Work disability is a major public health challenge, with various health conditions leading to long-term sickness and early retirement, placing a substantial burden on individuals and society.
Objective
This systematic review aimed to identify key health-related risk factors for work disabilities, highlighting the importance of early prevention strategies.
Methods
A systematic literature search was conducted in 06/2023 using MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE via OVID, and CINAHL via Cochrane Library Trials. Two independent reviewers screened abstracts and reviewed full-text articles describing risk factors for work disabilities. Data extraction followed PRISMA guidelines, with the databases searched using synonymous keywords for “risk factors” and “work disability”.
Results
Of the 61,872 articles identified, 17 met the inclusion criteria. The studies identified several health-related risk factors leading to work disabilities. The most frequently reported conditions were common mental disorders and musculoskeletal disorders, often leading to short- or long-term sick leave. The review highlighted that health-related risk factors frequently co-occur and interact, suggesting that work disability is rarely due to a single factor. The quality of the included studies varied, and many relied on self-reported data, which can introduce bias.
Conclusion
(Chronic) conditions, particularly mental and musculoskeletal disorders, are significant risk factors for work disability. Primary and secondary prevention measures, such as rehabilitation are crucial to mitigate the need for disability retirement. Future research should focus on prospective cohort studies and a thorough scientific investigation of potential intervention factors to provide decision-makers with information on cost-effective prevention programs.
LarssonATeiglandR. The digital transformation of labor. UK: Taylor & Francis, 2020.
2.
ChurchTSThomasDMTudor-LockeC, et al.Trends over 5 decades in U.S. Occupation-related physical activity and their associations with obesity. PLoS One2011; 6: e19657.
3.
SchmidtSHendricksVGriebenowR,et al.Demographic change and its impact on the health-care budget for heart failure inpatients in Germany during 1995–2025. Herz2013; 38: 862–867.
4.
ChristensenKDoblhammerGRauR,et al.Ageing populations: the challenges ahead. Lancet2009; 374: 1196–1208.
5.
NowossadeckEPrützFTetiA. Population change and the burden of hospitalization in Germany 2000–2040: decomposition analysis and projection. PLoS One2020; 15: e0243322.
6.
Beckert-ZieglschmidCBornA. Demographic change in psychiatry and psychotherapy–relevance of the age-relation. Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol2009; 59: 423–427.
7.
KalskiLVölkelLHäußlerS,et al.Efficacy of occupational rehabilitation in return to work for back pain: a systematic literature review. Work2024; 78: 29–43.
8.
Bundesinstitut für Bevölkerungsforschung SBB, Destatis, Wiesbaden. Bevölkerung. Daten, Fakten, Trends zum demographischen Wandel in Deutschland. 2008.
9.
TopiwalaAPatelSEbmeierKP. Health benefits of encore careers for baby boomers. Maturitas2014; 78: 8–10.
10.
LewisJMc AuliffeSO'SullivanK, et al.Musculoskeletal physical therapy after COVID-19: time for a new “normal”. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther2021; 51: 5–7.
11.
JordanSKrugSManzK, et al.Gesundheitsverhalten und COVID-19: erste Erkenntnisse zur Pandemie. J Health Monit2020; 5: 1–16.
12.
SivanMTaylorS. NICE Guideline on long COVID. Bmj2020; 371: m4938.
13.
GrimaniAAboagyeEKwakL. The effectiveness of workplace nutrition and physical activity interventions in improving productivity, work performance and workability: a systematic review. BMC Public Health2019; 19: 1676.
14.
PruggerCHeidrichJWellmannJ, et al.Trends in cardiovascular risk factors among patients with coronary heart disease: results from the EUROASPIRE I, II, and III surveys in the Münster region. Dtsch Arztebl Int2012; 109: 303–310.
15.
KalskiLGreißFHartungJJ, et al.Preventive health examinations: protocol for a prospective cross-sectional study of German employees aged 45 to 59 years (Ü45-check). Front Public Health2023; 11: 1076565.
16.
EzzatiMHoornSVRodgersA, et al.Estimates of global and regional potential health gains from reducing multiple major risk factors. Lancet2003; 362: 271–280.
17.
Fernandez-LlimosFFausMJ. Importance of medicine-related problems as risk factors. Lancet2003; 362: 1239.
18.
RothGAMensahGAJohnsonCO, et al.Global burden of cardiovascular diseases and risk factors, 1990–2019: update from the GBD 2019 study. J Am College Cardiol2020; 76: 2982–3021.
19.
Mateo-RodríguezIKnoxEDaponte-CodinaA. Factors associated with workability in Spanish health centre workers. Occup Med (Lond)2021; 71: 12–19.
20.
MensinkGBSchienkiewitzAHaftenbergerM, et al.Overweight and obesity in Germany: results of the German health interview and examination survey for adults (DEGS1). Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz2013; 56: 786–794.
21.
KlipkerKBaumgartenFGöbelK, et al.Psychische Auffälligkeiten bei Kindern und Jugendlichen in Deutschland – Querschnittergebnisse aus KiGGS Welle 2 und trends. J Health Monit2018; 3: 37–45.
22.
DengJZhouFHouW, et al.The prevalence of depression, anxiety, and sleep disturbances in COVID-19 patients: a meta-analysis. Ann N Y Acad Sci2021; 1486: 90–111.
23.
HossainMMTasnimSSultanaA, et al.Epidemiology of mental health problems in COVID-19: a review. F1000Res2020; 9: 636.
24.
ColagiuriSLeeCMColagiuriR, et al.The cost of overweight and obesity in Australia. Med J Aust2010; 192: 260–264.
25.
De VincentiisLCarrRAMarianiMP,et al.Cancer diagnostic rates during the 2020 ‘lockdown’, due to COVID-19 pandemic, compared with the 2018–2019: an audit study from cellular pathology. J Clin Pathol2021; 74: 187.
26.
ZengerMHinzAPetermannF, et al.Health and quality of life within the context of unemployment and job worries. Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol2013; 63: 129–137.
27.
NorströmFWaenerlundAKLindholmL, et al.Does unemployment contribute to poorer health-related quality of life among Swedish adults?BMC Public Health2019; 19: 457.
28.
JanlertU. Unemployment as a disease and diseases of the unemployed. Scand J Work Environ Health1997; 23: 79–83.
29.
LiberatiAAltmanDGTetzlaffJ, et al.The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med2009; 6: e1000100.
30.
PageMJMcKenzieJEBossuytPM, et al.The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. PLOS Medicine2021; 18: e1003583.
31.
van VilsterenMvan OostromSHde VetHC, et al.Workplace interventions to prevent work disability in workers on sick leave. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2015; 2015(10): Cd006955.
32.
HaydenJvan der WindtDCartwrightJ, et al.Assessing bias in studies of prognostic factors. Ann Intern Med2013; 158: 280–286.
33.
HaydenJACôtéPBombardierC. Evaluation of the quality of prognosis studies in systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med2006; 144: 427–437.
34.
AbásoloLCarmonaLHernández-GarcíaC, et al.Musculoskeletal work disability for clinicians: time course and effectiveness of a specialized intervention program by diagnosis. Arthritis Rheum2007; 57: 335–342.
35.
HaahrJPFrostPAndersenJH. Predictors of health related job loss: a two-year follow-up study in a general working population. J Occup Rehabil2007; 17: 581–592.
36.
MaindalHTStøvringHSandbaekA. Effectiveness of the population-based check your health preventive programme conducted in primary care with 4 years follow-up [the CORE trial]: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials2014; 15: 341.
37.
SveinsdottirVEriksenHRBasteV, et al.Young adults at risk of early work disability: who are they?BMC Public Health2018; 18: 1176.
38.
AasdahlLVasseljenOGismervikS, et al.Two-year follow-up of a randomized clinical trial of inpatient multimodal occupational rehabilitation vs outpatient acceptance and commitment therapy for sick listed workers with musculoskeletal or common mental disorders. J Occup Rehabil2021; 31: 721–728.
39.
DalgaardVLAndersenLPSAndersenJH, et al.Work-focused cognitive behavioral intervention for psychological complaints in patients on sick leave due to work-related stress: results from a randomized controlled trial. J Negat Results Biomed2017; 16: 13.
40.
HansenBBKirkeskovLBegtrupLM, et al.Early occupational intervention for people with low back pain in physically demanding jobs: a randomized clinical trial. PLoS Med2019; 16: e1002898.
41.
HangeDAriaiNKiviM, et al.The impact of internet-based cognitive behavior therapy on work ability in patients with depression - a randomized controlled study. Int J Gen Med2017; 10: 151–159.
42.
OremusMWolfsonCPerraultAM, et al.Interrater reliability of the modified jadad quality scale for systematic reviews of Alzheime’ s disease drug trials. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord2001; 12: 232–236.
43.
BoersmaKLintonSJ. Screening to identify patients at risk: profiles of psychological risk factors for early intervention. Clin J Pain2005; 21: 38–43. discussion 69–72.
44.
LahtiJHolstilaAMäntyM, et al.Changes in leisure time physical activity and subsequent disability retirement: a register-linked cohort study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act2016; 13: 99.
45.
LangeCLampertT. The health of unemployed women and men. First results of the telephone health survey 2003. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz2005; 48: 1256–1264.
46.
MomsenAHNielsenCVNielsenMB, et al.Work participation and health-related characteristics of sickness absence beneficiaries with multiple somatic symptoms. Public Health2016; 133: 75–82.
47.
OyeflatenILieSAIhlebækCM,et al.Prognostic factors for return to work, sickness benefits, and transitions between these states: a 4-year follow-up after work-related rehabilitation. J Occup Rehabil2014; 24: 199–212.
48.
TurnerSSmedleyJCherryN. Estimating occupational health events in workers with asthma or diabetes: a comparison of diary and snapshot methods. Occup Med (Lond)2001; 51: 325–331.
49.
Ubalde-LopezMArendsIAlmansaJ, et al.Beyond return to work: the effect of multimorbidity on work functioning trajectories after sick leave due to common mental disorders. J Occup Rehabil2017; 27: 210–217.
50.
LöfvanderMB. Cognitive-behavioural treatment of chronic pain in primary care. Eur J Gen Pract2002; 8: 151–158.
51.
CoggonDNtaniGVargas-PradaS, et al.International variation in absence from work attributed to musculoskeletal illness: findings from the CUPID study. Occup Environ Med2013; 70: 575–584.
52.
CoggonDNtaniGPalmerKT, et al.The CUPID (cultural and psychosocial influences on disability) study: methods of data collection and characteristics of study sample. PLoS One2012; 7: e39820.
53.
HeymansMWde VetHCBongersPM, et al.The effectiveness of high-intensity versus low-intensity back schools in an occupational setting: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976)2006; 31: 1075–1082.
54.
VermeulenSJAnemaJRSchellartAJ, et al.Cost-effectiveness of a participatory return-to-work intervention for temporary agency workers and unemployed workers sick-listed due to musculoskeletal disorders: design of a randomised controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord2010; 11: 60.
55.
de RezendeLFRodrigues LopesMRey-LópezJP, et al.Sedentary behavior and health outcomes: an overview of systematic reviews. PLoS One2014; 9: e105620.
56.
SmithMJ. Psychosocial aspects of working with video display terminals (VDTs) and employee physical and mental health. Ergonomics1997; 40: 1002–1015.
57.
MarcusMGerrF. Upper extremity musculoskeletal symptoms among female office workers: associations with video display terminal use and occupational psychosocial stressors. Am J Ind Med1996; 29: 161–170.
58.
VisscherTLSeidellJC. The public health impact of obesity. Ann Rev Public Health2001; 22: 355–375.
59.
CagnieBDanneelsLVan TiggelenD, et al.Individual and work related risk factors for neck pain among office workers: a cross sectional study. Eur Spine J2007; 16: 679–686.
60.
BarbeMFBarrAE. Inflammation and the pathophysiology of work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Brain Behav Immun2006; 20: 423–429.
61.
BurdorfAPorruFRuguliesR. The COVID-19 pandemic: one year later - an occupational perspective. Scand J Work Environ Health2021; 47: 245–247.
62.
CancelliereCDonovanJStochkendahlMJ, et al.Factors affecting return to work after injury or illness: best evidence synthesis of systematic reviews. Chiropr Man Therap2016; 24: 32.
63.
StøverMPapeKJohnsenR, et al.Work environment and disability pension– an 18-year follow-up study in a Norwegian working population. Scand J Public Health2013; 41: 587–596.
64.
TjulinÅMacEachenEStiwneEE,et al.The social interaction of return to work explored from co-workers experiences. Disabil Rehabil2011; 33: 1979–1989.
65.
CoggonDNtaniGPalmerKT, et al.Disabling musculoskeletal pain in working populations: is it the job, the person, or the culture?Pain2013; 154: 856–863.
66.
CoggonDNtaniGPalmerKT, et al.Drivers of international variation in prevalence of disabling low back pain: findings from the cultural and psychosocial influences on disability study. Eur J Pain2019; 23: 35–45.
67.
SoaresCOPereiraBFPereira GomesMV, et al.Preventive factors against work-related musculoskeletal disorders: narrative review. Rev Bras Med Trab2019; 17: 415–430.
68.
MilakovićMKorenHBradvica-KelavaK, et al.Telework-related risk factors for musculoskeletal disorders. Front Public Health2023; 11: 1155745.
69.
NicholsonPJMayhoGV. Ageing and employment: are patients ever too old to work?Br J Gen Pract2017; 67: 6–7.
70.
RileyRDMoonsKGMSnellKIE, et al.A guide to systematic review and meta-analysis of prognostic factor studies. BMJ2019; 364: k4597.
