METHODS: Data were collected between 2004 and 2010 from participants of the Singapore Multi Ethnic Cohort (MEC). Medical exclusion criteria for cohort participation were cancer, heart disease, stroke, renal failure and serious mental illness. Participants who were not working over the past 12 months and without data on sitting time were excluded from the analyses. Multivariable regression analyses were used to examine cross-sectional associations of self-reported age, gender, ethnicity, marital status, education, smoking, caloric intake and moderate-to-vigorous leisure time physical activity (LTPA) with self-reported occupational, leisure and total sitting time. Correlates were also studied separately for Chinese, Malays and Indians.
RESULTS: The final sample comprised 9384 participants (54.8% male): 50.5% were Chinese, 24.0% Malay, and 25.5% Indian. For the total sample, mean occupational sitting time was 2.71 h/day, mean leisure sitting time was 2.77 h/day and mean total sitting time was 5.48 h/day. Sitting time in all domains was highest among Chinese. Age, gender, education, and caloric intake were associated with higher occupational sitting time, while ethnicity, marital status and smoking were associated with lower occupational sitting time. Marital status, smoking, caloric intake and LTPA were associated with higher leisure sitting time, while age, gender and ethnicity were associated with lower leisure sitting time. Gender, marital status, education, caloric intake and LTPA were associated with higher total sitting time, while ethnicity was associated with lower total sitting time. Stratified analyses revealed different associations within sitting domains for Indians compared to Chinese and Malays.
CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the need to focus on separate domains of sitting (occupational, leisure or total) when identifying which factors determine this behavior, and that the content of intervention programs should be tailored to domain-specific sitting rather than to sitting in general. Finally, our study showed ethnic differences and therefore we recommend to culturally target interventions.
METHOD: This was a cross-sectional study involving SLE patients aged 18-56 years from Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre (UKMMC). Employment history was obtained from clinical interviews. WD was defined as unemployment, interruption of employment or premature cessation of employment due to SLE at any time after the diagnosis. SLE disease characteristics, presence of organ damage and Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment-SLE Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) flare index were determined from the medical records. Self-reported quality of life (QoL) was performed using the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36). Demographic factors, disease characteristics, and QoL were compared between patients with and without WD using statistical analyses.
RESULTS: A total of 215 patients were recruited and the majority were Malay (60.5%), followed by Chinese (33.5%), Indian (4.5%) and others (n = 4, 1.9%). The prevalence of WD was 43.2% (n = 93) with 22.3% (n = 48) patients were unemployed at the time of study. Over half the patients with WD (n = 51, 54.8%) had onset of disability at <5 years from diagnosis. Patients with WD had significantly lower health-related QoL. The independent factors associated with WD were SLEDAI score at diagnosis, frequency of flare, Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics score, being married, had lower education and lupus nephritis.
CONCLUSION: We found a high rate of WD in patients with SLE and it was significantly associated with SLE-related factors, in particular higher disease activity, presence of renal involvement and organ damage.
Methods: Data were obtained from the Social Security Organization, Malaysia database consisting of 10,049 RTW program participants in 2010-2014. The dependent variable was the RTW outcome which consisted of RTW with same employer, RTW with new employer or unsuccessful return. Multinomial logistic regression was performed to test the likelihood of successful return with same employer and new employer against unsuccessful return.
Results: Overall, 65.3% of injured workers were successfully returned to employment, 52.8% to the same employer and 12.5% to new employer. Employer interest; motivation; age 30-49 years; intervention less than 9 months; occupational disease; injuries in the lower limbs, upper limbs, and general injuries; and working in the manufacturing, services, and electrical/electronics were associated with returning to work with the same employer against unsuccessful return. Male, employer interest, motivation, age 49 years or younger, intervention less than 6 months, occupational disease, injuries in the upper limbs and services sector of employment were associated with returning to new employer against unsuccessful return.
Conclusion: There is a need to strengthen employer commitment for early and intensified intervention that will lead to improvement in the RTW outcome.