Level of Disability, Functioning, and Work Limitation: Association With Chronic Diseases in a Working Population.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic diseases are among the major causes of disability, and are associated with substantial individual and societal economic losses. The objective of this study was to assess the association of the different levels of disability, functioning, and work limitation, with chronic diseases. METHODS: A total of 516 workers were classified according to chronic disease status, and evaluated for disability, functioning and work Limitation. Quantile regression was performed to assess the associations across the quantiles of the disability, functioning, and work limitation. RESULTS: Overall disability was significantly associated with chronic diseases across all quantiles, while work limitation was only significant at the median and higher quantiles. Functioning domains showed a variable pattern of associations across their quantiles. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic diseases showed a variable magnitude and significance of associations across the levels of disability, functioning, and work limitation.

Effect of Chronic Diseases on Work Productivity: A Propensity Score Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of chronic disease(s) on work productivity. METHODS: Using the Health & Work Performance Questionnaire, information was collected from 516 workers on chronic disease status and work productivity. Propensity-score matching was performed to identify matched-pairs of workers. RESULTS: In the propensity-score matched sample, workers with chronic diseases were more likely to have increased absenteeism and presenteeism rates, 6.34 and 2.36 times the rates if no chronic diseases, respectively. In addition, they had greater odds for getting negative critical work incidents and less odds for positive incidents than none or balanced status. Multimorbidity showed more significant increase in absenteeism and presenteeism rates, as well as increased odds for excess negative critical work incidents. CONCLUSION: Chronic disease(s) can significantly reduce work productivity by increasing absenteeism, presenteeism, and net negative critical incidents.

Prevalence and risk factors of workplace violence against health care workers in emergency department in Ismailia, Egypt.

INTRODUCTION: Emergency department is one of the high-risk areas, where violence against health care workers (HCWs) is a prevalent and serious problem. Violence has negative effects on HCWs, and therefore on the quality of care provided in emergency department. This study aimed to determine the prevalence, types, sources and risk factors of violence reported by HCWs in emergency department. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a standardized questionnaire developed by the WHO. One hundred thirty four questionnaires were included in this study (94.4% response rate). RESULTS: WPV was reported by 59.7% of HCWs. Verbal violence was the most reported (58.2%), compared to physical violence (15.7%). The most reported reasons for violence were waiting time and that patient and family expectations not being met. Only 29.5% of HCWs who experienced verbal violence and 23.8% of who experienced physical violence reported it to hospital authority. About 75% of HCW thought that work place violence could be prevented, and about 60% said that no action was taken against the attacker by hospital authority. CONCLUSION: Violence against HCWs in emergency department is a significant issue that cannot be ignored. There are multiple reasons. The key point in dealing with the problem is to treat its specific causes.

Prevalence and risk factors of workplace violence against health care workers in emergency department in Ismailia, Egypt

Introduction: Emergency department is one of the high-risk areas, where violence against health care workers (HCWs) is a prevalent and seriousproblem. Violence has negative effects on HCWs, and therefore on the quality of care provided in emergency department. This study aimed to determine the prevalence, types, sources and risk factors of violence reported by HCWs in emergency department. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a standardized questionnaire developed by the WHO. One hundred thirty four questionnaires were included in this study (94.4% response rate). Results: WPV was reported by 59.7% of HCWs. Verbal violence was the most reported (58.2%), compared to physical violence (15.7%). The most reported reasons for violence were waiting time and that patient and family expectations not being met. Only29.5% of HCWs who experienced verbal violence and 23.8% of who experienced physical violence reported it to hospital authority. About 75% of HCW thought that work place violence could be prevented, and about 60% said that no action was taken against the attacker by hospital authority. Conclusion: Violence against HCWs in emergency department is a significant issue that cannot be ignored. There are multiple reasons.The key point in dealing with the problem is to treat its specific causes