Search

Objectives Prevailing job stress models encourage a multidimensional view of the psychosocial work environment and highlight the role that multiple co-occurring stressors play in the aetiology of mental health problems. In this study, we develop a latent typology of psychosocial work environment profiles to describe how a comprehensive array of job stressors are clustered in the Canadian labour market. We also examine the association between these latent psychosocial work environment profiles and several indicators of mental health. Methods Data were collected from 6408 workers who completed the Canadian National Psychosocial Work Environment Survey. Psychosocial work exposures were measured using standard items from the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire. We employed latent profile analyses to identify groups of individuals with similar psychosocial work environment profiles. We used log-linear regression models to examine the association between latent psychosocial work environment profiles and burnout, stress, and cognitive strain. Results Four distinct groups with highly divergent psychosocial work environment profiles were identified. Adjusting for a range of demographic and socioeconomic factors, latent psychosocial work environment profiles were strongly related to mental health. Individuals who reported exposure to a comprehensive array of psychosocial job stressors (11% prevalence) reported the highest probability of burnout (PR: 7.51, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.56–10.15), stress (PR: 8.98, 95% CI: 6.20–13.0), and cognitive strain (PR: 7.29, 95% CI: 5.02–10.60). Conclusions Findings suggest that psychosocial work stressors are tightly clustered in the Canadian labour market, and that the clustering of work stressors is strongly associated with adverse mental health outcomes. Future scholarship may benefit from adopting a more comprehensive approach to the assessment of psychosocial job quality as a determinant of health and well-being. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: With the aging of populations in many countries, workers are expected to remain employed longer but may struggle with the onset of common, chronic conditions like arthritis. To date, few studies have examined workplace policies and practices that could help accommodate individuals with arthritis, and fewer still have used a sex and gender-based approach to explore similarities and differences between women and men. Objectives: This study compared the health and work contexts of workers aged ≥50 years to better understand similarities and differences between women and men in accommodation availability, need, use, and unmet needs. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of men and women with osteoarthritis (OA), inflammatory arthritis (IA), or both OA and IA was administered online or by telephone and assessed demographics (e.g. age, education), health (e.g. pain, fatigue, workplace activity limitations), work context factors (e.g. job sector, full/part-time work, job control), and workplace accommodations (e.g. health bene- fits, flexible hours, special equipment/adaptations, modified duties). Sex and gender-based analyses examined similarities and differences between men and women and included descriptive statistics, multivariable multinomial analyses, and nested regression analyses. Results: There was a 58.9% response rate and final sample of 463 participants (women, n = 266; men, n = 197; OA = 59.0%; IA/both IA and OA = 23.7%; unsure = 17.3%). Women and men were significantly different in a number of health (e.g. fatigue, health variability, workplace activity limitations) and work context factors (e.g. job sector, part-time work, job stress). However, in other respects, they were similar (e.g. pain, job involving physical demands, size of organization, shift work, union membership, job control). There were no differences between men and women in the availability or use of workplace accommodations. However, women reported significantly more accommodation needs and had greater unmet needs. Multivariable multinomial analyses found male/female as a binary variable did not explain differences in accommodation need, use, and unmet need. Nested analyses highlighted that differences in health variables explained male/female differences in accommodation need, while work context differences explained male/female differences in whether needs were met. Conclusions: The findings highlight that women and men draw on a range of existing accommodation policies and practices to help manage their arthritis and that most have their accommodation needs met. Decomposing the context within which men and women with arthritis work suggests that women may face health and work context challenges that differ from men and that are related to greater accommodation needs and unmet need. This highlights potential vulnerabilities in the work of women that need to be addressed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. The objective of this study was to examine the extent of workplace activity limitations among persons with lupus and to identify factors associated with activity limitations among those employed.Methods. We conducted a cross-sectional study using a mailed survey and clinical data of persons with lupus who attended a large lupus outpatient clinic. Data were collected on demographics, health, work factors and psychosocial measures. The workplace activity limitations scale (WALS) was used to measure difficulty related to different activities at work. Multivariable analysis examined the association of health, work context, psychosocial and demographic variables with workplace activity limitations.Results. We received 362 responses from 604 (60%) mailed surveys. Among those not employed, 52% reported not working because of lupus. A range of physical and mental tasks were reported as difficult. Each of the physical, cognitive and energy work activities was cited as difficult by more than one-third of participants. Among employed participants, 40% had medium to high WALS difficulty scores. In the multivariable analysis, factors significantly associated with workplace activity limitations were older age, greater disease activity, fatigue, poorer health status measured by the 36-item Short Form Health Survey, lower job control, greater job strain and working more than 40 h/week.Conclusion. People with lupus experience limitations and difficulty at work. Determinants of workplace activity limitations are mainly those related to workplace and health factors. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Objective: The aims were to validate linguistically British‐English versions of the Long‐Term Conditions Job Strain Scale (LTCJSS), Long‐Term Conditions Work Spillover Scale (LTCWSS) and Work‐Health‐Personal Life Perceptions Scale (WHPLPS) in rheumatoid arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, osteoarthritis and fibromyalgia (FM). Methods: The three scales were forward translated and reviewed by an expert panel prior to cognitive debriefing interviews. Participants completed a postal questionnaire. Construct validity was assessed using Rasch analysis. Concurrent validity included testing between the three scales and work (e.g., Workplace Activity Limitations Scale [WALS]) and condition‐specific health scales. Two weeks later, participants were mailed a second questionnaire to measure test‐retest reliability. Results: The questionnaire was completed by 831 employed participants: 68% women, 53.5 (SD 8.9) years of age, with condition duration 7.7 (SD 8.0) years. The LTCJSS, LTCWSS and WHPLPS Parts 1 and 2 satisfied Rasch model requirements, but Part 3 did not. A Rasch transformation scale and Reference Metric equating scales with the WALS were created. Concurrent validity was generally good (rs = 0.41–0.85) for the three scales, except the WHPLPS Part 3. Internal consistency (Person Separation Index values) was consistent with group use in all conditions, and individual use except for the LTCWSS and WHPLSP Parts 1 and 2 in FM. Test‐retest reliability was excellent, with intraclass coefficients (2,1) of 0.80–0.96 for the three scales in the four conditions. Discussion: Reliable, valid versions of the British‐English LTCJSS, LTCWSS and WHPLPS Parts 1 and 2 are now available for use in the UK. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives Chronic conditions and multimorbidity are increasing worldwide. Yet, understanding longitudinal changes in multimorbidity over the lifecourse is limited. We compared the age-trajectory of multimorbidity by birth cohort and examined effects of socio-demographic (e.g. sex, income) and behavioral risk (e.g. obesity) factors in multimorbidity. Methods Using data from the Canadian Longitudinal National Population Health Survey (1994–2010), we examined 10,186 participants born 1925–1974 grouped in 5 birth cohorts. Data on the number of chronic conditions (up to 17), income, education, and behavioral risk factors were collected biannually. We used multilevel logistic growth modeling techniques for analyses of multimorbidity defined as the presence of 2+ chronic conditions versus 1 or none. Results We found significant cohort differences in the age-trajectory of multimorbidity: at corresponding ages, each succeeding recent cohort had higher odds of reporting multimorbidity than their predecessors. Access to healthcare did not fully explain these differences. Women, having lower income, being obese, smoking, and a sedentary lifestyle had increased odds of reporting multimorbidity. Obese individuals, particularly Gen Xers and younger boomers, reported multimorbidity at an earlier age than those of normal weight. We observed divergent trajectories of greater multimorbidity for lower than higher income individuals. Furthermore, after accounting for age and risk factors there was an apparent increase in reporting multimorbidity over time (period effect) across all ages. Discussion Our findings indicate that multimorbidity is not only becoming the norm, but is emerging earlier in the lifecourse and particularly for low income and obese individuals from more recent cohorts. The findings point to the importance of planning interventions and policies to deal with more recent birth cohorts entering into older age with worse health than their predecessors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is growing. However the factors contributing to changes over time and to birth cohort differences in CAM use are not well understood. Setting: We used data from 10186 participants, who were aged 20–69 years at the first cycle of data collection in the longitudinal component of the Canadian National Population Health Survey (1994/95-2010/11). We examined chiropractic and other practitioner-based CAM use with a focus on five birth cohorts: pre-World War II (born 1925–1934); World War II (born 1935–1944); older baby boomers (born 1945–1954); younger baby boomers (born 1955–1964); and Gen Xers (born 1965–1974). The survey collected data every two years on predisposing (e.g., sex, education), enabling (e.g., income), behavior-related factors (e.g., obesity), need (e.g., chronic conditions), and use of conventional care (primary care and specialists). Results: The findings suggest that, at corresponding ages, more recent cohorts reported greater CAM (OR = 25.9, 95% CI: 20.0; 33.6 for Gen Xers vs. pre-World War) and chiropractic use than their predecessors (OR = 2.2, 95% CI: 1.7; 2.8 for Gen Xers vs. pre-World War). There was also a secular trend of increasing CAM use, but not chiropractic use, over time (period effect) across all ages. Factors associated with cohort differences were different for CAM and chiropractic use. Cohort differences in CAM use were partially related to a period effect of increasing CAM use over time across all ages while cohort differences in chiropractic use were related to the higher prevalence of chronic conditions among recent cohorts. The use of conventional care was positively related to greater CAM use (OR = 1.8, 95% CI: 1.6; 2.0) and chiropractic use (OR = 1.2, 95% CI: 1.1; 1.4) but did not contribute to changes over time or to cohort differences in CAM and chiropractic use. Conclusion: The higher CAM use over time and in recent cohorts could reflect how recent generations are approaching their healthcare needs by expanding conventional care to include CAM therapies and practice for treatment and health promotion. The findings also underscore the importance of doctors discussing CAM use with their patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To characterize the breadth of challenges that people with IBD experience in the workplace and identify supports and accommodations that can help sustain employment. A scoping review was conducted using the Arksey and O'Malley framework. Electronic databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, EMBASE) and grey literature websites identified English-language studies published from inception through to June 2020. Studies where details were insufficient to extract the study purpose, sample, methods, and findings were deemed of poorer quality and excluded. Eighteen studies met selection criteria. Studies discussed common workplace challenges, including career planning, work performance, managing physical and cognitive symptoms, social impacts at work, and challenges related to the physical work environment and commuting. The range of workplace supports identified by studies was classified into five categories: flexibility, changes to the physical work environment, social support, self-management strategies, and extended health benefits. IBD research typically has been descriptive and focused on broad characterizations of workplace challenges and supports. Future work needs to examine causal pathways and assess the efficacy of workplace supports, as well as conduct subgroup analyses and develop resources to facilitate communication and accommodation planning between workers living with IBD and their employers. Rehabilitation professionals can play an important role in supporting people working with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) by identifying accommodations and ways to make work environments more supportive. Providing rehabilitation support to people with IBD goes beyond symptom management and needs to consider the broader social, policy, and environmental challenges of employment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study compares health and occupational outcomes following a work-related injury for nonstandard and day-shift workers. Methods: National Population Health Survey data were used to explore outcomes 2 years post-work injury. Retrospective-matched cohort analyses examined main effects and interactions of shift schedule and work injury with changes in health, shift schedule, and labor force status. Models were adjusted for respondent characteristics, baseline health status, and occupational strength requirements. Results: Injured nonstandard shift workers reported lower health utility index scores, compared with uninjured and injured daytime workers and uninjured nonstandard-shift workers. No significant interactions between shift and injury were found with schedule change and leaving the labor force. Conclusions: Injured nonstandard-shift workers are as likely to remain employed as other groups, but may be vulnerable in terms of diminished health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]