Department of Psychology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.
Unit of Intervention and Implementation Research for Worker Health, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2021 Apr;94(3):409-418. doi: 10.1007/s00420-020-01591-w. Epub 2020 Oct 24.
The first objective was to contribute to a better understanding of the contrasting and paradoxical results in studies of work environment factors and sickness presence and sickness absence. A second objective was to examine if, and under what conditions, employees choose to replace sickness absence with sickness presence, i.e., so-called substitution.
The study utilizes a large body of cross-sectional questionnaire data (n = 130,161) gathered in Sweden from 2002 to 2007 in connection with a comprehensive health promotion initiative. Health and motivation were analyzed as mediators of the effects of five job factors, job control, job support, job demand, role conflict and "work to family conflict" on sickness presence and absence.
The results concerning job demands indicate substitution in that increased job demands are associated with increased presenteeism and reduced absenteeism. The direct effect of higher job support was increased absenteeism, but via the health and motivation paths, the total effect of more social support was health-promoting and associated with a reduction in sickness absence and sickness presence. High job control emerged as the most pronounced health-promoting factor, reducing sickness presenteeism as well as absenteeism. More role conflicts and work-to-family conflicts were directly and indirectly associated with decreased health and increased absenteeism as well as presenteeism. earlier research.
The mediation analyzes shed light on some of the paradoxes in research on sickness presenteeism and sickness absenteeism, especially regarding job demands and job support. The substitution effect is important for workplace policy and occupational health practice.
第一个目标是增进对工作环境因素与疾病缺勤和疾病在职之间对比和矛盾结果的理解。第二个目标是检验员工是否以及在何种条件下选择用疾病在职替代疾病缺勤,即所谓的替代。
本研究利用了 2002 年至 2007 年期间在瑞典进行的一项全面健康促进倡议中收集的大量横断面问卷调查数据(n=130161)。健康和动机被分析为五种工作因素(工作控制、工作支持、工作需求、角色冲突和“工作与家庭冲突”)对疾病在职和缺勤的影响的中介因素。
关于工作需求的结果表明存在替代,即较高的工作需求与增加的出勤主义和减少的缺勤相关。更高的工作支持的直接效应是增加的缺勤,但通过健康和动机途径,更多的社会支持的总效应是促进健康的,并与减少疾病缺勤和出勤主义相关。高工作控制是最显著的促进健康的因素,减少了疾病出勤主义以及缺勤。更多的角色冲突和工作与家庭冲突与健康下降和缺勤以及出勤主义增加直接和间接相关。
中介分析阐明了一些关于疾病出勤主义和疾病缺勤的研究中的悖论,特别是关于工作需求和工作支持的悖论。替代效应对工作场所政策和职业健康实践很重要。