Stress can severely increase one’s risk of heart disease, and few things are more stressful than long days at the office, frustrating commutes, and workplace politics.
Stress and burnout at work hit record levels in 2020, and according to a 2023 survey from the American Psychological Association, stress levels are still at “concerning levels,” with 77% of workers reporting work-related stress.
But new research published in the American Journal of Public Health might give some hope to the rank and file. Researchers found that for some people, flexibility in the workplace and promoting work-life balance can decrease the risk of heart-related conditions, including heart attacks—the No. 1 cause of death in the U.S.—stroke, diabetes, insulin resistance, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
“The study illustrates how working conditions are important social determinants of health,” co-lead author and Harvard University professor Lisa Berkman told the Harvard Gazette.
As part of the study, supervisors at both an IT company and a long-term care company received training on strategies to show support for employees’ personal lives alongside job performance. Managers and employees also attended a training to identify ways to increase employee control over their schedules, which remains a priority for many workers following the COVID pandemic.
The interventions in both workplaces didn’t have a significant impact on the cardiometabolic risk score of employees overall, calculated by monitoring blood pressure, body mass index, cholesterol, and smoking status, among other things. Researchers did find, however, significant reductions among employees older than 45 and those with already higher risk scores.
“When stressful workplace conditions and work-family conflict were mitigated, we saw a reduction in the risk of cardiovascular disease among more vulnerable employees, without any negative impact on their productivity,” Berkman said. “These findings could be particularly consequential for low- and middle-wage workers who traditionally have less control over their schedules and job demands and are subject to greater health inequities.”
Orfeu Buxton, co-lead author and Penn State University professor, told the Gazette that the study’s implications go far beyond just the two companies they studied.
“We know such changes can improve employee health and should be more broadly implemented,” Buxton said.
Although the days of fully remote work for most employees are gone, exactly how hybrid work should be handled remains a major topic of conversation: How much flexibility should be allowed in a hybrid workplace? Can workers pick their own days in the office? Some executives have gone as far as monitoring employee badge swipes to check when employees enter and leave the office. Workers, however, have voiced their desire to for more autonomy to come and go as they need and work from where they want. If leaders are going to demand their employees return to offices, they might want to consider mitigating stressors by allowing them increased flexibility.
