| 1. |
- Bohman, Tony, et al.
(författare)
-
Influence of work ability and smoking on the prognosis of long-duration activity-limiting neck/back pain : A cohort study of a Swedish working population
- 2022
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ. - 2044-6055. ; 12:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVES: Long-duration activity-limiting neck/back pain is common, but the knowledge of what work and lifestyle factors that influence the prognosis is sparse. The objective was therefore to evaluate if two factors, good self-perceived work ability and no daily smoking, are associated with a favourable prognosis of long-duration activity-limiting neck/back pain in a working population, and if these exposures have a synergistic prognostic effect.DESIGN: A prospective cohort study based on three subsamples from the Stockholm Public Health Cohort.SETTINGS: A working population in Stockholm County, Sweden.PARTICIPANTS: Individuals, 18-61 years old, reporting long-duration activity-limiting neck/back pain the previous 6 months at baseline in 2010 (n=5177).MEASURES: The exposures were: self-perceived work ability (categorised into good, moderate and poor) and daily smoking (no/yes). The outcome in 2014 was 'absence of long-duration activity-limiting neck/back pain' the previous 6 months representing a favourable prognosis of reported problems at baseline in 2010. Risk ratios (RRs) and risk differences (RDs) with 95% CI was estimated by general linear regressions, and the synergistic effect was estimated by the synergy index (SI) with 95% CI.RESULTS: Participants with moderate or good work ability, respectively, had an adjusted RR for a favourable prognosis of 1.37 (95% CI 1.11 to 1.69), and 1.80 (1.49 to 2.17) in comparison with participants with poor work ability. The corresponding adjusted RD were 0.07 (0.02 to 0.11) and 0.17 (0.12 to 0.22). Participants not smoking on daily basis had an adjusted RR of 1.21 (1.02 to 1.42), and an adjusted RD of 0.05 (0.01 to 0.10) for a favourable outcome compared with daily smokers. The adjusted SI was 0.92 (0.60 to 1.43).CONCLUSION: For participants with long-duration activity-limiting neck/back pain, moderate or good self-perceived work ability and not being a daily smoker were associated with a favourable prognosis but having both exposures seemed to have no synergistic prognostic effect.
|
|
| 2. |
- Holm, Lena W., et al.
(författare)
-
Risk of transition from occasional neck/back pain to long-duration activity limiting neck/back pain : a cohort study on the influence of poor work ability and sleep disturbances in the working population in Stockholm County
- 2020
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ. - 2044-6055. ; 10:6
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives The prevalence of neck/back pain (NBP) is high worldwide. Limited number of studies have investigated workers with occasional NBP regarding the risk of developing long-duration activity limiting NBP (LNBP). The objectives were to assess (1) the effect of poor work ability and sleep disturbances in persons with occasional NBP on the risk of LNBP, and (2) the interaction effect of these exposures.Design Cohort study based on three subsamples from the Stockholm Public Health Cohort.Settings The working population in Stockholm County.Participants Persons aged 18–60 years, reporting occasional NBP the past 6 months at baseline year 2010 (n=16 460).Measures Work ability was assessed with items from the Work Ability Index, perceived mental and/or physical work ability. Sleep disturbances were self-reported current mild/severe disturbances. The outcome in year 2014 was reporting NBP the previous 6 months, occurring ≥couple of days per week and resulting in decreased work ability/ restricted other daily activities. The additive effect of having both poor work ability and sleep disturbances was modelled with a dummy variable, including both exposures. Poisson log-linear regression was used to calculate risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs.Results At follow-up, 9% had developed LNBP. Poor work ability and sleep disturbances were independent risk factors for LNBP; adjusted RR 1.7 (95% CI: 1.4 to 2.0) and 1.4 (95% CI: 1.2 to 1.5), respectively. No additive interaction was observed.Conclusion Workers with occasional NBP who have poor work ability and/or sleep disturbances are at risk of developing LNBP. Having both conditions does not exceed additive risk.
|
|
| 3. |
- Onell, Clara, et al.
(författare)
-
Work ability and psychological distress in a working population : results from the Stockholm Public Health Cohort
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Scandinavian Journal of Public Health. - : Sage Publications. - 1403-4948 .- 1651-1905. ; 51:4, s. 595-601
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims: Psychological distress is a global public health concern with individual and societal implications causing work-related disability and loss of productivity. It is less known how much work ability contributes to the development of psychological distress. This study aimed to assess the association between self-perceived physical and mental work ability in relation to job demands, and the incidence of psychological distress in a Swedish working population.Methods: Data were obtained from three subsamples of the Stockholm Public Health Cohort with baseline in 2010 and follow-up in 2014, based on a working population in Stockholm County aged 18–60 years, with no or mild psychological distress at baseline (n=29,882). Self-perceived physical and mental work ability in relation to job demands were assessed at baseline with a subscale from the Work Ability Index. Study participants scoring 4 or more on the General Health Questionnaire 12 at follow-up were classified as having developed psychological distress during the study period. Poisson log linear regression was used to calculate crude and adjusted rate ratios with 95% confidence intervals.Results: At follow-up, 2543 participants (12%) had developed psychological distress. Reporting poor physical and/or poor mental work ability in relation to job demands at baseline was associated with an almost doubled rate ratio of psychological distress at follow-up, compared to reporting good work ability (rate ratio 1.8; 95% confidence interval 1.6–2.0).Conclusions: Poor work ability is associated with a higher incidence of future psychological distress compared to good work ability.
|
|
