Association of open-plan offices and sick leave-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Daniel Mauss, Marc N Jarczok, Bernd Genser, Raphael Herr
{"title":"Association of open-plan offices and sick leave-a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Daniel Mauss,&nbsp;Marc N Jarczok,&nbsp;Bernd Genser,&nbsp;Raphael Herr","doi":"10.2486/indhealth.2022-0053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze the association of employees working in various kinds of open-plan offices with sick leave data, compared to those working in traditional cell offices. Databases of PubMed, PubPsych, and Psyndex were systematically searched following the PRISMA statement. Pooled summary estimates of odds ratio (OR) were calculated comparing sick leave of employees in cell offices with those working in small open-plan offices (4-9 people), and those in various open-plan office solutions (≥4 people). We used Forest plots visualizing study-specific estimates and the pooled fixed and random effects estimators. Five studies were identified (2008-2020) with a total of 13,277 (range 469-6,328) participants. Compared with employees working in cell offices, those working in small open-plan offices were associated with higher odds of sick leave days (OR=1.27; 95% CI 0.99-1.54; p=0.046) as well as those working in various kinds of open-plan offices with ≥4 colleagues (OR=1.24; 95% CI 0.96-1.51; p=0.004). Our results are consistent with those of earlier reviews focusing on other effects of open-plan office solutions such as health and well-being. Different solutions for office design and architectural lay-out should be the focus of future studies to balance pros and cons of open-plan offices.</p>","PeriodicalId":13531,"journal":{"name":"Industrial Health","volume":"61 3","pages":"173-183"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/af/ce/indhealth-61-173.PMC10269830.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Industrial Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2486/indhealth.2022-0053","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze the association of employees working in various kinds of open-plan offices with sick leave data, compared to those working in traditional cell offices. Databases of PubMed, PubPsych, and Psyndex were systematically searched following the PRISMA statement. Pooled summary estimates of odds ratio (OR) were calculated comparing sick leave of employees in cell offices with those working in small open-plan offices (4-9 people), and those in various open-plan office solutions (≥4 people). We used Forest plots visualizing study-specific estimates and the pooled fixed and random effects estimators. Five studies were identified (2008-2020) with a total of 13,277 (range 469-6,328) participants. Compared with employees working in cell offices, those working in small open-plan offices were associated with higher odds of sick leave days (OR=1.27; 95% CI 0.99-1.54; p=0.046) as well as those working in various kinds of open-plan offices with ≥4 colleagues (OR=1.24; 95% CI 0.96-1.51; p=0.004). Our results are consistent with those of earlier reviews focusing on other effects of open-plan office solutions such as health and well-being. Different solutions for office design and architectural lay-out should be the focus of future studies to balance pros and cons of open-plan offices.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

开放式办公室和病假的关联——系统回顾和荟萃分析。
我们的目标是系统地回顾和荟萃分析在各种开放式办公室工作的员工与在传统格子办公室工作的员工的病假数据之间的关系。根据PRISMA声明系统地检索PubMed、PubPsych和Psyndex数据库。对单间办公室、小型开放式办公室(4-9人)和各种开放式办公室方案(≥4人)员工的病假进行汇总汇总估计,计算比值比(OR)。我们使用Forest图来可视化研究特定的估计值,以及混合固定和随机效应估计值。五项研究(2008-2020年)共有13277名参与者(范围469- 6328)。与在格子办公室工作的员工相比,在小型开放式办公室工作的员工请病假的几率更高(OR=1.27;95% ci 0.99-1.54;p=0.046),以及在各类开放式办公室工作,且同事人数≥4人(OR=1.24;95% ci 0.96-1.51;p = 0.004)。我们的研究结果与之前关注开放式办公室解决方案的其他影响(如健康和幸福感)的研究结果一致。办公室设计和建筑布局的不同解决方案应该是未来研究的重点,以平衡开放式办公室的利弊。
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
Industrial Health
Industrial Health 医学-毒理学
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
64
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: INDUSTRIAL HEALTH covers all aspects of occupational medicine, ergonomics, industrial hygiene, engineering, safety and policy sciences. The journal helps promote solutions for the control and improvement of working conditions, and for the application of valuable research findings to the actual working environment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信