» Articles » PMID: 24004777

Modifiable Worker Risk Factors Contributing to Workplace Absence: a Stakeholder-centred Best-evidence Synthesis of Systematic Reviews

Overview
Journal Work
Publisher Sage Publications
Date 2013 Sep 6
PMID 24004777
Citations 20
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: A challenge facing stakeholders is the identification and translation of relevant high quality research to inform policy and practice. This study engaged academic and community stakeholders in conducting a best evidence-synthesis to identify modifiable risk and protective worker factors across health conditions impacting work-related absence.

Objectives: To identify modifiable worker disability risk and protective factors across common health conditions impacting work-related absence.

Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, CINHAL, The Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, BusinessSourceComplete, and ABI/Inform from 2000 to 2011. Quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods systematic reviews of work-focused population were considered for inclusion. Two or more reviewers independently reviewed articles for inclusion and methodological screening.

Results: The search strategy, expert input and grey literature identified 2,467 unique records. One hundred and forty-two full text articles underwent comprehensive review. Twenty-four systematic reviews met eligibility criteria. Modifiable worker factors found to have consistent evidence across two or more health conditions included emotional distress, negative enduring psychology/personality factors, negative health and disability perception, decreased physical activity, lack of family support, poor general health, increased functional disability, increased pain, increased fatigue and lack of motivation to return to work.

Conclusions: Systematic reviews are limited by availability of high quality studies, lack of consistency of methodological screening and reporting, and variability of outcome measures used.

Citing Articles

Systematic review and tools appraisal of prognostic factors of return to work in workers on sick leave due to musculoskeletal and common mental disorders.

Villotti P, Kordsmeyer A, Roy J, Corbiere M, Negrini A, Lariviere C PLoS One. 2024; 19(7):e0307284.

PMID: 39018306 PMC: 11253986. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0307284.


How effective are organizational-level interventions in improving the psychosocial work environment, health, and retention of workers? A systematic overview of systematic reviews.

Aust B, Moller J, Nordentoft M, Frydendall K, Bengtsen E, Jensen A Scand J Work Environ Health. 2023; 49(5):315-329.

PMID: 37158211 PMC: 10713994. DOI: 10.5271/sjweh.4097.


Does category of strength predict return-to-work after occupational injury?.

Yang C, Yin Y, Chu C, Tang P BMC Public Health. 2022; 22(1):1472.

PMID: 35918669 PMC: 9344704. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-022-13817-2.


What is pain: Are cognitive and social features core components?.

Craig K, MacKenzie N Paediatr Neonatal Pain. 2022; 3(3):106-118.

PMID: 35547951 PMC: 8975232. DOI: 10.1002/pne2.12046.


Does motivation predict return to work? A longitudinal analysis.

Vanovenberghe C, Bois M, Lauwerier E, Van den Broeck A J Occup Health. 2021; 63(1):e12284.

PMID: 34811863 PMC: 8609417. DOI: 10.1002/1348-9585.12284.