Impacts of presenteeism on work-related injury absence and disease absence

Abstract

Background: Many studies have been conducted on presenteeism and absenteeism, but the relationship between presenteeism and absenteeism is unclear. This study was undertaken to investigate the effect of presenteeism on future absenteeism. Methods: This study was conducted on non-white collar workers that underwent general health examinations in 2014 and 2015. We asked subjects to fill out a questionnaire about their experiences of presenteeism for the past one year in 2014. In 2015, it was checked whether the same subjects had any experience of absence from work due to injury or disease during the past year. The χ2 test was used to analyze relationships between sociodemographic and occupational characteristics, presenteeism, and absence. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated by logistic regression analysis controlled for confounding factors. Results: A total of 12,572 workers were included in the study. For workers who experienced presenteeism, the OR for injury absence was 2.705 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.044–3.581), and the OR for disease absence was 4.906 (95% CI: 3.996–6.024) after adjusting for sociodemographic and occupational confounding factors. For men that experienced presenteeism, the OR for injury absence was 3.035 (95% CI: 2.258–4.081), and the OR for disease absence was 5.508 (95% CI: 4.340–6.989). For women that experienced presenteeism, the OR for injury absence was 1.322 (95% CI: 0.577–3.028), which was not significant, and the OR for disease absence was 3.629 (95% CI: 2.405–5.475). Conclusions: This study suggests that presenteeism can influence future absenteeism. The effect of presenteeism may depend on cause of absence. Men who experienced presenteeism showed greater effects on injury and disease absence than women. For women, experience of presenteeism had a significant effect on disease absence but not on injury absence.