Objectives Occupational health and safety (OHS) interventions` effect on worker productivity is an essential, but complex element of the value of these programs. The trustworthiness of economic evaluation studies, aiming to provide guidance to decision-makers in the field of OHS, depends at least partly on how accurately productivity changes are measured. We aim to review the methods used to estimate productivity changes in recently published economic evaluations of OHS interventions. Methods We performed systematic searches of economic evaluations of OHS programs published between 2007 and 2017 and reviewed these studies` methods to quantify the programs` impact on worker productivity Results Of the 90 identified studies, 44 used a human capital approach, 17 a friction cost approach, 13 stated productivity in natural units (eg, a cost-per-absence-day-avoided), 7 made use of compensation expenses, 4 used output-based methods, 4 an "ad hoc" approach, and 1 study did not state its method. Different approaches were combined in 19 studies. Within these methods, we observed a wide diversity in their precise implementation, especially regarding the measurement and valuation of absenteeism and presenteeism. Conclusions Productivity is a key element of the economic attractiveness of investing in OHS. Economic evaluation studies of OHS would benefit from more methodological standardization in their approach to quantifying productivity change. Future research should better account for the methodological uncertainty that occurs in estimating it in order to demonstrate the impact that particular choices and approaches to productivity estimation can have on cost-effectiveness results.

An emerging issue in occupational health and safety (OHS) is that interventions increasingly have to demonstrate that they offer sufficient value for money. To this end, the last decennia have seen more and more economic evaluation methods being employed in this field. However, several recent publications have indicated that many of the published studies suffer from important shortcomings. This paper aims to highlight difficulties in assessing the value of OHS by use of current economic evaluation methods. First, a summary framework presents an overview of the costs and benefits relevant for OHS interventions. Next, three elements from this framework are selected that are at the same time crucial to OHS value, but also challenging to measure and monetise: Effects on worker productivity, ‘intangible’ benefits, such as reputation effects, and the influence of the broader legal–fiscal context in which an intervention takes place. The following sections then discuss the following research questions for each of these elements: Why is it difficult to exclude these factors from OHS economic evaluations? Why do they pose a challenge to the quality of economic evaluations in OHS? How can they be included, and what are the known advantages and disadvantages of the methods to measure these factors? Future work should investigate (and standardise) better methods to include these elements.

Objectives In many countries, organisations are legally obliged to have occupational physicians screen employees regularly. However, this system is time-intensive, and there may be more cost-effective alternatives. Our objective is to compare the short-term effectiveness of periodic occupational health screening of hospital employees by an occupational physician with a system of electronic screening with targeted follow-up. Methods A randomized controlled trial was set up among personnel of four Belgian hospitals, with three measurement moments between June 2019 and December 2020, to compare differences in self-assessed health, healthcare use, productivity and intermediate outcomes over 19 months. Mixed effects models were used to assess differences in effectiveness. Superiority and non-inferiority post-hoc tests were used as a robustness check. The experiment coincided with the first two COVID-19 waves during which hospital employees were exposed to an exceptional period of occupational stress. Results In total, 1077 employees (34% of the target population) participated. Although we observed some immediate effects of the intervention (less trust in the physician, absenteeism, and healthcare use), all these effects disappeared over time. After 19 months, including two waves of COVID-19 hospitalizations, no significant differences were observed between employees screened through face-to-face contact and those screened electronically. Conclusions Our study finds no indication that, in the short-term, substituting physician screening of the workforce with a quicker survey-based screening with targeted follow-up has different effects on the studied endpoints. However, as health and disease are often the result of a long-term process, more evidence is needed to determine long-term effects.

Introduction: Burnout is a major concern in medical education and healthcare. Despite growing attention, little is known about how burnout and engagement evolve within the different phases of medical education or which factors shape these outcomes within each phase. This study assesses phase-specific trajectories of burnout and engagement and identifies the demands, resources, and personality traits associated with these outcomes. Methods: A prospective cohort study with three annual measurement waves was conducted among medical students and residents (n = 1.257) from all five universities in Flanders, Belgium. Three cohorts (i.e. bachelor students, master students, and residents) were followed for three consecutive years, using an open cohort design. Data were collected annually: at baseline (T0), after one year (T1), and after two years (T2). Linear mixed-effects models and cross-lagged panel analyses were used to examine temporal changes in burnout complaints and engagement; and to identify key demands, resources and personality traits within each cohort. Results: Within each cohort, burnout complaints increased gradually over time, while engagement declined. Within all learning phases, workload and work-home conflict were identified as primary demands, whereas meaningfulness was identified as the main resource, followed by learning opportunities. Neuroticism was positively associated with burnout complaints and negatively with engagement, while perfectionistic strivings correlated positively with engagement. Conclusion: This study demonstrates how burnout complaints and engagement evolve within learning phases in medical education and identifies key determinants underlying these trajectories. Efforts should prioritize reducing perceived workload and work–home conflict, while strengthening meaningfulness and learning opportunities. In addition, acknowledging individual personality traits may help tailor interventions.

In many countries occupational health services (OHS) are increasingly pressurised due to a lack of resources or on-going shortages of available occupational health physicians and professionals.1 2 A recent survey of 500 employers in the UK indicated that ’businesses are not clear on how much absence is costing them (54%), and less than half (46%) believe the measures they currently have in place to reduce absence have clear benefits’.3 At the same time, it is widely acknowledged that people’s state of health and working conditions are closely connected, that a substantial fraction of the physical and mental disease burden has its origins in the work environment, and that occupational health professionals have particular skills in tackling these health problems.4 5 The benefits of OHS include protecting and promoting workers’ health and well-being and organising employee re-integration after illness, but also extend beyond that. For employers, a healthy workforce implies gains in worker productivity and engagement, reduced litigation costs and improved corporate image. …