Dataset Information

Sickness absence diagnoses among abstainers, low-risk drinkers and at-risk drinkers: consideration of the U-shaped association between alcohol use and sickness absence in four cohort studies.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

To estimate differences in the strength and shape of associations between alcohol use and diagnosis-specific sickness absence.

Design

A multi-cohort study. Participants (n = 47?520) responded to a survey on alcohol use at two time-points, and were linked to records of sickness absence. Diagnosis-specific sickness absence was followed for 4-7 years from the latter survey.

Setting and participants

From Finland, we had population cohort survey data from 1998 and 2003 and employee cohort survey data from 2000-02 and 2004. From France and the United Kingdom, we had employee cohort survey data from 1993 and 1997, and 1985-88 and 1991-94, respectively.

Measurements

We used standard questionnaires to assess alcohol intake categorized into 0, 1-11 and > 11 units per week in women and 0, 1-34 and > 34 units per week in men. We identified groups with stable and changing alcohol use over time. We linked participants to records from sickness absence registers. Diagnoses of sickness absence were coded according to the International Classification of Diseases. Estimates were adjusted for sex, age, socio-economic status, smoking and body mass index.

Findings

Women who reported drinking 1-11 units and men who reported drinking 1-34 units of alcohol per week in both surveys were the reference group. Compared with them, women and men who reported no alcohol use in either survey had a higher risk of sickness absence due to mental disorders [rate ratio = 1.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.22-1.88], musculoskeletal disorders (1.22, 95% CI = 1.06-1.41), diseases of the digestive system (1.35, 95% CI = 1.02-1.77) and diseases of the respiratory system (1.49, 95% CI = 1.29-1.72). Women who reported alcohol consumption of > 11 weekly units and men who reported alcohol consumption of > 34 units per week in both surveys were at increased risk of absence due to injury or poisoning (1.44, 95% CI = 1.13-1.83).

Conclusions

In Finland, France and the United Kingdom, people who report not drinking any alcohol on two occasions several years apart appear to have a higher prevalence of sickness absence from work with chronic somatic and mental illness diagnoses than those drinking below a risk threshold of 11 units per week for women and 34 units per week for men. Persistent at-risk drinking in Finland, France and the United Kingdom appears to be related to increased absence due to injury or poisoning.

SUBMITTER: Ervasti J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6099368 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Sickness absence diagnoses among abstainers, low-risk drinkers and at-risk drinkers: consideration of the U-shaped association between alcohol use and sickness absence in four cohort studies.

Ervasti Jenni J Kivimäki Mika M Head Jenny J Goldberg Marcel M Airagnes Guillaume G Pentti Jaana J Oksanen Tuula T Salo Paula P Suominen Sakari S Jokela Markus M Vahtera Jussi J Zins Marie M Virtanen Marianna M

Addiction (Abingdon, England) 20180605

<h4>Aims</h4>To estimate differences in the strength and shape of associations between alcohol use and diagnosis-specific sickness absence.<h4>Design</h4>A multi-cohort study. Participants (n = 47 520) responded to a survey on alcohol use at two time-points, and were linked to records of sickness absence. Diagnosis-specific sickness absence was followed for 4-7 years from the latter survey.<h4>Setting and participants</h4>From Finland, we had population cohort survey data from 1998 and 2003 and ...[more]

PMID: 29873143

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimEarlier research has revealed a strong relationship between alcohol use and sickness absence. The aim of this review was to explore and uncover this relationship by looking at differences in type of design (cross-sectional vs. longitudinal), type of data (self-reported vs. registered data), and type of sickness absence (long-term vs. short term).MethodSix databases were searched through June 2020. Observational and experimental studies from 1980 to 2020, in English or Scandinavian languages reporting the results of the association between alcohol consumption and sickness absence among working population were included. Quality assessment, and statistical analysis focusing on differences in the likelihood of sickness absence on subgroup levels were performed on each association, not on each study. Differences in the likelihood of sickness absence were analyzed by means of meta-analysis. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018112078.ResultsFifty-nine studies (58% longitudinal) including 439,209 employees (min. 43, max. 77,746) from 15 countries were included. Most associations indicating positive and statistically significant results were based on longitudinal data (70%) and confirmed the strong/causal relationship between alcohol use and sickness absence. The meta-analysis included eight studies (ten samples). The increased risk for sickness absence was likely to be found in cross-sectional studies (OR: 8.28, 95% CI: 6.33-10.81), studies using self-reported absence data (OR: 5.16, 95% CI: 3.16-8.45), and those reporting short-term sickness absence (OR: 4.84, 95% CI: 2.73-8.60).ConclusionThis review supports, but also challenges earlier evidence on the association between alcohol use and sickness absence. Certain types of design, data, and types of sickness absence may produce large effects. Hence, to investigate the actual association between alcohol and sickness absence, research should produce and review longitudinal designed studies using registry data and do subgroup analyses that cover and explain variability of this association.

Project description:BackgroundLifestyle factors influence the risk of morbidity and mortality, but the extent to which they are associated with employees' absence from work due to illness is unclear. We examined the relative contributions of smoking, alcohol consumption, high body-mass index, and low physical activity to diagnosis-specific sickness absence.MethodsWe did a multicohort study with individual-level data of participants of four cohorts from the UK, France, and Finland. Participants' responses to a lifestyle survey were linked to records of sickness absence episodes, typically lasting longer than 9 days; for each diagnostic category, the outcome was the total number of sickness absence days per year. We estimated the associations between lifestyle factors and sickness absence by calculating rate ratios for the number of sickness absence days per year and combining cohort-specific estimates with meta-analysis. The criteria for assessing the evidence included the strength of association, consistency across cohorts, robustness to adjustments and multiple testing, and impact assessment by use of population attributable fractions (PAF), with both internal lifestyle factor prevalence estimates and those obtained from European populations (PAFexternal).FindingsFor 74 296 participants, during 446 478 person-years at risk, the most common diagnoses for sickness absence were musculoskeletal diseases (70·9 days per 10 person-years), depressive disorders (26·5 days per 10 person-years), and external causes (such as injuries and poisonings; 12·8 days per 10 person-years). Being overweight (rate ratio [adjusted for age, sex, socioeconomic status, and chronic disease at baseline] 1·30, 95% CI 1·21-1·40; PAFexternal 8·9%) and low physical activity (1·23, 1·14-1·34; 7·8%) were associated with absences due to musculoskeletal diseases; heavy episodic drinking (1·90, 1·41-2·56; 15·2%), smoking (1·70, 1·42-2·03; 11·8%), low physical activity (1·67, 1·42-1·96; 19·8%), and obesity (1·38, 1·11-1·71; 5·6%) were associated with absences due to depressive disorders; heavy episodic drinking (1·64, 1·33-2·03; 11·3%), obesity (1·48, 1·27-1·72; 6·6%), smoking (1·35, 1·20-1·53; 6·3%), and being overweight (1·20, 1·08-1·33; 6·2%) were associated with absences due to external causes; obesity (1·82, 1·40-2·36; 11·0%) and smoking (1·60, 1·30-1·98; 10·3%) were associated with absences due to circulatory diseases; low physical activity (1·37, 1·25-1·49; 12·0%) and smoking (1·27, 1·16-1·40; 4·9%) were associated with absences due to respiratory diseases; and obesity (1·67, 1·34-2·07; 9·7%) was associated with absences due to digestive diseases.InterpretationLifestyle factors are associated with sickness absence due to several diseases, but observational data cannot determine the nature of these associations. Future studies should investigate the cost-effectiveness of lifestyle interventions aimed at reducing sickness absence and the use of information on lifestyle for identifying groups at risk.FundingNordForsk, British Medical Research Council, Academy of Finland, Helsinki Institute of Life Sciences, and Economic and Social Research Council.

Project description:BackgroundFrequent sickness absence-that is, 3 or more episodes of sickness absence in 1 year-is a problem for employers and employees. Many employees who have had frequent sickness absence in a prior year also have frequent sickness absence in subsequent years: 39% in the first follow-up year and 61% within 4 years. Moreover, 19% have long-term sickness absence (≥6 weeks) in the first follow-up year and 50% within 4 years. We developed an electronic health (eHealth) intervention, consisting of fully automated feedback and advice, to use either as a stand-alone tool (eHealth intervention-only) or combined with consultation with an occupational physician (eHealth intervention-occupational physician).ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the effect of the eHealth intervention, with or without additional occupational physician consultation, to reduce sickness absence frequency for employees with frequent sickness absence, versus care as usual (CAU).MethodsThis study was a three-armed randomized controlled trial. Employees with frequent sickness absence received invitational letters, which were distributed by their employers. The primary outcome measure was the number of register-based sickness absence episodes 12 months after completing the baseline questionnaire. Secondary outcome measures were register-based total sickness absence days and self-assessed burnout, engagement, and work ability. In a process evaluation 3 months after baseline, we examined adherence to the intervention and additional actions such as general practitioner and occupational physician visit, communication with the manager, and lifestyle change.ResultsA total of 82 participants were included in the analyses, 21 in the eHealth intervention-only group, 31 in the eHealth intervention-occupational physician group, and 30 in the CAU group. We found no significant difference in sickness absence frequency between the groups at 1-year follow-up. Sickness absence frequency decreased in the eHealth intervention-only group from 3 (interquartile range, IQR 3-4) to 1 episode (IQR 0.3-2.8), in the eHealth intervention-occupational physician group from 4 (IQR 3-5) to 3 episodes (IQR 1-4), and in the CAU group from 3 (IQR 3-4) to 2 episodes (IQR 1-3). For secondary outcomes, we found no significant differences between the intervention groups and the control group. The process evaluation showed that only 3 participants from the eHealth intervention-occupational physician group visited the occupational physician on invitation.ConclusionsAmong employees with frequent sickness absence, we found no effect from the eHealth intervention as a stand-alone tool in reducing sickness absence frequency, nor on total sickness absence days, burnout, engagement, or work ability. This might be due to low adherence to the intervention because of insufficient urgency to act. We cannot draw any conclusion on the effect of the eHealth intervention tool combined with an occupational physician consultation (eHealth intervention-occupational physician), due to very low adherence to the occupational physician consultation. An occupational physician consultation could increase a sense of urgency and lead to more focus and appropriate support. As this was the first effectiveness study among employees with frequent sickness absence, strategies to improve recruitment and adherence in occupational eHealth are included.Trial registrationNetherlands Trial Register NTR4316; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=4316 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/713DHhOFU).

Project description:IntroductionAlcohol is among the most commonly used psychoactive drugs, yet it can produce markedly different subjective effects in different people. Certain effects, including both heightened stimulatory effects and lesser sedative effects, are thought to predict repeated or excessive use. However, we do not fully understand the nature of these individual differences or their relationships to alcohol consumption. This controlled laboratory study examined subjective and physiologic responses to a moderate dose of alcohol in social drinkers in relation to the subjects' decision to consume alcohol.MethodsHealthy adult volunteers (N = 95) participated in a 5-session double-blind alcohol choice study. On the first 4 sessions, they received alcohol (0.8 g/kg) and placebo in alternating order, and on the fifth session, they chose and consumed whichever of the 2 they preferred. During each session, participants completed the Profile of Mood States (POMS) and Biphasic Alcohol Effects Scale (BAES) questionnaires and had their vitals recorded every 30 minutes. We compared subjective and physiologic response to alcohol during the sampling sessions in participants who chose alcohol or placebo on session 5.ResultsOf the 95 participants, 55 chose alcohol (choosers) and 40 chose placebo (nonchoosers). In the full sample, alcohol produced its expected effects (e.g., increased friendliness, elation, and vigor (POMS), and stimulation and sedation (BAES)). The chooser and nonchooser groups did not differ in demographic characteristics, blood alcohol levels, or cardiovascular measures. However, the choosers experienced greater alcohol-induced increases in positive mood (POMS) and liked the drug more, whereas the nonchoosers experienced greater anger, anxiety (POMS), and sedation (BAES) after alcohol.ConclusionBoth greater positive mood effects and lesser sedative effects after alcohol predicted preference under controlled conditions, suggesting that both factors can predict future consumption of alcohol.

Dataset Information

Sickness absence diagnoses among abstainers, low-risk drinkers and at-risk drinkers: consideration of the U-shaped association between alcohol use and sickness absence in four cohort studies.

Aims

Design

Setting and participants

Measurements

Findings

Conclusions

Publications

Sickness absence diagnoses among abstainers, low-risk drinkers and at-risk drinkers: consideration of the U-shaped association between alcohol use and sickness absence in four cohort studies.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets