Workplace and non-workplace loneliness: a cross-sectional comparative study on risk factors and impacts on absenteeism and mental health among employees in Spain
Purpose The aim of this study is to (1) evaluate prevalences and concordance between workplace and non-workplace loneliness, (2) compare sociodemographic risk factors between workplace and non-workplace loneliness, (3) compare working conditions-related risk factors between the two contexts of lonel...
| Autores: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2025 |
| País: | España |
| Recursos: | Universidad de Barcelona |
| Repositorio: | Dipòsit Digital de la UB |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:diposit.ub.edu:2445/227001 |
| Acesso em linha: | https://hdl.handle.net/2445/227001 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palavra-chave: | Treball precari Solitud Absentisme laboral Salut mental Precarious employment Solitude Absenteeism (Labor) Mental health |
| Resumo: | Purpose The aim of this study is to (1) evaluate prevalences and concordance between workplace and non-workplace loneliness, (2) compare sociodemographic risk factors between workplace and non-workplace loneliness, (3) compare working conditions-related risk factors between the two contexts of loneliness, and (4) compare the impact of workplace and nonworkplace loneliness on absenteeism, depression, anxiety and substance use disorder. Methods A sample of the employee residing in Spain (n=5400) was surveyed using computer-assisted web interviews (CAWI) during August and September 2024. Logistic regression models were constructed to compare the effects of risk factors for workplace and non-workplace loneliness (including sociodemographic factors, and factors related to working conditions), as well as the association of workplace and non-workplace loneliness on absenteeism, and symptoms of depression, anxiety, and substance use disorder. Results Among active workers, 40.7% report experiencing workplace loneliness, while 42.0% report non-workplace loneliness. The level of concordance between both types of loneliness is low (Kappa=0.36). Both types are more prevalent among younger and immigrant workers. Other sociodemographic risk factors (being female, non-married, and non-heterosexual) were significantly associated with non-workplace loneliness. Meanwhile, risk factors related to working conditions -particularly working under stress and labor precariousness- were associated with both types of loneliness, which showed an independent impact on absenteeism, depression, anxiety, and substance use disorder. Conclusion Most of the social determinants of workplace loneliness are rooted in the work environment, indicating that effective interventions should focus on addressing labor conditions and precariousness to improve both workplace and nonworkplace loneliness and their impacts on absenteeism and mental health. |
|---|