Predicting long-term sickness absence among employees with frequent sickness absence.

PURPOSE: Frequent absentees are at risk of long-term sickness absence (SA). The aim of the study is to develop prediction models for long-term SA among frequent absentees. METHODS: Data were obtained from 53,833 workers who participated in occupational health surveys in the period 2010-2013; 4204 of them were frequent absentees (i.e., employees with ≥ 3 SA spells in the year prior to the survey). The survey data of the frequent absentees were used to develop two prediction models: model 1 including job demands and job resources and model 2 including burnout and work engagement. Discrimination between frequent absentees with and without long-term SA during follow-up was assessed with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC); (AUC) ≥ 0.75 was considered useful for practice. RESULTS: A total of 3563 employees had complete data for analyses and 685 (19%) of them had long-term SA during 1-year follow-up. The final model 1 included age, gender, education, marital status, prior long-term SA, work pace, role clarity and learning opportunities. Discrimination between frequent absentees with and without long-term SA was significant (AUC 0.623; 95% CI 0.601-0.646), but not useful for practice. Model 2 showed comparable discrimination (AUC 0.624; 95% CI 0.596-0.651) with age, gender, education, marital status, prior long-term SA, burnout and work engagement as predictor variables. Differentiating by gender or sickness absence cause did not result in better discrimination. CONCLUSIONS: Both prediction models discriminated significantly between frequent absentees with and without long-term SA during 1-year follow-up, but have to be further developed for use in healthcare practice.

Effect of an eHealth Intervention to Reduce Sickness Absence Frequency Among Employees With Frequent Sickness Absence: Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Frequent sickness absence-that is, 3 or more episodes of sickness absence in 1 year-is a problem for employers and employees. Many employees who have had frequent sickness absence in a prior year also have frequent sickness absence in subsequent years: 39% in the first follow-up year and 61% within 4 years. Moreover, 19% have long-term sickness absence (≥6 weeks) in the first follow-up year and 50% within 4 years. We developed an electronic health (eHealth) intervention, consisting of fully automated feedback and advice, to use either as a stand-alone tool (eHealth intervention-only) or combined with consultation with an occupational physician (eHealth intervention-occupational physician). OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of the eHealth intervention, with or without additional occupational physician consultation, to reduce sickness absence frequency for employees with frequent sickness absence, versus care as usual (CAU). METHODS: This study was a three-armed randomized controlled trial. Employees with frequent sickness absence received invitational letters, which were distributed by their employers. The primary outcome measure was the number of register-based sickness absence episodes 12 months after completing the baseline questionnaire. Secondary outcome measures were register-based total sickness absence days and self-assessed burnout, engagement, and work ability. In a process evaluation 3 months after baseline, we examined adherence to the intervention and additional actions such as general practitioner and occupational physician visit, communication with the manager, and lifestyle change. RESULTS: A total of 82 participants were included in the analyses, 21 in the eHealth intervention-only group, 31 in the eHealth intervention-occupational physician group, and 30 in the CAU group. We found no significant difference in sickness absence frequency between the groups at 1-year follow-up. Sickness absence frequency decreased in the eHealth intervention-only group from 3 (interquartile range, IQR 3-4) to 1 episode (IQR 0.3-2.8), in the eHealth intervention-occupational physician group from 4 (IQR 3-5) to 3 episodes (IQR 1-4), and in the CAU group from 3 (IQR 3-4) to 2 episodes (IQR 1-3). For secondary outcomes, we found no significant differences between the intervention groups and the control group. The process evaluation showed that only 3 participants from the eHealth intervention-occupational physician group visited the occupational physician on invitation. CONCLUSIONS: Among employees with frequent sickness absence, we found no effect from the eHealth intervention as a stand-alone tool in reducing sickness absence frequency, nor on total sickness absence days, burnout, engagement, or work ability. This might be due to low adherence to the intervention because of insufficient urgency to act. We cannot draw any conclusion on the effect of the eHealth intervention tool combined with an occupational physician consultation (eHealth intervention-occupational physician), due to very low adherence to the occupational physician consultation. An occupational physician consultation could increase a sense of urgency and lead to more focus and appropriate support. As this was the first effectiveness study among employees with frequent sickness absence, strategies to improve recruitment and adherence in occupational eHealth are included. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NTR4316; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=4316 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/713DHhOFU).

Job satisfaction and sickness absence: a questionnaire survey.

BACKGROUND: When dissatisfaction with work precedes sickness absence, screening for satisfaction levels might usefully detect workers at risk of sickness absence. AIM: To investigate whether job satisfaction was associated with subsequent sickness absence days or episodes. METHODS: A sample of workers was randomly drawn from a population of employees who had an episode of absence between January and April 2003. Job satisfaction was measured using a validated single question with a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 7 (very satisfied). Job satisfaction levels were linked to the number of recorded sickness absence days and episodes in 2003, distinguishing between short (1-7 days) episodes and long (>7 days) episodes. RESULTS: Of 898 questionnaires distributed, 518 (58%) were returned. The mean+/-standard deviation job satisfaction level was 5.1+/-1.4 and negatively related to the number of sickness absence days. Job satisfaction was also negatively related to the number of short episodes and long episodes of absence, but these associations were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Job satisfaction was significantly related to total sickness absence duration. The association with the number of sickness absence episodes was weak and just below the level of statistical significance. Assessing work satisfaction levels might usefully identify those workers most likely to have the greatest sickness absence duration.

Focus Group Study Exploring Factors Related to Frequent Sickness Absence.

INTRODUCTION: Research investigating frequent sickness absence (3 or more episodes per year) is scarce and qualitative research from the perspective of frequent absentees themselves is lacking. The aim of the current study is to explore awareness, determinants of and solutions to frequent sickness absence from the perspective of frequent absentees themselves. METHODS: We performed a qualitative study of 3 focus group discussions involving a total of 15 frequent absentees. Focus group discussions were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. Results were analyzed with the Graneheim method using the Job Demands Resources (JD-R) model as theoretical framework. RESULTS: Many participants were not aware of their frequent sickness absence and the risk of future long-term sickness absence. As determinants, participants mentioned job demands, job resources, home demands, poor health, chronic illness, unhealthy lifestyles, and diminished feeling of responsibility to attend work in cases of low job resources. Managing these factors and improving communication (skills) were regarded as solutions to reduce frequent sickness absence. CONCLUSIONS: The JD-R model provided a framework for determinants of and solutions to frequent sickness absence. Additional determinants were poor health, chronic illness, unhealthy lifestyles, and diminished feeling of responsibility to attend work in cases of low job resources. Frequent sickness absence should be regarded as a signal that something is wrong. Managers, supervisors, and occupational health care providers should advise and support frequent absentees to accommodate job demands, increase both job and personal resources, and improve health rather than express disapproval of frequent sickness absence and apply pressure regarding work attendance.

Job satisfaction and short sickness absence due to the common cold.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated whether short episodes of sickness absence were associated with job satisfaction. PARTICIPANTS: 199 wage earners who reported sick due to the common cold between January 2003 and April 2003. METHODS: Job satisfaction was assessed on the first day of sickness absence and associated with the duration of sickness absence using a multiple logistic regression model to which demographics, working conditions, and the week day on which sick-leave was taken were stepwise added as covariates. RESULTS: Workers with low job satisfaction scores had higher odds (odds ratio [OR] =3.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.74 to 8.51) of being > 3 days absent from work due to the common cold compared to satisfied workers. However, the duration of sickness absence due to the common cold was more strongly related to the day of taking sick-leave with workers who reported sick on Monday or Tuesday being longer absent (OR=5.36; 95% CI 1.44 to 9.90) than those who reported sick on Friday. CONCLUSIONS: When having a common cold, dissatisfied workers are longer absent from work although the duration of short episodes of sickness absence seems to be determined by the week day on which sick-leave is taken rather than working conditions or perceptions about work.

Job satisfaction and short-term sickness absence among Dutch workers.

BACKGROUND: Sickness absence is a considerable economic and social problem. Short-term sickness absence is known to be associated with behavioural attitudes. The correlation between sickness absence and job satisfaction has been studied infrequently and with contradictory results. AIMS: This study investigated the correlation between short-term sickness absence and both global and specific job satisfaction. We defined short-term sickness absence as spells of up to 42 days. METHODS: A random sample of 898 Dutch workers from a variety of economic sectors and companies received a self-report questionnaire on their first day of sick leave. The questionnaire measured global and specific job satisfaction. In our regression analysis, we controlled for the confounding factors of age, gender, educational level, perceived workload, job autonomy and decision latitude. The duration of an absence spell was defined as the amount of calendar days between sick leave and return to work. RESULTS: Global job satisfaction did not correlate significantly with the duration of short-term sickness absence. While increasing physical job demands predicted longer absence, increasing job autonomy and educational level predicted shorter absence. Satisfaction with colleagues predicted longer duration absence. CONCLUSION: Global job satisfaction did not correlate with the duration of short-term absence spells, but specific satisfaction with colleagues was associated with longer sickness spells.