Are Psychosocial Resources Buffering the Relation Between Physical Work Behaviors and Need for Recovery?

Objectives: We investigate whether job control and/or social support at work play a buffering role in the relation between various physical work behaviors and Need for Recovery (NFR) among employees with physically demanding jobs. Methods: Our findings are based on data from 332 workers. The Job Content Questionnaire was used to assess job control, social support and specific physically demanding tasks. General physical work behaviors were measured by two Axivity AX3 accelerometers. The NFR Scale (0-11) was used to assess NFR. We used multiple linear regression models. Results: Sitting at work turned out to be negatively associated with NFR, whereas physically demanding tasks were associated positively with NFR. Our results show a significant buffering role for job control on the correlation between sitting, physically demanding tasks and NFR, but not for social support. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that higher job control might be beneficial to reduce high NFR and eventually may help to reduce early drop-out and sickness absence. Further research is called for to confirm the buffering role of job control and to investigate the underlying mechanisms.

The Relation between Domain-Specific Physical Behaviour and Cardiorespiratory Fitness: A Cross-Sectional Compositional Data Analysis on the Physical Activity Health Paradox Using Accelerometer-Assessed Data

In contrast to leisure time physical activity (LTPA), occupational physical activity (OPA) does not have similar beneficial health effects. These differential health effects might be explained by dissimilar effects of LTPA and OPA on cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF). This study investigated cross-sectional associations between different physical behaviours during both work and leisure time and CRF by using a Compositional Data Analysis approach. Physical behaviours were assessed by two accelerometers among 309 workers with various manual jobs. During work time, more sedentary behaviour (SB) was associated with higher CRF when compared relatively to time spent on other work behaviours, while more SB during leisure time was associated with lower CRF when compared to other leisure time behaviours. Reallocating more time to moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) from the other behaviours within leisure time was positively associated with CRF, which was not the case for MVPA during work. The results of our study are in line with the physical activity health paradox and we call for further study on the interaction between LTPA and OPA by implementing device-worn measures in a longitudinal design. Our results highlight the need for recommendations to take into account the different effects of OPA and LTPA on CRF.