Differences in the temporal patterns of occupational time on feet and sitting between homecare and nursing home workers.

IF 2.1 4区医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH

Annals Of Work Exposures and Health Pub Date : 2025-09-26 DOI:10.1093/annweh/wxaf049

Nestor Lögdal, Svend Erik Mathiassen, Jennie A Jackson, David M Hallman

{"title":"Differences in the temporal patterns of occupational time on feet and sitting between homecare and nursing home workers.","authors":"Nestor Lögdal, Svend Erik Mathiassen, Jennie A Jackson, David M Hallman","doi":"10.1093/annweh/wxaf049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Eldercare work is physically demanding, which may contribute to high rates of sickness absence. Understanding the temporal patterns of time on feet and sitting, the latter assumed to represent recovery, and how they depend on organizational and individual factors is key to a better work organization that can effectively promote health, but this has not been studied before.Aim: To describe temporal patterns of time on feet and sitting among homecare and nursing home workers and examine their associations with setting, job demands and resources, job title, and age.Methods: Swedish homecare (n = 101) and nursing home (n = 73) workers wore accelerometers for 7 consecutive days to assess physical behaviors. Short (≤5 min), moderate (>5 to ≤30 min), and long (>30 min) bouts of time on feet and sitting were identified, with their relative distribution expressed in 5 ratios and analyzed using compositional data analysis procedures. Workers also completed a questionnaire on job organizational factors (job demands and resources) and individual factors (job title and age). MAN(C)OVA models were used to analyze differences in behaviors between eldercare settings, with organizational and individual factors being added in 2 consecutive models. Univariate analyses followed the multivariate models.Results: Homecare and nursing home workers spent most of the workday on their feet (51.9% and 56.9%, respectively). The only statistically significant difference between settings was that homecare workers spent 30.1% less time sitting in long bouts relative to moderate and short compared to nursing home workers (P = 0.011), and this difference remained after adding covariates. Higher age was associated with more time on feet relative to sitting (P = 0.002, η2 = 0.06) and more time on feet in long bouts relative to moderate and short bouts (P = 0.001, η2 = 0.06) with medium effect sizes, as well as to more time on feet in moderate bouts relative short bouts (P = 0.011, η2 = 0.04), and less sitting in long bouts relative to moderate and short bouts (P = 0.019, η2 = 0.03) with small effect sizes.Conclusions: Temporal patterns varied by setting and age, with homecare workers sitting less in long bouts than nursing home workers, and older workers spending more time on feet than younger workers. These findings suggest that work setting and worker characteristics are associated with temporal patterns of physical behavior, although most effects were small-to-moderate and their practical relevance remain uncertain and warrants further study.","PeriodicalId":8362,"journal":{"name":"Annals Of Work Exposures and Health","volume":" ","pages":"855-867"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12463557/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals Of Work Exposures and Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/annweh/wxaf049","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Eldercare work is physically demanding, which may contribute to high rates of sickness absence. Understanding the temporal patterns of time on feet and sitting, the latter assumed to represent recovery, and how they depend on organizational and individual factors is key to a better work organization that can effectively promote health, but this has not been studied before.

Aim: To describe temporal patterns of time on feet and sitting among homecare and nursing home workers and examine their associations with setting, job demands and resources, job title, and age.

Methods: Swedish homecare (n = 101) and nursing home (n = 73) workers wore accelerometers for 7 consecutive days to assess physical behaviors. Short (≤5 min), moderate (>5 to ≤30 min), and long (>30 min) bouts of time on feet and sitting were identified, with their relative distribution expressed in 5 ratios and analyzed using compositional data analysis procedures. Workers also completed a questionnaire on job organizational factors (job demands and resources) and individual factors (job title and age). MAN(C)OVA models were used to analyze differences in behaviors between eldercare settings, with organizational and individual factors being added in 2 consecutive models. Univariate analyses followed the multivariate models.

Results: Homecare and nursing home workers spent most of the workday on their feet (51.9% and 56.9%, respectively). The only statistically significant difference between settings was that homecare workers spent 30.1% less time sitting in long bouts relative to moderate and short compared to nursing home workers (P = 0.011), and this difference remained after adding covariates. Higher age was associated with more time on feet relative to sitting (P = 0.002, η2 = 0.06) and more time on feet in long bouts relative to moderate and short bouts (P = 0.001, η2 = 0.06) with medium effect sizes, as well as to more time on feet in moderate bouts relative short bouts (P = 0.011, η2 = 0.04), and less sitting in long bouts relative to moderate and short bouts (P = 0.019, η2 = 0.03) with small effect sizes.

Conclusions: Temporal patterns varied by setting and age, with homecare workers sitting less in long bouts than nursing home workers, and older workers spending more time on feet than younger workers. These findings suggest that work setting and worker characteristics are associated with temporal patterns of physical behavior, although most effects were small-to-moderate and their practical relevance remain uncertain and warrants further study.

查看原文本刊更多论文

家庭护理工作者和疗养院工作者在脚和坐上的职业时间的时间模式的差异。

背景：老年人护理工作对体力的要求很高，这可能导致疾病缺勤率很高。了解脚和坐的时间模式（后者被认为代表恢复），以及它们如何依赖于组织和个人因素，是有效促进健康的更好的工作组织的关键，但这在之前还没有研究过。目的：描述家庭护理和养老院工作人员站立和坐着的时间模式，并研究其与环境、工作要求和资源、职称和年龄的关系。方法：瑞典家庭护理工作者（101名）和养老院工作者（73名）连续7天佩戴加速度计评估身体行为。确定短（≤5分钟）、中等（>5 ~≤30分钟）和长（>30分钟）的站立和坐着时间，用5种比例表示它们的相对分布，并使用成分数据分析程序进行分析。工人们还完成了一份关于工作组织因素（工作需求和资源）和个人因素（职位和年龄）的问卷。采用MAN(C)OVA模型分析不同养老机构之间的行为差异，并在连续2个模型中加入组织因素和个人因素。单变量分析遵循多变量模型。结果：家庭护理人员和养老院工作人员在工作日的大部分时间是站着的（分别为51.9%和56.9%）。唯一有统计学意义的差异是，与养老院工作者相比，家庭护理工作者在长时间坐着的时间比中等和短时间坐着的时间少30.1% (P = 0.011)，在加入协变量后，这一差异仍然存在。年龄高,更多的时间在脚相对坐着(P = 0.002,η2 = 0.06),更多的时间在英尺长发作相对温和,短期(P = 0.001,η2 = 0.06)和介质效应大小,以及更多的时间在脚在中度发作相对短的发作(P = 0.011,η2 = 0.04),和更少的坐在长时间相对温和,短期(P = 0.019,η2 = 0.03)和小尺度效应。结论：时间模式因环境和年龄而异，家庭护理工作者比养老院工作者在长时间的战斗中坐得更少，老年工作者比年轻工作者花更多的时间在脚上。这些发现表明，工作环境和工作者特征与身体行为的时间模式有关，尽管大多数影响是小到中等的，其实际相关性仍不确定，需要进一步研究。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Annals Of Work Exposures and Health Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

CiteScore

4.60

自引率

19.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： About the Journal Annals of Work Exposures and Health is dedicated to presenting advances in exposure science supporting the recognition, quantification, and control of exposures at work, and epidemiological studies on their effects on human health and well-being. A key question we apply to submission is, "Is this paper going to help readers better understand, quantify, and control conditions at work that adversely or positively affect health and well-being?" We are interested in high quality scientific research addressing: the quantification of work exposures, including chemical, biological, physical, biomechanical, and psychosocial, and the elements of work organization giving rise to such exposures; the relationship between these exposures and the acute and chronic health consequences for those exposed and their families and communities; populations at special risk of work-related exposures including women, under-represented minorities, immigrants, and other vulnerable groups such as temporary, contingent and informal sector workers; the effectiveness of interventions addressing exposure and risk including production technologies, work process engineering, and personal protective systems; policies and management approaches to reduce risk and improve health and well-being among workers, their families or communities; methodologies and mechanisms that underlie the quantification and/or control of exposure and risk. There is heavy pressure on space in the journal, and the above interests mean that we do not usually publish papers that simply report local conditions without generalizable results. We are also unlikely to publish reports on human health and well-being without information on the work exposure characteristics giving rise to the effects. We particularly welcome contributions from scientists based in, or addressing conditions in, developing economies that fall within the above scope.