We conducted a survey to examine the physical and mental state of medical staff after the disaster to assess their motivation toward work. We explained the purpose of the survey to staff and obtained their verbal consent to participate in this minimal risk research. The study received approval number 2020-194 from the Ethics Committee of Fukushima Medical University, which is guided by local policy, national law, and the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki.
Participants were 19 medical staff working in the Rehabilitation Center at Fukushima Medical University Hospital, located about 60 km from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. Already equipped to deal with acute disease and trauma, this hospital was among those in Fukushima Prefecture specially designated for disaster response. Although the hospital itself was not severely damaged, its municipal water supply was interrupted, necessitating extreme conservation measures during the first week of disaster response. For close to a month, routine outpatient care was suspended, and patients with chronic conditions were evacuated to facilities outside the disaster area. Emergency care patients were received, treated, and, if necessary, transferred, until routine hospital practice could be resumed.
Radiation levels around the hospital were monitored and disclosed to all staff. A brief peak, on par with background radiation levels experienced in a commercial jet at cruising altitude, was followed by rapid exponential decay. Nevertheless, medical staff were worried about exposure to continuous low-dose radiation.
Participants were 10 men and 9 women, 36.9 ± 12.3 years old (mean ± standard deviation [SD]). Five participants were in their 20s, eight were in their 30s, three were in their 40s, and three were in their 50s. Ten participants were physical therapists, three were occupational therapists, two were speech therapists, two were doctors, one was a nurse, and one was a nursing assistant. All participants had been working at the Rehabilitation Center when the Great East Japan Earthquake and the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident occurred.
This prospective, observational study began 12 days after the disaster, and continued for 4 years, with five surveys in total. The surveys were administered in March 2011 (Survey 1), March 2012 (Survey 2), March 2013 (Survey 3), March 2014 (Survey 4), and March 2015 (Survey 5).
The survey questionnaires included the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), EuroQol (EQ-5D), and MOS Short-Form 36-item Health Survey (SF-36). The informed consent process was conducted verbally, with all center staff agreeing to participate.
BDI
This self-report questionnaire measures the presence and severity of depression symptoms15,16). Higher scores indicate greater depression: minimal depression = 0-9, mild depression = 10-16, moderate depression = 17-29, and severe depression = 30-63. License to use the questionnaire is available from the following companies in Japan: SACCESS BELL (http://www.saccess55.co.jp/), Chiba Test Center (http://www.chibatc.co.jp), and Nihon Bunka Kagakusha (http://www.nichibun.co.jp/).
STAI
This self-report questionnaire measures the presence and severity of current symptoms of anxiety and generalized propensity to be anxious17-19). There are two subscales: the State Anxiety Scale (STAI-S) evaluates the current state of anxiety, and the Trait Anxiety Scale (STAI-T) evaluates relatively stable aspects of anxiety proneness. The score range for each subtest is 20-80; higher scores indicate greater anxiety. A cutoff point of 39-40 for the STAI-S has been suggested to detect clinically significant symptoms. License to use the questionnaire is available from the following companies in Japan: SACCESS BELL (http: //www.saccess55.co.jp/), Chiba Test Center (http: //www.chibatc.co.jp), and Nihon Bunka Kagakusha (http: //www.nichibun.co.jp/).
EQ-5D
This questionnaire is a standardized non-disease-specific instrument for describing and evaluating health-related QOL20-22). This instrument has five dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression) with three levels each. The descriptive system defines (35) = 243 different states with utility scores that range from 0.000-1.000. Higher scores indicate better QOL. The questionnaire was used after registration with the EuroQol Office (https: //euroqol.org).
SF-36
This questionnaire is a multi-item generic health-related QOL survey intended to measure “general health concepts not specific to any age, disease, or treatment group”23-25). The SF-36 measures eight health domains: physical functioning (PF), role physical (RP), bodily pain (BP), general health (GH), vitality (VT), social functioning (SF), role emotional (RE), and mental health (MH). The SF-36 also generates a physical component summary (PCS) score, a mental component summary (MCS) score, and a role/social component summary (RCS) score26). The scale scores are calculated by summing responses across scale items and then transforming these raw scores to a 0-100 scale. Computerized scoring algorithms are available and can be used to produce norm-based T scores for each scale (with a mean of 50 and SD of 10). Higher scores indicate better health. SF-36 was used under license between our institute and iHope QOL (https: //www.sf-36.jp/index.html).
Statistical analysis
We compared annual survey scores among the following age groups: 20s (n = 5), 30s (n = 8), and 40s/50s (n = 6). First, we used the Friedman test to analyze changes in BDI, STAI, EQ-5D, and SF-36 scores over time (Tables 1 and 2). The Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Bonferroni correction were applied after the Friedman test to compare data from the different surveys for each age group (Tables 1 and 2). The Mann-Whitney U test and Bonferroni correction were applied after performing the Kruskal-Wallis test to compare scores among the age groups (Tables 3 and 4). A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. All analyses were performed using IBM SPSS statistical software (version 26.0, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).

Table 1. Longitudinal changes in BDI, STAI, and EQ-5D scores during the 4-year period after the disaster
Data are shown as mean values (standard deviation).
BDI: Beck depression inventory, STAI: State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, STAI-S: State anxiety scale, STAI-T: Trait anxiety scale, EQ-5D: EuroQoL utility score.
a-k: Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Bonferroni correction were performed after Friedman’s test.
a, b, e, g, h, k:p < 0.05
c, d, f, i, j:p < 0.01

Table 2. Longitudinal changes in SF-36 scores during the 4-year period after the disaster
Data are shown as mean values (standard deviation).
SF-36: MOS Short-Form 36-item Health Survey, PF: physical functioning, RP: role physical, BP: bodily pain, GH: general health, VT: vitality, SF: social functioning, RE: role emotional, MH: mental health, PCS: physical component summary, MCS: mental component summary, RCS: role/social component summary
a-x: Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Bonferroni correction were performed after Friedman’s test.
a, d, h, o, p, q, r, s, t, u, v, x:p < 0.05
b, c, e, f, g, i, j, k, l, m, n, w:p < 0.01

Table 3. Intergenerational changes in BDI, STAI, and EQ-5D scores during the 4-year period after the disaster
Data are shown as mean values (standard deviation).
BDI: Beck depression inventory, STAI: State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, STAI-S: State anxiety scale, STAI-T: Trait anxiety scale, EQ-5D: EuroQoL utility score.
a, b, c: Mann-Whitney U test and Bonferroni correction were performed after Kruskal-Wallis test.
a, b, c:p < 0.05

Table 4. Intergenerational changes in SF-36 scores during the 4-year period after the disaster
Data are shown as mean values (standard deviation).
SF-36: MOS Short-Form 36-item Health Survey, PF: physical functioning, RP: role physical, BP: bodily pain, GH: general health, VT: vitality, SF: social functioning, RE: role emotional, MH: mental health, PCS: physical component summary, MCS: mental component summary, RCS: role/social component summary
a, b, c: Mann-Whitney U test and Bonferroni correction were performed after Kruskal-Wallis test.
a, b, c:p < 0.01