Background The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in changes to the working arrangements of millions of employees who are now based at home and may continue to work at home, in some capacity, for the foreseeable future. Decisions on how to promote employees’ health whilst working at home (WAH) need to be based on the best available evidence to optimise worker outcomes. The aim of this rapid review was to review the impact of WAH on individual workers’ mental and physical health, and determine any gender difference, to develop recommendations for employers and employees to optimise workers’ health. Method A search was undertaken in three databases, PsychInfo, ProQuest, and Web of Science, from 2007 to May 2020. Selection criteria included studies which involved employees who regularly worked at home, and specifically reported on physical or mental health-related outcomes. Two review authors independently screened studies for inclusion, one author extracted data and conducted risk of bias assessments with review by a second author. Results Twenty-three papers meet the selection criteria for this review. Ten health outcomes were reported: pain, self-reported health, safety, well-being, stress, depression, fatigue, quality of life, strain and happiness. The impact on health outcomes was strongly influenced by the degree of organisational support available to employees, colleague support, social connectedness (outside of work), and levels of work to family conflict. Overall, women were less likely to experience improved health outcomes when WAH. Conclusions This review identified several health outcomes affected by WAH. The health/work relationship is complex and requires consideration of broader system factors to optimise the effects of WAH on workers’ health. It is likely mandated WAH will continue to some degree for the foreseeable future; organisations will need to implement formalised WAH policies that consider work-home boundary management support, role clarity, workload, performance indicators, technical support, facilitation of co-worker networking, and training for managers.

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 =11.28, P=0.51; I=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.

Work-related musculoskeletal injuries and disorders (WMSD) are a significant issue in the health care sector. Allied Health professionals (AHP) in this sector are exposed to physical and psychosocial factors associated with increased risk of developing a WMSD. Clarification of relevant hazard and risk factors for AHP is needed to improve understanding and inform WMSD risk management. A systematic analysis of the literature was undertaken to determine prevalence and risk factors for WMSD in AHP. Databases of Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL (EBSCO), EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were reviewed. This quality of articles was low. Outcome measures were varied, with prevalence rates of WMSD reported from 28% to 96% over a one-year time period. The lower back was the most commonly affected body part. Relevant factors identified with the development of WMSD included inexperience in the role and area of employment. Future research needs to focus on undertaking high quality prospective studies to determine the factors associated with WMSD development in AHP.

This is a scoping review of literature on human resource management (HRM) and management practice that impacts on workers with physical, mental health and intellectual disabilities, employed or entering paid employment. The aim is to illuminate the use of HRM practices, managerial attitudes and employee outcomes in the disability literature. The methodological research framework commenced with seven databases and was supported with evidenced‐based literature to find three main themes. Themes highlight the management and employer support for workers with disabilities, discrimination and attitudes towards employment of this cohort of workers, and performance and employment outcomes. As governments around the world seek to reduce welfare costs and increase the employment of people with disabilities this paper is timely. Overall, the paper contributes to a dearth of literature on the management of people with disabilities at the workplace to unpack the key barriers, challenges and trends, and develop a comprehensive research agenda.

BackgroundExposures to occupational hazards substantially increase workers’ risk of developing musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) and can exacerbate pre-existing disorders. The effects on MSD risk of the physical requirements of work performance are well recognised, but there is now ample evidence that work-related psychosocial hazards can also have substantial effects; further, some hazards may be additive or interactive. This evidence is not reflected in current workplace risk management practices.DiscussionBarriers to more effective workplace management of MSD risk include: the widespread belief that risk arises largely or entirely from physical hazard exposures; regulatory and guidance documents targeting MSDs, most of which reflect this belief; risk assessment tools that focus narrowly on subsets of mainly physical hazards and yet generate outputs in the form of MSD risk indicators; and the conventional occupational health and safety (OHS) risk management paradigm, which is ill-suited to manage MSD risk.It is argued that improved workplace management of MSD risk requires a systems-based management framework and more holistic risk assessment and control procedures that address risk from all types of hazard together rather than in isolation from each other, and that support participation by workers themselves. New MSD risk management tools are needed to meet these requirements.Further, successful implementation of such changes is likely to require some restructuring of workplace responsibilities for MSD risk management. Line managers and supervisors often play key roles in generating hazards, both physical and psychosocial, so there is a need for their more active participation, along with OHS personnel and workers themselves, in routine risk assessment and control procedures.SummaryMSDs are one of our largest OHS problems, but workplace risk management procedures do not reflect current evidence concerning their work-related causes. Inadequate attention is given to assessing and controlling risk from psychosocial hazards, and the conventional risk management paradigm focuses too narrowly on risk from individual hazards rather than promoting the more holistic approach needed to manage the combined effects of all relevant hazards. Achievement of such changes requires new MSD risk management tools and better integration of the roles of OHS personnel with those of line managers.