Presenteeism in front-line physicians involved in COVID-19-related clinical practice: a national survey of employed physician members of the Japan Medical Association

BACKGROUND@#The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may have increased the rate of presenteeism among front-line physicians. Presenteeism is the term used to describe attendance at work despite ill health that would normally prompt rest or absence from work. This study aimed to examine the associations between COVID-19 clinical practice and presenteeism among physicians.@*METHODS@#A cross-sectional study was conducted from December 2021 to January 2022. The questionnaires were distributed to 21,737 employed physicians who were members of the Japan Medical Association. Presenteeism was measured by the Work Functioning Impairment Scale. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between COVID-19 clinical practice and presenteeism.@*RESULTS@#Overall, 3,968 participants were included in the analysis, and presenteeism was observed in 13.9% of them. The rate of presenteeism significantly increased with both the number of COVID-19 patients treated and the percentage of work time spent treating these patients (both P values for trend < 0.001). In comparison to those not currently engaged in the treatment of COVID-19 patients, presenteeism was significantly higher among front-line (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.71, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.16-2.53) and second-line physicians supporting those in the front-line (aOR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.17-1.78). There was no association between involvement in COVID-19 vaccination services and presenteeism.@*CONCLUSIONS@#The burden on front-line and second-line physicians in COVID-19 clinical practice must be minimized. Employed physicians also need to recognize the importance of communicating with their workplaces about presenteeism.

A Comparative Study of Health Checkup Results between Early and Late Elderly / General Medicine

<b>OBJECTIVE</b>: The present study assessed the validity of the benchmark, 75 years old, that divides elderly people into an early and a late stage, based on health checkup results for two consecutive years. We also investigated prevalent health problems and improvement trends.<br><b>METHODS</b>: This retrospective study was conducted on 1,416 subjects (1,007 early and 409 late elderly subjects) who received health checkups at the Health Care Center of the St. Marianna University School of Medicine Hospital between April 2006 and March 2007. The survey consisted of blood pressure, required blood test results, diagnoses according to the criteria defined by Kawasaki city, outcomes, and the presence or absence of a primary care doctor.<br><b>RESULTS</b>: The number of subjects with anemia and/or renal dysfunction was significantly greater in the late elderly than the early elderly (p<0.01). The results of the survey demonstrated that 79.6% of the early elderly and 87.4% of the late elderly had primary care doctors (p<0.01). In the early elderly, 57.0% of the subjects with primary care doctors and 43.2% of those without primary care doctors showed improvement; the subjects with primary care doctors showed significant improvement compared to those without primary care doctors (p<0.05). In the late elderly, 50.2% of the subjects with primary care doctors and 54.2% of those without primary care doctors showed improvement, resulting in no significant difference between the subjects with and without primary care doctors.<br><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>: We found differences in the detected health problems and outcomes between the early and late elderly. These results support the appropriateness of the current age segmentation and future prospects for medical care in detecting and managing health problems in the elderly.