Whether it’s your first or fourth cold of the season, many Australians are waking up at the moment with a sniffle, a sore throat or feeling more tired than usual.

June to August is peak flu season in Australia. There are also high rates of COVID circulating, along with other respiratory viruses such as respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and adenovirus.

Sometimes it’s clear when you need to spend the day in bed: you have a fever, aches and pains, and can’t think clearly. If it’s the flu or COVID, you’ll want to stay away from others, and to rest and recover.

But what about if your symptoms are mild? Are you sick enough to take the day off, or should you push through it? And what if you feel pressured to work?

Here’s what to consider.

Are you likely to spread it?

While it may seem like a good idea to continue working, especially when your symptoms are mild, going to work when infectious with a respiratory virus risks infecting your co-workers.

If you are in a client-facing role, such as a teacher or a salesperson, you may also infect others like students or customers.

The risks may be even greater for those working with vulnerable communities, such as in aged care work, where the consequences can be severe.

From an organisational perspective, you are likely less productive when you are not feeling well.

So, whenever possible, avoid going into work when you’re feeling unwell.

Should I work from home?

The COVID pandemic normalised working from home. Since then, more people work from home when they’re unwell, rather than taking sick leave.

Some employees join Zoom or Teams meetings out of guilt, not wanting to let their co-workers down. Others – and in particular, some men – feel the need to maintain their performance at work, even if it’s at the expense of their health.

A downside of powering through is that workers may prolong their illness by not looking after themselves.

Can you take leave when you need it?

Employees in Australia can take either paid or unpaid time off when they are unwell.

Most full-time employees get ten days of paid sick leave per year, while part-time employees get the equivalent pro-rata.

Employers can ask for reasonable evidence from employees to show they are unwell, such as asking for a medical certificate from a pharmacy or GP, or a statutory declaration. The type of evidence required may differ from organisation to organisation, with some awards and enterprise agreements specifying the type of evidence needed.

While taking a sick day helps many workers recuperate, a significant proportion of workers engaged in non-standard work arrangements do not receive these benefits. There are, for example, 2.6 million casual employees who don’t have access to paid sick leave.

Similarly, most self-employed people such as tradies and gig workers do not have any paid leave entitlements. Although these workers can still take unpaid leave, they are sacrificing income when they call in sick.

Research from the Australian Council of Trade Unions has found more than half of insecure workers don’t take time off when injured or sick.

So a significant proportion of workers in Australia simply cannot afford to call in sick.

Why pushing through isn’t the answer

“Presenteeism” is the phenomenon of people reporting for work even when they are unwell or not fully functioning, affecting their health and productivity.

While exact figures are hard to determine, since most organisations don’t systematically track it, estimates suggest 30%–90% of employees work while sick at least once a year.

People work while sick for different reasons. Some choose to because they love their job or enjoy the social side of work – this is called voluntary presenteeism.

But many don’t have a real choice, facing financial pressure or job insecurity. That’s involuntary presenteeism, and it’s a much bigger problem.

Research has found industry norms may be shaping the prevalence of “involuntary presenteeism”, with workers in the health and education sectors more likely to feel obligated to work when sick due to “at work” caring responsibilities.

What can organisations do about it?

Leaders set the tone, especially around health and wellbeing. When they role-model healthy behaviour and support time off, it gives others permission to do the same.

Supportive leaders can help reduce presenteeism, while pressure from demanding leaders can make it worse.

Your co-workers matter too. When teams step up and share the load, it creates a culture where people feel safe to take leave. A supportive environment makes wellbeing a shared responsibility.

But for some workers, leave isn’t an option. Fixing this requires policy change across industries and society more broadly, not just inside the workplace.

Alex Veen, Senior Lecturer and University of Sydney Business School Emerging Scholar Research Fellow, University of Sydney; Hannah Kunst, Lecturer in Leadership, University of Sydney, and Nate Zettna, Lecturer in Leadership, University of Sydney

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

A stroke happens when the blood supply to part of the brain is cut off, either because of a blockage (called an ischaemic stroke) or bleeding (a haemorrhagic stroke). Around 83% of strokes are ischaemic.

The main emergency treatment for ischaemic strokes is a “clot-busting” process called intravenous thrombolysis. But this only works if administered quickly – ideally within an hour of arriving to hospital, and no later than 4.5 hours after symptoms begin. The faster treatment is given, the better the person’s chance of survival and recovery.

However, not everyone gets an equal chance of receiving this treatment quickly. Notably, research has shown ambulance staff are significantly less likely to correctly identify a stroke in women compared to men.

In a recent study, we modelled the potential health gains and cost savings of closing this gap. And they’re substantial.

The sex gap in stroke diagnosis

In Australia, about three-quarters of people who experience stroke arrive at hospital by ambulance. If paramedics suspect a stroke, they can take patients directly to a hospital which specialises in stroke care, and alert the hospital team so scans and treatment can start immediately.

Research has shown women aged under 70 are 11% less likely than men to have their stroke recognised by paramedics before they arrive at the hospital.

While younger men and women experience stroke at a similar rate, the symptoms they present with may be different, with “typical” symptoms more common in men and “atypical” symptoms more common in women.

Research has shown women and men are equally likely to present with movement and speech problems when having a stroke. However, women are more likely to show vague symptoms, such as general weakness, changes in alertness, or confusion.

These “atypical” symptoms can be overlooked, leaving women more vulnerable to misdiagnosis, delayed treatment, and preventable harm.

What we did

In our study, published recently in the Medical Journal of Australia (MJA), we used ambulance and hospital data from a 2022 MJA study in New South Wales. This is the study we mentioned above that showed paramedics correctly identified stroke more often in men than women under 70.

From this dataset, we identified more than 5,500 women under 70 who had an ischaemic stroke between 2005 and 2018. Using this group, we built a model to compare two scenarios:

1. the status quo, where women’s strokes are identified at the current rate of accuracy; and
2. an improved scenario, where women’s strokes are identified at the same rate as men’s.

We then projected patients’ health over time, including their level of impairment, risk of another stroke, and immediate and long-term survival.

Closing the diagnosis gap would save lives and money

When women’s stroke diagnosis rate was improved to match men’s, each woman gained an average of 0.14 extra years of life (roughly 51 days) and 0.08 extra quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), meaning an additional 29 days in full health.

Scenario two also meant A$2,984 in health-care costs would be saved per woman.

Scaled to the national level based on the number of women under 70 hospitalised with ischaemic stroke each year, closing this gap would mean 252 extra years of life, 144 extra QALYs, and $5.4 million in cost savings annually.

Some limitations

We didn’t have sex-specific data for every aspect of the model, which is in itself a telling sign of the lack of recognition of sex as an important factor in understanding disease. Because of this, we used combined data from both men and women in some parts of our model, which may have affected the results.

Further, the NSW data we used for rates of treatment with intravenous thrombolysis were higher than the national average, so our national figures may be slightly over-estimated.

Beyond stroke – why all this matters

The disparity we found is one example of a broader, systemic issue in women’s health: sex-based differences in diagnosis and treatment that favour men.

Too often, women’s symptoms are misinterpreted or dismissed because they don’t match a “typical” pattern. This can lead to delays, missed opportunities for early treatment, and worse outcomes for women.

In stroke, faster and more accurate diagnosis means people are less likely to die or require long-term care, and more likely to recover better and get back to their daily lives sooner.

So what can we do to close the diagnosis gap?

Investing in better training for paramedics and other emergency responders, so they can recognise a wider range of stroke presentations, could pay off many times over. Public awareness campaigns that highlight atypical stroke symptoms could also help.

Technologies such as mobile stroke units and telemedicine support may be part of the solution, but they must be implemented with attention to sex-specific needs.

Lei Si, Associate Professor in Health Services Management, Western Sydney University; Laura Emily Downey, Senior Lecturer, Health Economics and Policy, George Institute for Global Health, and Thomas Gadsden, Research Fellow, Health Systems Science, George Institute for Global Health

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.