![Health Benefits of Work
• Good Work is Good for Health
• Focus on ‘Capacity’ not ‘Incapacity’ [Fit Note?]
• Early intervention is cost effective: Primary care,
workplaces, secondary care all play a part
• Work should be regarded as a clinical outcome of care
• Up to 30% of workers with MSDs also have mental
health problems – interventions need to take this into
account
• Work has therapeutic benefits – especially ‘good work’
– but what does this mean in practice?](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/fitforwork-140915224312-phpapp01/85/Fit-for-Work-16-320.jpg)
Fit for Work?
The document discusses the impact of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) on the workforce, highlighting their significant burden as a leading cause of disability globally. It emphasizes the importance of early intervention and the promotion of 'good work' to enhance employee health, engagement, and productivity, particularly in the face of an ageing workforce. Strategies for improving workplace well-being are outlined, focusing on prevention, support systems, and the economic benefits of maintaining a healthy workforce.
More Related Content
More from Occupational Health and Safety Industry Group
Fit for Work?
- 1. Fit for Work? Prevention & management of workforce illness, disability and absence from MSDs – the role of engagement & ‘good work’ Stephen Bevan Director, Centre for Workforce Effectiveness, The Work Foundation (UK) Honorary Professor, Lancaster University, UK Founding President, Fit for Work Europe Coalition
- 2. Themes • TheGlobal ‘Burden’ of MSDs • The EU & Asia Pacific & NZ picture • Ageing, retirement, work & health in 2030 • Areas for action: • Earlier diagnosis & intervention • ‘Good Work’ is good for health • Engagement & Wellbeing • Some examples
- 3. Global Burden ofMSDs ©The Work Foundation
- 4. Global Burden ofMSDs ©The Work Foundation 2nd greatest cause of disability in all regions of the world Disability due to MSDs increased by 45% from 1990 to 2010 1.7bn Affected: Back pain 632m Neck pain 332m OA knee 251m Other MSD 561m
- 5. MSDs and Disability • Ranking of major causes of death and disability (% DALYs) • Cardiovascular and circulatory diseases 11.8% • All neoplasms 7.6% • Mental and behavioural disorders 7.4% • Musculoskeletal disorders 6.8% • Yet MSDs not considered a priority non-communicable disease…. • …high on morbidity but low on mortality
- 6. Musculoskeletal Disorders inthe EU Workforce
- 7. Core Findings: NewZealand MSDs are the leading cause of disability in NZ affecting 1 in 4 In 2009 MSDs accounted for 21% of all sickness & invalid benefit payments MSDs cost the economy NZ$5.57 billion each year 15% of all citizens visit their GP with an MSD each year Income tax foregone due to Arthritis NZ$254m Lost productivity is the largest cost of Arthritis (47%) Indirect costs of Arthritis outweigh direct costs by 3.6:1 54% of people with Arthritis are of working age Earlier diagnosis & treatment of MSDs could improve workability, job retention and return to work – reducing their clinical, economic & social impact
- 8. Musculoskeletal Disorders inAsia Pacific
- 9. Ageing, retirement, work& health in 2030 ©The Work Foundation
- 10. Labour Market Dynamics • Ageing workforces in most developed economies • Pension/superannuation challenges mean many will retire later • Growing proportion of the workforce will have one or more chronic and work-limiting health condition
- 11. Reduced productivity Poor Workforce Health ©The Work Foundation More social exclusion & poverty Early labour market withdrawal Increased healthcare costs Reduced tax revenue Increased welfare spending Increased burden on families & carers Ageing Workforce Later Retirement More Chronic Illness Contextual Factors
- 12. LTCs in theUK Working Age Population - 2030 ©The Work Foundation N=21.6m Source: Vaughan-Jones & Barham, 2009 Mental Health CHD Stroke COPD Asthma MSDs Cancer Diabetes Asthma 2.6m Diabetes 1.3m Stroke 367k Mental Health 7m MSDs 7m COPD 1.6m Cancer 800k CHD 1m Comorbidity – limitations of the Biomedical model?
- 13. Action Areas •Early intervention • Health benefits of Work • Health & Wellbeing ‘strategy’ • Engagement & Wellbeing • Examples ©The Work Foundation
- 14. Early Intervention •Better treatment. The quicker an individual receives a diagnosis, the more rapidly they can get access to appropriate treatment which can stabilise or control their symptoms; • Reducing the risk of developing co-morbid conditions. For many people with chronic conditions issues like pain, fatigue, depression or anxiety can become a significant issue which can increase healthcare costs and reduces functional capacity; • Aiding a return to activities of daily living. Early intervention can ensure people with chronic conditions can become more self-reliant and rely less on health and social care services; • Staying in or returning to work. People whose health conditions are being well-managed are more likely to remain economically active, continue to pay taxes and be less reliant on welfare payments ©The Work Foundation
- 15. Madrid: Early Interventionfor MSDs 15 Early Intervention Clinic1 in Madrid – after 5 days 1Abasolo, L et al, (2005) A Health System Program To Reduce Work Disability Related to Musculoskeletal Disorders, Annals of Internal Medicine, 143:404-414. Reduce the duration of temporary disability by 39% Reduce the incidence of permanent disability by 50% Reduce the utilization of health care resources by 40% The analysis showed that $1 invested in the early intervention program yielded $11 of benefit If replicated across the EU this intervention would allow 1m additional workers to attend work each day
- 16. Health Benefits ofWork • Good Work is Good for Health • Focus on ‘Capacity’ not ‘Incapacity’ [Fit Note?] • Early intervention is cost effective: Primary care, workplaces, secondary care all play a part • Work should be regarded as a clinical outcome of care • Up to 30% of workers with MSDs also have mental health problems – interventions need to take this into account • Work has therapeutic benefits – especially ‘good work’ – but what does this mean in practice?
- 17. Components of ‘GoodWork’
- 18. Waddell & Burton, 2006 ‘Is work good for your health & wellbeing?’ Marmot 2005 ‘Status Syndrome: How Social Standing Affects our Health & Longevity’
- 19. Parker & Bevan 2011 ‘Good Work & Our Times’
- 20. Part of thedifficulty with the ‘Work is good for you’ statement is that it is too simple. What work? For whom? When? In what way? The statement has been amended – ‘Good work is good for your health’…
- 21. Is this aHealth & Wellbeing ‘Strategy’? ©The Work Foundation
- 22. Strategies to PromoteWorkplace Wellbeing • Being ‘strategic’ is not about having an eye-catching list of initiatives….. • It is about: – Aligning your HWB strategy with your business strategy – Prioritising prevention & early intervention – A focus on causes not just symptoms – Co-producing a healthy work environment with staff – Measuring & monitoring what you do – Including a public health & community dimension to what you do.
- 23. Early Referral ©TheWork Foundation Job Design Line Management Workplace Accommodations Vocational Rehabilitation Examples “The best workplace accommodation is a great manager”
- 24. Resilience – twoperspectives ‘both the capacity to be bent without breaking and the capacity, once bent, ©The Work Foundation to spring back’ ‘something which helps inoculate our employees against work pressure, ambiguity, poor management and bullying’ Or…
- 25. Challenges • HWB– cost or investment? • Line manager health • Employee engagement & wellbeing vs ‘Vitality Curve’ performance management • Disclosure, stigma & psychological health • HWB as ‘benefit’ or ‘intervention’? • Good Work: Tackling symptoms or causes? ©The Work Foundation
- 26. Engagement & Wellbeing • Strong links between both psychological and physical health and engagement • Engagement at work significantly affects people’s perceptions of whether they consider they are thriving in their wider lives • Organisations that have introduced initiatives aimed at improving physical health also see benefits from improved teamwork • Committed and healthy employees have a significant influence on customer service, lower staff turnover and reduced absence
- 29. ©The Work Foundation Recent study of Bank workers on work/non-work ‘boundary’ and wellbeing Non-work factors had a negative compounding effect on those already suffering work stress, reducing productivity by a further 6 per cent
- 31. Some Examples ©TheWork Foundation
- 32. BT – LineManager MH Education ©The Work Foundation
- 33. Unilever – HRAApproach • Started with a top-down approach • HRA with top 14 executives – modifyable health risks • Intensive lifestyle coaching (hydration, sleep, exercise, alcohol etc) • High impact results made a wider business case for extension of HRA • £3.8:£1 ROI achieved globally ©The Work Foundation
- 34. BP – EarlyOnset Dementia • Retention of skills & know-how is business-critical • Early onset dementia & cognitive decline seen as a risk • Pilot work by OHS to redesign jobs and provide support for employees showing early signs • TWF/LU planning to evaluate these interventions ©The Work Foundation
- 35. EDF Energy -Resilience • OH & HR initiative to shift the emphasis of MH from ‘Stress’ to ‘Resilience’ • Focus on coping, self-management & control • Strong link to Business ‘resilience’, H&S & agility • Training & support for line managers & staff • ‘Resilience’ not embraced by French ‘parent’ ©The Work Foundation
- 36. Conclusions • Mostadults spend a high proportion of their lives at work • As well as income, the workplace is where many of us find friendship, fulfilment and the emotional interactions that enrich our lives • People living with chronic illness or disability have the right to expect access to high quality, flexible and rewarding work • We know how to secure this and the pressure for all stakeholders to act is becoming irresistible
- 37. Thank You! Stayin Touch www.fitforworkeurope.eu www.theworkfoundation.com sbevan@theworkfoundation.com @StephenBevan