OBJECTIVE: To study associations between psychosocial work factors (PWF) and sick leave, occupational accident, and disability pension. METHODS: A random population of 967 civil servants participated in a survey on PWF and health. The median follow-up time was 7 years. RESULTS: Frequent feedback from supervisor, good opportunities for mental growth, good team climate, and high appreciation were associated with a decrease in the risk of sickness absences and shift/period work, monotonous movements, and crowdedness of workplace were associated with an increase in the risk of sickness absences. Good communication at work was associated with a decrease in client violence and high work pressure was associated with an increased risk of occupational accidents. High work control and good team climate were associated with a decreased and shift/period work and client violence was associated with an increased risk of disability pensions. CONCLUSIONS: Psychosocial work factors can predict health outcomes with economic impact.
OBJECTIVE: To study associations between psychosocial work factors (PWF) and sick leave, occupational accident, and disability pension. METHODS: A random population of 967 civil servants participated in a survey on PWF and health. The median follow-up time was 7 years. RESULTS: Frequent feedback from supervisor, good opportunities for mental growth, good team climate, and high appreciation were associated with a decrease in the risk of sickness absences and shift/period work, monotonous movements, and crowdedness of workplace were associated with an increase in the risk of sickness absences. Good communication at work was associated with a decrease in client violence and high work pressure was associated with an increased risk of occupational accidents. High work control and good team climate were associated with a decreased and shift/period work and client violence was associated with an increased risk of disability pensions. CONCLUSIONS:Psychosocial work factors can predict health outcomes with economic impact.
Authors: Oddgeir Friborg; Nina Emaus; Jan H Rosenvinge; Unni Bilden; Jan Abel Olsen; Gunn Pettersen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-08-28 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Stein Knardahl; Håkon A Johannessen; Tom Sterud; Mikko Härmä; Reiner Rugulies; Jorma Seitsamo; Vilhelm Borg Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2017-02-08 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Minna Pihlajamäki; Heikki Arola; Heini Ahveninen; Jyrki Ollikainen; Mikko Korhonen; Tapio Nummi; Jukka Uitti; Simo Taimela Journal: Prev Med Rep Date: 2020-04-22
Authors: Svetlana Lakiša; Linda Matisāne; Inese Gobiņa; Ivars Vanadziņš; Lāsma Akūlova; Maija Eglīte; Linda Paegle Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-01-29 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Kathrine Sørensen; Jeppe Karl Sørensen; Lars L Andersen; Julie Eskildsen Bruun; Paul Maurice Conway; Elisabeth Framke; Ida E H Madsen; Helena Breth Nielsen; Mads Nordentoft; Karina G V Seeberg; Reiner Rugulies Journal: Eur J Public Health Date: 2022-10-03 Impact factor: 4.424