Telework and health effects review

Abstract

Telework is an increasingly popular flexible working arrangement. The aim of this article is to describe the features that characterize telework. The advantages and disadvantages of teleworking are outlined, as well as its effects on the health of the worker. The method used was a literature review. The outputs of this search show that in general, empirical evidence favours a positive association between telework and worker health. However, there are also negative impacts on health such as stress and depression. The overall conclusion is that telework is likely to yield more good than bad for individual health.

Full text

http://ijh.sciedupress.com International Journal of Healthcare 2017, Vol. 3, No. 2
REVIEWS
Telework and health effects review
Aida Isabel Tavares∗
CEISUC, Centre for Health Studies of the University of Coimbra, Portugal
Received: April 3, 2017 Accepted: June 30, 2017 Online Published: July 11, 2017
DOI: 10.5430/ijh.v3n2p30 URL: https://doi.org/10.5430/ijh.v3n2p30
ABSTRACT
Telework is an increasingly popular flexible working arrangement. The aim of this article is to describe the features that
characterize telework. The advantages and disadvantages of teleworking are outlined, as well as its effects on the health of the
worker. The method used was a literature review. The outputs of this search show that in general, empirical evidence favours a
positive association between telework and worker health. However, there are also negative impacts on health such as stress and
depression. The overall conclusion is that telework is likely to yield more good than bad for individual health.
Key Words: Telecommuting, Teleworking, Workers, Health
1. INTRODUCTION
Teleworking originally started to become popular since the
oil crisis of the 1970s when it was realized that if one in
seven urban commuters would work from home, then the US
would have no need to import oil. So it became evident that
work flexibility could result in benefits for organization and
for employees. The term “telecommuting” was introduced
by Nilles[1] in the mid-1970s.
While the US term for “home-working” is telecommuting,
in Europe, it is termed telework. But the terms to express
telework are varied and include work-at-distance, off-site
work or even remote work. The idea behind all of them is
the same, it is the work to be done in a place and not a place
where the worker has to go.[2]
The European Framework Agreement on Telework of 2002
defines telework in Article 2: “Telework is a form of organ-
ising and/or performing work, using information technol-
ogy in the context of an employment contract/relationship,
where work, which could also be performed at the employer’s
premises, is carried out away from those premises on a regu-
lar basis”. Although this definition is broad, it does capture
the main idea behind telework, which is work flexibility in
space and time.
Flexible working became an opportunity for workers to im-
prove their work, family and social life by decreasing work
constraints and gaining autonomy over their own affairs. The
boundaries between working and non-working time have
become flexible and adjustable to the needs of people at
different stages in life: study time, family, aging or simple
individual preferences. Telework is therefore a decision-
making tool regarding working hours and adapting them to
the needs and preferences of workers (and the demands of
the employer).
Telework, as a form of flexible work arrangement, became
more and more significant in the late 1990s as the use of
home computers, laptops, mobile phones and sophisticated
telecommunications software become an everyday work tool.
The number of workers teleworking was still increasing in the
last decade. In the US, the growth was around 80% between
2005 and 2012 and in this last year teleworkers represented
∗Correspondence: Aida Isabel Tavares; Email: aitavar@gmail.com; Address: Avenida Dias da Silva, 165, 3004-512 Coimbra, Portugal.
30 ISSN 2377-7338 E-ISSN 2377-7346

http://ijh.sciedupress.com International Journal of Healthcare 2017, Vol. 3, No. 2
2.6% of the total employee workforce (about 3.3 million
people, excluding the self-employed and unpaid volunteers)
who considered home as their primary place of work.
[3]
The
number of employees using telework in the US between 2005
and 2012 is 1,819,355 and 3,268,525 respectively, and the
percentage of those employees in the total workforce is 2.6%
in 2012.
Telework is less often used in the European labour market
than it is in the US. Some figures show that at the beginning
of the 21st century, full-time telework was carried out by just
over 1% of the working population (around 1.5 million peo-
ple) and occasional teleworking was a slightly more common
(5% of workers).
[4]
More recently, it has been estimated that
around 3% of EU workers are teleworking from home.[5]
But the telework arrangement is not found consistently in Eu-
ropean countries. While the UK has around 10% of employ-
ees doing telework for at least 25% of the time, in Portugal
and Italy the figure is only 2%, as can be seen in Table 1.
[6]
The countries with the highest proportion of teleworkers are
Denmark, Netherlands, Sweden and Luxembourg.[5]
Table 1. Percentage of teleworkers in Europe
% work force UK L FIN NL A B DK S E F IRL D EL P I EU15
At least 25% time 10 9 8 7 6 6 6 5 4 4 4 4 2 2 2 5
All the time 2 3 1 1 3 2 1 1 3 2 1 0 1 1 0 1
Telework is naturally more often found in certain professions
and usually associated with highly skilled white collar jobs.
In Europe, 7% of telework is done by managers and 13%
by professionals or technicians (for instance, statisticians or
financial brokers).
[5]
In fact, the sectors where telework is
most often found are education, with 12% of teleworkers,
financial and other services (8%), and the public administra-
tion with 3% of teleworkers.[5]
Nowadays it can be seen that working hours have extended
into the evening and night and to weekends. So, they have
become more flexible in a 24-hour society. The 3rd EU
Survey on Working Condition showed that what is termed
normal working hours (meaning from 9.00-18.00 on week
days) have become the exception rather than the rule. Em-
ployed people with this traditional rigid pattern of working
hours represented only 27% of all the employed people in
the survey. Analysis of the survey data shows a positive
correlation between flexibility (under individual discretion
and control) and better health outcomes. However, results
also show that longer working hours are associated with
stress, fatigue, sleeping problems, and anxiety.
[6]
The Sixth
European Working Conditions Survey recently concluded
that overall, according to the job quality indices, teleworkers
work more intensively but have more autonomy at work and
better career prospects.[5]
The overall aim of this paper is to consolidate the informa-
tion on the topic of telework and health, and also to provide
a structured text for a wide range of interested readers. For
this, the main features of telework have been reviewed and its
associated trade-offs are described, in particular, the health
effects for workers. Telework tasks and jobs require a cer-
tain individual profile to ensure success. Additionally, the
characteristics of telework tasks and workers’ profiles help
to explain the advantages and disadvantages of telework to
the worker, as well as the effects on health.
The method used in this work was a literature review, so
this article has been written in a narrative non-exhaustive for-
mat, without evaluation of the articles, rather than a format
which could include quality assessment and tabular synthe-
sis. There are two systematic reviews on this topic in the
literature. One is by De Croon et al.,
[7]
and the other by
Joyce et al.
[8]
The first systematically reviews how the of-
fice concept (including telework) can influence a worker’s
job demands, job resources, short- and long-term reactions
(including health). The second reviews the health effects of
flexible work conditions on employees and their families.
2. METHOD
The method used is a general literature review as classified
by Grant et al.
[9]
This provides a review of the recent and
current literature and covers a wide range of subjects in vary-
ing degrees of completeness and comprehensiveness. This
form of literature review is usually presented in a narrative
form, as it is here.
Google Scholar was used to search for articles, using the
key words “telework + health”, “telecommuting + health”,
“telework + health + effects or impacts”, “telecommuting +
health + health or impacts”, between April and June 2015
and updated between 10-12 June 2016. The selection of the
articles was based on the general principal that the reference
should be a specialised report, an empirical analysis or a
review. The articles proposing a conceptual or theoretical
framework have not been analysed, nor have those which did
not have a clear focus on telework.
Published by Sciedu Press 31

http://ijh.sciedupress.com International Journal of Healthcare 2017, Vol. 3, No. 2
The search of the set of articles used here was not comprehen-
sive, and the quality of the work contained in them was not
assessed. A summary of the selected references is included,
based on the aspects covered in this article.
3. RES ULTS
3.1 Telework features and teleworkers
Professions that rely on telephones, computers and other
communication technology devices are strongly related to
the potential performance by telework. Some professions
have intrinsic features that make them better suited to being
performed through telework, such as management and spe-
cialised professionals. The tasks performed under a telework
contract are usually described as follows:[10,11]
•information based and portable,
•
their performance requires high level of concentration,
•
their performance involves a high degree of autonomy,
•
can be planned in advance and performed at varying
times of the day,
•creating, processing and disseminating information,
•
results in measurable output such as written reports,
statistical figures, software, etc.
This last characteristic plays an important role when contracts
are drafted between the firm and the worker. The sustaining
theory that models the relationship between employee and
employer is the well-known “agency theory”, which states
that interests of the two parties may be aligned by optimal
contracts, which mostly depend on the performance of the
employees.[12, 13]
The demanding nature of the tasks that can be performed
through telework suggests that not everyone is suited to
it. Empirical evidence profiles the successful teleworker
as someone with the following personal characteristics:
[14–16]
•
Self-motivation: skilled at setting routines and meeting
deadlines.
•
High level of job knowledge and skills: enough knowl-
edge of their position to facilitate working and solving
problems independently.
•
High performance: solid performers, although it is
important for some top performers to remain in the
office at least part of the time to mentor co-workers.
•
Independence and confidence: because there is less ex-
posure to supervision and feedback, individuals should
have the ability to make independent decisions.
•
Comfortable with solitude: because of the isolation,
individuals with less need for social interaction are
well suited to telecommuting arrangements.
•
Time management and organisational skills: because
of limited daily demands or checks, individuals should
have the ability to schedule and organise their work to
meet deadlines.
•
Concentration: highly focused and able to handle po-
tential distractions.
•
Strong communication skills: more effort is needed to
stay in touch with managers and co-workers, providing
them with necessary information and updates while
working away from the office setting.
•
Trustworthiness and reliability: individuals are ac-
countable for getting the job done to the same extent
as if they were being supervised in the office setting;
mutual trust is an essential element of a telework ar-
rangement.
These personal characteristics are very relevant to the way
people design strategies to deal with the obstacles of tele-
working and perform the tasks, especially without damaging
their health.
3.2 Pros and cons of telework
The advantages and disadvantages of telework, from
the teleworker perspective, have been identified by sev-
eral authors
[14, 17–26]
and others have reviewed or listed
them.[2, 15, 27, 28] These are summarised in Table 2.
Table 2. Advantages and disadvantages of telework
Advantages Disadvantages
Better balance of home and
work life Blurring of boundaries between
work and home time and overwork
Increased flexibility and
autonomy Presenteeism
Reduction in commuting time Social isolation
Increased productivity Lack of support, inadequate
equipment
Higher morale and job
satisfaction Career progression or promotions
Avoidance of office politics Resentment from colleagues
Teleworkers spend less time travelling, commuting and away
from home. They can thus use this time to be with the family
and enjoy a better balance of home and work life. However,
the blurring of boundaries between work and home time may
create family conflict or erode rest time.
Homeworking increases people’s flexibility and autonomy.
Teleworkers can often choose their hours of work, enabling
them to take advantage of off-peak hours at the supermarket,
the gym, and administrative offices so as to work in their
most productive part of the day, or even to take on another
job. Nevertheless, homeworking is right next to the breakfast
table and so teleworkers tend to work long and continuous
hours, even when they are sick. This is called presenteeism.
Working when unwell impacts the speed and quality of the
32 ISSN 2377-7338 E-ISSN 2377-7346

http://ijh.sciedupress.com International Journal of Healthcare 2017, Vol. 3, No. 2
recovery and well-being of the worker, not to mention the
effect on the quality of the work.
Teleworkers tend to be more productive than their counter-
parts in traditional offices because they have fewer interrup-
tions and distractions, can work longer hours, make better
use of high productivity moments, and enjoy flexibility when
planning work schedules. Despite this potential for higher
productivity, teleworkers often face lack of technical support
and may have inadequate equipment which prevents them
from achieving the desired productivity. Nevertheless, this
disadvantage can be mitigated nowadays because internet
access is provided via optical fibre cables, thereby ensuring
high speed and reliability. Additionally, computer anti-virus
software prevents problems of losing work and the use of
cloud computing systems allows sharing software and files.
Higher morale and job satisfaction are common among tele-
workers, who tend to be highly motivated to prove that this
choice is better and more successful. However, being away
from the central office may have a negative impact on their
career progression because they tend to be overtaken by other
workers who are better positioned for lobbying. However,
the lobbying by the work colleagues will happen no matter
what, they are focused on their goals and lobbying is part of
their tasks in the office.
Another advantage of homeworking is the avoidance of office
politics. This is mainly about relationships targeting power,
influence and careers; it consumes time and effort. Some
people may prefer to focus on performance and care less
about office politics. The other side of this can be the so-
cial isolation that workers may feel because they spend long
hours alone without social interaction and the resentment of
colleagues, who cannot be home-workers.
Today’s communication technology is built on high connec-
tivity instruments and processes, easy and reliable informa-
tion sharing, easy and cheap communication, and our sophis-
ticated computers and mobile phones make social interaction
and work output presentation easy, no matter where people
are located.
[29]
Therefore, from our perspective, the disad-
vantage of being absent from the main office is not really
relevant nowadays.
3.3 Health issues associated with telework
Telework has recognised effects on health. The overall ef-
fect on health is neither well known nor consensual.
[27, 30]
Most empirical work reports positive and negative effects but
there has been little analysis of the trade-offs associated with
telework and its net benefits or net costs.
The methodological difficulty of measuring trade-offs makes
it hard to determine if telework benefits outweigh the cost
to workers’ health. Nonetheless, apparently there is suffi-
cient evidence to infer that the benefits override the health
problems. Noting the historical and statistical evolution of
telework, which has been around now for more than 40 years
and is still expanding, it seems that it generates a net benefit
for individuals (and organisations). If telework had mainly
had a negative impact on the health (and job satisfaction) of
workers, then eventually they would have lost the willingness
to do it[31] and telework would have tended to disappear.
As Michael Marmot stated: “depriving people of control over
their lives.. . is indeed damaging to their health”,
[32]
so it is
likely that telework benefits health more than it damages it
because it helps people to be better able to control their life.
In fact, some evidence seems to indicate that telework has
net benefits for employees;
[28, 33–35]
in other words, “telecom-
muting is likely more good than bad for individual”.[36]
3.3.1 Identified health problems
The health problems associated with telework can be grouped
into four categories: musculoskeletal problems, isolation and
depression, stress and overwork and others. These are now
described in more detail.
Musculoskeletal problems
Working long hours with a computer, usually at home, is
associated with a static and constraining posture, repetitive
movements, extreme positions of the forearm and wrist, and
with long periods of continuous work. These are risky be-
haviours that contribute to the development of musculoskele-
tal problems in the neck, shoulders, wrist, hand and lumbar
regions.
[22, 27, 37]
Moreover, teleworkers do not socialise with
colleagues and so they do not take health breaks, which are
important for musculoskeletal relaxation, and they spend
long hours seated, without appropriate breaks.[38, 39]
Isolation and depression
The nature of telework means that teleworkers do not es-
tablish a social work relationship with their colleagues, es-
pecially those in the office. Being far from the workplace
added to the long, continuous working hours can induce feel-
ings of loneliness and isolation.
[15, 20, 22, 33, 36, 40]
It has even
been suggested that teleworkers should spend at least 20%
of their work time in the office to prevent such feelings of
isolation.[41]
Stress and overwork
Today stress is strongly correlated with cardiovascular dis-
eases, type 2 diabetes and poor mental health (particularly
depression), which is why it has our full attention today.[42]
Stress is an emotional response to pressure suffered due to
the context in which a person is living or working and over
Published by Sciedu Press 33

http://ijh.sciedupress.com International Journal of Healthcare 2017, Vol. 3, No. 2
which they have no control. While the immediate effects
of stress hormones may be beneficial, long term exposure
to stress accustoms the body to the high level of hormones,
which generates a negative effect on the human body. Stress
is caused by stressors and it is revealed by changes in physi-
ological and psychological behaviour. Stressors are triggers
of stress and they include all influences (job and non-job
related) that affect someone at work, such as work tasks,
deadlines, equipment, organisational and procedural regula-
tions, spatial-temporal and physical conditions.[43]
Stress-response theory provides a theoretical framework for
the linkages between work flexibility (as in telework) and
health.
[44]
This flexibility includes the schedule and the loca-
tion, which are the main aspects of telework. The linkages
between work flexibility and health are mainly twofold. On
the one hand, flexibility reduces exposure to some stressors
since workers are better able to control their lives, reduce
family conflict and improve family-work balance. Moreover,
telework flexibility provides resources to enable workers
to respond to stressors and so to prevent negative impacts
of stress on health.
[34]
On the other hand, flexibility creates
more stress due to family responsibilities, blurred work-home
life boundary and, potentially, family conflict.
[45, 46]
Addi-
tionally, telework creates job stress related to factors such as
overwork, tight deadlines, intense and long working hours,
inability of switch off and less time to rest.
[20, 46–48]
It is also
related to poor mental health, exhaustion and impaired state
of health.[17, 28, 31, 40]
Other health problems
Other health problems can be identified and associated with
flexible work conditions. These health problems include
metabolic, cardiovascular, and gastrointestinal disorders.
Metabolic disorders include hypertension, high cholesterol
and higher fasting blood sugar levels.
[49, 50]
Moreover, cancer
is likely to be a negative effect of certain health imbalances
created by work flexibility, and women’s reproductive func-
tion is also potentially affected.[49]
3.3.2 Health benefits
A number of health benefits are generated with telework for
people choosing this alternative work arrangement.
Several empirical works have found positive and beneficial
effects on teleworkers’ health. Benefits accrue from reduc-
ing the stress
[42]
of the daily home-work commute,
[30, 50, 51]
having greater schedule flexibility and a better work-life
balance,
[20, 28, 34, 52, 53]
better life control, and enhanced job
satisfaction.[17, 54–58]
The effects on health outcomes such as sickness and impair-
ment seem to occur less often with the choice of telework.
[34]
Moreover, working from home provides an environment that
favours better concentration, less noise, fewer interruptions,
more privacy (which open-office spaces often destroy), better
air quality (which may be dubious in the traditional office),
all of which contribute to workers’ health.[22]
4. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE RESEARCH
Telework is a flexible work arrangement which has been in-
creasingly adopted worldwide. Workers seem to be willing
to choose this form of work since it improves their working
and social life by easing work constraints and yielding gains
in autonomy over their own affairs. Telework has become a
solution for people at different stages in their life, when they
may be studying, bringing up a family, or growing older, or
it can simply match their individual preferences by letting
them decide when and where to work.
Telework tasks have particular features which require certain
personality traits for the job to be done successfully. More-
over, these features contribute to defining the pros and cons,
in particular the health effects, of doing a job under telework
conditions. Workers face a cost-benefit trade-off when do-
ing telework. There is a general view that it results in a net
benefit for workers and in a positive effect on their health.
This is mainly because there is less stress and a better work-
family life balance. This trend in the empirical evidence may
be more significant in today’s world. The reason for this
trend may be that some of the potential disadvantages of tele-
work, mainly related to workers not being in the main office,
are strongly mitigated by the sophisticated communication
technology readily available today.
The main limitation of this literature review is the potential
for the selection of the articles to be subjective, even though
Google Scholar provides the most cited articles and exhaus-
tive lists of references. The informative nature of this text
and the main goal defined do not require a systematic review
of the literature. This article is therefore contributing with
a well-structured and well-condensed text with information
obtained from a wide literature review on telework and its
health effects.
Future research may continue studying the effects of tele-
work on teleworkers and on health utilization. Another line
of potential research could focus, firstly, on the relation-
ship between the workers’ personality traits and their health
outcomes, and secondly, on the relationship between the
workers’ performance and their health outcomes, particu-
larly, those associated with depression and stress.
Finally, research is needed to reassess the relevance of some
telework disadvantages and health effects associated with iso-
lation and lack of social interaction, because nowadays there
34 ISSN 2377-7338 E-ISSN 2377-7346

http://ijh.sciedupress.com International Journal of Healthcare 2017, Vol. 3, No. 2
is a high speed communication technology, with diverse and
wide connectivity options, easy and trustworthy information
sharing, easy and cheap communication, and broad access to
sophisticated computers and mobile phones.
CON FLI CT S OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE
The author declares no conflicts of interest.
REFERENCES
[1]
Nilles JM. Telecommunications and organizations decentralization.
IEEE Transactions on Communications Com. 1975; 23: 1142-1147.
https://doi.org/10.1109/TCOM.1975.1092687
[2]
Baruch Y. Teleworking: benefits and pitfalls as perceived by pro-
fessionals and managers. New Technology Work and Employment.
2000; 15(1): 34-49.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-005X.00
063
[3]
Global Workplace Analytics, 2012 [cited 2015 Aug 4]. Avail-
able from:
http://globalworkplaceanalytics.com/telec
ommuting-statistics
[4]
The European Working Conditions Survey, 2015 [cited 2015 Aug
4]. Available from
https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/surv
eys/european-working- conditions-surveys
[5]
Eurofound . Sixth European Working Conditions Survey – Overview
report, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
2016.
[6]
Paolli P, Merllié D. Third European Survey on Working Conditions
2000. Dublin: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living
and Working Conditions, Loughlingstown, Co. 2001.
[7]
De Croon E, Sluiter J, Kuijer PP, et al. The effect of office con-
cepts on worker health and performance: a systematic review of
the literature. Ergonomics. 2005; 48: 2, 119-134. PMid: 15764312.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130512331319409
[8]
Joyce K, Pabayo R, Critchley JA, et al. Flexible working con-
ditions and their effects of employee health and wellbeing. The
Cochrane Library. Cochrane Database Systematic Reviews. 2010;
17(2): CD008009.
[9]
Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 re-
view types and associated methodologies. Health Information and
Libraries Journal. 2009; 26: 91-108. PMid: 19490148.
https:
//doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
[10]
Doherty ST, Andrey JC, Johnson LC. The economic and social im-
pacts of telework. Paper presented at the Telework: The new work-
place of the 21st Century symposium; 2000; New Orleans.
[11]
Van Horn CE, Storen D. Telework: Coming of age? Evaluating the
potential benefits of telework. Paper presented at the Telework: The
new workplace of the 21st Century symposium; 2000; New Orleans.
[12] Gray P. The virtual workplace. OR/MS Today.1995; 22(4): 22-26.
[13]
Eisenhardt KM. Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy
of Management Review 1989; 14(1): 57-74.
[14]
Pyoria P. Managing telework: risks, fears and rules. Management
Research Review 2011; 34(4): 386-399.
https://doi.org/10.1
108/01409171111117843
[15]
Bailey DE, Kurland NB. A review of telework research: find-
ings, new directions and lessons for the study of modern work.
Journal of Organizational Behaviour. 2002; 23: 383-400.
https:
//doi.org/10.1002/job.144
[16]
Shilling S. The basics of a successful telework network. HR Focus;
1999; 76(6): 9-11.
[17]
Sardeshmukh S, Sharma D, Golden T. Impact of telework on exhaus-
tion and job engagement: a job demands and job resources model.
New Technology, Work and Employment. 2012; 27(2): 193-207.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-005X.2012.00284.x
[18]
Jones K. Going home: new technology’s impact on remote work
engagement. Advances in Business Research. 2010; 1(1): 168-175.
[19]
McNall LA, Masuda AD, Nickling JM. Flexible work arrangements,
job satisfaction, and turnover intentions: the mediating role of work-
to-family enrichment. Journal of Psychology. 2010; I44(1): 61-81.
[20]
Mann S, Holdsworth L. The psychological impact of teleworking:
stress, emotions and health. New Technology, Work and Employment.
2003; 18(3): 196-211.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-005X.
00121
[21]
Hill EJ, Ferris M, Martinson V. Does it matter where you work?
A comparison of how three work venues (traditional office, vir-
tual office, and home office) influence aspects of work and per-
sonal/family life. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 2003; 63: 220-241.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791(03)00042- 3
[22]
Montreuil S, Lippel K. Telework and occupational health: a Quebec
empirical study and regulatory implications. Safety Science. 2003;
41: 339-358.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-7535(02)000
42-5
[23]
Baruch Y, Nicholson N. Home sweet work: requirements for effective
home working. Journal of General Management. 1997; 23: 15-30.
https://doi.org/10.1177/030630709702300202
[24]
Novaco RW, Gonzalez OI. Commuting and well-being. In Amichai-
Hamburger Y. (Ed) Technology and Psychology Wellbeing. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge Press; 2009.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CB
O9780511635373.008
[25]
Peters P, den Dulk L, van der Lippe T. The effects of time-spatial
flexibility and new working conditions on employeens’ work-life
balance: the Dutch case. Community, Work and Family. 2009; 12(3):
279-297. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668800902968907
[26]
Henke RM, Benevent R, Schulte P. The effects of telecommuting
intensity on employee health. American Journal of Health Promotion.
2016; 30(8): 604-612. PMid: 26389981.
[27]
Crawford JO, MacCalman L, Jackson CA. The health and well-being
of remote and mobile workers. Occupational Medicine (London).
2011; 61: 385-394. PMid: 21921124.
https://doi.org/10.109
3/occmed/kqr071
[28]
Butler AB, Grzywacz JG, Ettner SL, et al. Workplace flexibility,
self-reported health, and health care utilization. Work and Stress: An
International Journal of Work, Health and Organizations 2009; 23(1):
45-59. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370902833932
[29]
Pearce II J. Successful corporate telecommuting with technology con-
siderations for late adopters. Organizational Dynamics. 2009; 38(1):
16-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2008.10.002
[30]
Steward B. Health trade-offs in teleworking, and exploratory study
of work and health in computer home-based working. The Indexer.
2001; 22(3): 142-146.
[31]
Weinert C, Maier C, Laumer S. Why are teleworkers stressed? An
empirical analysis of the causes of telework enabled stress. In Thomas
O and Teuteberg F (Eds). Proceedings der 12 International en Tagung
Wirtshaftsinformatik. Osnabruck; 2015: 1407-1421.
Published by Sciedu Press 35

http://ijh.sciedupress.com International Journal of Healthcare 2017, Vol. 3, No. 2
[32]
Marmot M. The art of medicine, Europe: good, bad, and beautiful.
Lancet. 2013; 381: 1090-1091.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0
140-6736(13)60749- 7
[33]
Grant CA, Wallace LM, Spurgeon PC. An exploration of the psycho-
logical factors affecting remote e-worker’s job effectiveness, well-
being and work-life balance. Employee Relations. 2013; 35(5): 527-
546. https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-08- 2012-0059
[34]
Casey PR, Grzywacz JG. Employee health and well-being: the role of
flexibility and work-family balance. Psychologist-Manager Journal.
2008; 11: 31-47.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10887150801963
885
[35]
Grzywacz J, Casey P, Jones F. The effects of workplace flexibility on
health behaviors: a cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis. Journal
of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2007; 49(12): 1302-
1309. PMid: 18231077.
https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0b01
3e31815ae9bc
[36]
Gajendran RS, Harrison DA. The good, the bad and the unknown
about telecommuting: meta-analysis of psychological mediators and
individual consequences Journal of Applied Psychology. 2007; 92(6):
1524-1541. PMid: 18020794.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021
-9010.92.6.1524
[37]
Skov T, Borg V, Orhede E. Psychosocial and physical risk factors for
musculoskeletal disorders of the neck, shoulders, and lower back in
salespeople. Occupational Environmental Medicine. 1996; 53: 351-
356. PMid: 8673184.
https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.53.5.3
51
[38]
Sang K, Gyi D, Haslam C. Musculoskeletal symptoms in pharma-
ceutical sales representatives. Occupational Medicine. 2010; 60: 108-
114. PMid: 19812347.
https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqp
145
[39]
Budworth N. Health risks from teleworking. Croner’s Occupational
Hygiene Magazine. 1999; 18: 11-18.
[40]
Borg V, Kristensen TS. Psychosocial work environment and mental
health among travelling salespeople. Work Stress. 1999;13: 132-143.
https://doi.org/10.1080/026783799296101
[41]
Fairweather NB. Surveillance in employment: the case of tele-
working. Journal of Business Ethics. 1999; 22(1): 39-49.
https:
//doi.org/10.1023/A:1006104017646
[42]
Cohen S, Janicki-Deverts D, Miller GE. Psychological stress and
disease. JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association. 2007;
298 (14): 1685-1687. PMid: 17925521.
https://doi.org/10.1
001/jama.298.14.1685
[43]
Konradt U, Hertel G, Schmook R. Quality of management by ob-
jectives, task-related stressors and non-task-related stressors as pre-
dictors of stress and job satisfaction among teleworkers. European
Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. 2003; 12(1): 61-79.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320344000020
[44]
Rice VH. Theories of stress and relationship to health. In V. H. Rice
(Ed.) Handbook of stress, coping, and health: implications for nurs-
ing research, theory and practice (27- 45). Canada: Thousand Oaks,
Sage; 2000.
[45]
Standen P, Daniels K, Lamond D. The home as a workplace: work-
family interaction and psychological well-being in telework.Journal
of Occupational Health Psychology. 1999; 4(4): 368-381. PMid:
10526841. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.4.4.368
[46] Huws U, Podro S. Employment of homeworkers: examples of good
practice. Geneve: International Labor Organization – Conditions of
work and welfare facilities branch, 1995.
[47]
Hartig T, Kylin C, Johansson G. The telework tradeoff: stress mitiga-
tion vs constrained restoration. Applied Psychology: an International
Review. 2007; 56(2): 231-253.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14
64-0597.2006.00252.x
[48]
Dimitrova D. Controlling teleworkers: supervision and flexibility
revisited. New Technology, Work and Employment, 2003;18(3): 181-
195. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-005X.00120
[49]
Costa G. Shift work and health: current problems and preventive
actions. Safety Health Work. 2010;1: 112-123. PMid: 22953171.
https://doi.org/10.5491/SHAW.2010.1.2.112
[50]
Thomas LT, Ganster DC. Impact of family-supportive work variables
on work-family conflict and strain: a control perspective. Journal of
Applied Psychology. 1995; 80: 6-15.
https://doi.org/10.103
7/0021-9010.80.1.6
[51]
Kurland NB, Bailey DE. Telework the advantages and challenges of
working here, there, anywhere and anytime. Organization Dynamics.
1999; 28: 53-68.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-2616(00
)80016-9
[52]
Stephens G, Szajan B. Perceptions and expectations: why people
choose a telecommuting work style. International Journal of Elec-
tronic Commerce. 1998; 3(1): 70-85.
https://doi.org/10.108
0/10864415.1998.11518328
[53]
Bloom N, Liand J, Roberts J, et al. Does working from home work?
Evidence from a Chinese experiment. Quarterly Journal of Eco-
nomics. 2015; 130(1): 165-218.
https://doi.org/10.1093/qj
e/qju032
[54]
Wheatley D. Good to be home? Time use and satisfaction levels
among home-based teleworker. New Technology, Work and Employ-
ment. 2012; 27(3): 224-241.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14
68-005X.2012.00289.x
[55]
Madsen SR. The benefits, challenges, and implications of telework-
ing: a literature review. Journal of Culture and Religion. 2011; 1:
148-158.
[56]
Golden J, Wiens-Tuers B. To your happiness? Overtime work, worker
happiness and satisfaction. Journal of Socio-Economics. 2006; 35:
382-397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2005.11.039
[57]
Wilkes RB, Frolick MN, Urwiler R. Critical issues in developing suc-
cessful telework programs. Journal of Systems Management. 1994;
45(7): 30-34.
[58]
Kowalski KB, Swanson JA. Critical success factors in developing tele-
work programs. Benchmarking: an International Journal. 2005; 12(3):
236-249. https://doi.org/10.1108/14635770510600357
36 ISSN 2377-7338 E-ISSN 2377-7346