Physical Workload and Work Capacity across Occupational Groups

PLoS One. 2016 May 2;11(5):e0154073. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154073. eCollection 2016.

Abstract

This study aimed to determine physical performance criteria of different occupational groups by investigating physical activity and energy expenditure in healthy Swiss employees in real-life workplaces on workdays and non-working days in relation to their aerobic capacity (VO2max). In this cross-sectional study, 337 healthy and full-time employed adults were recruited. Participants were classified (nine categories) according to the International Standard Classification of Occupations 1988 and merged into three groups with low-, moderate- and high-intensity occupational activity. Daily steps, energy expenditure, metabolic equivalents and activity at different intensities were measured using the SenseWear Mini armband on seven consecutive days (23 hours/day). VO2max was determined by the 20-meter shuttle run test. Data of 303 subjects were considered for analysis (63% male, mean age: 33 yrs, SD 12), 101 from the low-, 102 from the moderate- and 100 from the high-intensity group. At work, the high-intensity group showed higher energy expenditure, metabolic equivalents, steps and activity at all intensities than the other groups (p<0.001). There were no significant differences in physical activity between the occupational groups on non-working days. VO2max did not differ across groups when stratified for gender. The upper workload limit was 21%, 29% and 44% of VO2max in the low-, moderate- and high-intensity group, respectively. Men had a lower limit than women due to their higher VO2max (26% vs. 37%), when all groups were combined. While this study did confirm that the average workload limit is one third of VO2max, it showed that the average is misrepresenting the actual physical work demands of specific occupational groups, and that it does not account for gender-related differences in relative workload. Therefore, clinical practice needs to consider these differences with regard to a safe return to work, particularly for the high-intensity group.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adolescent
  • Adult
  • Body Mass Index
  • Cross-Sectional Studies
  • Energy Metabolism / physiology
  • Exercise / physiology*
  • Humans
  • Middle Aged
  • Occupational Health / statistics & numerical data
  • Occupations / statistics & numerical data*
  • Physical Exertion / physiology*
  • Young Adult

Grants and funding

This study was financially supported by an unrestricted grant of the Swiss National Accident Insurance Fund (Suva). Grant number: not applicable. URL: http://www.suva.ch. Recipient: JDL. The funder (Suva) provided support in the form of a project grant that covered salaries for the involved personnel at the Cantonal Hospital Baselland Liestal as well as expenses for infrastructure and conducting the study, but did not have any role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of this manuscript. The participation of DM in the study was independent from the project grant and is covered by the contractual agreement between Suva and DM that permits active participation in independently conducted research projects. The specific role of each author is articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section.