77. The intervention effect of mental health care in the logistics industry based on emotional disorders

Abstract Background Practitioners in the logistics industry generally face problems such as high-intensity workloads, irregular schedules, and relatively high occupational risks. The prevalence of emotional disorders is significantly higher than that of the general population. This not only seriously affects the physical and mental health and quality of life of practitioners but may also increase the safety risks of logistics operations due to problems such as inattention and slow reaction. At present, the intervention for mental health in the logistics industry mainly takes the form of scattered mental health lectures and distributing promotional brochures, lacking systematic and targeted nursing intervention plans, and the effect is not good. Therefore, this study proposes a systematic mental health care intervention model to improve the mental health status of logistics practitioners and reduce occupational safety risks, with the aim of providing a basis for improving the mental health service system in the logistics industry. Methods In this study, 120 employees who met the screening criteria for mild to moderate depression or anxiety disorders were selected from the sorting and long-distance transportation department of a large logistics company. The research subjects were randomly divided into the intervention group (n = 60) and the control group (n = 60) by random sampling. The control group did not receive any intervention. The intervention group received structured mental health care intervention, including stress cognition reconstruction, emotion regulation skills, workplace interpersonal communication, and work-life balance strategies. The intervention period was 8 weeks, once a week, and each session lasted 90 minutes. After the intervention ended, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 were used. The GAD-7 and Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9) were used to evaluate the two groups. Results After the intervention, the PHQ-9 score of the intervention group was 5.8 ± 2.1 points, which was lower than 9.5 ± 2.7 points of the control group, and the difference was significant (p