The impact of leisure-time physical activity and occupational physical activity on sickness absence. A prospective study among people with physically demanding jobs.

OBJECTIVES: This prospective study aimed to investigate the relation between occupational physical activity (OPA), leisure-time physical activity (LTPA) and sickness absence (SA). A second aim was to explore the possible interaction effects between OPA and LTPA in determining SA. METHODS: The study is based on data from 304 workers in the service and manufacturing sector. Moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) was measured by two Axivity AX3 accelerometers for 2-4 consecutive working days. Participants reported on the level of their physically demanding tasks by using a 5-item scale from the Job Content Questionnaire. Data on SA was provided by the administration departments of the participating companies during a 1 year follow-up period. We used negative binomial regression models for our statistical analysis. RESULTS: After adjusting for potential confounders, physically demanding tasks were significantly associated with a higher number of SA episodes and days. Accelerometer-assessed MVPA during leisure time but not during work was correlated with lower SA. Our results show a significant interaction effect between MVPA during work and leisure time in the sense that more MVPA during work increased the risk for SA days only among workers with low LTPA, but not among workers with moderate-to-high LTPA. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that LTPA and OPA are related to opposite SA outcomes. MVPA during leisure time and work interact in their effect on SA, whereas we found no interaction effect between LTPA and self-reported physically demanding tasks in determining SA.

Are Psychosocial Resources Buffering the Relation Between Physical Work Behaviors and Need for Recovery?

Objectives: We investigate whether job control and/or social support at work play a buffering role in the relation between various physical work behaviors and Need for Recovery (NFR) among employees with physically demanding jobs. Methods: Our findings are based on data from 332 workers. The Job Content Questionnaire was used to assess job control, social support and specific physically demanding tasks. General physical work behaviors were measured by two Axivity AX3 accelerometers. The NFR Scale (0-11) was used to assess NFR. We used multiple linear regression models. Results: Sitting at work turned out to be negatively associated with NFR, whereas physically demanding tasks were associated positively with NFR. Our results show a significant buffering role for job control on the correlation between sitting, physically demanding tasks and NFR, but not for social support. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that higher job control might be beneficial to reduce high NFR and eventually may help to reduce early drop-out and sickness absence. Further research is called for to confirm the buffering role of job control and to investigate the underlying mechanisms.

Low back and neck pain: objective and subjective measures of workplace psychosocial and physical hazards.

OBJECTIVE: This study explored the role of occupational physical activity (OPA), physical demands and psychosocial work-related factors on low back pain (LBP) and neck-shoulder pain (NSP) amongst workers with physically demanding professions. METHODS: Data from 331 participants within the service and manufacturing sector in the Flemish Employees' Physical Activity (FEPA) study were used, with objective measures of OPA and subjective measures of physical and psychosocial work environment. A modified Nordic questionnaire collected data on LBP and NSP. RESULTS: LBP (> 30 days over a year) was reported by 25% of participants, NSP (> 30 days over a year) by 30% and the composite measure of LBP/NSP simultaneously by 17%. Objective measures of OPA were not significantly associated with any pain groups. In the final model, self-reported physical demands were associated with NSP (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.30-3.18) and LBP/NSP (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.16-3.45) but not LBP. Job control was negatively associated with LBP (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.35-0.99) and LBP/NSP (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.3-0.98). CONCLUSION: Objective measures were not associated with LBP or NSP. Self-reported measures provided insights into potential workplace hazards such as physical demands and job control which can be used to inform future strategies to prevent the development of LBP and NSP.

Is device-based total and domain-specific sedentary behaviour associated with psychological distress in Flemish workers?

BACKGROUND: There is increasing interest in the association between psychological distress and time spent in sedentary behaviour (e.g. sitting), a highly prevalent behaviour in modern society. The limited evidence is mixed and mainly based on studies using self-reported sedentary time. Few studies have investigated device-based total sedentary time in its association with distress. None, however, have examined device-based domain-specific sedentary time in relation to psychological distress. The aim of this study was to investigate whether device-based total and domain-specific sedentary behaviour were associated with psychological distress. METHODS: Flemish employees (n = 401; 20-64 years; 42.6% male; 83.6% had a 'physically active occupation') of seven organizations in service and production sectors participated. Sedentary behaviour (exposure) was assessed by two Axivity AX3 accelerometers (one placed on the thigh and one placed between the shoulders) for two to four consecutive working days. Based on diary completion, domain-specific sedentary behaviour (leisure vs. work) was assessed. The 12-item General Health Questionnaire was used to assess psychological distress (outcome). Adjusted hierarchical multiple regression models were conducted to report on the associations between total and domain-specific sedentary behaviour and psychological distress. RESULTS: About 35% of the sample had high levels of distress and average total sedentary time was 7.2 h/day. Device-based total sedentary behaviour [B = -0.009, 95% confidence interval (CI), -0.087 to 0.068], leisure-time (B = 0.001, 95% CI, -0.017 to 0.018) and work-related (B = 0.004, 95% CI, -0.006 to 0.015) sedentary behaviour were not significantly associated with psychological distress. CONCLUSION: This cross-sectional study examining the association between device-based total and domain-specific sedentary behaviour and psychological distress among employees showed a lack of significant findings.

The Relation between Domain-Specific Physical Behaviour and Cardiorespiratory Fitness: A Cross-Sectional Compositional Data Analysis on the Physical Activity Health Paradox Using Accelerometer-Assessed Data.

In contrast to leisure time physical activity (LTPA), occupational physical activity (OPA) does not have similar beneficial health effects. These differential health effects might be explained by dissimilar effects of LTPA and OPA on cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF). This study investigated cross-sectional associations between different physical behaviours during both work and leisure time and CRF by using a Compositional Data Analysis approach. Physical behaviours were assessed by two accelerometers among 309 workers with various manual jobs. During work time, more sedentary behaviour (SB) was associated with higher CRF when compared relatively to time spent on other work behaviours, while more SB during leisure time was associated with lower CRF when compared to other leisure time behaviours. Reallocating more time to moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) from the other behaviours within leisure time was positively associated with CRF, which was not the case for MVPA during work. The results of our study are in line with the physical activity health paradox and we call for further study on the interaction between LTPA and OPA by implementing device-worn measures in a longitudinal design. Our results highlight the need for recommendations to take into account the different effects of OPA and LTPA on CRF.

The association between occupational physical activity, psychosocial factors and perceived work ability among nurses.

AIM: To examine the relationship between physical and psychosocial work-related risk factors and perceived work ability (PWA) among nurses. BACKGROUND: The work of nurses is challenging due to its high physical and mental workload. This might reduce PWA. A sustainable level of PWA is crucial to maintain well-being at work and to prevent early dropout. As a consequence, gaining a better understanding of which factors play a role in determining PWA is essential for health care organisations. METHODS: The associations between work-related risk factors and PWA were investigated among 114 nurses from Ghent University Hospital, Belgium. PWA and psychosocial factors were subjectively assessed. Occupational physical activity (OPA) was objectively measured over a period of 2-5 days using two accelerometers. RESULTS: No association between OPA and PWA was found. Multiple linear regression models revealed that job demands were negatively associated with PWA, whereas job control showed a positive association with PWA. CONCLUSIONS: The results highlight the importance of psychosocial factors for more research on the PWA of nurses. Further investigation into the specific physical work demands of nurses is called for. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Giving attention to psychosocial factors is crucial to enhance the PWA and well-being of nurses.

The occupational sitting and physical activity questionnaire (OSPAQ): a validation study with accelerometer-assessed measures.

BACKGROUND: The Occupational Sitting and Physical Activity Questionnaire (OSPAQ) was developed as an easy-to-use instrument for self-reported assessment of percentage sitting, standing, walking, and performing heavy labour in a workplace setting. This study aimed to evaluate the concurrent validity of all dimensions of the OSPAQ compared to accelerometer-assessed measures of occupational physical activities in a mixed sample of sedentary and physically active professions. METHODS: Data from the Flemish Employees' Physical Activity (FEPA) study were used, including employees from the service and production sector. All participants filled in a questionnaire, underwent clinical measurements, and wore two Axivity AX3 accelerometers for at least 2 consecutive working days. Intraclass (ICC) and Spearman rho correlations (r) were analyzed to assess concurrent validity. RESULTS: The sample included 401 workers (16% sedentary profession) with a mean age of 39.2 (± 11) years. Concurrent validity was good and moderate for assessing percentage of sitting (ICC = 0.84; r = 0.53), and standing (ICC = 0.64; r = 0.53), respectively. The concurrent validity for walking was weak to moderate (ICC = 0.50; r = 0.49), and weak for performing heavy labour (ICC = 0.28; r = 0.35). Stronger validity scores were found in sedentary professions for occupational sitting and standing. In physically active professions, an underestimation of self-reported sitting and standing was found, and an overestimation of self-reported walking and heavy labour. No significant self-reported over- or underestimation was found for sitting and heavy labour in sedentary professions, but an underestimation of self-reported standing and an overestimation of self-reported walking was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The OSPAQ has acceptable measurement properties for assessing occupational sitting and standing. Accelerometer-assessed measures of occupational walking and heavy labour are recommended, since a poor concurrent validity was found for both.

Assessing physiological response mechanisms and the role of psychosocial job resources in the physical activity health paradox: study protocol for the Flemish Employees' Physical Activity (FEPA) study.

BACKGROUND: In the current labour system many workers are still exposed to heavy physical demands during their job. In contrast to leisure time physical activity (LTPA), occupational physical activity (OPA) is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular diseases and all-cause mortality, termed "the physical activity (PA) health paradox". In order to gain more insight into the PA health paradox, an exploration of structural preventive measures at the workplace is needed and therefore objective field measurements are highly recommended. The objective of this paper is to provide an overview of the protocol of the Flemish Employees' Physical Activity (FEPA) study, including objective measurements of PA, heart rate (HR) and cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) to gain more insight into the PA health paradox. METHODS: A total of 401 workers participated in the FEPA study across seven companies in the service and production sector in Belgium. The participants comprised 167 men and 234 women, aged 20 to 65 years. OPA and LTPA were assessed by two Axivity AX3 accelerometers on the thigh and upper back. Ambulatory HR was measured by the Faros eMotion 90° monitor. Both devices were worn during two to four consecutive working days. In addition, CRF was estimated by using the Harvard Step Test. Statistical analyses will be performed using Pearson correlation, and multiple regression adjusted for possible confounders. DISCUSSION: This study aims to provide a better insight in the PA health paradox and the possible buffering factors by using valid and objective measurements of PA and HR (both during LTPA and OPA) over multiple working days. The results of the study can contribute to the prevention of cardiovascular disease by providing tailored recommendations for participants with high levels of OPA and by disseminating the results and recommendations to workplaces, policy makers and occupational health practitioners.