Literature DB >> 21525073

Impacts on work performance; what matters 6 months on?

G Wynne-Jones1, R Buck, A Varnava, C J Phillips, C J Main.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Presenteeism often precedes and follows a period of work absence. Cross-sectional analysis of a workforce survey highlighted health, psychosocial and work characteristics as being particularly important in understanding current work performance, but it is unclear whether these variables predict future work performance. AIMS: To establish whether self-reported health, perceptions of work and objective characteristics of work measured at baseline can predict performance at 6 months follow-up.
METHODS: Self-completed questionnaires to assess health, objective characteristics of work and perceptions of work were completed at two public sector organizations. Follow-up questionnaires were completed at 6 months to assess workplace performance using a visual analogue scale for self-rated performance and the Stanford Presenteeism Scale 6 (SPS6).
RESULTS: Five hundred and five employees completed questionnaires at baseline and 310 (61%) of these completed follow-up questionnaires. Psychological distress as measured with the General Health Questionnaire and perceptions of work predicted both self-rated performance and SPS6 score. Objective characteristics of work were relatively unimportant in the prediction of future performance.
CONCLUSIONS: This study has provided an initial indication of the factors that may predict performance at follow-up in the population studied. These findings may be used to generate hypotheses for future studies and highlights the need to assess a range of factors in relation to an individual's performance at work including health and perceptions of work.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21525073     DOI: 10.1093/occmed/kqr005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Occup Med (Lond)        ISSN: 0962-7480            Impact factor:   1.611


  5 in total

1.  Prognostic factors for successful work functioning in the general working population.

Authors:  Femke I Abma; Benjamin C Amick; Jac J L van der Klink; Ute Bültmann
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2013-06

2.  Production loss among employees perceiving work environment problems.

Authors:  Malin Lohela-Karlsson; Jan Hagberg; Gunnar Bergström
Journal:  Int Arch Occup Environ Health       Date:  2014-11-29       Impact factor: 3.015

3.  The Development and Content of the Vocational Advice Intervention and Training Package for the Study of Work and Pain (SWAP) Trial (ISRCTN 52269669).

Authors:  G Sowden; C J Main; D A van der Windt; K Burton; G Wynne-Jones
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2019-06

4.  Does early identification of high work related stress affect pharmacological treatment of primary care patients? - analysis of Swedish pharmacy dispensing data in a randomised control study.

Authors:  Pernilla J Bjerkeli; Ingmarie Skoglund; Kristina Holmgren
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2020-04-25       Impact factor: 2.497

5.  Prognostic Factors for Staying at Work for Partially Sick-Listed Workers with Subjective Health Complaints: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Authors:  Kristel Weerdesteijn; Frederieke Schaafsma; Karin Bonefaas-Groenewoud; Martijn Heymans; Allard Van der Beek; Johannes Anema
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-09-30       Impact factor: 3.390

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.