Next Article in Journal
Ethical Problems and Moral Distress in Primary Care: A Scoping Review
Next Article in Special Issue
Socioeconomic Status, Mental Health, and Workplace Determinants among Working Adults in Hong Kong: A Latent Class Analysis
Previous Article in Journal
Relationship between Built Environment and COVID-19 Dispersal Based on Age Stratification: A Case Study of Wuhan
Previous Article in Special Issue
Quality of Life and Its Associations with Religiosity and Religious Coping among Outpatients with Psychosis in Singapore
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 18
Issue 14
10.3390/ijerph18147566
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Teacher Teleworking during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Association between Work Hours, Work–Family Balance and Quality of Life

by
Pablo A. Lizana
* and
Gustavo Vega-Fernadez
Laboratory of Morphological Sciences, Instituto de Biología, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso, Valparaíso 2373223, Chile
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18(14), 7566; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18147566
Submission received: 29 May 2021 / Revised: 8 July 2021 / Accepted: 9 July 2021 / Published: 16 July 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Social Determinants of Mental Health)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Background: Teachers worldwide had to reinvent their work routine according to teleworking during the COVID-19 pandemic, a work format that negatively impacts individuals’ physical and mental health. This study evaluates the association between work hours, work–family balance and quality of life (QoL) among teachers during the Chilean health emergency of the COVID-19 pandemic. Teachers from across Chile were contacted via email and social media to answer an online survey. QoL was evaluated via the SF-36 questionnaire, work hours and work–family balance in the pandemic. A total of 336 teachers from across Chile participated in this study. Teachers had a low QoL score, associated with age (p < 0.05). Teachers who were ≤44 showed lower deterioration risks in the Physical Component Summary (OR: 0.54) than the ≥45-year-old age group; simultaneously, the younger group (≤44 years) had a greater risk (OR: 2.46) of deterioration in the Mental Component Summary than teachers over 45 years. A total of 78.7% of teachers reported having increased their work hours during the COVID-19 pandemic due to teleworking and 86% indicated negative effects on their work–family balance. Pandemic work hours and negative work–family balance increase the risk of reducing the Mental Component Summary (OR: 1.902; OR: 3.996, respectively). Teachers presented low median QoL scores, especially in the Mental Component Summary, suggesting that it would be beneficial to promote a better workload distribution for teachers in emergency contexts, considering the adverse effects of teleworking.

1. Introduction

In December 2019, a respiratory disease was detected in the city of Wuhan, China; on 9 January 2020, Chinese health authorities via the World Health Organization (WHO) declared it to be a novel coronavirus [1]. On 12 January 2020 the genetic sequence of what we know as COVID-19 was made public and on 11 March 2020 a global declaration was made that the infection met all the characteristics of a pandemic [2].
The first measures in affected countries were confinement, social distancing and quarantines [2,3,4,5]. In this sense, these measures obligated various labor groups to implement teleworking [6], a work format which has been associated with psychosocial risks due to increased occupational stress [7,8]. Furthermore, these work conditions generate significant problems between personal and working life [7,9] due to the lack of control over working time and family attention at home affecting work–family balance [10]. The health measures for the COVID-19 pandemic (especially quarantines) were also reported to have negative effects on the mental health of people, promoting panic, anxiety, depression, frustration, rage, boredom and paranoia [11,12,13]. This background, along with the catastrophic context generated by the health emergency, causes people to develop mass hysteria, bringing negative consequences for mental and physical health [12,14]; this manifests in diminished hours of physical activity and sleep, and increased alcohol and tobacco use [15].
Social distancing and confinement also led to school closures, generating major impacts on national dynamics [16,17,18,19]. School closures by May 2020 left 1.2 billion students worldwide without in-person classes [18]. In Chile, the suspension of classes and closure of schools, daycares and universities was declared on 16 March 2020 [20]. Along with class suspensions in Chile, from 25 March there were confinement measures, mobility restrictions and quarantines [20].
School closures generated major challenges for teachers who had to reinvent their work methodology around teleworking, immediately learning to work with necessary technology for online courses and modifying their teaching and learning model by adjusting it to the pandemic context [18,21,22]; along with exposing their personal spaces (home) and personal contact for student and parent/guardian attention in expanded timeframes [23]. This teleworking context for teachers led to various consequences in health conditions including depression, anxiety, stress and burnout syndrome due to work overload during the pandemic [24,25,26].
The impact of teleworking during the COVID-19 pandemic among Chilean teachers is reported to have contributed to development of anxiety and stress, with high workloads, exhaustion and burnout [27]. Other reports in Chile, Latin America and the Caribbean reveal that teacher teleworking during the COVID-19 pandemic has meant greater time demands for class preparation and higher stress added to family worries [18]. Furthermore, before the COVID-19 pandemic, one of the professions with the greatest deterioration in health worldwide was teaching [28,29,30], with significant increases in the deterioration of mental health and physical discomfort in professional practice, with consequent psychosocial deterioration and quality of life (QoL) disorders derived from occupational stress [31,32,33,34] and burnout [35,36,37]. In this regard, recent studies have reported a decrease in QoL during the health crisis in teachers compared to QoL scores before the pandemic [38].
Given that teachers worldwide have been considered a high-risk population for rates of professional ailments impacting their QoL since before the pandemic, there are studies on the factors that impact Chilean teachers’ physical and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic [31,33,34,38,39,40]. Therefore, the main objective of this study was to evaluate the association between the intensity of teleworking hours during the pandemic, work–family balance and quality of life in Chilean teachers during the COVID-19 health emergency.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants

A cross-sectional study was conducted between the months of July and October 2020, a period of confinement and teleworking for teachers. A total of 362 teachers made up our initial sample, with the inclusion criteria of all teachers who had teleworking with primary or secondary school students; 14 teachers were excluded from the sample due to not satisfactorily completing all instruments, with another 12 were excluded for being university professors or teachers in higher learning institutes.
The teachers considered in the final sample were from 14 of the 16 current regions in Chile. The majority came from the Valparaíso Region (57.44%), followed by the Metropolitan Region (15.77%) and the Arica and Parinacota Region (10.42%).

2.2. Instruments

2.2.1. Sociodemographic Information

Teachers provided information about their age, gender, marital status, region and city of residence within Chilean territory.

2.2.2. Work-Related Information

Participating teachers provided information about the funding type of the establishment where they worked (public, private with state subsidies/charter school, or private without state subsidies) and work contract type (fixed-term or indefinite). Regarding the realization of telework, they also replied whether they were working 1 = more or 2 = fewer or the same number of hours as before the pandemic, considering the hours where they gave classes and all the hours in which teachers prepare materials, revise and create tests, supporting students and parents/guardians and other administrative work typical of the profession. All included teachers were teleworking.

2.2.3. Personal/Family Life Information

Personal information provided by teachers was related to the impact of telework on work–family balance. In this question they had to answer 1 = if family and personal relations were affected as a result of teleworking; 2 = family and personal relations were not affected by teleworking.

2.2.4. Quality of Life

The SF-36 survey, which has been adapted syntactically and semantically to the Chilean idiosyncrasy [41] and validated in Chilean teachers [38], was applied to evaluate QoL. The instrument consists of 36 questions measuring 8 health dimensions: physical function, bodily pain, role limitations related to physical problems, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, role limitations due to emotional problems and mental health, which are finally grouped into two summary measurements: Physical Component Summary and Mental Component Summary [42].
Survey score results are measured on a scale of 0 to 100, after which a t-score value is calculated with a median of 50 and a standard deviation of 10 for each of the 8 dimensions, which are categorized in the two summary measurements, Physical Component Summary and the Mental Component Summary. To calculate the t-score value, standardized values are used according to the method recommended by the creator and values greater or lesser than 50 indicate higher or lower QoL, respectively [43]. Regarding the reliability of the scale, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was α = 0.885 for the physical function scale, α = 0.880 for the limitations due to physical problems scale, α = 0.878 for the bodily pain scale, α = 0.874 for the general health perceptions scale, α = 0.867 for the vitality scale, α = 0.868 for the social functioning scale, α = 0.878 for the role limitations due to emotional problems scale, α = 0.865 for the mental health scale, α = 0.877 for the Physical Component Summary and α = 0.864 for the Mental Component Summary.

2.3. Procedure

Teachers were contacted by email and social media (Facebook and Instagram) following a snowballing approximation. Those who accepted participation proceeded to respond to the online instruments. The survey platform used was SurveyMonkey (SurveyMonkey, San Mateo, CA, USA).
Prior to data collection, each participant had to read and sign informed consent, which invited them to voluntarily participate in the study in a fully confidential way, without pay, compensation or conflict of interest with the researchers. To this regard, this study fulfills all the ethical requirements of the Helsinki Declaration, approved by the Bioethics Committee at Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso (n°BIOEPUCV-H 393-2021).

2.4. Statistical Analysis

The associations of sociodemographic variables were evaluated between each gender and age category and the 50th percentile of the Physical and Mental Component Summary via the chi-squared test and Fisher’s exact test. Age was categorized according to scores on the National Health Survey 2009–2010 (≤44 years old and ≥45 years old) from the Chilean Health Ministry [44]. QoL scores on their eight scales and the two summary measurements are described in the total sample, following which comparisons are made of medians between genders and age categories via t-tests for parametric variables and Wilcoxon tests for non-parametric variables according to the Shapiro–Wilk normality test. The 50th percentiles (50p) of each summary factor (Physical and Mental Component Summary) were used as a cutoff point to dichotomize the data. The subjects were classified in low (below 50p) or fair/good (above 50p) categories. Finally, three logistical regression models were made with the physical and mental health QoL measurements as dependent variables to evaluate the association with the following variables. First, with work hours in the pandemic and the work–family balance variable were used in the first model; the domestic work hours variable was incorporated in the second model; and, in the final one, age and gender variables were added. The goodness of fit of each logistical regression model was proven with the Hosmer-Lemeshow test. Data were analyzed with STATA 16 statistical software (2017, Stata Corp. LLC, College Station, TX, USA).

3. Results

3.1. Sociodemographic Characteristics

The total sample consisted of 336 teachers (79% women, n = 265) with a median age of 37.5 ± 10.7 years, with no significant differences observed between age medians between both genders. Table 1 shows the sociodemographic characteristics in the total sample after which the associations of these variables are evaluated between gender and age categories. A significant association was observed between age and marital status (p < 0.01) with a greater prevalence of single people in the ≤44-year-old group and age with the variable contract type, where teachers ≥ 45 years old had a higher percentage of indefinite contracts.

3.2. Quality of Life

In Table 2 we can observe the sociodemographic characteristics associated between the lowest and highest scores of the physical and mental health QoL components according to the 50th percentile. The group of teachers who were ≤44 years is significantly associated (p < 0.01) with a low score (score < p50) on the mental QoL component, with a prevalence of 84% versus 16% in the second age group (≥45 years). However, in the physical health component the first age group is significantly associated (p < 0.01) with a high QoL score (score > p50) and a prevalence of 82%. A significant association is also observed (p < 0.01) between lower scores (<p50) on the mental QoL component and the teachers reporting a high hourly workload (higher than before the pandemic) and those with their work–family balance affected.
Table 3 shows us the median values of the eight QoL scales and the two physical and mental health components according to the total sample, gender and age groups. In the total sample, the lowest value is found in the mental health (35.31 ± 10) scales, followed by the social functioning (35.6 ± 11.8) and Mental Component Summary (35.66 ± 9.5). In comparisons between both genders there are significant differences (p < 0.01) in four scales, physical function, bodily pain, vitality and mental health, with lower scores in the female gender. We can observe that from the summary measurements, the Mental Component Summary has the lowest score in both genders.
Among the age categories (Table 3), the ≤44-years-old group had significantly lower scores than the ≥45-years-old group for vitality, role limitations due to emotional problems, mental health and Mental Component Summary (p < 0.05); on the physical function scale and the Physical Component Summary measurement, there were significant differences between age groups (p < 0.05), where older teachers had lower scores than the younger teachers.

3.3. Multivariate Regression Analysis

Table 4 presents the results of the logistical regression between the percentiles ≤50 (worse health) of the mental and physical health components as dependent variables, with sociodemographic variables as independent variables. There were two predictor conditions of a deterioration in the mental health component: first, teachers who indicated working more hours than before the pandemic (OR: 1.902; p < 0.05) and, second, those whose work–family balance was affected due to work demands (OR = 3.996; p < 0.05). Teachers in the first age group (≤44 years) presented greater risk (OR: 2.462; p < 0.01) of mental health deterioration than the second group (≥45 years). However, the younger teachers presented lower risk of deterioration in the physical health component (OR: 0.536; p < 0.05) than the older group.

4. Discussion

The objective of this study was to evaluate QoL in a sample of Chilean teachers and its association with their sociodemographic characteristics, work hours and work–family balance during the COVID-19 pandemic. The principal results of this study indicate that teachers present low scores in the mental QoL components during the COVID-19 pandemic. First, teachers ≤ 44 years old present a greater risk of effects on the mental QoL component, while teachers ≥ 45 years old present a greater risk of effects on the physical QoL component. Finally, teachers who perceived a negative impact on work–family balance, and teachers who indicated working more hours than before the pandemic, reported the greatest mental health impact risk.

4.1. Age and Quality of Life

Regarding age groups, in this study younger adult teachers (≤44 years) have a significant risk of mental health deterioration (OR: 2.462; p < 0.01), which coincides with the cases of teachers in China and Chile prior to COVID-19 [33,38,39] and during the COVID-19 pandemic [38,45]. These findings could be explained due to the reported fact that older teachers present lower stress because they are more competent in routine work and solve problems more independently [39]; however, in this study there is a lower physical deterioration risk in younger teachers (OR:0.536), a result which can be related to the high rate of physical conditions and significant work capacity reduction of teachers ≥45 years old compared to ≤44 years old reported in Bulgaria and Chile [33,46].
The results regarding mental health in younger teachers during the pandemic also align with working populations beyond teachers: for example, in the UK and Austria, there have been reports among young adult populations of major QoL impact and especially on mental health during COVID-19 [47,48], as well as among young health workers and young people in the general population in China [49,50], all associated with various health and social situations resulting from the progress of the pandemic [51]. These data indicate a strong mental health deterioration among younger teachers, which could be related to workload increasing during the pandemic. It could also indicate lower stress management ability in unfavorable conditions compared to older professionals. Although more experienced teachers have already been reported to have tools for better facing stress [39], this could also indicate the need to develop skills during teachers’ academic formation to face stress events related to their work.

4.2. Increase in Workload and Quality of Life

Various working groups, including teachers, have reported the need to reinvent their work routine to accommodate teleworking [6,17,21,22]. A total of 78.7% of teachers in this study indicated that they worked more hours during the pandemic than before it with the same contract, consequently presenting an increased risk of lower mental health quality (OR: 1.902). These results are even more relevant in relation to reports from the International Labour Organization [7], indicating that teleworking in the COVID-19 context contributes to a significant rise in mental health disorders, with risk factors including high workloads and rhythms, long working days, excessive task fragmentation and the perception of having to be available at all times, among other factors [7]. The findings of this study also agree with reports from Chilean teachers about mental health deterioration caused by working from home [52]. A study on Chilean teachers also found that teachers presented work burnout at a significantly greater level than other professions, with diminished engagement over the course of the nationwide health emergency due to the forced teleworking transition [27]. All this background is very important when we consider that pre-pandemic teachers already presented high rates of work overload, burnout and high rates of professional ailments [33,39,40,53,54].

4.3. Work Family Balance and Quality of Life

Regarding work–family balance in the teleworking context, our results show that 86% of teachers with low mental health scores indicated that their family and personal lives were more affected during the COVID-19 pandemic than before it began. This factor causes the greatest risk increase in presenting low mental health in this study (OR: 3.996; p < 0.001), results that coincide with reports about the impact telework has on the work–family balance from teachers, especially in female workers [55,56]. However, the findings of this study indicate that QoL was affected in both genders in its physical and mental summary components. Nevertheless, a significant decrease was observed in several dimensions of QoL: physical function, bodily pain, vitality and mental health (see Table 3). These data are consistent with recent studies where the QoL of female teachers during the global health crisis of COVID-19 was affected [38], where higher stress and anxiety have been reported compared to men [45]. These observations are relevant in the context that women are predominant in the teaching profession.
Furthermore, these findings can be compared with reports from other professions where an impact on the work–family balance is associated with a negative impact on workers’ mental health [57,58]. In the UK, it was reported that work overload and imbalance between work and personal lives are principal stressors [59]. Studies in Spain and China reported that work–family balance is an important source of stress and burnout [60,61]. Work overload during COVID-19 confinement could affect the work–family balance in this study, as demonstrated by reports from a Chinese national general population survey or in Japanese nursing schools [62,63]. Therefore, since work–family balance impact and work overload are stressors, they affect workers’ QoL, especially their mental health [56,57].
Finally, before the COVID-19 pandemic there were already reports of high work overload, stress, and lack of time for personal and family life with impact on teachers’ mental health [33,38,54,64]. This means that all extra work in teaching hours, e.g., material preparation, test creation and revision and administrative work [53], are intensified during Chilean teachers’ teleworking, with a high risk of mental health deterioration in their QoL.

4.4. Limitations

The limitations of this study are typical of a cross-sectional study without the ability to compare results before and during the pandemic. Measuring impacts on the new work context on family and work life was also done via questions, making it necessary to have more in-depth studies which can evaluate the factors affecting work–family balance in teachers. Besides, the study is limited by using a single yes/no question to examine whether work/family relationships were affected during the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, the variable number of school-age children of teachers was not included and it is a variable that deserves future studies due to its reported influence on teachers’ mental health [45]. Another limitation is the snowball sampling method; non-probability sampling has inherent limitations in representing the entire population. However, it has the advantage of covering many people. The snowball sampling also had an important reach, but most representation came from the central zone of Chile, which may be because most of the national population lives in this zone. Future studies should have larger samples more representative of the regions of Chile.

5. Conclusions

The COVID-19 pandemic and the unavoidable change in Chilean teachers’ work format intensified work overload, generated work–family balance conflicts and resulted in a negative effect on teachers’ mental QoL components. Teachers ≤ 44 years old had the highest risk in the mental health component and teachers ≥ 45 years old had the highest physical health component risk. This suggests promoting improvements in policies for distributing teachers’ contractual hours, considering all the extra work hours which are unpaid but essential for making and reviewing material [53], in order to reduce pressure, work overload and burnout, factors which increase the risks associated with QoL deterioration. In addition, we agree with recent research that recommends establishing public policies focused on mitigating these stressors beyond the human-information and communication technologies interaction [65]. We also suggest that undergraduate teachers be adequately trained to face the conflicts associated with the profession.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, P.A.L.; methodology, P.A.L. and G.V.-F.; formal analysis, P.A.L., G.V-F.; investigation, P.A.L. and G.V.-F.; resources, P.A.L.; data curation, P.A.L., G.V.-F.; writing—original draft preparation, P.A.L., G.V.-F.; writing—review and editing, P.A.L., G.V.-F.; visualization, P.A.L., G.V.-F.; supervision, P.A.L., G.V.-F.; project administration, P.A.L.; funding acquisition, P.A.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by FONDECYT-ANID, grant number 11170716.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki. All procedures for this study were approved by the bioethics committee of the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso (BIOEPUCV-H393-2021).

Informed Consent Statement

Participating teachers signed informed voluntary consent prior to collecting their background information, which explicitly said that all personal results are strictly confidential.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the teachers of all the schools for their willingness to participate in this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. WHO. WHO Statement Regarding Cluster of Pneumonia Cases in Wuhan, China. Available online: https://www.who.int/china/news/detail/09-01-2020-who-statement-regarding-cluster-of-pneumonia-cases-in-wuhan-china (accessed on 2 February 2021).
  2. WHO Archived: WHO Timeline—COVID-19. Available online: https://www.who.int/news/item/27-04-2020-who-timeline---covid-19 (accessed on 10 April 2021).
  3. Mira, J. Pandemia COVID-19: Y ahora ¿qué? J. Health Qual. Res. 2020, 35, 133–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Phelan, A.; Katz, R.; Gostin, L.O. The Novel Coronavirus Originating in Wuhan, China: Challenges for Global Health Governance. JAMA 2020, 323, 709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Wang, C.; Horby, P.W.; Hayden, F.G.; Gao, G.F. A novel coronavirus outbreak of global health concern. Lancet 2020, 395, 470–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Guyot, K.; Sawhill, I. Telecommuting Will Likely Continue Long after the Pandemic. Brookings. Available online: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/04/06/telecommuting-will-likely-continue-long-after-the-pandemic/ (accessed on 10 April 2021).
  7. Bueno, C. Teletrabajo y Salud Mental: Avances y Desafíos Más Allá de la Pandemia. Available online: https://www.ilo.org/santiago/publicaciones/reflexiones-trabajo/WCMS_757609/lang--es/index.htm (accessed on 2 February 2021).
  8. Tresierra, C.E.V.; Pozo, A.C.L. Fatigue and mental workload among workers: About social distancing. Rev. Esp. Salud Publica 2020, 94, 202010112. [Google Scholar]
  9. Palumbo, R. Let me go to the office! An investigation into the side effects of working from home on work-life balance. Int. J. Public Sect. Manag. 2020, 33, 771–790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Thulin, E.; Vilhelmson, B.; Johansson, M. New Telework, Time Pressure, and Time Use Control in Everyday Life. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Brooks, S.K.; Webster, R.K.; Smith, L.E.; Woodland, L.; Wessely, S.; Greenberg, N.; Rubin, G.J. The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: Rapid review of the evidence. Lancet 2020, 395, 912–920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Dubey, S.; Biswas, P.; Ghosh, R.; Chatterjee, S.; Dubey, M.J.; Chatterjee, S.; Lahiri, D.; Lavie, C.J. Psychosocial impact of COVID-19. Diabetes Metab. Syndr. Clin. Res. Rev. 2020, 14, 779–788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Pfefferbaum, B.; North, C.S. Mental Health and the Covid-19 Pandemic. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 383, 510–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Wang, C.; Tee, M.; Roy, A.E.; Fardin, M.A.; Srichokchatchawan, W.; Habib, H.A.; Tran, B.X.; Hussain, S.; Hoang, M.T.; Le, X.T.; et al. The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on physical and mental health of Asians: A study of seven middle-income countries in Asia. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0246824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Stanton, R.; To, Q.G.; Khalesi, S.; Williams, S.L.; Alley, S.J.; Thwaite, T.L.; Fenning, A.S.; Vandelanotte, C. Depression, Anxiety and stress during COVID-19: Associations with changes in physical activity, sleep, tobacco and alcohol use in australian adults. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 4065. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Arriagada, P. Pandemic Covid-19: Distance education. Or the distances in education. Rev. Int. Educ. Justicia Soc. 2020, 9, 3. [Google Scholar]
  17. Cáceres-Muñoz, J.; Hernández, A.S.J.; Martín-Sánchez, M. Cierre de Escuelas y Desigualdad Socioeducativa en Tiempos del Covid-19. Una Investigación Exploratoria en Clave Internacional. Rev. Int. Educ. Justicia Soc. 2020, 9, 199–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. CEPAL-UNESCO Education in the time of COVID-19. Geopolitica 2020, 11, 11–13.
  19. Centro de Investigación Avanzada en Educación, Centro de Investigación para la Educación Inclusiva, E.R. de Servicios para la E. COVID-19 New Contexts, New Demands and Teaching Experience in Chile. 2020. Available online: http://eduinclusiva.cl/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/CIAE-COVID-VFinal-1.pdf (accessed on 10 May 2021).
  20. MINSAL President announces suspension of classes and reduces public Events—Ministerio de Salud—Gobierno de Chile, Plan de Acción Coronavirus COVID-19. Available online: https://www.minsal.cl/presidente-anuncia-suspension-de-clases-y-reduce-actos-publicos/ (accessed on 10 April 2021).
  21. Cheng, X. Challenges of “School’s Out, But Class’s on” to School Education: Practical Exploration of Chinese Schools during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Sci. Insights Educ. Front. 2020, 5, 501–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Dai, D.; Lin, G. Online Home Study Plan for Postponed 2020 Spring Semester during the COVID-19 Epidemic: A Case Study of Tangquan Middle School in Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, China. Best Évid. Chin. Educ. 2020, 4, 543–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ramos, V.; García, H.; Olea, C.; Lobos, K.; Sáez, F. View of teachers’ perception of the pedagogical work during COVID-19. CienciAmérica 2020, 9, 2–10. [Google Scholar]
  24. Aperribai, L.; Cortabarria, L.; Aguirre, T.; Verche, E.; Borges, Á. Teacher’s Physical Activity and Mental Health During Lockdown Due to the COVID-2019 Pandemic. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 577886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Sokal, L.; Trudel, L.E.; Babb, J. Canadian teachers’ attitudes toward change, efficacy, and burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int. J. Educ. Res. Open 2020, 1, 100016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Sitvast, J. Research Article. SFNurs Health J. 2017, 1, 293–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Fundación-Chile Engagement and Exhaustion in Chilean Teachers: A Look from the Covid-19 Reality. 2020. Available online: https://fch.cl/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/final-estudio-engagement-docentes.pdf (accessed on 30 April 2021).
  28. Travers, C.J.; Cooper, C.L. Mental health, job satisfaction and occupational stress among UK teachers. Work. Stress 1993, 7, 203–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Johnson, S.; Cooper, C.; Cartwright, S.; Donald, I.; Taylor, P.; Millet, C. The experience of work-related stress across occupations. J. Manag. Psychol. 2005, 20, 178–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Correlation among mental health, work stress and job burnout of rural teachers. Rev. Argent. DE Clin. Psicol. 2020, 29, 1345–1350. [CrossRef]
  31. Bauer, J.; Unterbrink, T.; Hack, A.; Pfeifer, R.; Buhl-Grießhaber, V.; Müller, U.; Wesche, H.; Frommhold, M.; Seibt, R.; Scheuch, K.; et al. Working conditions, adverse events and mental health problems in a sample of 949 German teachers. Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health 2007, 80, 442–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Bringi, S.C. Stress among the Teachers (Working Women) with Special Reference to Secondary School in Belgaum, Karnataka State: A Study. Indian J. Public Health Res. Dev. 2016, 7, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Lizana, P.A.; Vega-Fernandez, G.; Lera, L. Association between Chronic Health Conditions and Quality of Life in Rural Teachers. Front. Psychol. 2020, 10, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Vega-Fernández, G.; Lera, L.; Leyton, B.; Cortés, P.; Lizana, P.A. Musculoskeletal Disorders Associated with Quality of Life and Body Composition in Urban and Rural Public School Teachers. Front. Public Health 2021, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Arvidsson, I.; Håkansson, C.; Karlson, B.; Björk, J.; Persson, R. Burnout among Swedish school teachers –a cross-sectional analysis. BMC Public Health 2016, 16, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  36. Wang, Y.; Ramos, A.; Wu, H.; Liu, L.; Yang, X.; Wang, J.; Wang, L. Relationship between occupational stress and burnout among Chinese teachers: A cross-sectional survey in Liaoning, China. Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health 2014, 88, 589–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Innstrand, S.T.; Langballe, E.M.; Falkum, E.; Aasland, O.G. Exploring within- and between-gender differences in burnout: 8 different occupational groups. Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health 2011, 84, 813–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Lizana, P.; Vega-Fernadez, G.; Gomez-Bruton, A.; Leyton, B.; Lera, L. Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Teacher Quality of Life: A Longitudinal Study from before and during the Health Crisis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 3764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Yang, X.; Ge, C.; Hu, B.; Chi, T.; Wang, L. Relationship between quality of life and occupational stress among teachers. Public Health 2009, 123, 750–755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Karakaya, I.; Karakaya, M.G.; Tunç, E.; Kıhtır, M. Musculoskeletal problems and quality of life of elementary school teachers. Int. J. Occup. Saf. Ergon. 2015, 21, 344–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Olivares-Tirado, P. Health status profile of ISAPRES beneficiaries: Preliminary Report: 2005. Documento de Trabajo. Departa- mento de Estudios y Desarrollo. Superintendencia de ISAPRES. Available online: http://www.supersalud.cl/documentacion/569/articles-1062_recurso_1.pdf (accessed on 11 July 2021).
  42. Ware, J.E.; Sherbourne, C.D. The MOS 36-ltem Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). Med. Care 1992, 30, 473–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Ware, J.E.; Kosinski, M.A.; Keller, S.D. SF-36 Physical and Mental Health Summary Scales; Health Institute, New England Medical Center: Boston, MA, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  44. Ministerio de Salud de Chile II National Health Survey NHS: Chile, 2009–2010; 2010; 1. Available online: https://www.minsal.cl/portal/url/item/bcb03d7bc28b64dfe040010165012d23.pdf (accessed on 30 November 2020).
  45. Ozamiz-Etxebarria, N.; Santamaría, M.D.; Mondragon, N.I.; Santxo, N.B. Emotional State of School and University Teachers in Northern Spain in the Face of COVID-19. Rev. Esp. Salud Publica 2021, 95, e202102030. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  46. Vangelova, K.; Dimitrova, I.; Tzenova, B. Work ability of aging teachers in Bulgaria. Int. J. Occup. Med. Environ. Health 2018, 31, 593–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Pieh, C.; Budimir, S.; Delgadillo, J.; Barkham, M.; Fontaine, J.R.J.; Probst, T. Mental Health during COVID-19 Lockdown in the United Kingdom. Psychosom. Med. 2021, 83, 328–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Pieh, C.; Budimir, S.; Probst, T. The effect of age, gender, income, work, and physical activity on mental health during coronavirus disease (COVID-19) lockdown in Austria. J. Psychosom. Res. 2020, 136, 110186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Huang, Y.; Zhao, N. Generalized anxiety disorder, depressive symptoms and sleep quality during COVID-19 epidemic in China: A web-based cross-sectional survey. medRxiv 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Kang, L.; Ma, S.; Chen, M.; Yang, J.; Wang, Y.; Li, R.; Yao, L.; Bai, H.; Cai, Z.; Yang, B.X.; et al. Impact on mental health and perceptions of psychological care among medical and nursing staff in Wuhan during the 2019 novel coronavirus disease outbreak: A cross-sectional study. Brain, Behav. Immun. 2020, 87, 11–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Hossain, M.; Tasnim, S.; Sultana, A.; Faizah, F.; Mazumder, H.; Zou, L.; McKyer, E.L.J.; Ahmed, H.U.; Ma, P. Epidemiology of mental health problems in COVID-19: A review. F1000Research 2020, 9, 636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Ramos-Huenteo, V.; García-Vásquez, H.; Olea-González, C.; Lobos-Peña, K.; Sáez, F. Percepción docente respecto al trabajo pedagógico durante la COVID-19. CienciAmérica 2020, 9, 334–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Robalino, M.; Körner, A. Health Conditions and Teachers’ Work; Santiago de Chile: Oficina Regional de Educación de la UNESCO para América Latina y el Caribe, OREALC/UNESCO: Santiago, Chile, 2005; Available online: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000142551 (accessed on 29 January 2021).
  54. Lizana, P.A.; Aballay, J.; Vicente-Rodríguez, G.; Gómez-Bruton, A. Low interest in physical activity and higher rates of obesity among rural teachers. Work 2020, 67, 1015–1022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Bilge, S.; Kara, K.; Güneş, Z.; Tüysüzer, B.Ş. Work-Family Conflict During Working from Home Due to Pandemic: A Qualitative Research on Female Teachers. Int. J. Curric. Instr. 2021, 13, 251–273. [Google Scholar]
  56. da Silva, J.P.; Fischer, F.M. Understudied school teachers’ work/life balance and everyday life typologies. Chrono Int. 2020, 37, 1513–1515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Neto, M.; Chambel, M.J.; Carvalho, V.S. Work-Family life conflict and mental well-being. Occup. Med. 2018, 68, 364–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  58. Oakman, J.; Kinsman, N.; Stuckey, R.; Graham, M.; Weale, V. A rapid review of mental and physical health effects of working at home: How do we optimise health? BMC Public Health 2020, 20, 1825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Phillips, S.; Sen, D.; McNamee, R. Prevalence and causes of self-reported work-related stress in head teachers. Occup. Med. 2007, 57, 367–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  60. Pu, J.; Hou, H.; Ma, R.; Sang, J. The effect of psychological capital between work–family conflict and job burnout in Chinese university teachers: Testing for mediation and moderation. J. Health Psychol. 2017, 22, 1799–1807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Vergel, A.I.S. Conciliación y salud laboral: ¿una relación posible? Actualidad en el estudio del conflicto trabajo-familia y la recuperación del estrés. Med. Segur. Trab. 2011, 57, 115–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  62. Shimazu, A.; Bakker, A.; Demerouti, E. How Job Demands Affect an Intimate Partner: A Test of the Spillover-Crossover Model in Japan. J. Occup. Health 2009, 51, 239–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  63. Wang, H.M.; Ma, A.L.; Guo, T.T. Gender Concept, Work Pressure, and Work–Family Conflict. Am. J. Men’s Health 2020, 14, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Miño, A. Quality of working life in Chilean teachers. Summa Psicológica UST 2016, 13, 45–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Estrada-Muñoz, C.; Vega-Muñoz, A.; Castillo, D.; Müller-Pérez, S.; Boada-Grau, J. Technostress of Chilean Teachers in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic and Teleworking. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 5458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table
Table 1. Sociodemographic and working characteristics of Chilean teachers separated by gender and age group.
Table 1. Sociodemographic and working characteristics of Chilean teachers separated by gender and age group.
Total SampleGenderp-ValueAgep-Value
MaleFemale≤44≥45
n (%)n (%)n (%)n (%)n (%)
Age (years) c37.57 ± 10.7538.39 ± 11.2137.33 ± 10.630.442 a32.27 ± 5.4853.67 ± 5.52<0.001 a
Marital status
  Single158 (47.02)31 (43.66)127 (47.92)0.812 b140 (55.34)18 (21.69)<0.001
  Married/partnered155 (46.13)35 (49.30)120 (45.28) 108 (42.69)47 (56.63)
  DWW23 (6.85)5 (7.04)18 (6.79) 5 (1.98)18 (21.69)
Experience work (years) c23.62 ± 14.4127.01 ± 14.7722.71 ± 14.210.278 a26.72 ± 9.3422.60 ± 15.61<0.01 a
Type of contract
  Fixed-term218 (64.88)22 (30.99)96 (36.23)0.411 b122 (44.27)6 (7.23)<0.001
  Indefinite-term118 (35.12)49 (69.01)169 (63.77) 141 (55.73)77 (92.77)
Type of school
  Public (state)100 (29.76)21 (29.58)79 (29.81)0.589 b74 (29.25)26 (31.33)0.813 b
  Private (subsidized)156 (46.43)30 (42.25)126 (47.55) 120 (47.43)36 (43.37)
  Private (non-subsidized)80 (23.81)20 (28.17)60 (22.64) 59 (23.32)21 (25.30)
Domestic work
  <15 h268 (79.76)60 (84.51)208 (78.49)0.262 b208 (82.21)60 (72.29)0.059 b
  >15 h68 (20.24)11 (15.49)57 (21.51) 45 (17.79)23 (27.71)
Work hours in pandemic d
  Higher258 (78.66)51 (72.86)207 (80.23)0.182 b191 (76.40)67 (85.90)0.126 c
  Less/Equal70 (21.34)19 (21.14)51 (19.77) 59 (23.6)11 (14.1)
Work–family balance
  Unaffected46 (14.02)11 (15.71)35 (13.57)0.646 b32 (12.80)14 (17.95)0.253 b
  Affected282 (85.98)59 (84.29)223 (86.43) 218 (87.20)64 (82.05)
DWW, Divorced Widow Widower; <15 and >15, domestic work in hours; p < 0.05. a Wilcoxon test, b Chi-squared; c Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation; d Work hours in pandemic, Higher: more than before the pandemic, Less/Equal: less than or equal before the pandemic.
Table
Table 2. Sociodemographic and working characteristics of Chilean teachers separated by PCS (Physical Component Summary) and MCS (Mental Component Summary) scores below 50th percentile and above 50th percentile.
Table 2. Sociodemographic and working characteristics of Chilean teachers separated by PCS (Physical Component Summary) and MCS (Mental Component Summary) scores below 50th percentile and above 50th percentile.
Physical Component Summaryp-ValueMental Component Summaryp-Value
<P50>50<P50>P50
n (%)n (%)n (%)n (%)
Age (years) c38.95 ± 0.8936.17 ± 0.790.022 a34.60 ± 0.7140.51 ± 0.88<0.001 a
  ≤44116 (69.05)137 (81.55)0.010 b141 (83.93)112 (66.7)<0.001 b
  ≥4552 (30.95)31 (18.45) 27 (16.07)56 (33.33)
Marital status
  Single75 (44.64)83 (49.40)0.140 b89 (52.98)69 (41.07)0.091 b
  Married/partnered77 (45.83)78 (46.43) 69 (41.07)86 (51.19)
  DWW16 (9.52)7 (4.17) 10 (5.95)13 (7.74)
Work experience (years) c24.11 ± 13.023.13 ± 14.850.571 a24.58 ± 15.3222.65 ± 13.42<0.001 a
Type of contract
  Fixed-term62 (36.91)56 (33.33)0.493 b77 (45.83)41 (24.40)<0.001 b
  Indefinite-term106 (63.10)112 (66.67) 91 (54.17)127 (75.60)
  Type of school
  Public (state)55 (32.74)45 (26.79)0.489 b55 (32.74)45 (26.79)0.109 b
  Private (subsidized)75 (44.64)81 (48.21) 81 (48.21)75 (44.64)
  Private (non-subsidized)38 (22.62)42 (25) 32 (19.05)48 (28.57)
Domestic work
  <15 h135 (80.36)133 (79.17)0.786 b138 (82.14)130 (77.38)0.342 b
  >15 h33 (19.64)35 (20.83) 30 (17.86)38 (22.62)
Work hours in pandemic d
  Higher133 (82.10)125 (75.30)0.133 b141 (84.33)117 (72.67)0.010 b
  Less/Equal29 (17.9)41 (24.70) 44 (27.33)44 (27.33)
Work–family balance
  Unaffected17 (10.49)29 (17.47)0.069 b10 (5.99)36 (22.36)0.001 b
  Affected145 (89.51)137 (82.53) 157 (94.01)125 (77.64)
DWW, Divorced Widow Widower; p < 0.05. a Wilcoxon test, b Chi-squared; c data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation. d Work hours in pandemic, Higher: more than before the pandemic, Less/Equal: less than or equal before the pandemic.
Table
Table 3. Comparisons between median values of eight scales and mental and physical QoL components by SF-36 according to gender and age group.
Table 3. Comparisons between median values of eight scales and mental and physical QoL components by SF-36 according to gender and age group.
QoLTotal SampleGenderpAgep
Mean ± SDMaleFemale≤44≥45
PF49.42 ± 7.0951.14 ± 6.6848.96 ± 7.140.004 a50.56 ± 6.2045.96 ± 8.44<0.001 a
RP45.46 ± 7.0844.91 ± 6.9245.60 ± 7.120.476 a45.53 ± 7.2345.25 ± 6.620.835 a
BP39.94 ± 9.7843.73 ± 8.9838.92 ± 9.75<0.001 a39.71 ± 9.9540.63 ± 9.240.607 a
GH43.44 ± 10.0443.91 ± 9.0043.31 ± 10.310.802 a43.46 ± 10.0443.35 ± 10.090.897 a
VT39.80 ± 8.3943.40 ± 8.3938.83 ± 8.13<0.001 a39.02 ± 8.0142.14 ± 9.11<0.001 a
SF35.60 ± 11.8335.70 ± 11.9035.58 ± 11.840.976 a35.89 ± 11.2234.72 ± 13.570.442 a
RE43.76 ± 7.2844.11 ± 7.2043.67 ± 7.320.656 a43.01 ± 7.1546.06 ± 7.25<0.001 a
MH35.31 ± 10.0238.51 ± 10.8434.45 ± 9.630.008 a34.69 ± 9.3137.18 ± 11.800.045 a
PCS47.58 ± 6.8448.79 ± 6.7447.26 ± 6.850.119 a48.28 ± 2.7745.46 ± 6.670.002 a
MCS35.66 ± 9.4837.54 ± 10.0735.15 ± 9.270.059 b34.68 ± 9.0338.63 ± 10.24<0.001 a
SD, standard deviation; QoL, quality of life; PF, physical function; RP, role limitations due to physical problems. RE, role limitations due to emotional problems; BP, bodily pain; SF, social functioning; VT, vitality; GH, general health perceptions; MH, mental health; PCS, Physical Component Summary; MCS, Mental Component Summary; p < 0.05 a Wilcoxon’s text, b t-test; p < 0.05.
Table
Table 4. Logistical regressions for association of the 50th percentile of the Physical Component Summary and Mental Component Summary with sociodemographic and work characteristics adjusted by gender and age.
Table 4. Logistical regressions for association of the 50th percentile of the Physical Component Summary and Mental Component Summary with sociodemographic and work characteristics adjusted by gender and age.
Physical Component SummaryMental Component Summary
Percentile 50Percentile 50
Model 1Model 2Model 3Model 1Model 2Model 3
OROROROROROR
p-Valuep-Valuep-Valuep-Valuep-Valuep-Value
Work in pandemic (more than before)1.3981.3901.2681.7471.7331.902
0.2270.2360.4010.0520.0560.029
Work–family Relation (affected)1.6901.7191.8664.1194.2523.996
0.1150.1050.067<0.001<0.001<0.001
Domestic work (>15 h) 0.8270.761 0.7240.778
0.5010.340 0.2610.393
Gender (female) 1.397 1.350
0.228 0.295
Age (≤44 years) 0.536 2.462
0.021 0.001
Hosmer–Lemeshow test a0.8910.9990.1770.4430.5800.320
a A value above 0.05 indicates that the model fits the data.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lizana, P.A.; Vega-Fernadez, G. Teacher Teleworking during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Association between Work Hours, Work–Family Balance and Quality of Life. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 7566. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18147566

AMA Style

Lizana PA, Vega-Fernadez G. Teacher Teleworking during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Association between Work Hours, Work–Family Balance and Quality of Life. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18(14):7566. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18147566

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lizana, Pablo A., and Gustavo Vega-Fernadez. 2021. "Teacher Teleworking during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Association between Work Hours, Work–Family Balance and Quality of Life" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 14: 7566. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18147566

APA Style

Lizana, P. A., & Vega-Fernadez, G. (2021). Teacher Teleworking during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Association between Work Hours, Work–Family Balance and Quality of Life. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(14), 7566. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18147566

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop