Development of systemic approaches to management of the regional prevalence (literature review)

Managing the territorial prevalence in the population, especially the economically active part of it, requires an integrated approach based on the principles of primary health care (PHC) and interdepartmental cooperation. Key influencing factors include legislation, ethical standards, diagnostic methods, health monitoring, education, and coordination between government agencies, employers, and medical institutions.

The main elements on which the possibility of managing employee morbidity depends on the point of view of the impact on the health of employees (the working population of working age) are analyzed according to publicly available texts in the Russian Science Citation Index, on the PubMed portal.

The legislative framework, including International Labour Organization Conventions No. 155 and No. 161 in the field of occupational safety and health) and national standards, sets minimum standards for occupational safety, but workers’ health issues go beyond occupational diseases and require integration with PHC systems. Ethical aspects such as confidentiality and protection of workers’ rights complicate the collection of data necessary for effective management of prevalence. Modern diagnostic and monitoring methods, including biomonitoring and digital technologies, make it possible to identify risks at an early stage, but their implementation requires a balance between efficiency and respect for workers’ rights. Education that increases health literacy and risk awareness plays an important role.

Conclusion. To improve the management system, it is necessary to establish interaction between health and occupational safety information systems, ensure data protection and develop targeted prevention programs. Only coordinated efforts by all stakeholders will make it possible to create a sustainable system that promotes the preservation of the health of the able-bodied population and the socio-economic development of the regions.

Funding. This article was prepared by the author within the framework of the research work «Scientific substantiation of approaches to transforming the activities of outpatient and polyclinic institutions subordinate to the Department of Health of the City of Moscow» (no. according to EGISU: 123032100061-9).

Conflict of interest. The authors declare the absence of obvious and potential conflicts of interest in connection with the publication of this article.

Received: April 4, 2025 / Accepted: June 24, 2025 / Published: September 12, 2025

1. Matlin S.A., Depoux A., Schütte S., Flahault A., Saso L. Migrants’ and refugees’ health: towards an agenda of solutions. Public Health Rev. 2018; 39(1): 27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40985-018-0104-9

2. Starshinin A.V., Andrusov V.E. Aspects of the application of modern solutions in territorial planning of social organizations. Trud i sotsial′nyye otnosheniya. 2024; 35(4): 142–51. https://doi.org/10.20410/2073-7815-2024-35-4-142-151 https://elibrary.ru/marfcn (in Russian)

3. Arynova Z., Sartova R.B., Sartova S. Regional aspects of the implementation of social policy on the example of the Рavlodar region. J. Econ. Res. Bus. Adm. 2023; 145(3): 122–36. https://doi.org/10.26577/be.2023.v145.i3.011

4. de Leeuw E. Engagement of Sectors Other than Health in Integrated Health Governance, Policy, and Action. Annu. Rev. Public Health. 2017; 38: 329–49. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031816-044309

5. Gostin L.O., Monahan J.T., Kaldor J., DeBartolo M., Friedman E.A., Gottschalk K., et al. The legal determinants of health: harnessing the power of law for global health and sustainable development. Lancet. 2019; 393(10183): 1857–910. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30233-8

6. OECD Addressing societal challenges using transdisciplinary research. Paris: OECD Science; 2020.

7. Crawshaw P., Gray J., Haighton C., Lloyd S. Health inequalities and health-related economic inactivity: Why good work needs good health. Public Health Pract. (Oxf.). 2024; 8: 100555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhip.2024.100555

8. Montano M., Oursler K.K., Marconi V.C. Healthy aging: Linking causal mechanisms with holistic outcomes. Aging Cell. 2023; 23(1): e14065. https://doi.org/10.1111/acel.14065

9. Park J., Kim Y. From workers to the working-age population: a new paradigm for the occupational health service. Saf. Health Work. 2019; 10(3): 251–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shaw.2019.07.002

10. Yang L., Weston C., Cude C., Kincl L. Evaluating Oregon’s occupational public health surveillance system based on the CDC updated guidelines. Am. J. Ind. Med. 2020; 63(8): 713–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.23139

11. Rosner D., Markowitz G. A short history of occupational safety and health in the United States. Am. J. Public Health. 2020; 110(5): 622–8. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2020.305581

12. García García A.M. Occupational health from the health administration services: the “occupational perspective” opportunities for the exercise of Public Health. Arch. Prev. Riesgos Labor. 2020; 23(3): 309–14. https://doi.org/10.12961/aprl.2020.23.03.01 (in Spanish)

13. Linnan L.A., Leff M.S., Martini M.C., Walton A.L., Baron S., Hannon P.A., et al. Workplace health promotion and safety in state and territorial health departments in the United States: a national mixed-methods study of activity, capacity, and growth opportunities. BMC Public Health. 2019; 19(1): 291. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-6575-x

14. Mendis S., Graham I., Hammerich A., Mikkelsen B., Kavousi M., Pathirana R., et al. Promoting global cardiovascular health to advance the sustainable development agenda. JACC Adv. 2024; 3(12): 101388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacadv.2024.101388

15. Amirabdolahian S., Pare G., Tams S. Digital wellness programs in the workplace: meta-review. J. Med. Internet Res. 2025; 27: e70982. https://doi.org/10.2196/70982

16. Belgasm H., Alzubi A., Iyiola K., Khadem A. Interpersonal conflict and employee behavior in the public sector: investigating the role of workplace ostracism and supervisors’ active empathic listening. Behav. Sci. (Basel). 2025; 15(2): 194. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15020194

17. Jeganathan B. AI-powered ergonomics: enhancing workplace safety through posture detection. IJRSI. 2025; (Mar 5): 410–29. https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2025.12020037

18. Wahlström V., Öhrn M., Harder M., Eskilsson T., Fjellman-Wiklund A., Pettersson-Strömbäck A. Physical work environment in an activity-based flex office: a longitudinal case study. Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health. 2024; 97(6): 661–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-024-02073-z

19. Wütschert M.S., Romano-Pereira D., Suter L., Schulze H., Elfering A. A systematic review of working conditions and occupational health in home office. Work. 2022; 72(3): 839–52. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-205239

20. Guest D.E. Human resource management and employee well-being: towards a new analytic framework. Hum. Resour. Manag. J. 2017; 27(1): 22–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12139

21. Grimm L.A., Bauer G.F., Jenny G.J. Is the health-awareness of leaders related to the working conditions, engagement, and exhaustion in their teams? A multi-level mediation study. BMC Public Health. 2021; 21(1): 1935. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-11985-1

22. Carey F.R., Hu E.Y., Stamas N., Seelig A., Liu L., Schneiderman A., et al. Comparison of health measures between survey self-reports and electronic health records among Millennium Cohort Study participants receiving Veterans Health Administration care. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 2025; 25(1): 81. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-025-02529-x

23. Khudyakov Yu.G., Nikolaykin N.I., Andrusov V.E. Management of Industrial Environment Hazards [Upravleniye opasnostyami proizvodstvennoy sredy]. Moscow: Prospekt; 2017. (in Russian)

24. Andrusov V.E., Khudyakov Yu.G. The decrease of airline occupational environmental risk factors. Legislative and medical aspects. Nauchnyy vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo tekhnicheskogo universiteta grazhdanskoy aviatsii. 2017; 20(3): 90–9. https://elibrary.ru/ytxtvd (in Russian)

25. Vamos S., Okan O., Sentell T., Rootman I. Making a case for «Education for Health Literacy»: An international perspective. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2020; 17(4): 1436. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17041436

26. Andrusov V.E., Nikolaykin N.I., Khudyakov Yu.G. Morbidity with temporary disability as a tool for assessing workplace safety. XXI vek: itogi proshlogo i problemy nastoyashchego plyus. 2018; 7(1): 50–6. https://elibrary.ru/ytxpfr (in Russian)

27. Vlasenko A.V., Filin A.S., Andrusov V.E. On the possibility of assessing the health status and analyzing the morbidity of medical workers. In: Collection of Articles Based on the Materials of the XII-XIII International Scientific and Practical Conference. Modern Medicine: New Approaches and Current Research. Volume 6–7 (11) [Sovremennaya meditsina: novyye podkhody i aktual′nyye issledovaniya. Sbornik statey po materialam XII–XIII mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii. Tom 6–7 (11)]. Moscow: Internauka; 2018: 34–7. (in Russian)

28. Grote G., Guest D. The case for reinvigorating quality of working life research. SAGE Publications Ltd. Hum. Relat. 2017; 70(2): 149–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726716654746

29. Molnár C., Csehné P.I. Review of human resource management practices supporting the development of employee wellbeing. Új Munkaügyi Szemle. 2023; 4(3): 14–29. https://doi.org/10.58269/umsz.2023.3.2

30. Boon C., Eckardt R., Lepak D.P., Boselie P. Integrating strategic human capital and strategic human resource management. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Stud. 2018; 29(1): 34–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2017.1380063

31. Guest D.E. Strengthening links between HRM theories, HR practices and outcomes: A proposal to advance research on HRM and outcomes. Hum. Resour. Manag. J. 2025; 35(1): 319–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12569

32. Han J., Sun J.M., Wang H.L. Do high performance work systems generate negative effects? How and when? Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2020; 30(2): 100699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.100699

33. Ho H., Kuvaas B. Human resource management systems, employee well-being, and firm performance from the mutual gains and critical perspectives: The well-being paradox. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2020; 59(3): 235–53. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21990

34. Peccei R., Van De Voorde K. Human resource management–well-being–performance research revisited: Past, present, and future. Hum. Resour. Manag. J. 2019; 29(4): 539–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12254