Perceived Work Ability during Enforced Working from Home Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic among Finnish Higher Educational Staff.

Background: Due to COVID-19 pandemic, many employees were forced to suddenly shift to working from home (WFH). How this disruption of work affected employees' work ability is not known. In this study, we investigated the developmental profiles of work ability among Finnish higher education employees in a one-year follow-up during the enforced WFH. Secondly, we investigated demographic, organizational, and ergonomic factors associated with the developmental profiles. Methods: A longitudinal web-survey was conducted with four measurement points (April 2020-February 2021). Employees of a Finnish university who answered the questionnaire at baseline and at least at two follow-up surveys (n = 678) were included (71% women, 45% teachers/research staff, 44% supporting staff, 11% hired students). Perceived work ability was measured on a scale of 1-5 in all timepoints. Latent class growth curve analysis was used to identify profiles of work ability. Multinomial logistic regression was used to determine the associations of demographic factors, perceived stress, musculoskeletal pain, functionality of home for work, and organizational support with the work ability profiles. Results: Six distinct work ability profiles were identified. For most (75%), work ability remained stable during the follow-up. A total of 17% had a favourable trend (very good-stable or increasing) of work ability, and 8% had non-favourable (poor-stable or decreasing). Poor ergonomics at home, low organizational support, high stress, and musculoskeletal pain were associated with non-favourable development of work ability. Conclusions: Heterogeneity in development of work ability during forced WFH was found. Several factors were identified through which work ability can be supported.

Musculoskeletal pain trajectories of employees working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: In March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a rapid public health response which included mandatory working from home (WFH) for many employees. This study aimed to identify different trajectories of multisite musculoskeletal pain (MSP) amongst employees WFH during the COVID-19 pandemic and examined the influence of work and non-work factors. METHODS: Data from 488 participants (113 males, 372 females and 3 other) involved in the Employees Working from Home (EWFH) study, collected in October 2020, April and November 2021 were analysed. Age was categorised as 18-35 years (n = 121), 36-55 years (n = 289) and 56 years and over (n = 78). Growth Mixture Modelling (GMM) was used to identify latent classes with different growth trajectories of MSP. Age, gender, working hours, domestic living arrangements, workstation comfort and location, and psychosocial working conditions were considered predictors of MSP. Multivariate multinomial logistic regression was used to identify work and non-work variables associated with group membership. RESULTS: Four trajectories of MSP emerged: high stable (36.5%), mid-decrease (29.7%), low stable (22.3%) and rapid increase (11.5%). Decreased workstation comfort (OR 1.98, CI 1.02, 3.85), quantitative demands (OR 1.68, CI 1.09, 2.58), and influence over work (OR 0.78, CI 0.54, 0.98) was associated with being in the high stable trajectory group compared to low stable. Workstation location (OR 3.86, CI 1.19, 12.52) and quantitative work demands (OR 1.44, CI 1.01, 2.47) was associated with the rapid increase group. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study offer insights into considerations for reducing MSP in employees WFH. Key considerations include the need for a dedicated workstation, attention to workstation comfort, quantitative work demands, and ensuring employees have influence over their work.

Assessing the quality of evidence in studies estimating prevalence of exposure to occupational risk factors: The QoE-SPEO approach applied in the systematic reviews from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related burden of disease and Injury.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) have produced the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury (WHO/ILO Joint Estimates). For these, systematic reviews of studies estimating the prevalence of exposure to selected occupational risk factors have been conducted to provide input data for estimations of the number of exposed workers. A critical part of systematic review methodology is to assess the quality of evidence across studies. In this article, we present the approach applied in these WHO/ILO systematic reviews for performing such assessments on studies of prevalence of exposure. It is called the Quality of Evidence in Studies estimating Prevalence of Exposure to Occupational risk factors (QoE-SPEO) approach. We describe QoE-SPEO's development to date, demonstrate its feasibility reporting results from pilot testing and case studies, note its strengths and limitations, and suggest how QoE-SPEO should be tested and developed further. METHODS: Following a comprehensive literature review, and using expert opinion, selected existing quality of evidence assessment approaches used in environmental and occupational health were reviewed and analysed for their relevance to prevalence studies. Relevant steps and components from the existing approaches were adopted or adapted for QoE-SPEO. New steps and components were developed. We elicited feedback from other systematic review methodologists and exposure scientists and reached consensus on the QoE-SPEO approach. Ten individual experts pilot-tested QoE-SPEO. To assess inter-rater agreement, we counted ratings of expected (actual and non-spurious) heterogeneity and quality of evidence and calculated a raw measure of agreement (Pi) between individual raters and rater teams for the downgrade domains. Pi ranged between 0.00 (no two pilot testers selected the same rating) and 1.00 (all pilot testers selected the same rating). Case studies were conducted of experiences of QoE-SPEO's use in two WHO/ILO systematic reviews. RESULTS: We found no existing quality of evidence assessment approach for occupational exposure prevalence studies. We identified three relevant, existing approaches for environmental and occupational health studies of the effect of exposures. Assessments using QoE-SPEO comprise three steps: (1) judge the level of expected heterogeneity (defined as non-spurious variability that can be expected in exposure prevalence, within or between individual persons, because exposure may change over space and/or time), (2) assess downgrade domains, and (3) reach a final rating on the quality of evidence. Assessments are conducted using the same five downgrade domains as the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach: (a) risk of bias, (b) indirectness, (c) inconsistency, (d) imprecision, and (e) publication bias. For downgrade domains (c) and (d), the assessment varies depending on the level of expected heterogeneity. There are no upgrade domains. The QoE-SPEO's ratings are "very low", "low", "moderate", and "high". To arrive at a final decision on the overall quality of evidence, the assessor starts at "high" quality of evidence and for each domain downgrades by one or two levels for serious concerns or very serious concerns, respectively. In pilot tests, there was reasonable agreement in ratings for expected heterogeneity; 70% of raters selected the same rating. Inter-rater agreement ranged considerably between downgrade domains, both for individual rater pairs (range Pi: 0.36-1.00) and rater teams (0.20-1.00). Sparse data prevented rigorous assessment of inter-rater agreement in quality of evidence ratings. CONCLUSIONS: We present QoE-SPEO as an approach for assessing quality of evidence in prevalence studies of exposure to occupational risk factors. It has been developed to its current version (as presented here), has undergone pilot testing, and was applied in the systematic reviews for the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates. While the approach requires further testing and development, it makes steps towards filling an identified gap, and progress made so far can be used to inform future work in this area.

Indicators of Sustainable Employability among Older Finnish Postal Service Employees: A Longitudinal Study of Age and Time Effects

We first clarify the definition of sustainable employability, and then we study how the indicators of sustainable employability among older Finnish postal service employees have changed over time. Finally, we estimate the effect of age on these indicators in a two-year follow up. A questionnaire survey among the Finnish postal service employees was conducted in 2016, and a follow-up was conducted in 2018. We analyze data from 1262 subjects who replied to both the baseline and the follow-up surveys. Sustainable employability is defined as a multidimensional construct using nine indicators and covering three domains (health, well-being and employability) based on Fleuren and colleagues’ model. Measurement time (repeated measure) is used as a within-subjects factor, and age is used as a between-subjects factor. The estimated marginal means of the indicators of sustainable employability at the baseline and the follow-up by age in years are calculated. No significant change is found in eight indicators (work ability, time and resources, recovery after work, job satisfaction, motivation, perceived employment, enough training on the job and relevance of work) of sustainable employability after the two-year follow-up. We find a statistically significant effect of time on self-rated health (F = 6.56, p = 0.011). Six out of nine indicators (self-rated health, work ability, time and resources, recovery after work, job satisfaction, and perceived employment) have a statistically significant effect of age between subjects. Partial Eta Squared (ŋ2p) shows a very small difference in the indicators of sustainable employability during the follow-up, indicating that the employability of the workers was sustained throughout. We used the Fleuren model as the basis for our definition of sustainable employability. Although they are based on single items, these indicators of sustainable employability remain stable after the two-year follow-up. Significant effects of age between subjects are found for six out of nine indicators. The results suggest that age may be an important determinant of sustainable employability.