Health care workers have a high prevalence of sickness absence because of low back pain (LBP). This study examined whether fear-avoidance beliefs (FAB): 1) predicted sickness absence and 2) moderated the association between LBP and sickness absence among 1724 newly educated health care workers with LBP ≥ day during the previous 12 months. High FAB was associated with sickness absence days 1 year later (relative risk, 1.45, 95% confidence interval = 1.24 to 1.70), controlled for LBP, previous sickness absence, and age. When controlling for work environmental factors, the association remained significant but decreased. Furthermore, the results showed that health care workers with high degree of LBP would have more sickness absence days if they also had high FAB. To reduce sickness absence, education about pain management must be presumed to be beneficial.

Background: Low back pain (LBP) represents a major socioeconomic burden for the Western societies. Both life-style and work-related factors may cause low back pain. Prospective cohort studies assessing risk factors among individuals without prior history of low back pain are lacking. This aim of this study was to determine risk factors for developing low back pain (LBP) among health care workers. Methods: Prospective cohort study with 2,235 newly educated female health care workers without prior history of LBP. Risk factors and incidence of LBP were assessed at one and two years after graduation. Results: Multinomial logistic regression analyses adjusted for age, smoking, and psychosocial factors showed that workers with high physical work load had higher risk for developing LBP than workers with low physical work load (OR 1.8; 95% CI 1.1–2.8). In contrast, workers with high BMI were not at a higher risk for developing LBP than workers with a normal BMI. Conclusion: Preventive initiatives for LBP among health care workers ought to focus on reducing high physical work loads rather than lowering excessive body weight.

Worldwide, the number of cancer survivors is increasing, owing to improvements in cancer therapy, resulting in an increased need to address the physical and mental sequelae of cancer. This paper introduces a Danish psychosocial cancer intervention and presents the baseline characteristics of the cancer survivors with respect to cancer site, sociodemographic variables, social network, lifestyle, self-rated health and the prevalence of cancer-related late effects. The study is part of the FOCARE research project, in which the long-term effects of the rehabilitation programme are evaluated systematically. The study is based on data from a self-administered baseline questionnaire filled in by 2 174 cancer survivors who registered for a 1-week, publicly paid rehabilitation retreat and were invited to participate in the FOCARE study in the period 25 November 2002 to 31 December 2005. The response rate at baseline was 86% (n = 1876). Most participants were younger women with breast cancer. They were generally well educated and working. The cancer survivors reported having comprehensive social networks and being physically active. Several cancer-related symptoms were reported by women with cancers at selected sites, of which fatigue was the most prevalent. More than half reported good-to-excellent self-rated health, while fair-to-poor health was reported by 40%, most of whom were survivors of lung (56%) and haematological (48%) cancers. The results indicate that Danish cancer survivors experience considerably reduced physical health, possibly as late physical effects of treatment. The problems reported by the cancer survivors suggest that cancer rehabilitation should include these aspects of living after cancer and take account of differences among cancer survivors with regard to cancer site, sex, age, family, working status and social position. These challenges might be addressed optimally in multi-dimensional rehabilitation programmes.

Objective: To investigate the distribution of antibiotic prescriptions in primary health care among children aged 0–6 years and its association with socioeconomic factors. Design: A cross-sectional study describing antibiotic prescriptions and socioeconomic factors, using different population-based registers from Statistics Denmark. Setting: Antibiotic prescriptions in 2012 from primary health care in the Capital Region of Denmark. Subjects: The population of children aged 0–6 years (n = 139,398) in the Capital Region of Denmark. Main outcome measures: High use of antibiotics identified by number of antibiotic prescriptions (≥ 3 prescriptions per year) and defined daily doses (DDD). A multinomial logistic regression analysis estimating the association between high antibiotic use and parents’ education, employment status, income, child’s sex, and ethnic background. Results: Ten percent of children accounted for 25% of the total use DDD. There was a clear tendency that the risk for high antibiotic use increased as parental educational level decreased. The risk for high use was the highest among children of mothers and fathers with basic schooling ≤10 years (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.29–1.98, and OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.34–1.91, respectively). Low income and unemployment were not associated with high antibiotic use. Conclusion: Socioeconomic factors can only partially explain differences in antibiotic use. Further research is needed to clarify the unequal distribution of antibiotic prescribing and the association between high antibiotic use and low educational level. This would provide valuable information in the planning of strategies to promote rational use of antibiotics among children.

Aim: To compare levels of self-efficacy among the general working population and employees with sickness absence from work, and to examine if general self-efficacy measured before occurrence of sickness absence predicted subsequent onset of sickness absence and Return-to-Work. Methods: The study follows a cohort of 5357 working employees and 106 long-term sickness absent employees in Denmark. They were interviewed in 2000 regarding self-efficacy and various co-variates, and followed for 78 weeks in a national sickness absence register. Cox regression analysis was performed in order to assess the effect of self-efficacy on Return-to- Work after sickness absence. Results: General self-efficacy was significantly lower among those with sickness absence compared to the general working population. Self-efficacy showed no statistically significant association with later onset of sickness absence or with Return-to-Work. Conclusion: The results may suggest that lower self-efficacy among employees with sickness absence is a result of the sickness absence itself rather than a precursor of it. This indicates a need to investigate the potential change in self-efficacy in relation to the employee's change in labor market status; this will help to focus Return-to-Work interventions where planning has to be attentive towards the change in self-efficacy that can occur after onset of disease and sickness absence.

Background Continuous neck and shoulder pain is a common musculoskeletal complaint. Physical exercise can reduce pain symptoms, but compliance to exercise is a challenge. Exercise-specific self-efficacy has been found to be a predictor of participation in preplanned exercise. Little is known about the influence of exercise-specific self-efficacy on compliance to workplace physical exercise. Purpose To determine the influence of exercise-specific self-efficacy on compliance to specific strength exercises during working hours for laboratory technicians. Methods We performed a cluster-randomized controlled trial, including laboratory technicians from two industrial production units in Copenhagen, Denmark. The participants were randomized to supervised specific strength exercises for the neck and shoulder muscles for 20 minutes three times a week (n = 282) or to a reference group (n = 255). The participants answered baseline and follow-up questions regarding self-efficacy and registered all exercises in a diary. Results Overall compliance to exercises was 45 %. Compliance in company A (private sector) differed significantly between the three self-efficacy groups after 20 weeks. The odds ratio of compliance was 2.37 for moderate versus low self-efficacy, and 2.93 for high versus low self-efficacy. No significant difference was found in company B (public sector) or in the intervention group as a whole. Conclusion We did not find self-efficacy to be a general statistically significant predictor of compliance to exercises during 20 weeks, but found self-efficacy to be a predictor of compliance in a private sector setting. Workplace-specific differences might be present and should be taken into account.