Sickness presence, sickness absence, and self‐reported health and symptoms

Abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to compare sickness presence (SP) and sickness absence (SA) regarding the strength of their relationship to health/ill-health. In a previous Canadian study a stronger association between SP and health/ill-health than between SA and health/ill-health was shown. Design/methodology/approach -Five Swedish data sets from the years 1992 to 2005 provided the study populations, including both representative samples and specific occupational groups (n ¼ 425-3,622). Univariate correlations and multiple logistic regression analyses were performed. The data sets contained questions on SP and SA as well as on various health complaints and, in some cases, self-rated health (SRH). Findings -The general trend was that correlations and odds ratios increased regularly for both SP and SA, with SP showing the highest values. In one data set, SRH was predicted by a combination of the two measures, with an explained variance of 25 percent. Stratified analyses showed that the more irreplaceable an individual is at work, the larger is the difference in correlation size between SP and SA with regard to SRH. SP also showed an accentuated and stronger association with SRH than SA among individuals reporting poor economic circumstances. Practical implications -The results support the notion that SA is an insufficient, and even misleading, measure of health status for certain groups in the labor market, which seem to have poorer health than the measure of SA would indicate. Orginality/value -A combined measure of sickness presence and absence may be worth considering as an indicator of both individual and organizational health status.

Workplace bullying and sickness presenteeism: cross-sectional and prospective associations in a 2-year follow-up study

“…Therefore, SP may be seen as a warning sign that can be used to initiate early interventions countering the escalation of workplace bullying. At the workplace level, policies and practices need to be implemented that encompass SP and its consequences (Aronsson et al 2011) and contemplate an assessment of work-related risk factors potentially associated with the phenomenon. At the employee level, an important role might be played by close supervisors, who seem to be in a privileged position for detecting among subordinates even subtle behavioural changes signalling the presence of negative work situations, including workplace bullying.…”

“…In such cases, SP has the potential to hinder the recovery process and deplete individual resources (Taloyan et al 2012), leading to an accumulation of psycho-physiological strain and a consequent reduction in health. The health-impairing potential of SP has been established by prospective studies, showing a significant impact of working while ill on outcomes such as coronary heart diseases (Kivimäki et al 2005), poor general health (Aronsson et al 2011;Bergström et al 2009b; Gustafsson and Marklund 2011;Taloyan et al 2012), emotional exhaustion (Demerouti et al 2009;Taloyan et al 2012), depression (Conway et al 2014) and increased sickness absence (Bergström et al 2009a;Hansen and Andersen 2009;Janssens et al 2013). In these studies, SP remained associated with a subsequent reduction in health also after adjusting for baseline health status, which indicates that the negative health effects of SP cannot be completely attributed to the fact that employees with high SP are unhealthier than those with low or no SP (Conway et al 2014).…”

Consequences of sickness presence and sickness absence on health and work ability: A Swedish prospective cohort study

“…Cross-sectional studies have shown that SP is positively correlated with illness [8][9][10] and with sickness absence (SA).…”

Paid Sick Leave as a Means to Reduce Sickness Presenteeism Among Physicians

“…This behavior is unlikely to benefit the physicians, their colleagues, or their patients. Presenteeism has been associated with negative personal outcomes, such as decreased general health (Aronsson et al, 2011;Bergström et al, 2009), depression (Conway et al, 2014), burnout (Miraglia & Johns, 2015;Thun et al, 2014), and future sickness absenteeism (Bergström et al, 2009;Gustafsson & Marklund, 2011;Hansen & Andersen, 2009), and with negative organizational outcomes such as decreased performance and productivity (Dellve et al, 2011;Hemp, 2004;Schultz et al, 2009). Presenteeism has also been identified as a risk factor for committing serious errors and safety violations (Niven & Ciborowska, 2015), and in disease transmission (Widera et al, 2010).…”