Treatment interruption is a risk factor for sickness presenteeism: A large-scale cross-sectional study during the COVID-19 pandemic

  1. CORoNaWork project
  2. Makoto Okawara
  3. Tomohiro Ishimaru
  4. Seiichiro Tateishi
  5. Ayako Hino
  6. Mayumi Tsuji
  7. Akira Ogami
  8. Tomohisa Nagata
  9. Shinya Matsuda
  10. Yoshihisa Fujino

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Objectives

This study examined the relationship between interruption to routine medical care during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and sickness presenteeism among workers in Japan.

Methods

A cross-sectional study using data obtained from an internet monitor questionnaire was conducted. Interruption to medical care was defined based on the response “I have not been able to go to the hospital or receive treatment as scheduled.” The fraction of sickness presenteeism days in the past 30 days was employed as the primary outcome. A fractional logit model was used for analysis to treat bounded data.

Results

Of the 27 036 participants, 17 526 (65%) were workers who did not require routine medical care, 8451 (31%) were using medical care as scheduled, and 1059 (4%) experienced interrupted medical care. The adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of sickness presenteeism was significantly higher among workers who experienced interrupted medical care (3.44; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.04–3.89) than those who did not require routine medical care. In terms of symptoms, the highest aOR was observed among workers with mental health symptoms (aOR: 5.59, 95% CI: 5.04–6.20).

Conclusions

This study suggests the importance of continuing necessary treatment during a pandemic to prevent presenteeism.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1002/1348-9585.12313
  2. Version published to 10.1101/2021.08.14.21261996v4 on medRxiv
  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.08.14.21261996v3 on medRxiv
  4. Version published to 10.1101/2021.08.14.21261996v2 on medRxiv
  5. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.08.14.21261996: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Occupational and Environmental Health,
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    : Release 16; StataCorp LLC, TX, USA), with p<0.05 indicating statistical significance.
    StataCorp
    suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    There are several limitations to this study. First, we did not obtain detailed information related to treatment interruptions, including the type of disease, duration, and reasons for interruption. We were thus unable to determine whether the reason for interruption to treatment was due to patient-related reasons (e.g., economic situation and anxiety) or hospital-related reasons (e.g., schedule adjustment). Second, interruptions to treatment may be the result of better disease control and improved health. It is unclear how these factors would affect the occurrence of sickness presenteeism. Finally, we did not consider all possible confounders affecting sickness presenteeism because we did not obtain information on some confounders, such as job insecurity, annual leave rights, and the culture around employment and sick leave in each company.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  6. Version published to 10.1101/2021.08.14.21261996v1 on medRxiv