Search

OBJECTIVE: Working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic has affected many workers’ daily life and possibly their physical activity behavior. We studied the longitudinal association of working from home during the pandemic with physical activity and sedentary behavior. METHODS: Longitudinal data from 17 questionnaire rounds of the Lifelines COVID-19 cohort (March 2020–February 2021) were used. In total, 33 325 workers were included. In every round, participants reported their current work situation: location, home, or hybrid (working on location and from home). Physical activity levels and sedentary behavior before and during the pandemic were asked. Logistic generalized estimating equations adjusted for demographic/work/health covariates were used to study the association of work situation with physical activity and sedentary behavior. RESULTS: Home workers were less likely to meet the recommended ≥150 minutes/week of moderate-to-vigorous-intensity activity during the pandemic than location workers [odds ratio (OR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90–0.96] and more likely to be less physically active than before the pandemic (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.04–1.14). Furthermore, compared to location workers, home and hybrid workers were more likely to be more sedentary (sitting ≥8 hours/day) on workdays during than before the pandemic (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.39–1.64/1.36–1.68, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to location workers, home workers (and to a lesser extent hybrid workers) were more often physically inactive and sedentary during than before the COVID-19 pandemic. As a substantial part of the working population may continue to work (partly) from home after the pandemic, workers should be supported to increase activity and reduce sitting while working from home.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to provide insight into (i) how the combination of paid work and family care is longitudinally associated with gender-related differences in depressive symptoms and (ii) the role of work characteristics in this association. METHODS: Data were derived from STREAM, a Dutch prospective cohort study of older workers aged 45–64 years. Respondents were included if they were employed in at least one measurement between 2015 and 2017 (N=12 447). Mixed-models were applied to disentangle between-person (BP) and within-person (WP) effects of family caregiving on depressive symptoms. Analyses were stratified by gender. Work characteristics (social support, autonomy, emotional and mental workload) were separately added to the multivariable models. RESULTS: For older employees, family caregiving was positively associated with depressive symptoms between and within persons for both women [BP B=0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52–1.08; WP B=0.32, 95% CI 0.08–0.56] and men (BP B=0.75, 95% CI 0.45–1.05; WP B=0.25, 95% CI 0.01–0.48). Social support at work reduced the adverse effect of family care on depressive symptoms for women (BP) and men (BP and WP). Emotional workload partly explained the effect of family care for both women and men (BP). CONCLUSIONS: The longitudinal association between family care and mental health was similar for male and female employees. Resources at work (ie, social support) could protect caregiving employees against depressive symptoms. More research is needed regarding the relative impact of the care context compared to the work context of working family caregivers.

OBJECTIVE: Using a novel mediation method that presents unbiased results even in the presence of exposure–mediator interactions, this study estimated the extent to which working conditions and health behaviors contribute to educational inequalities in self-rated health in the workforce. METHODS: Respondents of the longitudinal Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) in 16 countries were selected, aged 50–64 years, in paid employment at baseline and with information on education and self-rated health (N=15 028). Education, health behaviors [including body mass index (BMI)] and working conditions were measured at baseline and self-rated health at baseline and two-year follow-up. Causal mediation analysis with inverse odds weighting was used to estimate the total effect of education on self-rated health, decomposed into a natural direct effect (NDE) and natural indirect effect (NIE). RESULTS: Lower educated workers were more likely to perceive their health as poor than higher educated workers [relative risk (RR) 1.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.37–1.60]. They were also more likely to have unfavorable working conditions and unhealthy behaviors, except for alcohol consumption. When all working conditions were included, the remaining NDE was RR 1.30 (95% CI 1.15–1.44). When BMI and health behaviors were included, the remaining NDE was RR 1.40 (95% CI 1.27–1.54). Working conditions explained 38% and health behaviors and BMI explained 16% of educational inequalities in health. Including all mediators explained 64% of educational inequalities in self-rated health. CONCLUSIONS: Working conditions and health behaviors explain over half of the educational inequalities in self-rated health. To reduce health inequalities, improving working conditions seems to be more important than introducing health promotion programs in the workforce.

OBJECTIVES: Shift work may be associated with an increased incidence of respiratory infections. However, underlying mechanisms are unclear. Therefore, our aim was to examine the mediating role of sleep, physical activity, and diet in the association between shift work and respiratory infections. METHODS: This prospective cohort study included 396 shift and non-shift workers employed in hospitals. At baseline, sleep duration and physical activity were measured using actigraphy and sleep/activity diaries, sleep quality was reported, and frequency of meal and snack consumption was measured using food diaries. In the following six months, participants used a smartphone application to report their influenza-like illness/acute respiratory infection (ILI/ARI) symptoms daily. Mediation analysis of sleep, physical activity, and diet as potential mediators of the effect of shift work on ILI/ARI incidence rate was performed using structural equation modeling with negative binomial and logistic regression. RESULTS: Shift workers had a 23% [incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.23, 95% CI 1.01–1.49] higher incidence rate of ILI/ARI than non-shift workers. After adding the potential mediators to the model, this reduced to 15% (IRR 1.15, 95% CI 0.94–1.40). The largest mediating (ie, indirect) effect was found for poor sleep quality, with shift workers having 29% more ILI/ARI episodes via the pathway of poorer sleep quality (IRR 1.29, 95% CI 1.02–1.95). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to non-shift workers, shift workers had a higher incidence rate of ILI/ARI that was partly mediated by poorer sleep quality. Therefore, it may be relevant for future research to focus on perceived sleep quality as an underlying mechanism in the relation between shift work and increased infection susceptibility.

OBJECTIVE: Unfavorable eating patterns might contribute to the adverse health effects of shift work. Our objective was to examine differences in meal and snack frequency, as well as the quality of snacks, between shift and day workers and between different types of shifts. METHODS: Cross-sectional data from 485 healthcare workers aged 18–65 years of the Klokwerk+ cohort study was used. Dietary intake was assessed using 3-day food diaries, and meals and snacks were classified by the food-based classification of eating episodes method. Using multivariable-adjusted regression analyses, we estimated differences in meal and snack frequency and the quality of snacks between shift and day workers. Within the shift working group, eating frequency on day, evening, and night shifts were compared to work-free days. RESULTS: Meal and snack frequency as well as the quality of snacks showed no significant differences between shift and day workers (P≥0.05). Shift workers had a higher frequency of high-quality snacks [β 0.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12–0.46] and a lower frequency of low-quality snacks (β -0.29, 95% CI -0.49– -0.09) on evening shifts compared to their work-free days. Compared to work-free days, shift workers had a higher frequency of high-quality snacks on days shifts (β 0.24, 95% CI 0.10–0.38), and only those aged ≤40 years had a higher frequency of snacks on night shifts (β 0.53, 95% CI 0.06–1.00) (interaction by age P

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to provide an overview of the effectiveness of health promotion interventions at the workplace on physical and mental health outcomes related to chronic diseases. METHODS: A search for reviews published between 2009 and 2018 was performed in electronic databases. References of the included reviews were checked for additional reviews. Workplace health promotion interventions were included if they studied metabolic risk factors as important predictors of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and cardiovascular diseases (CVD) or if they studied mental or musculoskeletal health outcomes. Review quality was assessed using the AMSTAR checklist. RESULTS: Of the 23 reviews included, 9 were of high quality. For weight-related outcomes, there was strong evidence for favorable effects of workplace interventions, especially for interventions targeting physical activity and/or diet. For the remaining metabolic risk factors, there was no evidence for a positive effect of workplace health promotion interventions due to the absence of high quality reviews and mixed conclusions between the reviews. There was also strong evidence for a positive, small effect on the prevention of mental health disorders of workplace psychological interventions, especially those that use e- health and cognitive behavioral therapy techniques. Furthermore, strong evidence was found for the prevention of musculoskeletal disorders through workplace interventions, especially resistance exercise training. CONCLUSIONS: This review found evidence for the effectiveness of workplace interventions on the prevention of weight-related outcomes as well as mental health and musculoskeletal disorders. Future research is however needed on the factors that contribute to the successful implementation of an intervention.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically review the literature on the contribution of work and lifestyle factors to socioeconomic inequalities in self-rated health among workers. METHODS: A search for cross-sectional and longitudinal studies assessing the contribution of work and/or lifestyle factors to socioeconomic inequalities in self-rated health among workers was performed in PubMed, PsycINFO and Web of Science in March 2017. Two independent reviewers performed eligibility and risk of bias assessment. The median change in odds ratio between models without and with adjustment for work or lifestyle factors across studies was calculated to quantify the contribution of work and lifestyle factors to health inequalities. A best-evidence synthesis was performed. RESULTS: Of those reviewed, 3 high-quality longitudinal and 17 cross-sectional studies consistently reported work factors to explain part (about one-third) of the socioeconomic health inequalities among workers (grade: strong evidence). Most studies separately investigated physical and psychosocial work factors. In contrast with the 12 cross-sectional studies, 2 longitudinal studies reported no separate contribution of physical workload and physical work environment to health inequalities. Regarding psychosocial work factors, lack of job resources (eg, less autonomy) seemed to contribute to health inequalities, whereas job demands (eg, job overload) might not. Furthermore, 2 longitudinal and 4 cross-sectional studies showed that lifestyle factors explain part (about one-fifth) of the health inequalities (grade: strong evidence). CONCLUSIONS: The large contribution of work factors to socioeconomic health inequalities emphasizes the need for future longitudinal studies to assess which specific work factors contribute to health inequalities.

OBJECTIVES: Shift work may alter workers’ leisure-time and occupational physical activity (PA) levels, which might be one of the potential underlying mechanisms of the negative health effects of shift work. Therefore, we compared objectively measured PA levels between hospital shift and non-shift workers. METHODS: Data were used from Klokwerk+, a cohort study examining the health effects of shift work among healthcare workers employed in hospitals. In total, 401 shift workers and 78 non-shift workers were included, all of whom wore Actigraph GT3X accelerometers for up to seven days. Time spent sedentary, standing, walking, running, stairclimbing, and cycling during leisure time and at work was estimated using Acti4 software. Linear regression was used to compare proportions of time spent in these activities between hospital shift and non-shift workers. RESULTS: Average accelerometer wear-time was 105.9 [standard deviation (SD) 14.0] waking hours over an average of 6.9 (SD 0.6) days. No differences between hospital shift and non-shift workers were found in leisure-time PA (P>0.05). At work, shift workers were less sedentary [B=-10.6% (95% CI -14.3– -6.8)] and spent larger proportions of time standing [B=9.5% (95% CI 6.4–12.6)] and walking [B=1.2% (95% CI 0.1–2.2)] than non-shift workers. However, these differences in occupational PA became smaller when the number of night shifts during accelerometer wear-time increased. CONCLUSIONS: Leisure-time PA levels of hospital shift workers were similar to those of non-shift workers, but shift workers were less sedentary and more physically active (ie, standing/walking) at work. Future research to the role of occupational activities in the health effects of shift work is recommended.

OBJECTIVE: Extended working lives due to an ageing population will necessitate the maintenance of work ability across the life course. This systematic review aimed to analyze whether workplace interventions positively impact work ability. METHODS: We searched Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Embase databases using relevant terms. Work-based interventions were those focused on individuals, the workplace, or multilevel (combination). Work ability – measured using the work ability index (WAI) or the single-item work ability score (WAS) – was the outcome measure. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development & Evaluation (GRADE) criteria was used to assess evidence quality, and impact statements were developed to synthesize the results. Meta-analysis was undertaken where appropriate. RESULTS: We reviewed 17 randomized control trials (comprising 22 articles). Multilevel interventions (N=5) included changes to work arrangements and liaisons with supervisors, whilst individual-focused interventions (N=12) involved behavior change or exercise programs. We identified only evidence of a moderate quality for either individual or multilevel interventions aiming to improve work ability. The meta-analysis of 13 studies found a small positive significant effect for interventions on work ability [overall pooled mean 0.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03–0.21] with no heterogeneity for the effect size (Chi^2=11.28, P=0.51; I^2=0%). CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis showed a small positive effect, suggesting that workplace interventions might improve work ability. However, the quality of the evidence base was only moderate, precluding any firm conclusion. Further high quality studies are require to establish the role of interventions on work ability.

OBJECTIVE: Physical inactivity has been hypothesized as an underlying factor for the association between shift work and adverse health outcomes. We compared leisure-time and occupational physical activity and sedentary behavior between day, night, and non-night shift workers. METHODS: We identified 612 day workers, 139 night shift workers and 61 non-night shift workers aged 18–65 years (54% men) in two Danish studies: the New method for Objective Measurements of physical Activity in Daily living (NOMAD) and the Danish Physical ACTivity cohort with Objective measurements (DPhacto) between 2011–2013. Sedentary behavior, light, and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity were measured using an accelerometer. Physical activity was expressed as percentage of leisure and work time spent in each activity. Linear regression analyses were used to test differences in physical activity and sedentary behavior between day, night, and non-night shift workers. RESULTS: No differences in leisure-time sedentary behavior and physical activity were observed between day and shift workers (P>0.05). Non-night shift workers spent 7.2% [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 2.3–12.1) more time in occupational sedentary behavior than day workers and 5.9% (95% CI -10.1– -1.7) and 1.9% (95% CI -3.7– -0.2) less time in occupational light and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, respectively. Compared to day workers, night shift workers spent 4.3% (95% CI 2.4–6.1) more time at work in uninterrupted sedentary periods of ≥30 minutes. CONCLUSIONS: Shift workers had similar leisure-time physical activity patterns as day workers, but were more sedentary at work. Future research should elucidate whether occupational physical inactivity and sedentary behavior contributes to shift work-related adverse health effects.

OBJECTIVE:Shift work has been linked to cardio-metabolic diseases, but insight into different shift work-related aspects and chronotype of shift workers and their relation with metabolic risk factors is limited. This study examined the association between current shift work status, frequency and duration of night shift work, chronotype, and metabolic risk factors in a population of health care workers. METHODS:Anthropometrics, questionnaires, and blood samples were collected from 503 shift working and 93 non-shift working health care workers employed in hospitals. Body mass index, waist circumference, cholesterol (total, HDL, LDL), triglycerides, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein were measured. Associations of current shift work, frequency (non-night shift worker, 1-2, 3-4, ≥5 night shifts/month) and duration of night shift work (non-night shift workers,

OBJECTIVE: Shift work is associated with adverse health outcomes, and an unhealthy diet may be a contributing factor. We compared diet quantity and quality between day and shift workers, and studied exposure–response relationships regarding frequency of night shifts and years of shift work. METHODS: Cross-sectional general population data from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition-Netherlands (EPIC-NL) cohort was used. Dietary intake was assessed in 1993–1997 among adults aged 20–70 years using a food frequency questionnaire. We calculated energy intake, the Mediterranean Diet Score (MDS) and WHO-based Healthy Diet Indicator (HDI). In 2011–2014, we retrospectively identified 683 shift workers and 7173 day workers in 1993–1997. Using multivariable-adjusted linear regression analysis, we estimated regression coefficients (β) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) of the differences in dietary intake between day and shift workers. RESULTS: Shift workers had a higher energy intake than day workers (β:56 kcal/d, 95% CI 10–101), and a higher consumption of grains, dairy products, meat and fish (P

Abstract Background Common mental health problems, such as stress, anxiety and depression, are highly prevalent among workers and often lead to long-term absenteeism and work disability. Effective elements found in previous researched interventions were to explicitly focus on return to work (RTW) and not solely on symptom reduction, to take into account the employees’ cognition towards RTW and to include the workplace environment. Based on these elements, a stepped-care approach was developed. The aim of this paper is to present the study design of a randomized controlled trial (RESTART), evaluating the effectiveness of the stepped-care approach on lasting RTW and the implementation process. Methods RESTART is a randomized controlled trial with a 2 × 2 factorial design and a follow-up of one year. Employees eligible for this study are those who reported sick within 2 to 8 weeks with psychological distress based on a distress screener. Participants will be randomized to a group receiving a tailored e-Health app or usual care, as well as randomized to a group receiving a Participatory Approach (PA; conversational method) in the workplace or usual care. The PA will however only be provided in case of persistent sickness absence at 8 weeks. Measurements take place at baseline, after the e-Health intervention period (3 months), and after the PA intervention period (6 months) and 12 months. Primary outcome is lasting RTW, defined as full RTW in previous or equal work for at least four consecutive weeks. Secondary outcomes are (the severity of) stress-related symptoms, total number of sickness absence days, self-efficacy for RTW and self-reported health. A process evaluation including a realist evaluation will also be conducted. Discussion Early intervention that focuses on RTW, the cognition towards RTW despite symptoms and involves the workplace environment, plays a crucial role in managing sickness absence among employees with psychological distress. If effective, the stepped-care approach is relevant for employees, employers and society as a whole. Trial Registration ISRCTN: 90663076. Registered on 5 October 2023.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a draft occupational health guideline, aimed at preventing weight gain, on employees’ body weight-related outcomes, cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors, and quality of life. METHODS: In a cluster randomized controlled trial including 16 occupational physicians (OP) and 523 employees, guideline-based care was compared to usual care by OP between 2009–2011 in the Netherlands. Guideline-based care consisted of (i) providing advice to employers on how to assess and intervene on the obesogenic work environment, (ii) conducting five face-to-face behavioral change counseling sessions with employees to improve their lifestyles, and (iii) evaluating the outcome and maintaining sections i and ii. Data were collected at baseline and 6, 12, and 18-months follow-up. To evaluate the effects of the intervention, multilevel analyses were performed. RESULTS: No significant differences were found between the intervention and control group on waist circumference [β 1.2 cm, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) -0.6–2.9], body weight (β 0.3 kg, 95% CI -1.0–1.6), body mass index (β 0.1 kg/m^2, 95% CI -0.3–0.5), systolic blood pressure (β 1.7 mmHG, 95% CI -2.4–5.8), diastolic blood pressure (β 0.3 mmHG, 95% CI -1.0–0.6), cholesterol (β 0 mmol/l, 95% CI -0.2–0.2), or quality of life indicators after 18-months follow-up. Stratified analyses showed an increase in waist circumference among men (β 2.5 cm, 95% CI 0.5–4.5) and obese intervention participants (β 2.7 cm, 95% CI 0.6–4.7) compared to control participants. CONCLUSION: The draft occupational health guideline was not more effective than usual care. Therefore, the guideline in its current form cannot be recommended for implementation.

OBJECTIVES: A worksite lifestyle intervention aiming to improve lifestyle behaviors could be an effective tool to keep older workers vital, and thereby prolong their labor participation. Therefore, this study evaluates the effectiveness of such an intervention on vitality, work engagement, productivity and sick leave. METHODS: In a randomized controlled trial design, 367 workers (control group: N=363) received a 6-month intervention, which included two weekly guided group sessions: one yoga and one workout, as well as one weekly session of aerobic exercising, without face-to-face instruction, and three individual coach visits aimed at changing workers’ lifestyle behavior by goal setting, feedback, and problem-solving strategies. Furthermore, free fruit was provided at the guided sessions. Data on work-related vitality (UWES vitality scale), general vitality (RAND-36 vitality scale), work engagement (UWES), productivity (single item scoring 0–10), and sick leave (yes/no past 3 months) were collected using questionnaires at baseline (N=730), and at 6- (N=575) and 12-months (N=500) follow-up. Effects were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle with complete cases (N=500) and imputed data (N=730). RESULTS: There were no significant differences in vitality, work engagement, productivity, and sick leave between the intervention and control group workers after either 6- and 12-months follow-up. Yoga and workout subgroup analyses showed a 12-month favorable effect on work-related vitality [β=0.14, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.04–0.28] and general vitality (β=2.9, 95% CI 0.02–5.9) among high yoga compliers. For high workout compliers, this positive trend was also seen, but it was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of worksite yoga facilities could be a useful strategy to promote vitality-related work outcomes, but only if high compliance can be maximized. Therefore, impeding factors for participation should be investigated in more detail in future research.

OBJECTIVE:Sedentary behaviors are reported to impose health risks. Since occupational exposure is a major proportion of total sedentary time, we studied the association between occupational sitting and a number of health problems. METHODS:From the longitudinal Doetinchem Cohort Study, we selected those working at baseline with complete data (n = 1,509). Participants were examined four times at 5 year-intervals between 1993 and 2012. We characterized occupational sitting as follows: 1) stable sitters and stable non sitters over a 15-year period, based on job characteristics and (2) having a job with a low, moderate or high amount of sitting, based on tertiles of self-reported number of hours per week of occupational sitting, measured at wave 5. Linear and logistic regression models were used. Outcomes were self-reported mental health, low-back or upper extremity pain, and objectively measured cardiometabolic health (overweight, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia). RESULTS:Compared to stable non sitters, a lower risk of chronic upper extremity pain was observed for stable sitters (OR 0.75, 95% CI: 0.57; 1.00) as well as for those in the two upper tertiles for hours of occupational sitting (>4 hr/wk) (OR 0.65; 95%CI 0.50-0.86). For the other health outcomes studied, no significant associations were found with occupational sitting. CONCLUSION:Our findings do not support the hypothesis that occupational sitting is associated with health problems. The finding that occupational sitting is associated with less upper extremity pain might be due to the association of occupational sitting with less physical load.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to appraise and summarize the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of worksite physical activity and/or nutrition programs. METHODS: We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, SportDiscus, PsycInfo, NIOSHTIC-2, NHSEED, HTA, and Econlit for studies published up to 14 January 2011. Additionally, we searched for articles by reviewing references, searching authors’ databases, and contacting authors of included studies. Two researchers independently selected articles. Articles had to include a cost-effectiveness and/or cost-utility analysis comparing a worksite physical activity and/or nutrition program to usual care or an abridged version of the program. Data were extracted on study characteristics and results. Two researchers independently assessed the risk of bias using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria list (CHEC-list). RESULTS: Ten studies (18 programs) were included. More than 50% of the studies fulfilled 11 (58%) of the 19 CHEC-list items. From various perspectives, worksite nutrition and worksite physical activity and nutrition programs (N=6) were more costly and more effective in reducing body weight than usual care. When only intervention costs were considered, most worksite nutrition (N=4/5) and worksite physical activity and nutrition programs (N=5/6) were more costly and more effective in reducing cholesterol level and cardiovascular disease risks, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The cost-effectiveness of more costly and more effective programs depends on the “willingness to pay” for their effects. It is unknown how much decision-makers are willing to pay for reductions in body weight, cholesterol level, and cardiovascular disease risks. Therefore, conclusions about the cost-effectiveness of worksite physical activity and/or nutrition programs cannot be made. There is substantial need for improvement of the methodological quality of studies and particular emphasis should be placed on the handling of uncertainty.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to investigate the effectiveness of the Stay@Work participatory ergonomics (PE) program to prevent low-back and neck pain. METHODS: A total of 37 departments were randomly allocated to either the intervention (PE) or control group (no PE). During a six-hour meeting, working groups followed the PE steps and composed and prioritized ergonomic measures aimed at preventing low-back and neck pain. Subsequently, working groups were requested to implement the ergonomic measures in the departments. The primary outcomes were low-back and neck pain prevalence and secondary outcomes were pain intensity and duration. Data were collected by questionnaires at baseline, and after 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-months follow-up. Additionally, the course of low-back and neck pain (transitions from no symptoms to symptoms and from symptoms to no symptoms) was modeled. RESULTS: The randomization procedure resulted in 19 intervention departments (N=1472 workers) and 18 control departments (N=1575 workers). After 12 months, the intervention was not more effective than the control group in reducing the prevalence of low-back and neck pain or reducing pain intensity and duration. PE did not increase the probability of preventing low-back pain [odds ratio (OR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.97–1.57) or neck pain (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.74–1.40). However, PE increased the probability of recovering from low-back pain (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.01–1.96), but not from neck pain (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72–1.26). CONCLUSION: PE neither reduced low-back and neck pain prevalence nor pain intensity and duration nor was it effective in the prevention of low-back and neck pain or the recovery from neck pain. However, PE was more effective in the recovery from low-back pain.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to review systematically the repeatability and validity of questionnaires used to assess occupational physical activity among healthy adults. METHODS: We searched PubMed and Embase using occupational, work-related, job-related, physical activity, motor activity, and questionnaires as keywords. Two reviewers independently performed article selection, data extraction, and quality assessment. The methodological quality and results of the studies were evaluated based on an existing checklist. The level of evidence and repeatability, criterion, and construct validity were rated. RESULTS: We included 31 papers describing 30 questionnaires in the review. Repeatability was assessed in 22 studies, 11 used appropriate measures to assess 12 questionnaires. Intra-class correlation coefficients and weighted Cohen’s kappa ranged between 0.43–0.95. Six studies used appropriate measures to assess criterion validity of 13 questionnaires. One questionnaire, the Tecumseh Self Administered Occupational Physical Activity Questionnaire (TOQ), showed good criterion validity against a physical activity (PA) record. Eighteen studies used appropriate measures to assess the construct validity of 23 questionnaires. Comparison included those against accelerometers, maximal oxygen uptake, questionnaires, and body composition measures. None showed good construct validity. CONCLUSIONS: There is strong evidence for good reliability of four questionnaires. None of the reviewed questionnaires showed good criterion validity compared to objective measures. Compared to PA records, moderate-to-good validity was observed for two questionnaires. Objective measures of occupational PA are needed.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this review was to summarize the evidence for an effect of lifestyle-targeted interventions at the workplace on the main biological risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD). METHODS: We performed an extensive systematic literature search for randomized controlled trials (RCT) that met the following inclusion criteria: (i) targeted at workers; (ii) aimed at increasing physical activity and/or improving diet; and (iii) measured body weight, body fat, blood pressure, blood lipids and/or blood glucose. We used a nine-item methodological quality list to determine the quality of each study. A best-evidence system was applied, taking into account study quality and consistency of effects. RESULTS: Our review included 31 RCT, describing a diversity of interventions (eg counseling, group education, or exercise). Of these studies, 18 were of high quality. Strong evidence was found for a positive effect on body fat, one of the strongest predictors of CVD risk. Among populations “at risk”, there was strong evidence for a positive effect on body weight. Due to inconsistencies in results between studies, there was no evidence for the effectiveness of interventions on the remaining outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We found strong evidence for the effectiveness of workplace lifestyle-based interventions on body fat and, in populations at risk for CVD, body weight. Populations with an elevated risk of CVD seemed to benefit most from lifestyle interventions; supervised exercise interventions appeared the least effective intervention strategy. To gain better insight into the mechanisms that led to the intervention effects, the participants’ compliance with the intervention and the lifestyle changes achieved should be reported in future studies.

Abstract Background Digital interventions are potential tools for reducing and limiting occupational sedentary behaviour (SB) in sedentary desk-based jobs. Given the harmful effects of sitting too much and sitting for too long while working, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the effectiveness of workplace interventions, that incorporated digital elements, to reduce the time spent in SB in office workers. Methods Randomised control trials that evaluated the implementation of workplace interventions that incorporated digital elements for breaking and limiting SB among desk-based jobs were identified by literature searches in six electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycINFO and PEDro) published up to 2023. Studies were included if total and/or occupational SB were assessed. Only studies that reported pre- and postintervention mean differences and standard deviations or standard errors for both intervention arms were used for the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5; Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). Risk of bias was assessed using the Standard Quality Assessment Criteria for Evaluating Primary Research Papers from a Variety of Fields QUALSYST tool. Results Nineteen studies were included in the systematic review. The most employed digital elements were information delivery and mediated organisational support and social influences. Multicomponent, information, and counselling interventions measuring total and/or occupational/nonoccupational SB time by self-report or via device-based measures were reported. Multicomponent interventions were the most represented. Eleven studies were included in the meta-analysis, which presented a reduction of 29.9 (95% CI: -45.2, -14.5) min/8 h workday in SB (overall effect: Z = 3.81). Conclusions Multicomponent interventions, using a wide range of digital features, have demonstrated effectiveness in reducing time spent in SB at the workplace among desk-based employees. However, due to hybrid work (i.e., work in the office and home) being a customary mode of work for many employees, it is important for future studies to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of these interventions in the evolving work landscape. Trial registration The review protocol was registered in the Prospero database (CRD42022377366).

Our current 24-hour society requires an increasing number of employees to work nightshifts with millions of people worldwide working during the evening or night. Clear associations have been found between shiftwork and the risk to develop metabolic health problems, such as obesity. An increasing number of studies suggest that the underlying mechanism includes disruption of the rhythmically organized body physiology. Normally, daily 24-hour rhythms in physiological processes are controlled by the central clock in the brain in close collaboration with peripheral clocks present throughout the body. Working schedules of shiftworkers greatly interfere with these normal daily rhythms by exposing the individual to contrasting inputs, i.e., at the one hand (dim)light exposure at night, nightly activity and eating and at the other hand daytime sleep and reduced light exposure. Several different animal models are being used to mimic shiftwork and study the mechanism responsible for the observed correlation between shiftwork and metabolic diseases. In this review we aim to provide an overview of the available animal studies with a focus on the four most relevant models that are being used to mimic human shiftwork: altered timing of 1) food intake, 2) activity, 3) sleep or 4) light exposure. For all studies we scored whether and how relevant metabolic parameters, such as bodyweight, adiposity and plasma glucose were affected by the manipulation. In the discussion, we focus on differences between shiftwork models and animal species (i.e., rat and mouse). In addition, we comment on the complexity of shiftwork as an exposure and the subsequent difficulties when using animal models to investigate this condition. In view of the added value of animal models over human cohorts to study the effects and mechanisms of shiftwork, we conclude with recommendations to improve future research protocols to study the causality between shiftwork and metabolic health problems using animal models.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a worksite mindfulness-related multi-component health promotion intervention on work engagement, mental health, need for recovery and mindfulness. METHODS: In a randomized controlled trial design, 257 workers of two research institutes participated. The intervention group (n = 129) received a targeted mindfulness-related training, followed by e-coaching. The total duration of the intervention was 6 months. Data on work engagement, mental health, need for recovery and mindfulness were collected using questionnaires at baseline and after 6 and 12 months follow-up. Effects were analyzed using linear mixed effect models. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in work engagement, mental health, need for recovery and mindfulness between the intervention and control group after either 6- or 12-months follow-up. Additional analyses in mindfulness-related training compliance subgroups (high and low compliance versus the control group as a reference) and subgroups based on baseline work engagement scores showed no significant differences either. CONCLUSIONS: This study did not show an effect of this worksite mindfulness-related multi-component health promotion intervention on work engagement, mental health, need for recovery and mindfulness after 6 and 12 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NTR2199.

ObjectivesWhite collar workers spend an increasing amount of time in occupational sedentary behavior (OSB) and are thereby at risk for adverse health outcomes. Nevertheless, the association between OSB and the need for recovery (NFR), an important indicator of wellbeing, is unknown and therefore examined.MethodsBaseline data from a cluster randomized controlled trial was used. A subgroup of 89 white collar workers wore a triaxial accelerometer for 7 days. NFR was measured using the Questionnaire on the Experience and Evaluation of Work. Compositional data analysis was applied to determine the composition of different OSB bouts (short, medium and long) and occupational physical activity (OPA) (light, moderate and vigorous and standing). Linear regression analyses were performed to explore the associations between occupational compositions and NFR.ResultsRelatively more time spent in long OSB bouts was associated with a lower NFR (β: −11.30, 95% CI: −20.2 to −2.4). Short and medium OSB bouts and OPA were not associated with NFR.ConclusionAssociations between OSB bouts, OPA and NFR hinted at contrasting trends, suggesting the need to consider different bout lengths of OSB in future studies.