Implementation of self-rostering (the PRIO-project): effects on working hours, recovery, and         health.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to (i) investigate the consequences of self-rostering for working         hours, recovery, and health, and (ii) elucidate the mechanisms through which recovery and health are affected.


METHODS
Twenty eight workplaces were allocated to either an intervention or reference group. Intervention A encompassed the         possibility to specify preferences for starting time and length of shift down to 15 minutes intervals. Interventions B         and C included the opportunity to choose between a number of predefined duties. Questionnaires (N=840) on recovery and         health and objective workplace reports of working hours (N=718) were obtained at baseline and 12 months later. The         interaction term between intervention and time was tested in mixed models and multinomial logistic regression models.


RESULTS
The odds ratio (OR) of having short [OR 4.8, 95 % confidence interval (95% CI) 1.9-12.3] and long (OR         4.8, 95% CI 2.9-8.0) shifts increased in intervention A. Somatic symptoms (β= -0.10, 95% CI -0.19-         -0.02) and mental distress (β= -0.13, 95% CI -0.23- -0.03) decreased, and sleep (β= 1.7, 95% CI         0.04-0.30) improved in intervention B, and need for recovery was reduced in interventions A (β= -0.17, 95%         CI -0.29- -0.04) and B (β= -0.17, 95% CI -0.27- -0.07). There were no effects on recovery and health         in intervention C, and overall, there were no detrimental effects on recovery or health. The benefits of the         intervention were not related to changes in working hours and did not differ by gender, age, family type, degree of         employment, or working hour arrangements.


CONCLUSIONS
After implementation of self-rostering, employees changed shift         length and timing but did not compromise most recommendations for acceptable shift work schedules. Positive         consequences of self-rostering for recovery and health were observed, particularly in intervention B where worktime         control increased but less extensively than intervention A. The effect could not be statistically explained by changes         in actual working hours.
National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark. ahg@nrcwe.dk
Anne Helene
AH
Garde
Karen
K
Albertsen
Kirsten
K
Nabe-Nielsen
Isabella Gomes
IG
Carneiro
Jørgen
J
Skotte
Sofie Mandrup
SM
Hansen
Henrik
H
Lund
Helge
H
Hvid
Åse Marie
ÅM
Hansen
D000328:Adult; D004651:Employment; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D014940:Work Schedule Tolerance