Sara Moreira, Ana Miranda, Carolina Lima, Cristina Gonçalves, Cristina Mesquita, Sofia Lopes, Jorge Machado, Paula Santos Background Computer workers remain in the stationary positions for long periods and are subject to high workloads that can interfere with Quality of Life, taking into account the worker’s characteristics (such as personality, autonomy, competence and commitment to work). Quality of Life is a multidimensional concept influenced by socio-demographic, health and work factors, which has become an occupational health challenge, due to the growing concern of organizations working at this level. Aim(s) To evaluate the perception of Quality of Life and relate it to sociodemographic variables, health and work conditions. Methods This is a cross-sectional observational analytical study, with a sample of 119 office workers (82 male and 37 female) from an automotive components manufacturer. The SF-36v2 questionnaire was used to evaluate the perception of Quality of Life related to health, and a sample characterization questionnaire to collect socio-demographic, health and work data, filled out on Google Forms. In the data analysis, descriptive and inferential statistics, with a significance level of 0.05, were performed through IBM SPSS Statistics version 25.0. Results Office workers scored in all dimensions of Quality of Life scores above 52 out of 100. The physical dimensions were the ones that presented the highest scores, being the Physical Function dimension the one with the highest score (95.3±7.74), the mental dimensions presented lower scores, namely Emotional Performance (52.1±43.10) and Vitality (57.9±24.16). Regarding the analysis of socio-demographic variables and Quality of Life, male gender presented a better perception of Quality of Life with statistically significant differences in Vitality (p=0.047) and Pain (p=0.043) dimensions. Regarding health conditions, it was verified that the variable Obesity presented statistically significant differences in the dimensions Physical Function (p=0.001) and General Health Status (p=0.003), being the workers with obesity the most affected in these dimensions. Being chronically ill negatively influenced the dimensions General Health Status (p=0.034) and Vitality (p=0.047). As well as being on sick leave affected the dimensions Social Function (p=0.019) and Mental Health (p=0.001). Regarding the working conditions, there were significant differences in the variable steering function and the Physical Performance dimension (p=0.001), being the workers with steering functions the ones with lower values in this dimension. Conclusion The perception of the Quality of Life differed in the different dimensions, having been verified that the mental dimensions were the most affected (Emotional Performance and Vitality), on the other hand the physical dimensions were the ones that most contributed to the good perception of the Quality of Life of the workers. The offers implemented by the company may have positively influenced the results of the study and justify a good overall perception of the Quality of Life of these office workers.

The program “+ Família” part of the activities promoted by CLDS + from Paredes de Coura in 2015, has enabled to act at the level of strategy development for qualifying families. The perceived quality of life of children and youngsters was evaluated in 2 moments: at the beginning (n = 23) and in the end (n = 11). We used the scale kidscreen-10, translated and measured for the Portuguese population. At the first moment, the sample consisted of 65% of women and 35% man; 87% aged between 6 and 10 years old and 13% aged between 11 and 15 years old; 74% attended the 1st cycle of studies and 13% had some type of disability. Based on 4 of the questions, the perception of quality of life has improved, between the beginning and the end of the program implementation. So for the remaining 6 questions, quality of life was perceived in a more negative way in the same period. An intra subject analysis would have to be made in order to measure the results’ bias due to the absence of 12 subjects in the final evaluation.Disclosure of interestThe authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.