (N), 63 women and 31 men, accepted to join the study and
completed the assessment. A detailed sample description is summarized in Table 1.
Table 1. Description of study population: sociodemographic characteristics and health status factors.
Total Women Men

p-Value
n (%) n (%) n (%)
Sociodemographic Factors
Total 94 (100) 63 (67.0) 31 (33.0)
Age
Mean ± SD 50.4 ± 7.5 51.6 ± 6.4 48.0 ± 8.9 0.052
Range 30–62 33–62 30–62
Education
Middle school 11 (1.7) 7 (11.1) 4 (12.9) 0.600
High School 49 (52.1) 31 (49.2) 18 (58.1)
Graduation 34 (36.2) 25 (39.7) 9 (29.0)
Marital status
Single 33 (35.1) 22 (34.9) 11 (35.5) 0.957
Married/Cohabitant 61 (64.9) 41 (65.1) 20 (64.5)
Children
No 25 (26.6) 15 (23.8) 10 (32.3) 0.383
Yes 69 (73.4) 48 (76.2) 21 (67.7)
<18 years 20 (21.3) 14 (22.2) 6 (19.4) 0.960
≥18 years 49 (52.1) 34 (54.0) 15 (48.4)
Health Status Factors
Physical diseases 27 (28.7) 21 (33.3) 6 (19.4) 0.159
Mental illnesses 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0.159
Medications 8 (8.5) 6 (9.5) 2 (6.5) 0.616
SARS-CoV-2 infected contact 5 (5.3) 4 (6.3) 1 (3.2) 0.526
SARS-CoV-2 risk exposure 13 (13.8) 8 (12.7) 5 (16.1) 0.651
The mean age of study population was 50.4 years; though women were slightly older
than men (51 vs. 48 years, respectively), this difference was not statistically significant. The
majority of the individuals possessed a high school diploma; moreover, one third of the
female subjects was graduated. Married/cohabitant subjects were similarly represented
among women and men (about 65%), but more men than women had no children (32%
and 24%, respectively). Only nearly 20% of participants had children under 18 years of age.
About one third of female respondents had physical illnesses (15 hypertension, 3 dia-
betes, 2 autoimmune disorders and 1 respiratory disease); only 20% of men suffered from a
disease (5 hypertension, 1 diabetes) and none of the subjects suffered from mental illnesses.
Within the totality of samples, 5 participants had a contact with a SARS-CoV-2 infected
subject and 13 respondents declared they had SARS-CoV-2 infection risk exposure.
A description of the scores resulting from the interview is reported in Table 2. Different
outcomes were measured with a 5-point Likert-type scale; in these cases, scores were also
dichotomized using 2 as cut-off.
Table 2. Description of the results of the survey regarding work performance, mood and sleep
alteration in home office workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, in a gender perspective.
Total Women Men

p-Value
n/N (%) n/N (%) n/N (%)
Do you think the age of your children has affected your working performance?
Yes 1 13/69 (18.8) 7/48 (14.6) 6/21 (28.6) 0.172
Yes (<18 years children) 2 8/20 (40.0) 6/14 (42.9) 2/6 (33.3) 1.000
Yes (≥18 years children) 3 5/49 (10.2) 1/34 (2.9) 4/15 (26.7) 0.026
Are you satisfied with your work performance despite the pandemic?
Yes 90 (95.7) 60 (95.2) 30 (96.8) 1.000
Do you think you have been connected to the internet (mobile, tablet and PC) . . .
Less than before 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0.700
As before 22 (23.4) 14 (22.2) 8 (25.8)
More than before 72 (76.6) 49 (77.8) 23 (74.2)
Are you satisfied with the online services for video connections?
≤2 2 (2.1) 2 (3.2) 0 (0.0) 1.000
>2 92 (97.9) 61 (96.8) 31 (100.0)
Mean (SD) 4.1 (0.8) 4.1 (0.8) 4.0 (0.8) 0.436
Do you feel more tired after a video call?
≤2 61 (65.6) 43 (68.3) 18 (58.1) 0.364
>2 33 (35.4) 20 (31.7) 13 (41.9)
Mean (SD) 2.1 (1.3) 2.1 (1.3) 2.2 (1.4) 0.701
Has your work changed?
The work got worse 16 (17.0) 11 (17.4) 5 (16.2) 0.987
The work is unchanged 51 (54.3) 34 (54.0) 17 (54.8)
The work has improved 27 (28.7) 18 (28.6) 9 (29.0)
Are you feeling irritable?
≤2 62 (66.0) 40 (63.5) 22 (71.0) 0.499
>2 32 (34.0) 23 (36.5) 9 (29.0)
Mean (SD) 2.0 (1.2) 2.1 (1.1) 1.9 (1.3) 0.662
Do you feel lonely?
≤2 74 (78.7) 51 (81.0) 23 (74.2) 0.452
>2 20 (21.3) 12 (19.0) 8 (25.8)
Mean (SD) 1.7 (1.1) 1.3 (1.0) 1.8 (1.2) 0.278
Are you having problems falling asleep?
≤2 55 (58.5) 35 (55.6) 20 (64.5) 0.407
>2 39 (41.5) 28 (44.4) 11 (35.5)
Mean (SD) 2.3 (1.2) 2.3 (1.2) 2.1 (1.2) 0.477
Do you wake up in the night and have difficulties in getting back to sleep?
≤2 44 (46.8) 27 (42.9) 17 (54.8) 0.274
>2 50 (53.2) 36 (57.1) 14 (45.2)
Mean (SD) 2.5 (1.3) 2.6 (1.3) 2.4 (1.4) 0.488
Do you have nightmares?
Yes 10 (10.6) 10 (15.9) 0 (0.0) 0.028
Are you afraid of being infected?
≤2 31 (33.0) 18 (28.6) 13 (41.9) 0.195
>2 63 (67.0) 45 (71.4) 18 (58.1)
Mean (SD) 3.1 (1.4) 3.3 (1.4) 2.7 (1.3) 0.042
Do you want to go out and go back to previous life?
≤2 15 (16.0) 11 (17.5) 4 (12.9) 0.766
>2 79 (84.0) 52 (82.5) 27 (87.1)
Mean (SD) 3.8 (1.3) 3.7 (1.3) 4.1 (1.2) 0.140
Do you think the pandemic has affected your life?
No 14 (14.9) 10 (15.9) 4 (12.9) 0.769
Yes 80 (85.1) 53 (84.1) 27 (87.1)
p values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant and reported in bold characters; 1 Percentages calculated
on the number of participants with children (n = 69); 2 Percentages calculated on the number of participants
with children <18 years (n = 20); 3 Percentages calculated on the number of participants with children ≥18 years
(n = 49).
Considering the answers concerning how the age of children was affecting working
performance, we found a doubled percentage of men (28.6%) compared to women (14.6%),
but after stratifying the subjects depending on children’s age (choosing 18 years as cut-off),
half of women vs. one third of men having children <18 years considered their age to be
an influencing factor on work performance, as well as one third of men and only 1 over
34 women having children ≥18 years, with a statistically significant difference between
men and women.
Almost all of the subjects were satisfied with their work performance despite the
pandemic period and above three quarters of them were convinced to be more connected
than before through the use of internet. In addition, a good degree of satisfaction with
video services was also detected (mean ± SD = 4.1 ± 0.8) with only a few subjects feeling
more tired after a video call. The majority of individuals stated that their work was
not changed (54.3%) and about one third declared a work improvement. Low scores of
irritability (mean ± SD = 2.0 ± 1.2) and loneliness (mean ± SD = 1.7 ± 1.1) were registered.
Higher scores were found in assessing sleep quality, in particular, problems in falling asleep
(mean ± SD = 2.3 ± 1.2), nocturnal awakenings with difficulties in getting back to sleep
(mean ± SD = 2.5 ± 1.3) and 10 subjects (all women) complained of having nightmares.
Additionally, women reported higher scores than men regarding their fear of being infected
with SARS-CoV-2, with a statistically significant difference. The majority of the subjects
had a strong willingness to return to previous life and 85% of the participants declared that
the pandemic affected their everyday life.
We applied generalized linear model for the answers regarding the changes in work
perception, irritability and loneliness (Table 3), problems in falling asleep and nocturnal
awakenings with difficulties in getting back to sleep (Table 4), fear of contagion and
willingness to return to previous life (Table 5); binary logistic regression was applied for
nightmares’ occurrence (Table 4) and pandemic influence on everyday life (Table 5).
Table 3. Generalized linear model for perception in work changes, irritability and loneliness in the
study population (N = 94) of home office workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Work Changes Irritability Loneliness

Independent Variables
B P B P B P
Age (<40 years) −1.75 0.057 0.55 0.518 −0.87 0.398
Gender (F) −0.62 0.217 0.83 0.109 −0.85 0.128
Marital status (married/cohabitant) −0.99 0.067 −0.43 0.427 −1.10 0.040
Education (graduated) 1.97 0.002 −0.86 0.138 0.44 0.501
Parenthood (yes) 45.63 0.999 24.77 0.999 2.11 1.000
Having children ≥18 years (no) 0.28 0.671 −0.68 0.329 −0.92 0.251
Children’s age affecting remote working (yes) 0.79 0.293 −1.71 0.013 −0.25 0.772
Physical diseases (no) 0.97 0.109 −0.74 0.188 −0.47 0.486
Medications (no) −0.43 0.654 0.43 0.607 −0.30 0.735
SARS-CoV-2 infection risk exposure (no) 0.14 0.832 −1.67 0.012 −0.65 0.362
Contacts with SARS-CoV-2 infected subject (no) 0.76 0.436 0.68 0.468 −0.44 0.689
Satisfied with work performance (yes) 0.60 0.592 −3.03 0.003 −2.37 0.029
Time connected to the internet (more than before) −1.44 0.009 1.31 0.020 0.55 0.345
Satisfied with the online services (yes) 0.06 0.964 0.23 0.892 20.34 0.999
Feeling tired after a video call (no) 0.74 0.119 −0.07 0.877 −0.50 0.304
p values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant and reported in bold characters.
Table 4. Generalized linear model for problems in falling asleep and nocturnal awakenings with
difficulties to return to sleep; binary logistic regression for nightmare in the study population (N = 94)
of home office workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Nocturnal
Falling Asleep Problems Nightmares
Independent Variables Awakenings
B P B P OR P
Age (<40 years) 0.76 0.321 −0.08 0.919 0.01 0.999
Gender (F) 0.83 0.078 0.69 0.149 1.01 0.999
Marital status (married/cohabitant) 0.05 0.923 −0.40 0.427 1.26 0.732
Education (graduated) −0.87 0.139 −0.64 0.248 0.83 0.790
Parenthood (yes) 1.08 0.602 0.79 0.710 1.21 0.797
Having children ≥18 years (no) −0.37 0.572 −0.10 0.877 0.98 0.980
Children’s age affecting remote working (yes) 0.31 0.637 −0.22 0.730 1.44 0.746
Physical diseases (no) 0.69 0.266 0.24 0.667 4.50 0.030
Medications (no) −1.39 0.122 −0.57 0.503 1.22 0.859
SARS-CoV-2 infection risk exposure (no) 0.01 0.985 −0.76 0.217 1.66 0.553
Contacts with SARS-CoV-2 infected subject (no) −1.08 0.213 −1.25 0.159 2.22 0.496
Satisfied with work performance (yes) 0.64 0.549 −1.63 0.086 2.00 0.999
Time connected to the internet (more than before) 1.82 0.001 2.04 <0.001 1.25 0.788
Satisfied with the online services (yes) 22.49 0.999 22.18 0.999 2.12 0.999
Feeling tired after a video call (no) −0.73 0.099 −0.35 0.423 0.77 0.721
Table 5. Generalized linear model for fear of infection and willingness to go out and return to
previous life; binary logistic regression for the perception that the pandemic has affected everyday
life in the study population (N = 94) of home office workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Willingness to Go Out Pandemic

Fear of Infection and Return to Influence on
Independent Variables
Previous Life Everyday Life
B P B P OR P
Age (<40 years) 0.27 0.716 −0.66 0.398 2.52 0.392
Gender (F) 0.69 0.126 −0.46 0.353 0.79 0.704
Marital status (married/cohabitant) −0.78 0.115 −0.57 0.280 0.97 0.959
Education (graduated) −0.01 0.989 −0.66 0.235 0.67 0.523
Parenthood (yes) −1.21 0.598 −0.43 0.837 0.89 0.856
Having children ≥18 years (no) 0.70 0.256 0.36 0.555 0.57 0.502
Children’s age affecting remote working (yes) 0.39 0.511 −0.47 0.452 3.52 0.999
Physical diseases (no) −0.77 0.159 0.98 0.077 0.64 0.516
Medications (no) −0.25 0.793 −1.21 0.174 0.80 0.843
SARS-CoV-2 infection risk exposure (no) −0.04 0.942 1.06 0.075 1.05 0.957
Contacts with SARS-CoV-2 infected subject (no) 0.65 0.427 0.85 0.287 0.01 0.999
Satisfied with work performance (yes) −0.69 0.555 0.21 0.844 3.97 0.999
Time connected to the internet (more than before) 1.04 0.039 −0.35 0.519 0.23 0.016
Satisfied with the online services (yes) −1.65 0.223 0.54 0.391 0.01 0.999
Feeling tired after a video call (no) 0.13 0.761 0.14 0.754 0.46 0.254
Considering the independent variables used in the statistical models, married/cohabitant

subjects felt less lonely than single ones. Being graduated acted as a predictive factor of
perceiving a work improvement during the pandemic. Subjects who thought that the age of
their children had affected remote working performances were related to lower irritability.
Participants without physical disease had a higher risk of complaining about nightmares
(OR 4.50). The absence of SARS-CoV-2 infection risk exposure acted as a protective factor
against irritability. Moreover, being satisfied with personal work performance acted as a
predictor of reporting lower levels of irritability and loneliness. More time than before
spent on the internet demonstrated to be a predictor of worse work perception, higher
J.Int.
Environ. Int.
J. Environ.
Int.
Res. J. Public
Environ.
Res.
J. Environ. Res.
Public
Health
Res. Public
Health
Public
2022, Health
2022,
Health
19, 19,
1990 2022,
199019,19,
2022, 1990
1990 8 of 812of 128 8of of1212
t. J. Environ.
Environ. Res. Public
Res. Public Health
Health 2022,2022, 19, 1990
19, 1990 8 of 812of 12
Health
on.
Int. Res. 2022,
Public19,
J. Environ. 1990
Health
Res. Public
2022,Health
19, 1990
2022, 19, 1990 8 of 12 8 of 12 8 of 12
Int.Int.
Int. J. Environ. J. Res.
Environ. Res.
J. Environ.
Public
Int. J.Public
Health
Res. tective
tective
Health
Environ.
Public
2022, 19, 2022,
Health
Res. 1990
tective
factor
factor
tective
Public19,
2022, 1990
Health
19,
factor
against
against
factor
1990 19,
against
2022,irritability.
against
1990
irritability.
irritability. Moreover,
irritability.
Moreover, Moreover,
being
Moreover,
being beingsatisfied
satisfied
satisfied
being satisfied
withwith withpersonal
personal
personal
with personal
work work workperfor-
perfor-
perfor-
work
8 of 12
perfor-
8 of 12 12
8 of 8 of
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public mance mance
tective
Healthacted mance
acted
mance
factor
2022,
tective irritability. as
19,
factor against a acted
as
acteda
against
1990 as
predictor
as a a
predictor predictor
irritability.
irritability. of
predictor
of of
reporting
reporting
of reporting
lower
reporting
lower
Moreover,
Moreover, being levelslower
levels
lower
being of levels
of
levels of
irritability
satisfied
satisfied with of
with irritability
irritability and
irritability
and and
loneliness.
personal
personal and
workwork loneliness.
loneliness. More
loneliness.
More
perfor-
perfor- More
More
8 of 12
tective
. Res. Public Health factor
2022, 19, against
1990
tective
Int. J.factor
tective
Environ. against
factor
Res.
time Public Moreover,
irritability.
thanagainst
Health 2022,
Int.
before being
19,
J. 1990 satisfied
irritability.
Moreover,
Environ.
spent Moreover,
being
Res. with
Public personal
satisfied
being
Health
onthe the with work
2022, satisfied
19, 1990 perfor-
personal
internet with work8perfor-
personal of work
12
demonstrated perfor- tobeand
bea apredictor
predictor ofworseworse work per-
time time
mance than than
acted
time
before before
aas
than spent spent
a before
predictor
on spenton
the the
of on
internetinternet
reporting demonstrated
lower
demonstrated
internet levels
demonstrated toairritability
of
to irritability
be be atopredictor
predictor and
of of
worse worse
loneliness.
of
work work More
per- per-
work per-
mance acted asmance
mance a predictor
acted
acted
mance as a
as
acted
ception,
predictor
ofpredictor
reporting
as a predictor
higher of
of
lower
reporting
reporting
levels
irritability,of of
reporting
lowermore
lower
irritability
levels
levels
lower
problems of
of
and
levels loneliness.
irritability
in of
falling irritability
and
asleep More loneliness.
loneliness.
and and loneliness.
nocturnal More
More
More
awakenings and
ception,
time
ception,
time than than
higher higher
before
ception, irritability,
spent
irritability,
higher on the
irritability,
more more
internet
problems problems
more demonstrated
problems
in fallingin falling in
asleep asleep
to abe
falling and and
aasleep
predictor nocturnal
nocturnal and ofawakenings
nocturnalworseawakeningsworkawakenings
andper- and and
time than before
time than spent time onbefore
tective
before
tective
the
than factor
higher
spent
tective
internet
spentbefore on
factor
against
fear
on
factor the
against
tective
demonstrated
spent
the
of internet
on
internet
irritability.
against
infection.
factor
the
demonstrated
irritability.
irritability.
against
to
demonstrated
internet
People
Moreover,
be athat Moreover,
irritability.
predictor
demonstratedMoreover,
to being
declared be
to
a
be
of being
worsepredictor
satisfied
Moreover,
being
predictor
toto be be a
satisfied
worksatisfied
with
predictor
connectedof
of
being
per-
worse
worse
with
personal
to
satisfied
with
of
work
the
work
personal
worse personal
work
per-
internet
per-
with
work
work
perfor-
like
workperfor-
personal
per- before
perfor-
work perfo
the
higher
ception, higher
ception, fear
higher fear
higher
higher
of
mance offearinfection.
irritability,
infection.
irritability,
irritability,acted ofpredictor
as
moremore People
infection.
People a more that
problems
predictor
problems that
problems
People declareddeclared
of
in that
in into
declared
falling
reporting
falling be to
falling belower
connected
asleep
asleep connected
asleep
to be
and
and and
connected
levelsto to
the
nocturnal
nocturnal of the
nocturnal
internet internet
to theawakenings
awakenings
irritability
awakenings like like
internet
before
and before
like
and and
the
loneliness.
and the fear
before
higher the
More of
ception, higher
tective
ception, factor mance
irritability,
higher against
ception, acted
more mance as
problems a
acted
irritability.
irritability,
higher mance as
in
irritability,
more a
acted
falling
Moreover,
problems predictor
of
more reporting
as
asleep a
being
problems
in predictor
of
and
falling reporting
lower
nocturnal
satisfied
in
asleep of
falling levels
reporting
lower
with
and of
awakenings
asleep levels
irritability
personal
nocturnal andlower of andlevels
irritability
work
nocturnal and
awakenings loneliness.
of
perfor- irritability
and
awakenings
and loneliness.
More and
and loneliness.
More Mor
pandemic
higher
pandemic
higher fear fearpandemic
pandemic
ofshowedofshowed
infection.
to showed
toPublic
showed
have
Peoplehave
People
an to
tectivean
toHealth have
increased
have
that factor
increased
that an
declared an increased
declared against
increased
risk risk
tofactor
be to factor
be
risk risk
irritability.
(OR
connected factor
tective
(OR
connected
factor
4.33; 4.33;
to(OR
95%(OR
Moreover,
the factor
to 95% 4.33;
the
4.33;
CI
internet CI 95%
against
from
internet
from
95% being
1.32
CI
like CI1.32from
irritability.
like
from
to satisfied
to
before
14.24)
before 1.321.32
14.24)
the for
to to
with
the 14.24)
Moreover,
for
14.24) for for being
personal worksat
higher fear of infection. time Int.
thantime
J.time than
infection.
Environ.
before than before
Res.People
spent
time
before on spent
than that
spent
the on
before2022,
internet
on the
declared 19, internet
spent
the 1990 to be
demonstrated
internet
on demonstrated
theconnected
demonstrated
internet to be to to
the
demonstrated
a be
predictor
to be a
internet predictor
a like
predictor
of toworse
be a of
before worse
predictor
of
work the
worse per- work
pandemic
of
work per-
worse per- work pe
mance
higher acted
fear asPeople
higher
of
thinking
thinking
pandemic athat
infection.
fear
thinking
thinking
that
predictor
thatof the
the
showed
declared
People
pandemic
that of
infection.
that reporting
pandemic
to the
havethat
the to
People
mance
pandemic
would
an
be connected
declared
pandemic
would lower
that
acted
increasedbe to
be
would asbeato
levels
declared
would affecting
affecting
risk be
the
of
connected
be to
predictor
affecting
their
factor
internet
irritability
be
affecting
their connected
to
mance
of
everyday
(OR the
their
4.33;
like
their and
reporting
everyday
before
internet
to
acted
everyday
life.
95% loneliness.
everyday the
life.
CI as the
like
internet
lower
froma
life. before
life.
predictorMore
levels
1.32 like
to the ofbefore
of
14.24)irritability
reporting
for the and lower loneliness
levels o
pandemictime showed pandemictoception,
have showed
ception,
showed
anhigher
ception,
increasedto have
higher
to havean
irritability,
higher
ception,
risk increased
irritability,
an increased
irritability,
factor more
higher (OR risk
more
problems factor
risk
irritability,
more
4.33; problems
95% (OR
factor
problems
infactor
falling
CImore from 4.33;
in
(OR problems
in
asleep 95%
falling
4.33;
falling
1.32 to CI
asleep
95%
and in from
asleep
14.24) CI and
nocturnal
falling 1.32
from
and
for asleepto
nocturnal
1.32 14.24)
nocturnalto
awakenings
and for
awakenings
14.24)
nocturnal for
awakenings
and and
thinking
awakenings
and an
thanthinking
pandemic before
pandemic
showed spent to
Furthermore,
that
Furthermore, on
showed
have
the the
Furthermore,aninternet
to
we
pandemic
Furthermore,
we increased
have time we
considered
considered we demonstrated
an
would increased
risk
considered
than
considered
the be factor
before
the risk
affecting
possibility to
(OR
the
spent
possibility
the be 4.33;
their a
on
possibility
to predictor
possibility(OR
95%
the
totime 4.33;
CI
internet
find
everyday
find abeto to
thana of
from95%worse
find
before 1.32
CI
a
demonstrated
correlation
life.
correlation
find work
from
to
spent
a correlation
between 14.24)
correlation per-
1.32
on
between for
to
to
the 14.24)
between
be
between
the out- internet
thea for
predictor
out- the out-
demonstrated
the out- of worse wo to
thinking that thinking
the higher
pandemic thatfear the
that
higher
would pandemic
higher
of the fear
be pandemic
of
infection.
fear
affectingwould
infection.
higher
of would
infection.
People
feartheir be thataffecting
ofPeople be
infection.
People affecting
that
declared thattheir
declared
Peopleto everyday
their
declaredbe everyday
that toto
connected
declared life.
beconnected life.
connected
to to to
thebeinternet the
connected
to theinternet
like
internet to
before like
the like before
internet
the before the
like
thebefore th
ception,
thinking higher
comes that
comes ofirritability,
thinkingthe of pandemic
comes
Furthermore,
comes
the that
the
current
of the
of more
current
the pandemic
the
we wouldproblems
current be
ception,
investigation
considered
investigation
current would ineveryday
affecting
investigation
investigation
(Table falling
higher
the be
(Table affecting
their
possibility
6).
life.
asleep
6).
(Table everyday
(Table
irritability, and
their
to
6). nocturnal
6).more everyday
findlife.
ception, aproblems awakenings
life.
higher
correlation in
irritability,
falling
between and
asleep more
the andproblems
out- nocturnal in falling
awakenin asl
Environ. Res. PublicFurthermore,
Health 2022, 19, Furthermore,
we
1990pandemic pandemic
considered pandemic
showedwethe considered
Furthermore,
showed
pandemic
toshowed
have
possibility to
Int. we
an to
J. the
have
showed
increased
tohave
Environ. possibility
considered
findan anincreased
to
tective
a
Res. the
increased
have
risk to
factor
factor
correlation
Public an
Health find
possibility
risk
increased
risk
(OR
againsta
factor
between
2022, correlation
factor to
4.33;
19, find
(OR
risk
1990 (OR
95%
the a
4.33;
factor
irritability. 4.33;
CI
out-between
correlation
95%
from
(OR
95%
Moreover,CI1.32 the
between
from
4.33;
CI from
to
8 out-
95%
of 1.32
14.24)
1.32
being
12CI the
to from
for
to outcomes
14.24)
14.24)
1.32
satisfied forfor
to
with 14.24)
persfo
higher Furthermore,
fear of
comes infection.
Furthermore,
of thinking
the we People
considered
current that
we declared
considered
the
higher
investigation possibility
fear to the
(Tableofbe connected
possibility
to
infection.
6).be find a to
to
People the
correlation
find
higher internet
thatfear a correlationlike
between
declared
of infection.before
tolife. the
between
the out-
be connected
People that the out-
to declared
the internet to be like
conn
bef
comes of the
thinking ofthat
currentthe
thinking current
the investigation
that theinvestigation
pandemic (Table (Table
6).
would 6).be affecting their everyday
1990
comes of pandemic
the current
comes Table
investigation
ofshowed
comes
the6. current
Table 6.ofto
Table have
the
Correlation
Correlation
Table 6. 6. anpandemic
(Table
investigation
current that
thinking
Correlation
Correlation
matrix
6).
increased
matrix
the
investigation
between
pandemic
that
would
(Table
matrix
pandemic
between
matrix risk the be
factor
6).
between
considered
between
pandemic
mance
showed
would
(Table
considered
affecting
(OR acted
6). 4.33;
considered
consideredto
outcomes
would
have
outcomes
affecting
their
as95% a everyday
be
predictor
CI
12 from
outcomes
8 anpandemic
increased
regarding
regarding
outcomes
of
affecting
their everyday
life.
1.32of their
regarding
regarding
work showed
work risk
reporting
performance,
work work
factorto
everyday
toperformance,
14.24) life.performance,
have
(OR
lowerlife.
for
performance,
mood an4.33;
levelsmood
increased
mood and 95% and
mood
of irritability
CI risk
from
and and factor
1.32 to
and
(OR14
Furthermore,
sleep
Furthermore,
Furthermore,
alteration we in the
we
considered
Furthermore,weconsidered
study considered
the
time
population we than the
possibility
considered
the
(N
possibility
before
= 94) possibility
toof find
the
spent
home
toon find
possibility
aoffice
to
correlation
thefind a acorrelation
internet
workers to correlation
find
between
during athe
demonstrated between
correlation
the between
the out-
COVID-19
the
to out-
between
the
be aout-
pan-predictorthe ouo
thinking Table
that
sleep sleep
Table
6.
the
alterationpandemic
6.alteration
sleep
Correlation
Correlation in
alteration
in the
matrix
would
the
study
matrixstudy
in
between
be
population
the affecting
population
study
thinking
between population
(N
that
considered
considered = their
(N
94)
the= 94)
of
outcomes
everyday
(N of
home
pandemic=
outcomes home
94) office
of life.
office
homeworkers
thinking
would
regarding
regarding workers
office
work be during
that
work workers
affectingduring
the the
performance,
performance, the
during
pandemic COVID-19
COVID-19
their moodeveryday
mood COVID-19
would
andpan- and pan-
life.
be pan-
affecting their ev
Table 6. Correlation comes
matrix 6.of
betweenTable
comescomes
the ofCorrelation
6.
current the
of
considered current
comes
the ofmatrix
investigation
current
outcomes investigation
the between
investigation
current (Table
ception,
regarding considered
(Table
investigation
6). (Table
higher
work outcomes
6).irritability,
6). (Table regarding
6).more problemswork performance,
in falling moodand
asleep and nocturna
Table 6.sleep
Correlation
demic.
sleep
Table
Furthermore,
tective factor
demic.
alteration
demic.
Correlation
we
demic.
alteration in
matrix
againstconsidered
thein thebetween
study
matrix
irritability.
study considered
the between
possibility
population
population Moreover,
Furthermore,
(N
considered
=
outcomes
(N
94) = to
94)
of being
home find
ofweregarding
outcomes
home aperformance,
office office
considered regarding
work
correlation
satisfied workers with
tective
workers
mood
performance,
Furthermore,
the
during
work
between
personal
factor and
during
possibility performance,
the the
themood
work
againstwe
COVID-19 out- and
perfor-
COVID-19
to
considered
find mood
irritability.
pan- a pan- and
correlation
the Moreover,
possibility
between being
to fith
sleep alteration in alteration
the study sleep alteration
population 94) in the study population (N = 94) of home office workers during the COVID-19
sleep
comes sleep
of demic.
mance the alteration
in
current
acted the
as study in(N
investigation
a predictorthe= study
population of
of population
home
(Table (N =6).
reporting
office
94) of workers
higher
(N
home
lower = 94) fearofduring
office
levels ofworkers
home of
the
infection.
office COVID-19
irritabilityduring
mance People
workers thepan-
and
acted that
during
COVID-19 declared
loneliness.
as a the COVID-19
pan-
predictor to be
More of connected
pan-
reporting to the inter
lower leve
demic. comes of the current
12between 23 work investigation
3 34perfor-comes4 45have of(Table
the current
6).
56 7performance, investigation
67regarding 78 mood 9 8 89(OR (Table 6).
9 9and
ive factor demic.
against irritability.
demic. Moreover,
Table
demic. 6.Table
pandemic.
Table 6. 6.
being
Correlation Correlation
satisfied
Correlation
Table
matrix matrix
1with
1 6.between 2 1between
Correlation
matrix personal 3 2 considered
considered
matrix
pandemic 4showed
considered
between
outcomes outcomes
5regarding
considered
outcomes
to 6regarding
5an
regarding
outcomes
work 6work
increased work performance,
8risk
7performance,work andmood
performance,
mood andmood an
time than beforesleep spent
alteration on the internet
inirritability
the study demonstrated
population (N =4to 94) beof ahomepredictor
time than
office of worse
before
workers work
spent
during onfactor
per-
the the internet
COVID-19
4.33; 95%
demonstrated
pan-
CI from
nce acted as a predictor of reporting lower
sleep alteration sleep levels
alteration
in the of
sleep
study
1 1
alteration
in population
the 2 study 2 in and
3
thinkingloneliness.
population
the(N study
=3 94) 4 of
population
that(N
home =theMore
94)
5 5
office
of (N
pandemichome workers
=6 94) 6
office
of
would home
during
7 7
workers office
be the
8 8
during
COVID-19
workers
affecting 9 the 9
during
theirCOVID-19
pan- the
everyday COVID-19
pan- life. pa
1 1 spent Table
1 before
e1 than Work
on the
6.changes
Work Correlation
ception, higher
Work
changes
Work
demic.
internet
matrix
1changes
changes 2between
irritability,
demic. 1 demic.
demic. considered
1to3more− Table problems
2a 1−predictor 3−outcomes
−2 5 in
42 6. Correlation
of3/ worse 3/regarding
4falling 6 asleep
matrix 7work
45/ 4/between/and
Table 5/performance,
6ception, nocturnal
8 Correlation
considered
6. 8/mood
6// 69 /awakenings
/ 7/ higher outcomes7// 7/and
irritability,
matrix 8// and
9/between
regarding more problems
9// work
/ 8/ considered in falling
9/ outcomes
/performance, mre
sleep alteration
higher indemonstrated
fear the
of study population
infection. People
be (N
that
sleep = alteration
94)
declaredof home intoFurthermore,
office
the be
work
studyworkers
connected
per- we
during
population
sleep to
higher considered
the
alterationthe
(Ninternet
fear
= COVID-19
94)of
in of
the the
like
infection.
home studypossibility
pan-
before
office People
populationthe
workers tothat find
(N a correlation
declared
during
= 94) of
the to
home be
COVID co
offi
1 higher irritability,
Work Work changes
changes −and nocturnal / / / / / / / / / /
ion, 1 Work
1Work changes demic.more
changes Work
Work
problems
changes
changes − in falling asleep
− − −/ demic. 1
− / 12 /
1
/ / awakenings
comes 23/of /
2 the
1 / 3
4
/ and
current
/
3 2
demic./ /
45investigation
/ /
4 3 / 56 / /
5/ 4 / (Table
67 / 6 /
5 /6).
78 / 7 6 / 89/ 8 7 / 9 9 8 9
pandemic showed to have an increased risk factor (OR 4.33; 95% pandemic CI from showed1.32 toto14.24) have for an increased risk factor (O
her
2 2
fear of2infection.
2 People that Irritability
declared
Irritability
Irritability Irritability to be connected −0.29 −0.29
to the −−0.29
internet
−0.29 − 4 − −their
like before the / /that / the/ // pandemic / / // /
2 thinking that the pandemic
Irritability 1 − 0.29 would
2 − be
3 affecting 5 everyday
/ 1/ for6 life.
thinking 7 / 8 /
9 // 2/ 6 be affecting
5/ /would 4 their
demic
21
showed 1 1 to have1an increased
Work Work
changes
Irritability Work changes
risk factor
changes Work (OR 4.33;
changes −0.29
95%
− CI−
−from
− 1.32
Table 6. to− 14.24)
/ Correlation matrix / 2 /between /
// 3/ considered
/
// 4/ / 1//outcomes
/ / 3/ 7/ / work
/ /regarding 8perf
/
Irritability Irritability Furthermore,
−0.29 −we considered
−0.29 − the possibility / to find / a correlation/
/ Furthermore, / between / we the out-
considered the possibility to
king2 that the 3pandemic would
Irritability be
Irritability
Loneliness affecting their
−0.29 everyday
−Work
0.13 changes −
−0.29 life. − sleep− alteration in the / study population
/ / / /(N = 94) /of home office workers during
Work changes comes 1 of the current −investigation 1 0.29 /
(Table 6).
demic.
/ Work−changes / comes / of the / /current// investigation − / / / (Table // / 6). /
3Furthermore,
3 3 32 we considered Loneliness
Loneliness the possibility to find
Loneliness
Loneliness
Irritability −0.13 a−0.13
correlation
0.29 −0.13
−0.13 0.29
−0.29
between
−0.29 0.29
−− −−0.29−
the
− out- / // / / /// / / /// / /
2
mes3of the current 2 2
4 investigation
Falling Irritability
asleep(Table Irritability
problems6). Irritability
− 0.27 −0.29 0.33 −
−0.290.43 − − / / / / / // / / /
Loneliness Table 6. Correlation −0.13
matrix−0.13 0.29
between −considered − outcomes regarding / work / /
3 LonelinessIrritability
Loneliness
LonelinessLoneliness −0.13 0.29
−0.29 − −0.29
−0.13Irritability −0.13
0.29
−0.29 − / / Table / /6.1/performance, // / 2/ / /matrix
Correlation mood3 between
/ /
/and4
/ /
considered
5 6outcome7
5 sleep 2 alteration
Nocturnal awakenings in the study −0.20 population 2 0.37 (N = 94)0.39 of home 0.82 Irritability
−0.29
office workerssleep
− − during
alteration the inCOVID-19
the −0.29
study pan-
population
/ − (N = /94) of home/
le
4 6. 4Correlation
4 43 matrix Falling between
Fallingasleep asleep
Falling
demic. considered
Falling
problems asleep
problems
asleep outcomes
problems regarding
problems
1 −0.27 −0.27 work
0.33−0.27
Work −0.27performance,
0.33 0.43
changes 0.330.33
0.43 − mood
0.430.43
− and − −
demic. − / / / / / / / /
3
p alteration 36 study population
in the Nightmares
3 Loneliness (NLoneliness
Loneliness
= 94) of home −office
Loneliness 0.06 workers −0.13 0.09 during −0.13
0.29
−0.13 0.24 the 0.29
−COVID-19
0.29−0.13 0.36− −0.29 pan- 0.35 − − / / // / // / / // / / /
4 Falling
Falling asleep asleep
problemsproblems −0.04 −0.27 −0.27 0.33 0.33 0.43 0.43 − − / /
Falling
ic. 4 asleep 7
problems
Falling asleep
Falling
Fear of infection
problems
asleep −0.27 0.33 −0.270.43 10.29 0.14
2− −0.43 0.04
0.333 −0.434
0.36 5 0.236/ 7 / / 8−
0.16
/ 9 1 0.29 2
/ / 3 4
Loneliness
Willingness 3 toproblems go out and
−0.13 0.33
Loneliness −0.27
3 −−0.13
Loneliness 0.29/ − / −0.13 − / /
5 5 5
5 8 Nocturnal Nocturnal Nocturnal
Nocturnal awakenings
awakenings awakenings
awakenings
2 −0.10 −0.20−0.20 0.17 0.37−0.20−0.20
0.37−0.39
Irritability 0.01
0.370.37
0.39 0.82 0.07
0.390.39
0.82 −0.82 0.82
0.05− −0.29 −
− −0.15 − 0.03/ / −/ / / / /
returnFallingto2previous life
54
4 4 Work 41 changes
Falling
Nocturnal asleepFalling
awakenings
asleep
problems 3 Falling
asleep problems 4asleep−problems
problems 5 −0.2716 −0.27
−0.20 0.37 0.33
−0.27 / 7 0.39 0.33
0.430.33 8 0.43
−0.27 0.82 0.43 9 changes
/0.33
−Work −
− −/0.43 / − / / / /− / / //
Nocturnal awakeningsNocturnal awakenings
Pandemic influence
−0.20 on0.37−0.20 −0.20
0.39 0.37 0.37
0.82 0.39 0.82 − /
5 Falling
9
Nocturnal
asleepNocturnal
awakenings
problems awakenings −0.27
−0.11
0.33 −0.20 0.24 0.39
0.43 0.37−0.13 −0.82 0.39 0.24 −0.82 0.27− / 0.05 /
/ − − −0.27
0.17 / −0.06 −
ges
6 6 6 6 − everyday
4
Nightmares
Nightmares Nightmares life
Nightmares / Falling /
asleep 4
−0.06−0.060.09 problems/−0.06−0.06
0.09 0.24 / 0.090.09Falling
0.24 0.36 / 0.240.24
asleep
−0.27
0.36 0.35 / 0.36 0.36
problems
0.33
0.35 −0.35− / − / 0.35 0.43 / / / 0.33 / /
/0.43 − /
5 Nocturnal 3
awakenings Loneliness
−0.20 0.37 0.39 0.82 −0.13 − 0.29 − / /
65 5 Irritability
Nocturnal
5 Nightmares
Nightmares Nocturnal
awakenings Nocturnal
awakenings −0.29
awakenings
−0.06 −0.06−0.20 −2 0.09
0.09 0.37
−0.20
0.24 0.240.390.37
0.36−0.20 0.36 0.82 Irritability
0.39
0.37
0.35 0.35 −0.82 /0.39− −//0.82/ / − / −0.29
− / / / −< 0.05, / :
Black color indicates a negative correlation; white color indicates positive correlation. : p-value
7 67 Nightmares77 FearFear
Nightmares ofFear
ofNightmares
infection Fear of
of−0.06
infection infection
infection 0.09−0.060.24 0.09
−0.04 −0.04
−0.06 0.36 0.14 0.24
−0.04−0.04
0.14
0.090.35 0.04 0.36
0.140.14
0.04−0.36
0.24 0.35
0.040.04
0.36/0.23 0.36−0.36
0.23 0.16
0.35 0.23/0.23
0.16− / −0.16 0.16 −/ / −/ −/ / / // / /
ty Nocturnal awakenings
−0.29 −out −0.20 0.37awakenings 0.39
/−0.10 0.82/ 0.04 /−−0.01 / −0.15
8 8 Willingness
8 7 8 Willingness
Willingness Willingness
goto
toFear go
out
Fear out
and
to
ofto
5go go
and
return
infection
of infectionNightmares
out
return
andtoand to
previousreturn
return previousto to
Nocturnal
life previous
previouslife
−0.10
−0.04 5 life
−0.10
life 0.17 0.14−0.10
0.17 −0.01 0.17
−0.01
0.17 Nocturnal
0.07 0.36−0.01
−0.20
0.07 0.05 0.07
0.230.07
awakenings
0.05 0.37 −0.15 0.05
−0.15
0.05
0.16 0.39 0.03
−0.15
− 0.03 0.82−0.03 /0.03
−0.20− − / −/0.37 −/ /
/0.39 0.82/
Fear of infection
69 6 Fear of infection −0.04 p-value 0.14 < 0.01,−0.04 0.04 0.14 −0.06
p-value
:Falling
0.36 0.04 0.09
< 0.001.
0.23 0.36 0.24
0.16 0.23
−0.09 0.36 0.16 /0.24 −/ −−/ −/0.35 // // − −−0.06
967 Willingness
9 8 Willingness Pandemic
9 Pandemic to PandemicFear
Pandemic
6 out
influence
go andofon
Nightmares
influence infection
influence
on
influence Nightmares
everyday
return everyday
to on4previous
on life
everyday −0.04
everyday
Nightmares
life life life 0.14
life
−0.11
−0.10−0.04
−0.06
−0.11 0.24 0.04
−0.11
0.17asleep
0.14
−0.11
0.09
−0.06
0.24 0.13 problems
0.36
0.24
−0.010.04
0.24
0.130.09−0.06
0.24 0.23
0.13
0.07 0.13
0.36
0.240.24
0.27 0.16
0.24
0.050.23
0.24
0.35
0.27 0.36 0.05 −0.35
−0.27
0.27
−0.15 0.16
0.27
0.05−0.35 0.36
0.170.33
0.05
0.03/0.05
0.17 −0.06 0.43
0.17
−/0.17
−0.06 −−0.06
/ − / / − −/ / /
to go out Loneliness
and return to−0.10
previous life −0.13 −0.10 0.29
0.173 −0.01 − 0.07 Loneliness
0.05 −0.15 0.03/ −/ /
−0.13 0.29 −
to go8out and
Willingness toreturn
go outtoand
Willingness toprevious
goreturn
out life
and
to previous
return Black tolife 0.17
previous
color −0.10 −0.01
life
indicates 0.17−0.10 0.07
a −0.01
negative 0.170.05 0.07 −0.15
−0.01
correlation; 0.050.070.03
white −0.15
color0.05 −indicates
0.03
−0.15 / positive
−0.03correlation. / p-value
− : p-value
correlation. / p-value
: p-value <
9 Pandemic
Pandemic Nightmares influence
influence Black
on Black
on color
everyday color
Black
everydayindicates
lifeindicates
color
life a indicates
−0.06 −0.11 a
negative negative
−0.11a
0.09 6 0.24 correlation;
correlation;
negative 0.24
0.24−0.04 correlation;
0.13 white 0.13
0.36 0.14 whitecolor
0.24 color
white
0.24
0.35Nightmares indicates
indicates
0.27color0.27
− 0.36 positive
indicates
0.05 positive
0.05
/ 0.23 0.17 correlation.
correlation.
positive 0.17 :
−0.06
/ −0.35 − < : < <
mic 79 Pandemic
ss influence 7 on
7 Pandemic
everyday
influence 7 Fear
−0.13 on
6of
lifeeveryday
influence 0.29 Fear
infection
Fear
on
of of
−0.11
life −infection
everyday infection
Fear
0.24
An life of
−0.11
Nightmares
infection
0.13 0.24
improvement −0.04
−0.11 0.24 0.13 in0.14 −0.04
0.240.27
work / white
0.240.04
0.130.14
0.05
perception−0.04
/ 0.27 −0.06
0.04
0.36
0.240.04
0.14
0.17
was / 0.05 0.23
0.27
0.09
0.36
−0.06
related 0.04 0.17 0.16
to
0.05
0.24
0.23
a−0.36lower
−0.06
0.16
0.17 −−0.06
0.36
0.16 0.23−0.06
irritability
−−0.06/ −−0.16 (r0.09
=−// − −/ 0.29)
− 0.24 // / 0.36 /
/ and
8 8 colorWillingness Black Black
toand color
go outcolor
indicates
and indicates
return a negativea negative correlation;
correlation; white color color
indicatesindicates positive positive correlation.
correlation. : p-value: p-value < <
8 Willingness 0.05,5to : to<p-valueprevious :<p-value
0.01, life
Nocturnal <−0.10 : asleep
<p-value
awakenings 0.17 <−0.10
0.001. −0.01
− 0.170.07 :−−0.20 0.05 −0.15
0.37 0.39 0.03 0.82−/ −0.03 < −0.04
/with
BlackFear ofWillingness
Falling
to 8go out
indicates
Black
infection
asleep
Willingness
0.05,
color ato
7 Black
problems
go return
negative
0.05, :out
indicatesp-value
0.05,
color and
to go
previous
return
correlation;
:lower
p-value :out
<−0.04
aindicates0.01,
p-value
negative and
problems to
Fear
life
previous
return
awhite
0.01, < 0.01,−0.10
correlation;
negative
0.14
−0.27
color
in
of infection
:to
7 0.33
life
previous
p-value
40.04−0.11
0.17
indicates
falling −0.10
: 0.001.
correlation;
white p-value
0.43 0.36 life
0.001.
color −0.010.17
positive
(r
<indicates
white 0.001.
0.23
−−0.11 Fear
Falling
0.07
−0.01
correlation.
=color 0.27).
positive
indicates
0.16
−0.04
of
0.05
infection
asleep
0.07
0.14
−0.01
Irritability −0.15
p-value
correlation.
positive
problems
0.05 0.07/< 0.03
was
0.04correlation. :−0.15 0.05
positively
p-value
0.36 / −0.04
/0.27
−0.03
<:−0.15
0.23
−0.27
associated
p-value 0.14 0.16
0.33
/ −
−
0.43 0.36/ −
/
9 9 9 Pandemic Pandemic
9 Pandemic
influence influence
Pandemic
on
influence
everyday on on
loneliness everyday
influence
life
everyday life
on
(r =0.17 life
everyday
−0.11
0.29), mood 0.24
life
−0.11 alterations 0.24
0.130.24 0.13
0.24
were 0.13
0.24 0.24
0.27
related0.030.24 0.13 0.27
0.05 0.27
both to −problems0.24 0.05
0.17 0.05 0.17
−0.06 0.17 0.05 −0.06
in falling asleep and−−0.06 0.17 − −
−0.06 −
illingness to go out and return 0.05,
0.05,8to previous : p-value
:Willingness
p-value life< 0.01, < 0.01,
−0.10 : p-value−0.01 < 0.001.0.07 to0.05 −0.15 / −0.10
0.05, : p-value
0.05, < 0.01, :<Black
p-value to<improvement
color
An <go
0.001. out: p-value
indicates and8<areturn <Willingness
negative
in
0.001.
to previous
work <correlation;
perception life
go out −0.10
white and
was return
color 0.17
related totoprevious
indicates −0.01 positive
airritability
lower 0.07
life correlation.
irritability 0.05 (r0.17 −0.15 −0.01
: <p-value 0.03< <:0.07 −
roblems
Pandemic influence−0.27 on everyday
: p-value
0.330.05,
Black
Anlife An color :to
improvement
0.43 0.01,
6
p-value
Black
indicates
improvement
An color
improvement
nocturnal−
−0.11
0.01,
: Black
p-value
aindicates
in negative
in
work color
work
awakenings;
0.24
:perception
0.001.
p-value
a0.13
inindicates
correlation;
negative
perception
work
Nightmares
0.001.
acorrelation;
negative
white
perception
additionally,
0.24 was was
related
/
0.27 color
correlation;
waswhite
relatedindicates
to
loneliness
0.05 color
to
related
a lowera white
positive
lower
was
0.17 indicates
to color
irritability
a
−0.060.13 lower
associated
−0.06correlation.
positive
indicates
irritability
(r
0.09 0.24 0.24 =
to
− (rcorrelation.
positive
: p-value
= −0.29)
−0.29)
nightmares (rand = =−0.29)−0.29)
correlation.
and (r =and and
: p-value
0.24). p-value
9 Pandemic influence9 on everyday Pandemic life influence
−0.11 on0.24 everyday life −0.11 0.270.36 0.24 0.050.35 0.130.17 −0.24 −0.06 /
lower lower
problems
All inproblems
the in falling in falling
asleep (rasleep
=indicates
−0.27). (r = Irritability
−0.27). Irritability
was was
positively positively
associated =associated
with lone- with lone-
Black color
Nocturnal
An improvement
lower
awakeningsAn0.05,in
Anlower
problems
work
improvement
improvement
indicates 0.05, problems
:aimprovement
negative
perception
p-value
0.05, :three
falling
:in
aspects
in
workin
correlation;
<p-value −0.20
0.01,
p-value
0.05, was
work
asleepfalling
<Black
0.01,0.37 of
(r
<perception
5white
:related
0.01,
:p-value
sleep
perception
=asleep
color
p-value
−0.27).
:color
0.39
to
quality
:awas
<<p-value
0.01,
=was
(rIrritability
−0.27).
related
indicates
lower
0.001.
p-value 0.82 (problems
<a0.001.relatedpositive
Nocturnal
<negative
irritability
: 0.001.
p-value
to
Irritability
towas
− aBlack <to
in falling
acorrelation.
lower
positively
lowerawakenings
correlation;
(r color
0.001.
was
irritability
=lower
−0.29)
asleep,
irritability
positively
associated
indicates
white and (ranocturnal
: color
p-value / (r <−0.29)
associated
=negative with
−0.29)
indicates −0.20 awakenings
lone-
and and
correlation;with
positive 0.37lone- white
and
0.39color 0.82
correlation. indic
: p-
An improvement
lower
liness liness(r An (rliness
problems
= liness nightmares)
0.29),7= 0.29),
(r in
(r
in
mood
= work
= mood0.29),
falling
0.29), perception
werein
mood work
mood
asleep
alterations positively
alterations (rperception
alterations
Fear were =was
alterations
of were
−0.27). related
associated
related
infection was
were
related
Irritability
were bothto related
a lower
related
with
both
relatedto each
to
was
problems
both irritability
bothaother.
problems
positively
to toproblems
−0.04 in irritability
problems
The (r
in
falling =
fear −0.29)
falling
associated
0.14 of
in in
asleep (r and
=
falling
infection
asleep
falling
0.04 with −0.29)
and asleep
was
and
lone-
asleep
0.36to and toand and
positively
0.23 to to 0.16 −
lower problems in falling asleep (r = −0.27). Irritability was positively associated with lone-
kenings lower problems lowerin
−0.20
0.05, falling
:problems
0.37lower
p-value
nocturnal
liness
nocturnal <asleep
(r problems
in
0.39
=nocturnal
0.01, related
nocturnal80.29),
awakenings;
(r0.82
falling = −0.27).
awakenings;moodin
:toasleep
awakenings;
Willingness −Irritability
falling
awakenings;
p-value
problems (r <to=asleep
alterations
additionally,
0.05, −0.27).
0.001.
additionally,
go in out :(r was
Irritability
were
additionally, = −0.27).
additionally,
falling
loneliness
and
p-value
positively
asleep
loneliness
related
return< Irritability
/was
loneliness
loneliness
0.01,was
to (r
both
associated
=
waspositively
0.36)
previous :to
associatedwas
0.05,was
was
associatedand
problems
p-valuelife
with
positively
associated
associated
nocturnal
associated
to
<: −0.10 to
p-value
0.001.
lone-associated
in
nightmares nightmares
falling
to
0.17
< with
tonightmares
0.01, (r lone-
nightmares
awakenings asleep
=
−0.01 (r =
0.24).
: with
0.24).
and
p-value (r(r
All
0.07 lone-
(r
= =
to=
All 0.24).
0.23).
0.24).
< 0.05
0.001. AllAll
The −0.15 0.0
liness (r alterations
= An0.29), mood
An
improvement An alterations
improvement
improvementin
An work were
inperception
improvement inwork related
work both
perception
perception
in was work to
relatedproblems
was
perception
was related
toasleep
related
ain intoand falling
airritability
lower asleepirritability and to(r =and −0.29) and
liness (r = Nightmares
0.29),
linessmood (rnocturnal
=liness
0.29), (rthe
mood9=three
0.29),
three
willingness
were
alterations
mood
aspects related
−0.06
to go
Pandemicalterations
were
ofout
both
0.09 6influence
sleepand
to
related 0.24 problems
were
quality
return on both 0.36
related
to to
(problems
previous
everyday
inproblems
falling
0.35
bothNightmares
life into
life −lower
problems
falling
was
was
falling to
asleep,
negatively
−0.11
related
/a in lower
to
asleep
falling
0.24 nocturnal
toand
irritability
associated
a(r lower
=to−0.06
asleep
0.13
−0.29) irritability
/awakenings
and
with
0.24
(r =0.09
to−0.29)
nightmares
0.27
(r
and
and
0.24= −0.29)
0.05 0.360.1
an
the
nocturnal the
three threethe
aspects
awakenings; aspects
awakenings;
lower ofaspects
problems of
sleep sleep
quality
of quality
sleep
additionally,
additionally,in falling (problems(problems
quality
loneliness
asleeploneliness (problems
(r in
was
= in
falling
was
−0.27). falling
inasleep,
associated
associated
Irritabilityasleep,
falling to nocturnal
to nocturnal
asleep,
nightmares
was nightmares nocturnal
positivelyawakenings
(r awakenings
= (r
0.24).= awakenings
0.24).
associated Alland All and
with and
lone-
nocturnal awakenings; Annightmares) lower
improvement problems
additionally, lower problems
in lower
falling
loneliness problems
in
asleep
was falling (r =
associatedin
asleep
−0.27).
falling (r
to Irritability
=asleep
−0.27).
nightmares (r Irritability
= was
−0.27).
(r positively
= Irritability
0.24). was Allpositively
associated was positively
associated
with lone- associated
with lone- with lon
nocturnal the nocturnal
awakenings;
nightmares)
three (rwere
aspects
nightmares) =in
nightmares) work
awakenings;
−wereadditionally,
0.15).
of
positively perception
were additionally,
Subjects
positively
sleep
were quality
positivelyloneliness
positively
An
who
associated was
−associatedthoughtrelated
improvement
Black
(problems loneliness
associatedwas
associated
/with that
color
with to
associated
each afalling
thelower
was
in
in indicateswith
each
with work
pandemic
other. irritability
associated
to
each
other. aThe
asleep,
each nightmares
perception
An
negative other.
The
other. had
fear to
improvement
nocturnal (rnightmares
affected=infection
The
was
correlation;
fear
The
of of−0.29)
(r
fear=fear 0.24).
related and
of
inin
everyday
infection
awakenings
of white (r
All
workto=was
infection
was 0.24).
infectionaposi-
color lower
perception
life All
werewas
indicates
posi-
and was posi-
irritability
was
related totorelated
positive (r =corre
−0.t
res
the threeFear
−0.06
aspects
lower
the
theof
of infection 0.09
three
problems
three liness
sleep
the
aspects in
three
0.24
aspects
(rliness
quality =liness
falling
of
of
aspects
0.36
0.29),
sleep
(r sleep
(r=mood
(problems
asleep
0.29),
quality
of
0.35
quality
−0.04
=liness
0.29),
(r
sleep=
mood
in 0.14
alterations
(r mood
−0.27).
(problems 7(problems
=falling
quality
alterations
0.29), 0.04
alterations
were
mood
asleep,
Irritability
(problems
in
in
falling
falling
were
0.36
related
alterations
were
nocturnal
was in 0.23
Fear
both / of
asleep,
related
related
positively
asleep,
falling were
to both nocturnal
0.16
infection
problems
awakenings
nocturnal both
asleep,
to
related
associated
problems
to
nocturnal in
and awakenings
−problems
both
awakenings falling
with
falling
to/awakenings
problems
in
lone- asleep
and /and
−0.04
falling asleep
and in
asleep
and to posi-
0.14
fallingand and 0.04
asleep 0.36 t
and
tively tively
relatedto to higher related
to problems to
irritability problems
lower in (rproblems
falling=in in
0.24), falling
asleep in
more asleep
=falling
(r problems (r
asleep =
=lower 0.36)(r
in and
problems
=associated
−0.27).
falling nocturnalIrritability
in
asleep falling awakenings
(rlife=(rasleep
was
0.24) positively
(r
and (r
==0.17 =
−0.27). 0.23).
nocturnalassociated
Irritability wit w
Willingness to go out were
nightmares) and nightmares)
tively
nightmares)
return
positively
relatedtively
to previous
nocturnal were
nocturnal were
related
nocturnalproblems
positively
associated life
awakenings;
positively
to problems
awakenings;
−0.10
nocturnalin associated
awakenings;
with
associated
falling
0.17
additionally,
each 8awakenings;asleep
additionally,
other.
falling
−0.01with
Willingness
additionally,
0.05,
with
(r
loneliness
Themood
asleep
each
0.07 to=loneliness
each
0.36)
additionally,
fear
: to
p-value
0.36)
other.
loneliness
go
was
of
(rother.
and
0.05
out and
0.36)
and
associated
infection
<other.
0.01,
The
nocturnal
The was nocturnal
−0.15 and
fear
return
loneliness
was was
fear
of 0.03
to
associated
: to
of
nocturnal
awakenings
infectionawakenings
infection
previous
nightmares
posi-
p-value was to −awakenings
associated
<was to
0.001. was
nightmares
nightmares
was /(r
(r =posi-0.23).
=−0.10
0.24).
=posi-
0.23).
(r
to nightmares(r
(r
All == 0.23).
0.24).
0.24). All
−0.01
(r
All= 0.24).0.07A
ction liness
−0.04 (rThe
nightmares) =tively
0.29),
0.14nightmares)
The weremood
0.04The
willingness
related
willingness The alterations
positively
towere
willingness
awakenings 0.36
willingness
to go to
problems positively
go
out 0.23
(rout
to
and=were
associated
to
goin go
0.27).
liness
and related
associated
out
0.16
falling
return
out (r with
return
and and
=to 0.29),
asleep −both
each
to
returnreturn
previous to
with
other.
previous
(r
to = problems
each
0.36)
life The
previous
/previous life
was and/was
alterations fear
liness inlife falling
The
of
(r
nocturnal
negatively
life was was
were
negatively = infection
fear
0.29),asleep
negatively
related
negatively ofmood
associated
awakenings
associated and
infection
both to
posi-
associated
alterations
associated
with to with
(r was
problems
=
night- posi-
night-
0.23).
with with
were night-
in
night-related
falling both
asleep to
Pandemic
eturn to previoustively life influence
related
nocturnal
tively
−0.10 totively
problems related
on everyday
the three
awakenings;
related
0.17tively to in the
related
−0.01
tolife
the
problems
mares
problems
three
aspects
falling three
to
0.07
(r
aspects
of
=asleep
additionally, the
problems
in
inthree
−0.11
aspects
sleep(rfalling
falling
−0.15).0.05
of sleep
0.24 9 sleep
quality
of aspects
=loneliness
0.36)
in
Subjects
nocturnalasleep
−0.15
asleep
falling
quality
and 0.13
(problems
(r
who
quality
of
was
0.03
(rPandemic
= (problems
sleep
nocturnal
asleep
=thought
awakenings; 0.36)
0.36)
0.24 (problems
−quality
associated
thought (r
and in and0.27nocturnal
influence
falling
awakenings
=life
0.36)
that to
nocturnal
the
inin
additionally,
falling
/ (problems
0.05
on (r
asleep,
falling
nightmares
and nocturnal
pandemic
nocturnal awakenings
awakenings
asleep,
everyday 0.17
=nocturnal
in
asleep,
0.23).
loneliness
awakenings;
falling
(r
had
nocturnal
life −0.06
=affected
0.24).
awakenings (r
affected
was
(r = 0.23).
nocturnal
awakenings
asleep,
All
= additionally,
0.23).
−awakenings
−0.11nocturnal
(rlife
everyday
associated
awakenings
= 0.23). and
to life
and
0.24 awakenings
were
loneliness
nightmares
0.13
and 0.24
was
an
(r =ass 0.
The
Black The
mares mares (r
willingness
color = (r
willingness
mares
−0.15). = −0.15).
nightmares)
indicates to (rgo
a to
Subjects
= go
out
negativeSubjects
−0.15). out
and
werewho and
Subjects
returnwho return
thought
positively
correlation; thought
who
to to
previous
white that that
previous
the
associated
color the
pandemic
life that pandemic
was
with
indicates was
the negatively
eachnegatively
pandemic
had
positive
Black had
affected
other. affected
had
associated
correlation.
color associated
The everyday
indicates feareveryday
with
a:of with
everyday
life
p-value night-
infection
negative night-
were< were life
was
correlation; were
posi-white color in
n everydayThe life willingnessthe The
−0.11three to go nightmares)
aspects
willingness
0.24Theoutwillingness
andof
to
0.13 4.nightmares)
return
go were
Discussion
sleep out
0.24 to
quality
to
and nightmares)
positively
go were
previous
out
0.27 (problems
return and positively
life
to0.05associated
were
was
return
previous in positively
associated
negatively
0.17falling
to Anwith
previous
life asleep,
was
−0.06 each
improvement associated
withother.
associated
nocturnal
negatively
life − was each inThe
with
with
negatively other.
work
associated fear
each
night-
awakenings The
of
perceptionother.
infection
associated
with fear and
night- The
ofwas infection
withwas fear
relatedposi-
night- of infection
was posi-was
to a lower pos
irritabi
related
mares maresrelated
(r =to(r related
to
related
higher
=
−0.15). higher
−0.15). to to
irritability
Subjects higher
Subjectshigher
irritability
who irritability
the
irritability
(rthought
who three
(r
= 0.24), =
thought 0.24),
(r
that (r
aspects
more =
=falling 0.24),
more
0.24),
that
the of
problems
the sleep
more
pandemic more
problems
pandemic problems
quality
the
problems
inhad in three
falling had (problems
falling
affected in in
aspects
asleep falling
asleep
falling
affected inof
(reveryday
everyday asleep
= 0.24)asleep
falling
(rsleep
= 0.24)
life(r
and(r
quality =
asleep,
and
= 0.24)
life
were 0.24)
noc-
were and and
(problems
noc- nocturnal noc-
noc- in
awakenin
falling
tively related to problems in asleep (r = 0.36) and nocturnal awakenings (r = 0.23).
k color indicatesmaresa(r =nightmares)
−0.15).
negative mares 0.05,
turnal
related (r =tively
Subjects
correlation; were
mares
−0.15).
: p-value
toawakenings
higher
related
who
white
(rturnal=tively
<thought
positively
Subjects
= (r
color
−0.15).
= (r
irritability 0.27).(r
torelated
problems
who
awakenings
0.01,
In the
= 0.24),
tively
that
indicates
associated
Subjects tothe
:thought
p-value
current
more
related
problems
in falling
(rpandemic
positive
who
nightmares)
problems =with
<that
study,
to
thought
0.27).
0.001.
problems
the
we
in falling
in
lowerasleep
correlation.
each were
falling
had
pandemic
that
investigated
asleep
(rthe
problems
affected
other. in
asleep
=: p-value
positively
0.36)
falling
The
pandemic
had in (r
and
fear asleep
= of
falling
everyday <0.05,
affected
workers’
nightmares)
0.36)
associated
nocturnal (r
infection
had and
asleep
life =were
everyday
feelings
0.36)
nocturnal
withwas
affected
: p-value
were
awakenings
(r and
= <everyday
−0.27).
about
each life posi-
0.01,
positively
nocturnal
wereawakenings
working
other.
(rlife
Irritability = 0.23).
:The were
p-value
associated
awakenings
from
(r = positively
was
fear< of
0.23).(r = 0.23
home,
0.001.
withinfection
each oth
ass
wa
turnal
related toawakenings
turnal
higher
The awakenings
(r
irritability
=willingness
0.27).to (r
=to
go = 0.27).
0.24),
out more
and problems
return =to in(rmood
previous falling life asleep
was = (r
(rlife
negatively = 0.24)
0.24) and and
noc-both
associated noc-withto night-
related totively
higher
related toThe towillingness
irritability
related related
higher
turnal
(r
problems
to The willingness
0.24),
irritability
awakenings higher
related
toirritability
in
to (r
The
go
more
falling=out
willingness
(r= 0.27).
both
and
problems
asleep
0.24),
quality
tively
go return
=out
(rmore
and(r =to
inand
0.24),
related
to
gomore
liness
0.36)
problemsreturn
previous
fallingout
performance,
to
(r
and and
problems
to return
previous
0.29),
asleep life
nocturnal
problems
in falling
along
in
was
tively
to
in negatively
=fallingprevious
life
0.24)
awakenings
asleep
falling
with
was
alterations
and
sleep
related
negatively
=noc-
(r asleep
asleep
associated
0.24)(r
quality,
to (r
was
were
=and
(r
problems
= = negatively
0.23).
mood
0.36)
associated
0.24)with
related
noc-
and
in and night-
alterations
falling
associated
noc-
nocturnal
with
and
asleep
night-
problems
the
within
awakenings
nigh
fal
(r = 0.36) (ran
: p-value < 0.01,
turnal awakenings: turnal
p-value (r awakenings
<
mares 0.001. mares
(r
= improvement
0.27). =mares
−0.15).(r =
(r 0.27).
−0.15).
Subjects
=mares
−0.15). Subjects
(rwho
Subjects
= −0.15). who
thought who thought
Subjects
nocturnal that
thought the
who that the
pandemic
that
thought
awakenings; the pandemic
pandemic
that
had the had
affected
additionally, affected
pandemic
had everyday
affected had
loneliness everyday
everyday
life
affected
was were life were
everyday
life
associated were tolife wer
nightm
The willingness
turnal An
4.awakenings
turnal to
4. Discussion
Discussion go
4. out
4.awakenings
(r
Discussion
general
Discussion and
= 0.27).inreturn
impact work
(r of
Thetothe
= 0.27). previous
perceptionpandemic
willingness lifeto
was was
related
on go negatively
everyday
out toandaThe
lower associated
life.
return irritability
An
willingness
to previouswith
improvement
to (r
go =night-
−0.29)
life
out and
in work
was
and negatively
return perception
to previous waslife
associated relate
with
wa
related related
torelated
higher totohigher
irritability
related
higher irritability
toirritability
(r
higher
= 0.24), (r
the =more
0.24),
irritability
(r = 0.24),
three more
problems
(r
more
aspects problems
= 0.24),
ofproblems
in more
falling
sleep inproblems
quality falling
in
asleep
falling asleep
(r in
(problemsasleep
=with
0.24)(rin
falling = 0.24)
(r
and asleep
= 0.24)
noc-
falling and(r
and=noc-
0.24)
asleep,noc- and no
nocturna
mareslower(r =4.−0.15).
problems
Discussion Subjects inIn who
falling
Overall,
the thought
asleep
this
current mares(r that
population
study, (r =the
= −0.27). pandemic
Irritability
−0.15).
we studySubjects
investigated had
was
demonstrated affected
who positively
mares lower
workers’thought everyday
great
(rfeelings associated
problems
=feelings
−0.15).
that life
in
satisfaction
the
Subjects
about were
falling
pandemic lone-
for
who
workingasleep
remote
had
thought (r =working
−0.27).
affected
from Irritabilit
thateveryday
home, the pandem li
An improvement in work4. Discussion
perception
In
turnal In
the was
the
current
turnalIn
awakenings
turnal related
current
the study,
current
awakenings to
awakenings
turnal
(r a
study,we
=Onlylowerwe
study,
0.27). irritability
investigated
investigated
(r =
awakenings
(r we
0.27).
= third
0.27). investigated
(r (r =
workers’ −0.29)
workers’ and
workers’
feelingsfeelingsabout about working
working
about from
working
from home, home,
from home,
4. Discussion 4. Discussion
related liness 4.
(rDiscussion
to higher irritability
= 0.29), mood
performance.
related to (r
both = 0.24),
alterations related
quality more
were
one to
and problems
related
higher of=the
nightmares)
performance,
0.27).
both
irritability
were
inparticipants
falling
to positively
asleep
problems liness
related
along (r = (r
in
reported
0.24),
with to =more
sleep
associated
=0.24)
falling
(rhigher 0.29), and
higherasleep
quality,mood
problems
with
noc- and
levels
irritabilitymood
each
to
alterations
in of
(rfalling
=
other.
0.24),
alterations were
irritability
asleep
more
The fear of
related
and
and(r
problems
= both
0.24) an
in
er problems in falling asleep (rIn
related= −0.27).
related
the toIrritability
Intorelated
the
both
current both
current
qualityquality
tostudy, was
study,
both and positively
and
quality
we we performance,
investigated
performance, associated
and performance,
investigated tively along
workers’along
workers’
related with
with with
along lone-
sleep
feelings
to sleep
feelings
with
problems quality,
quality,
about about
sleep in mood mood
working
quality,
working
falling alterations
from
alterations
mood
from
asleep home,
alterations
home,
(r = and
0.36) andand and
nocturnal awa
In the current
turnal In study,
awakenings
nocturnal
the current
In we (r
the
the investigated
awakenings;=study,
0.27). we
loneliness
current
general study,workers’
additionally,
and 16%
investigated
turnalweofthe feelings
loneliness
women
investigated
workers’
awakenings about
was
complained
workers’
(rfeelingsworking
associated
=life.
0.27). of from
to
nocturnal
having
about
feelings
turnal home,
nightmares awakenings;
nightmares.
workingabout
awakenings (r ==Most
working
from(r 0.24).
home, ofAll
additionally,
from
0.27). the loneliness was
participants
home,
ss (r = 0.29), mood alterations
related to both
the
related
quality
the
were
the
general
related
4.
three to general
and
the
to
Discussion
both 4.
aspects
Discussion
related
impact
general
both
4.
quality
performance,
stated
both
impact
of andsleep
that 4.impact
to
of
ofimpact
quality
Discussion the
and problems
the
pandemic
and of of
pandemic
the
performance,
along
quality
the pandemic with
in
(problems
pandemic
pandemic
performance,
Discussion on falling
The
sleep
on
everyday
along
importantly
on
along on
asleep
everyday
with
willingness
quality,
in along
falling
everyday
everyday
with and
life.
sleep
mood to
asleep,
affected
to
sleep life.
life.
quality,
quality,
go out
alterations
the and
nocturnal
theirthree
dailymood mood
return
and
alterations
alterations
to
awakenings
aspects
life ofprevious
(85.1%). sleep and
and
andwas negatively asso
life
quality (problems in falli
related
turnal awakenings; additionally, to related
both quality
lonelinessto both was quality
performance,
associatedand performance,
toon along
nightmares with sleep withquality,
sleep mood
quality, alterations
mood alterations
and and
the general4. the the the
Discussion
impact general
ofthe
nightmares)
general
the In impact
pandemic
were
impact
theofcurrentof
In on
Albeit
of
the
Inpositively
thethe
the
study,
everyday
the
pandemic
pandemic
current
current
In study,
the
we
associated
majority study,
current
life.
on
ofeveryday
wemares
investigatedwe
with
the
everyday
study, (r(rworkers’
investigated
each
population
=−0.15).
=life.
investigated
we
0.24).
other.
All
life.workers’
Subjects
investigated
workers’
feelings
The
studied fear feelings
who
declared
nightmares) about
workers’
of feelings about
thought
working
infection
no
were about
feelings
changes wasworking
that the
working
fromabout
posi-
in
positively work from
pandemic
home, home,
working
from had
home,
perception,
associated affected
from
with homeo
each
general
three aspects of sleep quality (problems impact
general impact
the pandemic
in falling of the4.
asleep, Discussion
pandemic
on everyday
nocturnal on everyday
life.
awakenings 4.
life.
and Discussion
related to both quality and performance,
related to higher along with
irritability sleep (r = quality,
0.24), mood
more alterations
problems in and
falling asleep
the related
tively
htmares) were positivelyInassociated
relatedto
current to
with
related
both
about problems
study, quality
onetorelated
eachweother.
both
in and
third quality
oftoperformance,
falling
investigated
The
both
the
In
and
asleep
fear
quality
subjects
workers’
the
performance,
current
ofturnal
infection
and
along
(r =reported
0.36)
feelings
study,
performance,
with
and
was
along
aabout
we
sleep
work
nocturnal
posi-
with
tively quality,
workingalong
improvement
investigated
In the
sleep
awakenings
related
current
with
mood
quality,
to
from sleepalterations
(r =mood
with
problems
workers’ home,
study,
quality,
a0.23).
high
feelings
we in alterations
and
mood
rate
falling
aboutasleep
investigated
alterations
and(r = 0.36)
(95.7%)
working
workers’from
an
fe
The the generalthe
ofthe general
impact
general
satisfaction impact
the
of impact
the
general
in of
work the
pandemic
of impact
the pandemic
pandemic
on
performance of on
awakenings
everyday
the everyday
pandemic
on
and everyday
life.
online (r
on life.
= 0.27).
everyday
life.
services for life.
video connections. In accor-
ly related to problems related towillingness
in falling both quality
asleep
to go out
(r =and 0.36)
and related
performance, return along
and nocturnal
to
toprevious
both with
awakenings
life was
sleep
quality negatively
quality,
(rand
The
related
= 0.23). mood
performance, to associated
willingness
bothalterations
along
quality with
towith
go and
and night-
out andquality,
sleep return to
performance, previous
mood
along lifes
alteratio
with
theand mares impact
general (r = −0.15). dance
of the with the
Subjects
pandemic who existing
thought
on literature,
everyday that the home-based
life. pandemic had workers
affected
mares (rwith goodSubjects
everyday
=everyday
−0.15). access
life to
were
who communication
thought that thelife.
pand
willingness to go out return to previous life the
was negatively general 4.impact
associated
Discussion ofwiththe night-
pandemic
the general on impact of life.
the pandemic on everyday
related to higher technologies
irritabilityare (r =more0.24),efficient
more and reliable
problems inrelated
in falling performing
asleep (r =their
to higher 0.24) work,
and noc-
irritability experiencing
(r = 0.24), more de- problem
es (r = −0.15). Subjects who thought that the pandemic had affected everyday life were
turnal awakenings (r = 0.27). In the current turnal study, awakenings
we investigated workers’ feelings about wo
(r = 0.27).
ted to higher irritability (r = 0.24), more problems in falling asleep (r = 0.24) and noc-
related to both quality and performance, along with sleep quality, mo
nal awakenings (r = 0.27).
4. Discussion the general impact of the pandemic on everyday life.
4. Discussion
iscussion In the current study, we investigated workers’ feelings about working
In the from
current home,
study, we investigated workers
termination and connectedness, while scarce online connection services might generate
frustration, affecting job performance [20]. Additionally, the effects of home life on work
should not be underestimated. On one hand, the interaction between working at home
and family life may produce more prolific outcomes in home office workers; on the other
hand, some authors sustain the hypothesis that domestic responsibilities may negatively
affect telework, especially in those who are not able to establish limitations between the
two [21]. Childcare may represent a constraint for home-based working [22]. We investi-
gated whether children’s age influenced work performance. After stratifying the sample
in accordance to children’s age (18 years as cut-off), men claimed that children’s age has
affected work from home independently from age (almost one third); conversely, half of
female subjects with children <18 years complained of a negative impact on work perfor-
mance from home compared to only one woman with children >18 years. Women are more
directly involved in childcare, therefore they may consider young children’s age to be a
detrimental factor affecting work performance. These findings might suggest a persistent
gender gap both in workplaces and home, resulting in a double burden of work bearing on
women.
In our statistical models, being graduated acted as a predictor of an enhancement in
work performance. Other authors suggest that the education level may be positively associ-
ated with a better perception of work ability [23,24]; since home office workers have been
no longer under straight control by their supervisor, we can hypothesize that graduated
subjects felt more control and responsibilities, resulting in a better perception in work qual-
ity and performance [25]. The interviewed subjects which declared to spend increased time
online compared with before the pandemic, showed to have an increased risk of perceiving
a worsening in work performance, coupled with higher level of irritability, decreased sleep
quality and higher fear of being infected. The subjects were also more driven to think
that the pandemic affected their everyday life. Thus, more time spent on the internet has
led to worse outcomes, suggesting that an uncontrolled flow of information, the so-called
“COVID-19 Infodemic”, may have contributed to negatively affect the perception of remote
working, altering mood and sleep quality [26]. Furthermore, our results highlighted that a
worsening in work perception has been related to scarce sleep quality and high irritability,
probably due to the detrimental effects that a dysfunctional sleep/awake cycle might have
on work performance and mood states [27–30].
In our population study, these mood alterations were predicted by a high SARS-
CoV-2 risk exposure. In addition, being not satisfied with remote working performance
predicted a higher irritability and loneliness. The perception of the pandemic as a traumatic
event may have contributed to modify the mental well-being, resulting in psychological
symptoms, and probably leading to increased levels of anxiety and depression [31]. Our
results highlighted not only that irritability and loneliness were associated with each
other, but also that both were related to sleep insufficiency. The literature suggests that
a poor sleep quality can cause tiredness, thereby leading to reduced levels of alertness
and amplified irritability [32,33]. Although our statistical models did not find gender as
a predictor of poor sleep quality, more women than men (10 vs. 0) complained about
nightmares, resulting in a statistically significant gender difference and confirming that
women are more susceptible to sleep disturbances [34,35].
In our investigation, nightmares are associated with a scarce willingness to go out
and to return to the lifestyle conducted before the pandemic. Problems in falling asleep
and nocturnal awakenings are related to the idea that the pandemic might have negatively
affected the everyday life; this outcome is also related to a higher irritability. Our findings
suggested that there could be a mutual interrelation among sleep quality, mental well-
being and the perception of the pandemic as a traumatic event, as proposed by other
authors [36–38].
During the pandemic, remote working increment has brought advantages for the
population such as shorter commuting times, greater personal motivation, better work-life
balance and better control over schedules. Conversely, it is also important to highlight the
disadvantages of home-based working which can be related to employees’ performance

checking, communication gaps that may arise or the problems that might be linked with
the commixture of domestic with work tasks. Social isolation, satisfaction with video con-
nection services, work-family balance and children’s care are the issues raised in this study.
They represent factors which may affect job performance, mood states and psychological
well-being, sleep quality and everyday life. It is worthwhile to wonder whether working
remotely will become an available option for the majority of office workers, thereby result-
ing in changes in accommodation and risk assessment, or if it will endure to be seen as a
special advantage. This research suggests the need to increase childcare services and to
support women with younger children during the acute phases of the pandemic. Finally,
particular attention should be paid to the emotional patterns of loneliness and sadness
associated with sleep disturbances, which can be configured as subthreshold depressive
patterns which need to be managed to further prevent the development of mood disorders.
This study presents some limitations. First, a cross-sectional design does not allow us
to establish the direction of causation and to transpose the results to a general population.
Secondly, we did not use standardized questionnaires. Moreover, the majority of our
sample was composed of female subjects (67%), who tend to be more worried about their
health status and are willing to take part in health surveys more often than males [39].
5. Conclusions
Our results highlighted that home office workers were satisfied by the perceived work
quality and performance; notwithstanding, about a third of the subjects reported mood
alterations and women revealed to be more susceptible to sleep disturbances.
The COVID-19 pandemic might be seen as a challenging exam for employers to test
their skills in harmonizing a work environment, considering how remote working will
progress as the economy evolves in the next few years.
Since the pandemic is still an ongoing issue, the lesson learnt is that local government
actions are needed to assist home office workers through tailored programs to support
families. Given the central role of women in childcare, female workers would mainly benefit
from social support accordingly to their parental tasks and remote work organization.
It would be also worthwhile to address further research towards the evaluation of the
possible amplification of gender inequalities due to working from home.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, C.F. and C.C.; methodology, C.M., C.F. and C.C.; software
and data curation, S.I.; validation, F.G. and C.V.; formal analysis, S.I.; investigation, M.T.; resources,
F.G. and C.V.; writing—original draft preparation, S.I. and M.T.; writing—review and editing, C.F.,
C.C. and S.I.; supervision, C.C. and C.F.; project administration, C.F.; funding acquisition, C.F. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: This study was carried out in accordance with the Decla-
ration of Helsinki’s ethical standards. The study needed no formal approval by the local Ethics
Committee.
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the
study.
Data Availability Statement: The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are
available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Park, C.L.; Russell, B.S.; Fendrich, M.; Finkelstein-Fox, L.; Hutchison, M.; Becker, J. Americans’ COVID-19 Stress, Coping, and
Adherence to CDC Guidelines. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 2020, 35, 2296–2303. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. Kramer, A.; Kramer, K.Z. The potential impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on occupational status, work from home, and
occupational mobility. J. Vocat. Behav. 2020, 119, 103442. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
3. Italia, S.; Costa, C.; Briguglio, G.; Mento, C.; Muscatello, M.R.A.; Alibrandi, A.; Filon, F.L.; Spatari, G.; Teodoro, M.; Fenga, C.
Quality of Life, Insomnia and Coping Strategies during COVID-19 Pandemic in Hospital Workers. A Cross-Sectional Study. Int. J.
Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 12466. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Awada, M.; Lucas, G.; Becerik-Gerber, B.; Roll, S. Working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic: Impact on office worker
productivity and work experience. Work 2021, 69, 1171–1189. [CrossRef]
5. Ingram, A.E.; Hertelendy, A.J.; Molloy, M.S.; Ciottone, G.R. State Preparedness for Crisis Standards of Care in the United States:
Implications for Emergency Management. Prehospital Disaster Med. 2021, 36, 1–3. [CrossRef]
6. Manuti, A.; Giancaspro, M.; Molino, M.; Ingusci, E.; Russo, V.; Signore, F.; Zito, M.; Cortese, C. “Everything Will Be Fine”: A
Study on the Relationship between Employees’ Perception of Sustainable HRM Practices and Positive Organizational Behavior
during COVID 19. Sustainability 2020, 12, 10216. [CrossRef]
7. Shammi, M.; Doza, B.-; Islam, A.R.M.T.; Rahman, M. COVID-19 pandemic, socioeconomic crisis and human stress in resource-
limited settings: A case from Bangladesh. Heliyon 2020, 6, 04063. [CrossRef]
8. Costa, C.; Briguglio, G.; Mondello, S.; Teodoro, M.; Pollicino, M.; Canalella, A.; Verduci, F.; Italia, S.; Fenga, C. Perceived Stress in
a Gender Perspective: A Survey in a Population of Unemployed Subjects of Southern Italy. Front. Public Health 2021, 9, 640454.
[CrossRef]
9. Settineri, S.; Merlo, E.M.; Fabio, F.; Marchetti, D.; Verrocchio, M.C.; Pellegrino, M.G.; Mento, C.; Fenga, C. The Experience of
Health and Suffering in the Medical Profession. Med. J. Clin. Psychol. 2018, 6, 1–3. [CrossRef]
10. Fenga, C.; Faranda, M.; Aragona, M.; Micali, E.; Di Nola, C.; Trimarchi, G.; Crimi, B.; Cacciola, A. Burnout and occupational stress
in nurses. Med. Lav. 2007, 98, 55–63.
11. Fenga, C.; Micali, E.; Cacciola, A.; Trimarchi, G.; Germanò, D. Stressful Life Events and Fibrinogen Level in Middle-Aged Teachers.
Psychopathology 2004, 37, 64–68. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
12. Wilson, J.M.; Lee, J.; Fitzgerald, H.N.; Oosterhoff, B.; Sevi, B.; Shook, N.J. Job Insecurity and Financial Concern During the
COVID-19 Pandemic Are Associated with Worse Mental Health. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 2020, 62, 686–691. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
13. Giorgi, G.; Lecca, L.I.; Alessio, F.; Finstad, G.L.; Bondanini, G.; Lulli, L.G.; Arcangeli, G.; Mucci, N. COVID-19-Related Mental
Health Effects in the Workplace: A Narrative Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7857. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
14. van Knippenberg, B.; Martin, L.; Tyler, T. Process-orientation versus outcome-orientation during organizational change: The role
of organizational identification. J. Organ. Behav. 2006, 27, 685–704. [CrossRef]
15. Fenga, C.; Di Nola, C.; Cacciola, A.; Nardella, C. Assessment of Occupational Stress Among Shopping Centre Employees.
PsycEXTRA Dataset 2010, 31, 56–63. [CrossRef]
16. Pollard, T. Changes in mental well-being, blood pressure and total cholesterol levels during workplace reorganization: The
impact of uncertainty. Work Stress 2001, 15, 14–28. [CrossRef]
17. Long, C.S.; Ismail, W.K.W.; Amin, S.M. The role of change agent as mediator in the relationship between HR competencies and
organizational performance. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2013, 24, 2019–2033. [CrossRef]
18. Fenga, C.; Platania, C.A.; Di Rosa, A.; Alibrandi, A.; De Luca, A.; Barresi, G.; Di Nola, C.; Cacciola, A. Mobbing: Between
personality traits and organizational-managerial characteristics of the occupational environment. G. Ital. Med. Lav. Ergon. 2012,
34, 11–16.
19. Levasseur, R.E. People Skills: Ensuring Project Success—A Change Management Perspective. Interfaces 2010, 40, 159–162.
[CrossRef]
20. Golden, T.D.; Veiga, J.F.; Dino, R.N. The impact of professional isolation on teleworker job performance and turnover intentions:
Does time spent teleworking, interacting face-to-face, or having access to communication-enhancing technology matter? J. Appl.
Psychol. 2008, 93, 1412–1421. [CrossRef]
21. Schur, L.A.; Ameri, M.; Kruse, D. Telework After COVID: A “Silver Lining” for Workers with Disabilities? J. Occup. Rehabil. 2020,
30, 521–536. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
22. Allen, T.D.; Golden, T.D.; Shockley, K.M. How Effective Is Telecommuting? Assessing the Status of Our Scientific Findings.
Psychol. Sci. Public Interest 2015, 16, 40–68. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
23. Håkansson, C.; Gard, G.; Lindegård, A. Perceived work stress, overcommitment, balance in everyday life, individual factors,
self-rated health and work ability among women and men in the public sector in Sweden–a longitudinal study. Arch. Public
Health 2020, 78, 1–6. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
24. Godinho, M.R.; Greco, R.M.; Teixeira, M.T.B.; Teixeira, L.R.; Guerra, M.R.; Chaoubah, A. Work ability and associated factors of
Brazilian technical-administrative workers in education. BMC Res. Notes 2016, 9, 1–10. [CrossRef]
25. Steidelmüller, C.; Meyer, S.-C.; Müller, G. Home-Based Telework and Presenteeism Across Europe. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 2020,
62, 998–1005. [CrossRef]
26. Heyerdahl, L.W.; Lana, B.; Giles-Vernick, T. The Impact of the Online COVID-19 Infodemic on French Red Cross Actors’ Field
Engagement and Protective Behaviors: Mixed Methods Study. JMIR Infodemiol. 2021, 1, e27472. [CrossRef]
27. Marklund, S.; Mienna, C.S.; Wahlström, J.; Englund, E.; Wiesinger, B. Work ability and productivity among dentists: Associations
with musculoskeletal pain, stress, and sleep. Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health 2019, 93, 271–278. [CrossRef]
28. Briguglio, G.; Teodoro, M.; Italia, S.; Verduci, F.; Pollicino, M.; Coco, M.; De Vita, A.; Micali, E.; Alibrandi, A.; Lembo, G.; et al.
Salivary Biomarkers and Work-Related Stress in Night Shift Workers. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 3184. [CrossRef]
29. Costa, C.; Mondello, S.; Micali, E.; Indelicato, G.; Licciardello, A.A.; Vitale, E.; Briguglio, G.; Teodoro, M.; Fenga, C. Night shift
work in resident physicians: Does it affect mood states and cognitive levels? J. Affect. Disord. 2020, 272, 289–294. [CrossRef]
30. Costa, C.; Pollicino, M.; Briguglio, G.; Verzera, A.; Coco, M.; Verduci, F.; Lembo, G.; Alibrandi, A.; Micali, E.; Fenga, C. Factors
Associated with Work Ability in a Population of Dock Workers. Mediterr. J. Clin. Psychol. 2021, 9, 1–21. [CrossRef]
31. Buselli, R.; Corsi, M.; Baldanzi, S.; Chiumiento, M.; Del Lupo, E.; Dell’Oste, V.; Bertelloni, C.A.; Massimetti, G.; Dell’Osso, L.;
Cristaudo, A.; et al. Professional Quality of Life and Mental Health Outcomes among Health Care Workers Exposed to Sars-Cov-2
(Covid-19). Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 6180. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
32. Pellegrino, P.; Marqueze, E.C. Aspects of work and sleep associated with work ability in regular aviation pilots. Rev. Saúde Pública
2019, 53, 16. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
33. Marqueze, E.C.; Nicola, A.C.B.; Diniz, D.H.M.D.; Fischer, F.M. Working hours associated with unintentional sleep at work among
airline pilots. Rev. Saúde Pública 2017, 51, 61. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
34. Sato, S.; Liu, Y.; Ikeda, A.; Filomeno, R.; Suzuki, Y.; Maruyama, K.; Tomooka, K.; Wada, H.; Koyama, Y.; Tanigawa, T. Work-family
conflict and insomnia symptoms among women working in aged care services in Japan. Sleep Med. 2021, 82, 155–158. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
35. Costa, C.; Teodoro, M.; Briguglio, G.; Vitale, E.; Giambò, F.; Indelicato, G.; Micali, E.; Italia, S.; Fenga, C. Sleep Quality and Mood
State in Resident Physicians during COVID-19 Pandemic. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 8023. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
36. Wu, T.; Jia, X.; Shi, H.; Niu, J.; Yin, X.; Xie, J.; Wang, X. Prevalence of mental health problems during the COVID-19 pandemic: A
systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Affect. Disord. 2021, 281, 91–98. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
37. Deng, J.; Zhou, F.; Hou, W.; Silver, Z.; Wong, C.Y.; Chang, O.; Huang, E.; Zuo, Q.K. The prevalence of depression, anxiety, and
sleep disturbances in COVID-19 patients: A meta-analysis. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2020, 1486, 90–111. [CrossRef]
38. Marelli, S.; Castelnuovo, A.; Somma, A.; Castronovo, V.; Mombelli, S.; Bottoni, D.; Leitner, C.; Fossati, A.; Ferini-Strambi, L. Impact
of COVID-19 lockdown on sleep quality in university students and administration staff. J. Neurol. 2021, 268, 8–15. [CrossRef]
39. Pratesi, C.B.; Häuser, W.; Uenishi, R.H.; Selleski, N.; Nakano, E.Y.; Gandolfi, L.; Pratesi, R.; Zandonadi, R.P. Quality of Life of
Celiac Patients in Brazil: Questionnaire Translation, Cultural Adaptation and Validation. Nutrients 2018, 10, 1167. [CrossRef]

San I Rad Covid 19

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

San I Rad Covid 19

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral

2. Materials and Methods

2.2. Procedures and Measures

2.2.1. Work Perception and Video Connections

2.2.2. Mood and Sleep Quality

2.2.3. Pandemic Impact on Everyday Life

2.3. Statistical Analysis

Total Women Men

Total Women Men

Work Changes Irritability Loneliness

Willingness to Go Out Pandemic

Considering the independent variables used in the statistical models, married/cohabitant

disadvantages of home-based working which can be related to employees’ performance

You might also like