Skip to main content
. 2022 Apr 15;31(6):e13605. doi: 10.1111/jsr.13605

TABLE 4.

Changes in Work Ability Score (WAS) according to changes in sleep parameters

Work ability (WAS)
Mean change (95% CI) Mean change adjusted estimate (95% CI) F value (DF) p Group comparisons
Mean difference adjusted estimate (95%CI) p
Sleep quality
Worse −0.18 (−0.43 to 0.07) −0.20 (−0.51 to 0.10) 3.8 (2) 0.022 Worse vs. no change −0.25 (−0.54 to 0.04) 0.11
No change 0.18 (0.07 to 0.29) 0.05 (−0.18 to 0.28) Worse vs. improved −0.41 (−0.76 to −0.06) 0.016
Improved 0.47 (0.28 to 0.67) 0.21 (−0.06 to 0.47) No change vs. improved −0.16 (−0.41 to 0.09) 0.28
Sleep duration
Decreased 0.11 (−0.03 to 0.25) 0.01 (−0.23 to 0.26) 1.7 (2) 0.19 Decrease vs. no change −0.01 (−0.25 to 0.22) 0.99
No change 0.21 (0.04 to 0.38) 0.03 (−0.21 to 0.27) Decrease vs. increase −0.17 (−0.42 to 0.07) 0.24
Increased 0.27 (0.12 to 0.42) 0.19 (−0.06 to 0.43) No change vs. increase −0.16 (−0.40 to 0.08) 0.26
Sleep medication use
Increased −0.03 (−0.48 to 0.43) −0.44 (−0.83 to −0.052) 4.8 (2) 0.0082 Increase vs. no change −0.54 (−0.94 to −0.13) 0.0055
No change 0.20 (0.11 to 0.29) 0.10 (−0.12 to 0.31) Increase vs. decrease −0.48 (−1.01 to 0.05) 0.084
Decreased 0.32 (−0.09 to 0.73) 0.04 (−0.34 to 0.42) No change vs. decrease 0.06 (−0.32 to 0.43) 0.94

CI, confidence interval; DF, degrees of freedom; WAS, Work Ability Score.

Note: Mean changes (non‐adjusted and adjusted) with 95% CIs in WAS years 2014–2015 according to changes in sleep parameters. Adjusted mean values, F values, DF and p values are from three different models for multiway analysis of covariance to explain factors affecting the change in work ability. Change in sleep quality, sleep duration and sleep medication use were all entered in different models with WAS change. All models were adjusted for age, gender, body mass index, educational level, disease burden, and WAS level at baseline. Group comparisons between different classes of sleep parameters are also presented. Mean differences in WAS between groups are presented with 95% CIs. The p values and 95% CIs for group comparisons are adjusted with Tukey's method.