Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Jan 7;67(1):uiaf051.
doi: 10.1093/joccuh/uiaf051.

Effectiveness of work ability interventions on productivity: a systematic review

Pasi Kekkonen  1   2 , Eija Savolainen  2 , Mari Immonen  1 , Pauliina Kangas  1 , Elisa Rissanen  2 , Ismo Linnosmaa  2
Affiliations

Effectiveness of work ability interventions on productivity: a systematic review

Pasi Kekkonen et al. J Occup Health. .

Abstract
in English, Finnish

Objectives: This systematic review aimed to synthesize the effectiveness of work ability interventions on productivity outcomes.

Methods: This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024541404) and conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. In December 2024, a systematic search from 2000 onward was conducted using databases including EBSCO, ProQuest, Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed. Two reviewers independently screened articles, assessed quality using risk-of-bias tools, and extracted data, with a third reviewer resolving any disagreements. The eligibility criteria were defined using population, intervention, comparison, outcomes, and study design (PICOS) elements.

Results: Of the 55 articles that underwent quality assessment, 26 were excluded due to high risk of bias. Among the remaining 29 articles, 24 were randomized controlled trials, of which 5 conducted economic evaluation, and 5 were nonrandomized controlled trials, collectively conducting 33 interventions. The results of the original studies showed that 5 work ability interventions had a statistically significant effect on productivity. Four interventions effectively reduced absenteeism, and 1 intervention increased the risk of absenteeism. One intervention indicated that the cost of absenteeism was reduced, and another showed that the intervention was more effective and less costly than usual occupational care.

Conclusions: Our analysis of work ability interventions showed that 28 interventions did not have an effect on productivity and only 5 interventions affected productivity. This systematic review highlights the limited evidence regarding evidence-based work ability interventions that affect productivity. Despite the importance of the topic, it remains understudied, and there is insufficient evidence to support decision-makers aiming to enhance productivity.

Objectives: This systematic review aimed to synthesize the effectiveness of work ability interventions on productivity outcomes.

Methods: This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024541404) and conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. In December 2024, a systematic search from 2000 onward was conducted using databases including EBSCO, ProQuest, Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed. Two reviewers independently screened articles, assessed quality using risk-of-bias tools, and extracted data, with a third reviewer resolving any disagreements. The eligibility criteria were defined using population, intervention, comparison, outcomes, and study design (PICOS) elements.

Results: Of the 55 articles that underwent quality assessment, 26 were excluded due to high risk of bias. Among the remaining 29 articles, 24 were randomized controlled trials, of which 5 conducted economic evaluation, and 5 were nonrandomized controlled trials, collectively conducting 33 interventions. The results of the original studies showed that 5 work ability interventions had a statistically significant effect on productivity. Four interventions effectively reduced absenteeism, and 1 intervention increased the risk of absenteeism. One intervention indicated that the cost of absenteeism was reduced, and another showed that the intervention was more effective and less costly than usual occupational care.

Conclusions: Our analysis of work ability interventions showed that 28 interventions did not have an effect on productivity and only 5 interventions affected productivity. This systematic review highlights the limited evidence regarding evidence-based work ability interventions that affect productivity. Despite the importance of the topic, it remains understudied, and there is insufficient evidence to support decision-makers aiming to enhance productivity.

Keywords: absenteeism; effectiveness; intervention; presenteeism; productivity; work ability.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

All authors declared that they have no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Prisma flow diagram of the studies included in the systematic review. Modified figure from Covidence.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Tengland P-A. The concept of work ability. J Occup Rehabil. 2011;21(2):275-285. 10.1007/s10926-010-9269-x - DOI - PubMed
    1. OECD . OECD Manual: Measurement of Aggregate and Industry-Level Productivity Growth. OECD Publishing; 2001.
    1. Zhang W, Bansback N, Anis AH. Measuring and valuing productivity loss due to poor health: a critical review. Soc Sci Med. 2011;72(2):185-192 - PubMed
    1. Widera E, Chang A, Chen HL. Presenteeism: a public health hazard. J Gen Intern Med. 2010;25(11):1244-1247. 10.1007/s11606-010-1422-x - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Krol M, Brouwer W, Rutten F. Productivity costs in economic evaluations: past, present, future. PharmacoEconomics. 2013;31(7):537-549. 10.1007/s40273-013-0056-3 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources