What is Number of Days in Number of Times? Associations Between, and Responsiveness of, Two Sickness Presenteeism Measures

Favorable Working Conditions Related to Health Behavior Among Nurses and Care Assistants in Sweden-A Population-Based Cohort Study

Objective: To analyze the associations between favorable physical and psychosocial work factors and health behavior among healthcare employees (nurses and care assistants) with health complaints.

Methods: The study was based on seven iterations (2001–2013) of a biennial Swedish work environment survey linked with data from public registers. In all, 7,180 healthcare employees, aged 16–64 years, who had reported health complaints, were included. Health behavior was operationalized through four combinations of sickness absence (SA) and sickness presence (SP): ‘good health behavior' (Low SP/Low SA), ‘recovery behavior' (Low SP/High SA), ‘risk behavior' (High SP/Low SA), and ‘poor health behavior' (High SP/High SA). Odds ratios (OR) were calculated by multinomial logistic regression with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results: After adjusting for socio-demographic factors, those who rarely worked in strenuous postures had an increased probability of having ‘good health behavior' (OR range: nurses 1.72–2.02; care assistants 1.46–1.75). Those who rarely experienced high job demands had increased odds for having ‘good health behavior' (OR: nurses 1.81; OR range: care assistants 1.67–2.13), while having good job control was found to be related to ‘good health behavior' only among care assistants (OR range 1.30–1.68). In the full model, after also considering differences in health, none of the work environment indicators affected ‘good health behavior' among nursing professionals. Among care assistants, rarely having heavy physical work and having low psychosocial demands remained significantly associated with ‘good health behavior' (OR range: 1.24–1.58) and ‘recovery behavior' (OR range: 1.33–1.70). No associations were found between favorable work environment factors and ‘risk behavior' among the two groups of employees. However, positive assessments of the work situation were associated with ‘good health behavior,' even after controlling for all confounders for both groups (OR range: 1.43–2.69).

Conclusions: ‘Good health behavior' and ‘recovery behavior' among care assistants were associated with favorable physical and psychosocial working conditions even when health was considered. This implies that reduced sickness presence and sickness absence among care assistants can be achieved through improved physical and psychosocial working conditions.

Reasons for presenteeism in different occupational branches in Sweden: a population based cross-sectional study

Objective

To compare the prevalence and reasons for presenteeism in occupations in three branches defined as employees handling people, handling things or handling symbols.

Method

A cross-sectional population-based cohort study was conducted. The study group was drawn from a representative sample (n = 6230) aged 16–64, who had been interviewed in 2015 or in 2017 for the Swedish Work Environment Surveys (SWES). The odds ratios (ORs) stratified by occupational category for reasons of presenteeism, with 95% confidence intervals (CI), were estimated using binomial multiple logistic regression analysis.

Results

The study showed that presenteeism was more common among employees handling people (74%), when compared to employees handling things (65%) or handling symbols (70%). The most common reason for presenteeism among employees handling people was “I do not want to burden my colleagues”, while “Because nobody else can carry out my responsibilities” was most common in the other two categories. After control for socio-demography, work environments and health, the differences in reasons mostly remained significant between the three occupational categories.

Conclusion

The differences between occupational categories are important for prevalence and reasons for presenteeism. As presenteeism affects the future health of employees and the productivity of the work unit, attempts to reduce presenteeism may be important. Because the reasons vary between occupations, customized preventive measures should be applied in different occupational settings. Among employees handling people, covering up for absence in work team is relevant, while among employees handling symbols and handling things the corresponding focus could be on shared responsibilities for specific tasks.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00420-021-01701-2.