Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 29, Number 12—December 2023
Research

Work Attendance with Acute Respiratory Illness Before and During COVID-19 Pandemic, United States, 2018–2022

Faruque AhmedComments to Author , Mary Patricia Nowalk, Richard K. Zimmerman, Todd Bear, Carlos G. Grijalva, H. Keipp Talbot, Ana Florea, Sara Y. Tartof, Manjusha Gaglani, Michael Smith, Huong Q. McLean, Jennifer P. King, Emily T. Martin, Arnold S. Monto, C. Hallie Phillips, Karen J. Wernli, Brendan Flannery, Jessie R. Chung, and Amra Uzicanin
Author affiliations: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA (F. Ahmed, B. Flannery, J.R. Chung, A. Uzicanin); University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA (M.P. Nowalk, R.K. Zimmerman, T. Bear); Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA (C.G. Grijalva, H.K. Talbot); Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, California, USA (A. Florea, S.Y. Tartof); Texas A&M University College of Medicine, Temple (M. Gaglani); Baylor Scott and White Health, Temple, Texas, USA (M. Gaglani, M. Smith); Marshfield Clinic Research Institute, Marshfield, Wisconsin, USA (H.Q. McLean, J.P. King); University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA (E.T. Martin, A.S. Monto); Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington, USA (C.H. Phillips, K.J. Wernli)

Main Article

Table 1

Likelihood of working at any location among adults with COVID-19, influenza, or other acute respiratory illness who were scheduled to work, by work experience in a typical week before illness onset, United States, 2018–2022*

Period
 Day before illness
 Day 1 of illness
 Day 2 of illness
 Day 3 of illness
Prepandemic influenza seasons n = 1,409 n = 2,596 n = 2,444 n = 2,373
Unadjusted analysis
Work experience†
Remote only 97.5 (39/40) 70.5 (43/61) 66.7 (40/60)‡ 68.4 (39/57)‡
Hybrid 90.6 (222/245) 72.6 (329/453) 68.0 (297/437) 63.3 (274/433)
Onsite only 92.3 (1,037/1,124) 69.4 (1,445/2,082) 51.4 (1,000/1,947) 48.4 (912/1,883)
Adjusted analysis§
Work experience
Remote only NA 1.02 (0.57–1.84) 1.90 (1.06–3.39) 2.13 (1.16–3.91)
Hybrid NA 1.01 (0.78–1.30) 1.92 (1.50–2.46) 1.66 (1.30–2.12)
Onsite only
 NA
 Referent
 Referent
 Referent
COVID-19 pandemic period n = 2,738 n = 3,178 n = 3,090 n = 3,040
Unadjusted analysis
Work experience†
Remote only 95.8 (498/520)‡ 80.5 (495/615)‡ 71.7 (451/629)‡ 72.4 (449/620)‡
Hybrid 95.6 (540/565) 78.4 (514/656) 68.9 (451/655) 65.2 (416/638)
Onsite only 90.1 (1,490/1,653) 65.1 (1,242/1,907) 41.6 (752/1,806) 37.4 (666/1,782)
Adjusted analysis§
Work experience
Remote only NA 2.03 (1.58–2.59) 3.37 (2.68–4.23) 3.78 (3.00–4.77)
Hybrid NA 1.69 (1.34–2.13) 2.75 (2.22–3.42) 2.56 (2.06–3.19)
Onsite only NA Referent Referent Referent

*NA, not applicable. †Values are percentage (no. persons worked at any location/no. persons scheduled to work). ‡p<0.001 (comparison of 3 work experience categories for specified day and period). §Values are adjusted odds ratio (95% CI). Dependent variable for the multilevel logistic regression models is worked at any location on a specified day of illness (0 = did not work, 1 = worked). Independent variables are work experience in a typical week before illness onset (remote only, hybrid, onsite only), study period (0 = prepandemic influenza seasons, 1 = COVID-19 pandemic period). PCR test result (0 = other acute respiratory illness, 1 = influenza or COVID-19), race/ethnicity, general health before illness, current smoker, type of employment, healthcare personnel, hours worked in a typical week before illness onset, employees discouraged from coming to work with flu-like symptoms, and study site. We excluded persons with missing information for independent variables (303 for day 1, 314 for day 2, and 279 for day 3). p<0.001 for work experience study period interaction term for days 1–3 of illness.

Main Article

Page created: November 02, 2023
Page updated: November 18, 2023
Page reviewed: November 18, 2023
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
file_external