Among patients with acute low back pain, continuing ordinary activities within the limits permitted by the pain leads to more rapid recovery than either bed rest or back-mobilizing exercises.

No abstract

Objectives: To study the associations between self-reported health problems and sickness absence from work. Methods: The results of a questionnaire survey were combined with archival data of sickness absence of 1341 employees (88% males; 62% blue-collar) in the construction, service and maintenance work within one corporation in Finland. Sex, age and occupational grading were controlled as confounders. A zero-inflated negative binomial (ZINB) regression model was used in the statistical analysis of sickness absence data. Results: The prevalence of self-reported health problems increased with age, from 23% in 18-30-year-olds to 54% in 55-61-year-olds. However, in those aged 18-30 years, 71% had been absent from work and in those aged 55-61 years this proportion was 53%. When health problems and occupational grading were accounted for in the ZINB model, age as such was not associated with the number of days on sick leave, but the young workers still had higher propensity for (any) sickness absence than the old. Self-rated future working ability and musculoskeletal impairment were strong determinants of sickness absence. Among those susceptible to taking sick leave, the estimated mean number of absence days increased by 14% for each rise of 1 unit of the impairment score (scale 0-10). Conclusions: Young subjects had surprisingly high probability for sickness absence although they reported better health than their older colleagues. A higher total count of absence days was found among subjects reporting health problems and poorer working ability, regardless of age, sex and occupational grade. These findings have implications for both management and the healthcare system in the prevention of work disability. S ickness absence means non-attendance by an employee at work due to a (certified) health complaint when the employer expects attendance. Despite the straightforward definition, sickness absence has proved to be a complex phenomenon. In addition to illness, it has been associated with, for example, demographical and socioeconomic factors, organisational features, job content and attitudes to work.1 The key psychosocial predictors of sickness absence include individuals' own perceptions of health and working ability. It is a common belief that older (supposedly in poorer health) employees are more absent from work than their younger (supposedly healthier) colleagues.4 5 However, the young seem to stay out of work due to minor health complaints more than older workers. Also some earlier studies have found that older age increases the risk of overall sickness absences, but decreases that of one-day absences. 6 We investigated how age and self-reported health problems are associated with sickness absence within a cohort predominantly employed in physical work. METHODS Study design and ethicsThe design was cross-sectional: data from questionnaires were combined with records of demographics and sickness absence from the employer's salary register. The Helsinki University Research Ethics Board approved the study, and it ...

BackgroundLack of physical activity (PA) is a known risk factor for many health conditions. The workplace is a setting often used to promote activity and health. We investigated the effectiveness of an intervention on PA and productivity-related outcomes in an occupational setting.MethodsWe conducted a randomized controlled trial of 12 months duration with two 1:1 allocated parallel groups of insurance company employees. Eligibility criteria included permanent employment and absence of any condition that risked the participant’s health during PA. Subjects in the intervention group monitored their daily PA with an accelerometer, set goals, had access to an online service to help them track their activity levels, and received counseling via telephone or web messages for 12 months. The control group received the results of a fitness test and an information leaflet on PA at the beginning of the study. The intervention’s aim was to increase PA, improve work productivity, and decrease sickness absence. Primary outcomes were PA (measured as MET minutes per week), work productivity (quantity and quality of work; QQ index), and sickness absence (SA) days at 12 months. Participants were assigned to groups using block randomization with a computer-generated scheme. The study was not blinded.ResultsThere were 544 randomized participants, of which 521 were included in the analysis (64% female, mean age 43 years). At 12 months, there was no significant difference in physical activity levels between the intervention group (n = 264) and the control group (n = 257). The adjusted mean difference was −206 MET min/week [95% Bayesian credible interval −540 to 128; negative values favor control group]. There was also no significant difference in the QQ index (−0.5 [−4.4 to 3.3]) or SA days (0.0 [−1.2 to 0.9]). Of secondary outcomes, body weight (0.5 kg [0.0 to 1.0]) and percentage of body fat (0.6% [0.2% to 1.1%]) were slightly higher in the intervention group. An exploratory subgroup analysis revealed no subgroups in which the intervention affected physical activity. No adverse events were reported.ConclusionsThe intervention was not found effective, and this study does not provide support for the effectiveness of the workplace PA intervention used here.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00994565

Objectives:To evaluate the effectiveness of two occupational health intervention programmes, both compared with usual care.Methods:Based on a health survey, 1341 employees (88% males) in construction, service and maintenance work were classified into three groups: “low risk” (n = 386), “intermediate risk” (n = 537) and “high risk” (n = 418) of sickness absence. Two separate randomised trials were performed in the groups “high risk” and “intermediate risk”, respectively. Those high risk subjects that were allocated to the intervention group (n = 209) were invited to occupational health service for a consultation. The intervention included, if appropriate, a referral to specialist treatment. Among the intermediate risk employees those in the intervention group (n = 268) were invited to call a phone advice centre. In both trials the control group received usual occupational health care. The primary outcome was sickness absence during a 12-month follow-up (register data).Results:The high risk group, representing 31% of the cohort, accounted for 62% of sickness absence days. In the trial for the high risk group the mean sickness absence was 30 days in the usual care group and 19 days in the intervention group; the mean difference was 11 days (95% CI 1 to 20 days). In the trial for the intermediate risk group the mean sickness absence was 7 days in both arms (95% CI of the mean difference –2.3 to 2.4 days).Conclusions:The identification of high risk of work disability was successful. The occupational health intervention was effective in controlling work loss to a degree that is likely to be economically advantageous within the high risk group. The phone advice intervention for the intermediate risk group was not effective in controlling work loss primarily due to poor adherence.