» Articles » PMID: 36612934

Assessing Differences in Attitudes Toward Occupational Safety and Health Measures for Infection Control Between Office and Assembly Line Employees During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Germany: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Baseline Data from a Repeated...

Abstract

In our study, we investigated possible differences across occupational groups regarding employees’ perceived work-related risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2, attitudes toward technical, organisational, and personal occupational safety and health (OSH) measures for infection control, and factors associated with this attitude. We analysed baseline data (10 August to 25 October 2020) from a repeated standardised online survey distributed at a worldwide leading global supplier of technology and services in Germany. 2144 employees (32.4% women; age (mean ± SD): 44 ± 11 years) who worked predominantly remotely (n = 358), at an on-site office (n = 1451), and assembly line/manufacturing (n = 335) were included. The work-related SARS-CoV-2 risk of infection differed between office employees working remotely and on-site (mean ± SD = 2.9 ± 1.5 vs. 3.2 ± 1.5; Mann-Whitney-U-Test: W = 283,346; p < 0.002; ε2 = 0.01) and between on-site office and assembly line/manufacturing employees (3.8 ± 1.7; W = 289,174; p < 0.001; ε2 = 0.02). Attitude scores toward technical OSH-measures differed between remote and on-site office (4.3 ± 0.5 vs. 4.1 ± 0.6; W = 216,787; p < 0.001; ε2 = 0.01), and between on-site office and assembly line/manufacturing employees (3.6 ± 0.9; W = 149,881; p < 0.001; ε2 = 0.07). Findings were similar for organisational and personal measures. Affective risk perception, COVID-19-specific resilience, and information about COVID-19-related risks were associated with the employees’ attitudes. To promote positive attitudes, it seems to be important to consider occupational-group-specific context factors when implementing OSH-measures for infection control.

Citing Articles

Exploring organizational aspects that promote health-related preventive behavior: using the example of work-related SARS-CoV-2 infection control measures in Germany, August 2020 to November 2021.

Soeder J, Wagner A, Neunhoffer A, Martus P, Papenfuss F, Wittich A Front Public Health. 2024; 12:1388996.

PMID: 39416946 PMC: 11480029. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1388996.


Assessing Attitudes and Participation Regarding a Pilot COVID-19 Workplace Vaccination Program in Southern Germany Considering the Occupational Health Perspective-A Mixed Methods Study.

Wagner A, Keles K, Preiser C, Neunhoffer A, Soeder J, Schwille-Kiuntke J Vaccines (Basel). 2023; 11(6).

PMID: 37376471 PMC: 10304481. DOI: 10.3390/vaccines11061082.

References
1.
Beck D, Lenhardt U . Consideration of psychosocial factors in workplace risk assessments: findings from a company survey in Germany. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2019; 92(3):435-451. PMC: 6420464. DOI: 10.1007/s00420-019-01416-5. View

2.
Wagner A, Schone L, Rieger M . Determinants of Occupational Safety Culture in Hospitals and other Workplaces-Results from an Integrative Literature Review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020; 17(18). PMC: 7559364. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17186588. View

3.
Bauerle A, Teufel M, Musche V, Weismuller B, Kohler H, Hetkamp M . Increased generalized anxiety, depression and distress during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study in Germany. J Public Health (Oxf). 2020; 42(4):672-678. PMC: 7454766. DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdaa106. View

4.
Oude Hengel K, Burdorf A, Pronk A, Schlunssen V, Stokholm Z, Kolstad H . Exposure to a SARS-CoV-2 infection at work: development of an international job exposure matrix (COVID-19-JEM). Scand J Work Environ Health. 2021; 48(1):61-70. PMC: 8729167. DOI: 10.5271/sjweh.3998. View

5.
Rodriguez-Blazquez C, Romay-Barja M, Falcon M, Ayala A, Forjaz M . The COSMO-Spain Survey: Three First Rounds of the WHO Behavioral Insights Tool. Front Public Health. 2021; 9:678926. PMC: 8202823. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.678926. View