Background
Absenteeism refers to temporary absences from work and this phenomenon is one of the key factors of labor productivity and generates a significant part of “hidden” labor costs. A report by the Society for Human Resource Management & Kronos Workforce Institute (2014) estimated that 38.3% of gross salary is paid for work that is never done. In addition to direct and indirect costs, absenteeism in the organization results in a range of negative phenomena such as management frustration, employee overload, conflict, ultimately to the detriment of organizational culture. Much of the research into absenteeism defines observed phenomena through individual-level concepts such as job satisfaction or organizational commitment and job involvement.1,2 These individual models often ignore the role of work organization and working conditions in explaining absenteeism.3 Researchers tend to explain non-attendance by concepts such as absence culture, job satisfaction or organizational commitment and job involvement.1,2,4 They build individual models where sickness absence is viewed as a voluntary behavior influenced by attitudes such as shared attitudes to work (absence culture) or the employees’ satisfaction with their jobs. Therefore, it is viewed as a social problem rather than a health problem. Few studies in management have studied the link between organizational factors and absenteeism. Such organizational factors encompass physical and psychosocial working environments as well as organization and social relations at work.4 Organizational level factors include for example: organizational culture, leadership, workload, size and type of organization, profession, and position in hierarchy. When organizational changes occur, many workers can become disillusioned, insecure and “take” sick leave. Other implications of organizational changes are that workers may be present but de-motivated and are not productive.
Changing macro factors such as the implementing health reform, legislation and socio-economic framework would take years. Similarly, changes at the individual level of workers would require a change in the model of behavior or the development of awareness of the working population, a more pragmatic approach to initially try to understand and then eliminate the organizational causes of absenteeism.
In our review, by organizational factors we mean physical and psychosocial work environment as well as work organization and social relations at work. The aim of this review was to give a multifactorial background of absenteeism and to highlight significant associations that have an impact on the occurrence of sick leave events.
Size and Type of Organization
Size of an organization has been said to influence absenteeism, with absence rates higher in large firms.5,6 Size and type of organization have implications across organizational factors such as hierarchical control and support from colleagues. Garcia-Prado and Chawla research found that big organizations have less group cohesiveness, greater bureaucracy and that individual efforts can go unnoticed.7 Similarly, Torrington remarked that patterns of higher absences in most surveys are in larger organizations.8 Eurofound highlighted that lower absence rates were recorded in small organizations.9 Notably, Edwards and Ram explained this finding by suggesting that workers in smaller organizations report a relatively high quality of work and less generous sick pay provisions than in larger organizations.10 Similarly, absence may be more disruptive and noticeable in smaller organizations, while sick pay schemes tend to be less generous or even non-existent.11 The sector with the highest average days lost was public services, in contrast to manufacturing and production with the lowest average days lost. In the healthcare setting, Garcia-Prado and Chawla’s work in Costa Rica evaluated the impact of changes in reimbursement methods and organizational reforms on absenteeism.7 They concluded that absenteeism generally increased more so in large hospitals than smaller ones.
Geographical location
When addressing absenteeism in healthcare organizations, the location of specific facilities, (i.e., whether rural or urban) and distance from workplace to where the health workers live have been reported to influence the absence rate of the health workers. Muthama et al., hypothesized that absenteeism would be greater in rural areas caused by irregular transport and health workers needing to travel long distances in Nigeria.12,13 In Bangladesh and Kenya, health workers that lived in the same town or village as the health center they worked in were less absent compared to those that lived a distance away from their place of work.12,14 Goerke and Lorenz reported in Germany that employees who commute long distances are absent about 20% more than employees with no commutes.15 The authors explored various explanations for the effect of long-distance commutes to work and could not find evidence that it is due to working hours’ mismatch, lower work effort, reduced leisure time or differences in health status.
Department & Profession
The impact of departmental and professional norms has received attention. While research findings have been inconsistent, possibly due to the difficulty in isolating these factors, there is evidence of association of such factors with absenteeism. In the hospital setting, Sancinetti et al., observed that surgical ward units registered the highest rates of absenteeism, followed by internal medicine units.16 The study also showed that the highest absenteeism rates occurred among nursing technicians/aides in internal medicine units. In their study of 690 hospital personnel in Tehran of which 180 had sick leave, Mollazadeh et al., reported that more than two-thirds (114/180) of sick leave was taken by the nursing group. One-third (71/180) of this sick leave occurred in the intensive care unit (ICU), cardiac care unit (CCU), and emergency room.17 The implication of these findings is that high acuity settings with increased workload had negative associations with absenteeism. Analyzing the impact of varying professions on absenteeism, Gianino et al., found that medical doctors, technical (sic. health and social care professionals) and management had lower absenteeism (on average less than 1 day/person) than workers in non-medical support staff, administrative and nursing who had on average more than 2 days absence per person.18 The authors comment that medical and management personnel (approximately 17% of personnel) may recognize that the hospital cannot obtain coverage for their positions when they take sick leave and, therefore, feel obligated to return to work as early as possible. Jiang et al., in findings similar to Mossad et al., reported that physicians were significantly more likely to work while ill than nurses and most other categories of healthcare workers.19,20 Rates of absenteeism were slightly higher among workers in direct contact with patients possibly due to healthcare acquired infections.18 On reviewing the literature, it is difficult to generalize whether there is an association between individual professions or department and absenteeism. There are confounding variables that are difficult to correct for in this context, such as individual health status, position and tenure that may impact findings.
Workload
Workload is a factor that encompasses variables such as time pressure, shift work, long working hours and monotony of work.3 The relationship between the number of hours spent working in a week (work hours) and overall health has been the focus of numerous studies in recent years. There is no general consensus on the relationship between work hours and sickness absence and its potential underlying mechanisms.21 Several studies have found that longer working hours are associated with a wide range of adverse health outcomes, such as diabetes, depression and anxiety, mortality risk, and coronary heart disease.22–24 In Canada, a study among physicians regarding the impact of heavy workload on their attitudes and outcomes found that absenteeism increased with an increase in workload.25 Similar trends were observed in other international studies among nurses and healthcare workers.26–28 Rauhala and colleagues found that individuals who exceeded the optimum workload by 15% or more had increased risks of sickness absence.28 The association was the same for both short-term (self-certified) and long-term (physician-certified) sickness absence. Kriegsman et al. study results suggest that patients’ self-reports on selected chronic diseases are fairly accurate.29 Böckerman and Laukkanen reported that work hours and sickness absence are not causally related but rather a spurious relationship influenced by a third variable (i.e., motivation).30 This assertion is supported by evidence that longer working hours can also correlate with a higher degree of presenteeism. Rosenström and colleagues reported the strongest risk of sickness absence was associated with highly irregular working hours, with night and weekend shifts, and interrupted job contracts.31 Ala-Mursula et al. reported that longer working hours correlated counter-intuitively with shorter (< 4 days) rather than longer periods of sickness absence.32 A clear association exists between stress and absenteeism, however, there are conflicting findings between increased workload and its causation on stress. It seems reasonable to suggest that most absences were recorded after a stretch of consecutive working days due to accumulated stressors. The general consensus from the literature is that increased workload is negatively associated with absenteeism.
Working conditions
Working conditions have been identified as a primary factor in organizational causations of absenteeism. Working conditions include autonomy or role, workload, facilities, compensation etc. Stressful working conditions are another factor related to sickness absence, mainly because of their ill health-related consequences.33 Unfavorable working conditions are also related to higher sickness absenteeism.34,35 Studies have shown that heavy physical work is associated with increased risk of disability, while such factors as prolonged standing, body vibration and working in uncomfortable positions all showed associations with sickness absence.36–41 Literature in the healthcare context found consistent evidence amongst nurses linking work stress to sickness absence.42 Time pressure and autonomy are known to be related to health and sickness absence.43–45 Schreuder et al., found that more stressful roles in nursing generally led to higher absences.46 Rajbhandary and Basu reported that licensed practice nurses (LPNs) reported an increase in absenteeism with an increase in role overload.47 LPNs working in long-term care facilities reported less absenteeism than LPNs working in hospitals. Summarizing these findings, improving working conditions reduce absenteeism with a consequent improvement in labor supply.47
Bullying
Bullying in the workplace has been labelled as a severe stressor.48 As an example, in Ireland, there is currently no dedicated legislation addressing the issue of workplace bullying and as a result, reliance is generally placed on companies’ ‘Codes of Practice’.49 These have been described as legally ineffective in protecting people from bullying at work.50 It is estimated that almost one-in-ten employees have recent experience of being bullied.51 The victims of bullying recorded 1.5 times higher self-certified absence than the rest of staff. The ratios of absence remained significant after adjustment for demographic area, occupational background, baseline health status and sickness absence. Campanini et al., also confirmed that workers exposed to workplace bullying reported higher sickness absenteeism compared to non-exposed subjects, also when a potentially highly stressful work environment is considered.52 The literature confirms that bullying in the workplace has a strong negative association with absenteeism.
Psychosocial factors
Psychosocial factors such as psychological job demands and job control as measures of psychosocial work environment have been acknowledged in the literature as potential factors in absenteeism.53 An adverse psychosocial work environment has received growing attention as a potential antecedent of sickness absence.54 Low job controls at work (little influence on the work situation and decision authority) appears to be the most consistent work-related psychosocial factor.55–59 In line with previous studies, Kottwitz et al., reported that low autonomy, specifically with respect to decision authority, leads to increased absenteeism.60–64 Some studies have indicated that job strain, lack of social support and job demands may also be important.65–67 Plant & Coombes considered socio-demographics an important factor in causing particular psychosocial sickness absence due to stress and burnout.68 Indeed, aging is a particularly highly individualized process that incorporates changes of the physiological system and of socioemotional motivations.69 Older people may be more vulnerable to rigors of work, because the aging process is accompanied by changing coping capabilities and resources as well as changes in the physiological system.70,71 In that case, the association between psychosocial factors such as stress would be more pronounced for older workers.72
Workload, non-work factors and management style are reported as the top three causes of stress at work. Vahtera evaluated job control among municipal personnel and showed that high job control combined with good work demands led to commitment to work and fewer sickness absences.73 Götz et al. found, in their study based on employed men and women in Germany, clear evidence that stressful work is linked to a higher number of sickness days.33 The study also reported that associations between stressful roles and absence were stronger amongst older workers, both for men and women. Sterud’s research on work-related psychosocial factors found significantly higher certified general sick leave and long-term sick leave among women.74 It is proposed that women as primary homemakers have additional stresses and pressures outside of work. Roskes et al., and Clays et al., found that having difficulties with combining the demands at work and in family life, possibly resulting in work-family conflict, is strongly related to ill health and sick leave.75,76
Studies of the impact of psychosocial factors in the healthcare area are limited. In 2021, the Irish Health Service launched the program “Work Positive”, which is a confidential psychosocial risk management process that assists managers to identify ways to improve employee health, safety and wellbeing.77 Its outcomes are not yet known.
The consensus is that psychosocial factors such as autonomy, job strain and support networks impact positively on job satisfaction. Adversely, the impact of low job controls and lack of support from colleagues is negatively related to job satisfaction and positively related to stress. Stress has a strong negative association with absenteeism.
Job control
Job control improves one’s capacity to make a decision, to exert professional autonomy, and to gain other resources at work.78 A sense of control is a resource that enhances working conditions.79 Nachreiner et al. posited that job demands should primarily predict exhaustion, whereas job resources (e.g., job control) should primarily predict disengagement.80 Aronsson et al., utilized a large body of cross-sectional questionnaire data (n = 130,161) gathered in Sweden from 2002 to 2007 in connection with a comprehensive health promotion initiative.81 The study found that high job control emerged as the most pronounced health-promoting factor, reducing sickness presenteeism as well as absenteeism. More role conflicts and work-to-family conflicts were directly and indirectly associated, respectively, with decreased health and increased absenteeism as well as presenteeism.
Job involvement
Job involvement is different to work involvement and describes a general attitude towards the organization.82 Mase and Aondoave stated job involvement as the key to unlocking employee motivation and increasing productivity from an organizational perspective.83 The direct relationship between job involvement and absenteeism was not significant in two studies.84,85 However, Taunton et al. showed a significant negative relationship of job involvement and absenteeism if job involvement and organizational commitment were both high.85 Further work from Cohen reported that, as job involvement increased, absenteeism significantly decreased.86 In that study, Cohen described a significant positive relationship between work involvement and absenteeism.86 More studies are needed to establish whether links exist between job involvement and sickness absence across the wide spectrum of health service staff in a range of occupations with varying income levels and educational standards. This would rule out associations between job involvement and sickness absence due to cohort specific characteristics.
Injustice
Injustice has been identified as a factor leading to weak job commitment, lower team dynamics and stress.87 Research on absenteeism has identified several contributing factors including professional burnout, nature and requirements of the job, weak commitment to work, unionization rate and the feeling of inequity or injustice.88,89
Burnout has been defined as a syndrome of emotional exhaustion that has not been managed leading to feelings of energy depletion causing cynicism that is more prevalent among individuals who do ‘people work’ reducing professional efficacy.90,91 Professional burnout has been acknowledged publicly as the main contributory factor for nurses leaving the profession. In Ireland, a survey highlighted worrying levels of burnout among nurses and midwives whereby two-thirds of nurses and midwives have considered leaving the profession.92 One dimension of burnout (personal accomplishment) was related significantly and negatively to absenteeism (as personal accomplishment increased, absenteeism decreased). Taunton et al. reported that as the inequities perceived in implementation of distributive justice caused feelings of injustice they lead to increased job stress and increases in absenteeism.85 These connect the effects between justice and stress on absenteeism and highlight the determinants that result in or influence short-term and long-term absences. This framework proposes that distributive injustice acts as an event to trigger a cognitive appraisal process through which people mentally assess the impact on them. If it is believed that the event is because of unfair procedures, then perceived distributive injustice is heightened and elicits stronger stress reactions that lead to absenteeism. Zatzick et al. found that employee involvement and high involvement work systems positively related to employee job satisfaction.93 Increased levels of employee involvement are negatively associated with absenteeism.
Organizational commitment has been shown to be influenced by work environment factors, such as leadership style and organizational culture.94,95 Bennett found that the nature of management hierarchy, low levels of responsibility and organizational commitment are factors leading to employee absenteeism.96
Injustice is a complex, confounding factor that directly impacts on absenteeism depending on personality traits of the individual and their perception of fairness. Injustice and its link to absenteeism can be understood in terms of a stressor that causes illness to the individual or absence used as a mechanism to rebalance perceived wrongs. In that context, procedural justice is a preconception of unfair procedures, which illicit a cognitive appraisal that may lead to absenteeism. Notably, the literature does not appear to include research regarding the role of injustice in the healthcare sector.
Leadership styles
Numerous explanations, classifications, theories and definitions about leadership exist in the contemporary literature.97 Leadership can influence factors such as job control, job satisfaction, culture and support that have associations with absenteeism. Much of the literature focuses on the attitude of managers and its impact on job satisfaction. Appreciative leadership, or lack thereof, can make or break an organization’s morale.98 Mullins stressed the importance of people-centric strategies which enhance the work environment and enhance job satisfaction.99 Davey et al. found that relational leadership practices of managers may reduce absenteeism.100 Kuoppala et al. confirmed the positive impact of supportive leadership through a systematic literature review, concluding that supportive leadership was associated with lower sickness absence levels.101 Munir et al. reported that sickness absence length was shorter if the manager gave lighter duties and incorporated phased return to work.102 Madlock cited that when leaders communicate effectively, their followers experience greater levels of satisfaction.103 The role of managers is critical as, if they can show employees consideration and communicate as to why they took a given decision, they will reduce the perceived distributive injustice. Thus, policies need to be consistent to encourage employee acceptance and line manager support.8
Research in the health care sector has focused typically on management style; particularly in the nursing cohort. Belita et al. reported that the leadership style used in health facilities can influence the absence trends of health workers.104 Rouse identified that nursing management most typically focused on best practices, while leadership failures rarely receive the same level of scrutiny.105 Poor management was seen as contributing to both the causes and consequences of sick leave.68 Kerfoot suggested leader engagement, as well as disengagement, can be contagious in a nursing environment and may impact on morale.106 Kimura, a director of compliance and risk management in the United States, noted that ineffective ICU nursing management contributed to a variety of organizational problems, including low productivity well as high absenteeism and turnover.107 Rosengren et al. in a phenomenological study of nurses in Sweden found ICU staff strongly preferred leaders who were present and available.108 The findings suggest that nurse managers who adopt more flexible working policies encourage retention and reduce absenteeism. The implication is that distant leadership leads to worker disengagement and severs the psychological contract. A significant negative relationship was reported when leaders showed consideration to employees; employee absenteeism decreased. One manager characteristic (influence in personnel resources) was significantly and negatively related to staff nurse absenteeism.
The majority of studies exploring the link between management style and absenteeism, conclude that situational leadership and relationship-oriented managers are preferable to workers, directly impacting on job satisfaction. Managers who showed an interest in employees were best equipped to provide support, which in turn leads to lower absenteeism rates, through earlier return to work. Other studies suggested that relationship leadership had only a distal effect on absenteeism and that individual-level factors such as personality traits had the greatest impact on absence rates.
Position in the hierarchy
Seniority of position has been associated with low absenteeism.3 Cadres that are higher up in the organization, for example doctors, are said to be less absent compared to other staff categories. On this finding, Kivimäki et al. observed that physicians had lower rates of short-term and long-term sickness absence compared to their nursing colleagues in Finland.25 Ritchie et al. confirmed this finding, reporting in the UK that auxiliary staff had the highest rates and duration of absence, while medical and dental staff had the lowest.109 Such findings are consistent with findings from other countries such as Nigeria, Denmark, Thailand, Switzerland and Saudi Arabia.13,110–113 Staff who are more senior in the organizational structure also reported higher presenteeism than other cadres.25 It is understandable that professional values require senior staff to be physically present, while lack of suitably qualified replacements to cover for them when they are away may also reduce absenteeism. However, it is equally plausible that there is poorer collection of information on absenteeism among such workers.13,113 It has been reported in developing countries that medical staff may be absent from the public sector, while providing services in the private sector, and especially where policies are relatively permissive.114 Eisler’s and Potter’s research recognized that the Nordic countries have less hierarchical hospital structures, where nurses have greater autonomy and influence in workplace decision-making.115 They concluded that this contributes to higher satisfaction and lower absenteeism in these countries. At all levels of the hierarchy, absence may be driven by physical job strain and lack of autonomy and satisfaction.116 Issues of control and status in the profession of nursing were identified as important. Factors such as control of demand, control of workload and expectation of support from management and colleagues in the team are important in enabling the decision to “go off sick”.168
Limitations While many factors predicted to be associated with absenteeism such as nightshift working, stress or physically demanding roles correlated clearly with increased absenteeism, the literature failed to show a consistent association with other factors. For example, while increased workload was generally found to be associated with absenteeism, Ala-Musula reported that longer working hours counter-intuitively correlated with shorter rather than longer periods of absenteeism and so workload was not a reliable determinant of absenteeism.32 Such inconsistencies may be explained by international variability with findings from countries at different stages of development and support the need for country-specific data. Another limitation is that findings were often based on causation, meaning that an exposure of a factor led to absenteeism rather than by association. The variability of definitions of absenteeism also proved challenging when comparing research findings.
Discussion and conclusion
Managers have an important role in maintaining the psychological contract: the perception of equity and dealings with employees has a strong association with job satisfaction and lower absence levels. Job involvement increases motivation to attend, and recruitment policies can select personalities likely to be committed to the role. There are differing options and regulations for absence across different occupations and industries, therefore links between absence and work stress may vary as well. For example, hospice nurses exposed to chronic stressors are at an elevated risk for depressive symptoms, affecting their overall well-being.117
The literature supports the development of leadership styles and behaviors that can positively influence employee health outcomes. Many healthcare managers learn on the job without formal leadership education.118–120 Effective supervisors might also be more successful in creating a healthy working environment by changing psychosocial work conditions in a way that is beneficial for the employee’s health and well-being.121,122 Supportive leadership coupled with good teamwork, is perhaps one of the most important recommendations evidenced in studies.46,123 The literature also notes that flexibility and fairness should also be guiding principles in workload allocation to nurses.124,125 Garcia-Prado & Chawla found in Costa Rica that policies aimed at controlling absence actually resulted in higher absence rates by undermining employee commitment or producing other unintended effects on employee behavior so there is a fine balance to be struck by managers.7
The literature confirms the value of differentiating types of absence on the basis of their routes through wellbeing and trust perceptions. Findings support the conjectures about the role of the psychological contract breach in explaining the effects of employees’ attitudes and behaviors. Shamian and El-Jardali discussed the importance of creating healthy workplaces to reduce organizational outcomes such as absenteeism and turnover.126
While many factors predicted to be associated with absenteeism such as nightshift working, stress or physically demanding roles correlated clearly with increased absenteeism, the literature failed to show a consistent association with other factors. For example, while increased workload was generally found to be associated with absenteeism, Ala-Mursula reported that longer working hours counter-intuitively correlated with shorter rather than longer periods of absenteeism and so workload was not a reliable determinant of absenteeism.32
Such inconsistencies may be explained by international variability with findings from countries at different stages of development and support the need for country-specific data. Another limitation is that findings were often based on causation, meaning that an exposure of a factor led to absenteeism rather than by association. In addition, the variability of definitions of absenteeism also proved challenging when comparing research findings.
The impact of teamwork has a positive association with lower absence rates.127 Plant & Coombes reported the team may operate as either an enabling factor or barrier to taking sick leave.68 Job satisfaction is known to be affected by an increase in job pressure especially when this is not accompanied by increased work autonomy.128 Variables such as increased responsibility led to a greater feeling of achievement leading to less absence.129 In studies by the Queens School of Business and by the Gallup Organization, disengaged workers had 37% higher absenteeism, 49% more accidents, and 60% more errors and defects.130 Sledge et al. showed that satisfied employees had lower levels of absence.131 The psychological contract with the employer influences motivation to attend work and how this relationship manifests can determine absence rates.
Smaller organizations have lower absence rates than larger organizations. Absence rates increase as organizations increase in size. This may be an implication of more generous sick pay schemes in larger organizations. In smaller organizations there may be job control and commitment, therefore motivating the workers to attend work. Job control is perceived as higher across health service staff. While there is routine in roles, there is autonomy in the majority of roles. There may be repetitive tasks in areas such as some administrative duties and within the general support areas, which could manifest in higher absence rates for these staff categories. Allebeck & Mastekaasa and Joensuu et al., reported that while autonomy consistently was found to predict absenteeism rates, the associations with demands are rather weak and inconsistent.132,133 This may be due to the wide variety of conceptualizations of job demands.134
High levels of autonomy may help prevent employees from sickness absenteeism. Absenteeism was predicted by time pressure and time autonomy, showing that stress is involved in sickness absenteeism behavior. Previous research on sickness
absence indicating low autonomy to increase absenteeism, specifically with respect to decision authority.60–63 Work redesign with increase of time autonomy and reduction of time pressure should reduce absenteeism in hospital employees.64
In terms of the management of attendance, there are two general trends. The first is the issue of control, reflected with the costs of absence, together with policies for controlling these costs, notably the health insurance systems. This issue of control may also be connected to presenteeism, where management are too controlling forcing workers to attend work though they are ill. The second trend is the development towards health and well-being.135 Several countries have made systematic efforts, at national and company levels to improve employee health.9 Sickness absence may in some cases be the only avenue to take time off work to attend other personal matters.136 Tripathi et al., found that non-sickness leaves constituted more than half the leaves of absence.116 Organizations that have policies in relation to sickness absence (e.g., compulsory vaccination) have reported impacts on absence rates. Gianino et al. stated that unvaccinated employees used approximately 3.2 days of additional sick leave per person during the influenza season compared with vaccinated employees.18 Interestingly, the difference in absenteeism between vaccinated and unvaccinated healthcare workers was also evident during non-epidemic periods, with unvaccinated healthcare workers losing, on average, 2.5 additional days/person to sick leave.18 In a related observation, Jiang et al. found healthcare workers reported working for a mean of 1.9 days with acute respiratory infection symptoms.19 There are several implications of these findings for hospital management policies such as infection control and occupational health and safety. There is an evident need to inform healthcare workers of risks associated with transmission of viruses causing acute respiratory infections, and to improve self-awareness of when the healthcare workers themselves are at higher risk of transmitting to their vulnerable patients.137 In that context, it is obvious that hospital management should develop and implement policies to mitigate risk of working while symptomatic. Merkin et al. studied reduction of medical staff absenteeism during the COVID-19 pandemic finding that implementation of a robust sick resident coverage system was successful for maintaining resident and patient safety.138 Management actions (such as removing all medical residents from electives, subspecialty rotations, and outpatient clinics, which were closed for in-person visits early in the pandemic) created a pool of internal medicine residents available for surge staffing and an expanded sick resident coverage system. With the large influx of COVID-19 patients and related sickness absence of medical staff, medical management created a new call schedule, converting from 6 days on with 1 day off to 7 days on with 7 days of combined off time and sick resident coverage time. These scheduling changes facilitated the creation of new teams that were needed during the COVID-19 surge, increasing the total inpatient team count from 20 to 44 teams.138 The surge staffing structure was altered to also increase the ratio of patients to medical staff. The staffing of the new ward teams included the recruitment of non-internal medicine residents to join ward teams and function as internal medicine interns.138 These residents came from a wide range of training programs, including radiology, physiatry, psychiatry, podiatry, orthopedic surgery, dermatology, radiation oncology, and urology. Fourth-year medical students who graduated early also joined this surge staffing system.138 This was a novel solution that would have been considered unacceptable prior to the pandemic.
Most of the literature on absenteeism in the healthcare setting focuses on nursing. Nurses are typically the largest single health staff category and records on absence may be better kept or investigators feel less comfortable investigating the historically more powerful group of physicians.104
Further work in the area of absenteeism might produce more generalizable learnings if a structured typology of the forms of absenteeism is used. This may help to understand contextual factors such as management styles, job control and cultural expectations and their influence on different forms of absenteeism, thereby providing a basis for interventions to address it.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Funding Statement
No funding was obtained for this manuscript.
Author Contributions
All authors have reviewed the final manuscript prior to submission. All the authors have contributed significantly to the manuscript, per the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors criteria of authorship.
-
Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
-
Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
-
Final approval of the version to be published; AND
-
Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Acknowledgments
None.
Corresponding author
Professor Colum Dunne,
School of Medicine, University of Limerick,
Limerick, Ireland.
Tel: +353-(0)86-0430739
Email: colum.dunne@ul.ie