现在的常态

Joven Jeremius Q. Tanchuco, MD, MHA
{"title":"现在的常态","authors":"Joven Jeremius Q. Tanchuco, MD, MHA","doi":"10.47895/amp.v58i4.9943","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 as a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) on January 30, 2020 and soon thereafter with 118,000 cases in 114 countries and 4,291 deaths, declared it as a pandemic on March 11, 2020. 1,2 In the Philippines, lockdown was declared by then President Rodrigo Duterte on March 15, 2020. 3 It was for an initial one-month period but extended for progressively longer durations afterwards. Adding to the confusion were the various levels of lockdown soon promulgated, subject to the number of COVID-19 cases in the neighborhood. As to be expected, this kept fluctuating over time and disrupted the way people were able to go to work and do their day-to-day activities outside of their homes. More stress was added because of the lack of meaningful information onCOVID-19, sowing anxiety and fear among the populace. 4-6 \nOne of the more visible effects of the pandemic lockdown was the change in allowed modes of public transportation. 7 This was most difficult for people in the Philippines who got sick of COVID-19 themselves and health workers who had to continue taking care of the rapidly rising COVID-19 cases. 8,9 For those who could choose to continue working from home, they had to quickly familiarize themselves with the digital platforms, skills needed to work with gadgets and devices, as well as the need for internet services. Although initially thought to offer more work flexibility, time saved from taking public transportation and traffic congestion, and being in a more convenient working environment, working from home was soon seen to cause its own mental health issues. 10-13 With this information, it has increasingly become necessary to constantly evaluate working from home arrangements and configure it more specifically to the needs of the worker and/or the job role. 14-17 \nIn this context, we bring attention to an article from Indonesia published in this issue of the journal by Wibowo and colleagues. 18 Although there have been numerous articles published on the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on students and health workers, including in this Journal, it would be useful to also look at other sectors who may have been affected as well. 19-24 On top of the concerns on personal safety and challenges with public transportation shared by most students and health workers, non-health workers are also concerned about their job and food security. 25,26 \nThe paper by Wibobo et al., first published as an Early Access article in the Journal a year ago, involved technical and field workers (construction, manufacturing, mining, oil, and gas industries) who did not have the same option to work from home. 18 These workers were already being exposed to significant workplace hazards even prior to the pandemic. 27-30 For its part, the study looked into psychological (feeling of safety and work pressure) and organizational (management commitment) factors as determinants of job satisfaction. Questionnaires were handed out during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. \nThe authors reported that workers’ feelings of safety and work pressures were significant determinants of employee job satisfaction; but management commitment was not. As the authors discussed, this was contrary to most organizational strategic goals. To be effective, Management should be seen as sincerely concerned about the safety of their employees. Whether this was because Management lacked adequate information on COVID-19 to help deal with it in the workplace setting or there was truly a perceived lack of Management concern for worker safety even before the pandemic was less clear. A similar job satisfaction survey PRIOR to the pandemic for baseline comparison would have been helpful to understand this better. With the available data, it is difficult to definitively attribute the findings in the study to the COVID-19 pandemic. \nThe WHO declared on May 5, 2023 the end to COVID-19 as a public health emergency. 31 The cumulative cases worldwide up to that time stood at 765,222,932 with nearly 7 million deaths. This does not mean however that we go back to the way we were before the pandemic. Our experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic have given us new insights and we could adapt many of the ways we have changed our practices to how we do them now. \nWhether it is for the remote or hybrid worker or those who would still need to be present in their worksite, it is possible to adopt many of these measures. For the remote worker, individualizing options and not imposing a “one-size-fits all” policy could help lessen the challenges. 32,33 A hybrid model using varying combinations of remote/online approaches with face-to-face interactions should be looked at. Even for those workers who had traditionally been considered as having to be physically present, new technologies (robots, robotics, telemetry, drones, etc.) can be adapted to lessen the exposure to onsitesafety hazards. 34-38","PeriodicalId":502328,"journal":{"name":"Acta Medica Philippina","volume":"175 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Now Normal\",\"authors\":\"Joven Jeremius Q. Tanchuco, MD, MHA\",\"doi\":\"10.47895/amp.v58i4.9943\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 as a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) on January 30, 2020 and soon thereafter with 118,000 cases in 114 countries and 4,291 deaths, declared it as a pandemic on March 11, 2020. 1,2 In the Philippines, lockdown was declared by then President Rodrigo Duterte on March 15, 2020. 3 It was for an initial one-month period but extended for progressively longer durations afterwards. Adding to the confusion were the various levels of lockdown soon promulgated, subject to the number of COVID-19 cases in the neighborhood. As to be expected, this kept fluctuating over time and disrupted the way people were able to go to work and do their day-to-day activities outside of their homes. More stress was added because of the lack of meaningful information onCOVID-19, sowing anxiety and fear among the populace. 4-6 \\nOne of the more visible effects of the pandemic lockdown was the change in allowed modes of public transportation. 7 This was most difficult for people in the Philippines who got sick of COVID-19 themselves and health workers who had to continue taking care of the rapidly rising COVID-19 cases. 8,9 For those who could choose to continue working from home, they had to quickly familiarize themselves with the digital platforms, skills needed to work with gadgets and devices, as well as the need for internet services. Although initially thought to offer more work flexibility, time saved from taking public transportation and traffic congestion, and being in a more convenient working environment, working from home was soon seen to cause its own mental health issues. 10-13 With this information, it has increasingly become necessary to constantly evaluate working from home arrangements and configure it more specifically to the needs of the worker and/or the job role. 14-17 \\nIn this context, we bring attention to an article from Indonesia published in this issue of the journal by Wibowo and colleagues. 18 Although there have been numerous articles published on the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on students and health workers, including in this Journal, it would be useful to also look at other sectors who may have been affected as well. 19-24 On top of the concerns on personal safety and challenges with public transportation shared by most students and health workers, non-health workers are also concerned about their job and food security. 25,26 \\nThe paper by Wibobo et al., first published as an Early Access article in the Journal a year ago, involved technical and field workers (construction, manufacturing, mining, oil, and gas industries) who did not have the same option to work from home. 18 These workers were already being exposed to significant workplace hazards even prior to the pandemic. 27-30 For its part, the study looked into psychological (feeling of safety and work pressure) and organizational (management commitment) factors as determinants of job satisfaction. Questionnaires were handed out during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. \\nThe authors reported that workers’ feelings of safety and work pressures were significant determinants of employee job satisfaction; but management commitment was not. As the authors discussed, this was contrary to most organizational strategic goals. To be effective, Management should be seen as sincerely concerned about the safety of their employees. Whether this was because Management lacked adequate information on COVID-19 to help deal with it in the workplace setting or there was truly a perceived lack of Management concern for worker safety even before the pandemic was less clear. A similar job satisfaction survey PRIOR to the pandemic for baseline comparison would have been helpful to understand this better. With the available data, it is difficult to definitively attribute the findings in the study to the COVID-19 pandemic. \\nThe WHO declared on May 5, 2023 the end to COVID-19 as a public health emergency. 31 The cumulative cases worldwide up to that time stood at 765,222,932 with nearly 7 million deaths. This does not mean however that we go back to the way we were before the pandemic. Our experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic have given us new insights and we could adapt many of the ways we have changed our practices to how we do them now. \\nWhether it is for the remote or hybrid worker or those who would still need to be present in their worksite, it is possible to adopt many of these measures. For the remote worker, individualizing options and not imposing a “one-size-fits all” policy could help lessen the challenges. 32,33 A hybrid model using varying combinations of remote/online approaches with face-to-face interactions should be looked at. Even for those workers who had traditionally been considered as having to be physically present, new technologies (robots, robotics, telemetry, drones, etc.) can be adapted to lessen the exposure to onsitesafety hazards. 34-38\",\"PeriodicalId\":502328,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Medica Philippina\",\"volume\":\"175 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Medica Philippina\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47895/amp.v58i4.9943\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Medica Philippina","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47895/amp.v58i4.9943","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

世界卫生组织(WHO)于 2020 年 1 月 30 日宣布 COVID-19 为国际关注的突发公共卫生事件(PHEIC),此后不久,COVID-19 在 114 个国家出现 118,000 例病例,4,291 人死亡,世界卫生组织于 2020 年 3 月 11 日宣布 COVID-19 为大流行病。1,2 在菲律宾,时任总统罗德里戈-杜特尔特于 2020 年 3 月 15 日宣布封锁。3 封锁期限最初为一个月,但随后逐渐延长。很快,根据附近地区 COVID-19 病例的数量颁布了不同级别的封锁措施,这让情况更加混乱。不出所料,随着时间的推移,封锁级别不断变化,扰乱了人们上班和外出的日常活动。由于缺乏有关 COVID-19 的有意义的信息,人们的压力更大了,这在民众中播下了焦虑和恐惧的种子。4-6 大流行病封锁的一个更明显的影响是允许的公共交通方式发生了变化。7 这对菲律宾自己感染 COVID-19 的人和必须继续照顾迅速上升的 COVID-19 病例的医务工作者来说是最困难的。8,9 对于那些可以选择继续在家工作的人来说,他们必须尽快熟悉数字平台、使用小工具和设备所需的技能以及对互联网服务的需求。尽管人们最初认为在家办公可以提供更多的工作灵活性,节省乘坐公共交通工具的时间,避免交通拥堵,工作环境也更加便利,但很快人们就发现在家办公也会带来心理健康问题。10-13 有了这些信息,我们越来越有必要不断评估在家办公的安排,并根据员工和/或工作角色的需要进行更具体的配置。14-17 在这种情况下,我们提请大家注意 Wibowo 及其同事在本期期刊上发表的一篇来自印度尼西亚的文章。18 虽然包括本期期刊在内的许多文章都在讨论 COVID-19 大流行对学生和医务工作者的影响,但我们也应该关注可能受到影响的其他部门。19-24 除了大多数学生和医务工作者共同关心的人身安全和公共交通问题外,非医务工作者也担心他们的工作和食品安全。25,26 一年前,Wibobo 等人的论文作为早期访问文章首次发表在《期刊》上,论文涉及技术和现场工人(建筑、制造、采矿、石油和天然气行业),他们没有在家工作的相同选择。18 甚至在大流行之前,这些工人就已经暴露在严重的工作场所危险中。27-30 就其本身而言,该研究调查了作为工作满意度决定因素的心理(安全感和工作压力)和组织(管理承诺)因素。在 COVID-19 大流行期间发放了调查问卷。作者报告说,工人的安全感和工作压力是员工工作满意度的重要决定因素,但管理承诺却不是。正如作者所讨论的,这与大多数组织的战略目标背道而驰。要想取得成效,管理层应被视为真诚地关心员工的安全。这究竟是因为管理层缺乏有关 COVID-19 的足够信息来帮助在工作场所应对该疾病,还是管理层在大流行病发生之前就确实缺乏对工人安全的关注,这一点并不清楚。在大流行之前进行一次类似的工作满意度调查作为基线比较,将有助于更好地了解这一点。根据现有数据,很难将研究结果明确归因于 COVID-19 大流行。世卫组织于 2023 年 5 月 5 日宣布 COVID-19 作为公共卫生紧急事件结束。31 截至当时,全球累计病例达 765,222,932 例,近 700 万人死亡。但这并不意味着我们又回到了大流行之前的状态。我们在 COVID-19 大流行期间的经验给了我们新的启示,我们可以将许多改变做法的方法调整为现在的做法。无论是对于远程工作者、混合工作者,还是那些仍然需要在工作场所工作的人,都可以采取其中的许多措施。对于远程工作者来说,个性化选择和不强加 "一刀切 "的政策有助于减少挑战。32,33应考虑采用一种混合模式,将远程/在线方法与面对面互动相结合。即使是那些传统上被认为必须亲临现场的工作人员,也可以采用新技术(机器人、机械手、遥测技术、无人机等)来减少现场安全隐患。34-38
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Now Normal
The World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 as a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) on January 30, 2020 and soon thereafter with 118,000 cases in 114 countries and 4,291 deaths, declared it as a pandemic on March 11, 2020. 1,2 In the Philippines, lockdown was declared by then President Rodrigo Duterte on March 15, 2020. 3 It was for an initial one-month period but extended for progressively longer durations afterwards. Adding to the confusion were the various levels of lockdown soon promulgated, subject to the number of COVID-19 cases in the neighborhood. As to be expected, this kept fluctuating over time and disrupted the way people were able to go to work and do their day-to-day activities outside of their homes. More stress was added because of the lack of meaningful information onCOVID-19, sowing anxiety and fear among the populace. 4-6 One of the more visible effects of the pandemic lockdown was the change in allowed modes of public transportation. 7 This was most difficult for people in the Philippines who got sick of COVID-19 themselves and health workers who had to continue taking care of the rapidly rising COVID-19 cases. 8,9 For those who could choose to continue working from home, they had to quickly familiarize themselves with the digital platforms, skills needed to work with gadgets and devices, as well as the need for internet services. Although initially thought to offer more work flexibility, time saved from taking public transportation and traffic congestion, and being in a more convenient working environment, working from home was soon seen to cause its own mental health issues. 10-13 With this information, it has increasingly become necessary to constantly evaluate working from home arrangements and configure it more specifically to the needs of the worker and/or the job role. 14-17 In this context, we bring attention to an article from Indonesia published in this issue of the journal by Wibowo and colleagues. 18 Although there have been numerous articles published on the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on students and health workers, including in this Journal, it would be useful to also look at other sectors who may have been affected as well. 19-24 On top of the concerns on personal safety and challenges with public transportation shared by most students and health workers, non-health workers are also concerned about their job and food security. 25,26 The paper by Wibobo et al., first published as an Early Access article in the Journal a year ago, involved technical and field workers (construction, manufacturing, mining, oil, and gas industries) who did not have the same option to work from home. 18 These workers were already being exposed to significant workplace hazards even prior to the pandemic. 27-30 For its part, the study looked into psychological (feeling of safety and work pressure) and organizational (management commitment) factors as determinants of job satisfaction. Questionnaires were handed out during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The authors reported that workers’ feelings of safety and work pressures were significant determinants of employee job satisfaction; but management commitment was not. As the authors discussed, this was contrary to most organizational strategic goals. To be effective, Management should be seen as sincerely concerned about the safety of their employees. Whether this was because Management lacked adequate information on COVID-19 to help deal with it in the workplace setting or there was truly a perceived lack of Management concern for worker safety even before the pandemic was less clear. A similar job satisfaction survey PRIOR to the pandemic for baseline comparison would have been helpful to understand this better. With the available data, it is difficult to definitively attribute the findings in the study to the COVID-19 pandemic. The WHO declared on May 5, 2023 the end to COVID-19 as a public health emergency. 31 The cumulative cases worldwide up to that time stood at 765,222,932 with nearly 7 million deaths. This does not mean however that we go back to the way we were before the pandemic. Our experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic have given us new insights and we could adapt many of the ways we have changed our practices to how we do them now. Whether it is for the remote or hybrid worker or those who would still need to be present in their worksite, it is possible to adopt many of these measures. For the remote worker, individualizing options and not imposing a “one-size-fits all” policy could help lessen the challenges. 32,33 A hybrid model using varying combinations of remote/online approaches with face-to-face interactions should be looked at. Even for those workers who had traditionally been considered as having to be physically present, new technologies (robots, robotics, telemetry, drones, etc.) can be adapted to lessen the exposure to onsitesafety hazards. 34-38
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信