The Home Office Work Scale (HOWS) was applied to situations with people in social distancing, working at home.

The survey initially included a representative sample of 1,083 volunteers of both sexes, 18 to 70 years of age, divided into seven age groups. We excluded 27 questionnaires due to completion errors, resulting in a final sample of 1,056 participants. Data were collected online through the authors´ digital channels using a structured computational tool (Google Forms). The questionnaire remained available for 45 days (06.15.2020 to 07.30.2020), which determined the sample size. The target audience consisted of persons working exclusively in a home office format during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The HOWS scale (Annex 1) consisted of 10 questions with detailed instructions for volunteers, with the following options: no (0); yes, a little (1), or yes, a lot (2) to verify respondents´ perception of their home office experience.

To reduce possibilities of research bias, detailed instructions for volunteers were described at the beginning of the scale (Annex 1).

There is no specific law or guidelines that regulate this kind of research method in Brazil, as with face-to-face collections.

Respondents of both sexes who were working at home, belonging to different age groups, established in the survey, and using digital access without face-to-face contact with coworkers, superiors, or clients.

Volunteers working either in person at their regular workplace or in a hybrid format (some days at home and some days in person at their regular workplace).

There were errors in the completion of 27 questionnaires that required excluding those participants, decreasing the sample from 1,083 to 1,056 valid questionnaires.

The statistical analysis consisted of a demographic analysis of the prevalence of participation between women and men and age groups for testing the hypothesis.

In Table 1, the sample's descriptive statistics showed greater participation by women (58% females and 42% males). The age groups from 18 to 25 and from 66 to 70 years showed the lowest participation rates, while the other age groups were balanced [10, 11].

Student's t-test was applied to the mean difference between males and females, aimed at verifying whether men and women behaved differently at work in a home office format during the pandemic, which did not occur (Table 2).

Since the p-value exceeded 0.05, statistically, we do not reject the hypothesis that the mean of the groups is the same. That is, independently of sex, there was no evidence for further investigating whether men and women behaved differently, although the number of women was higher.

Cohen's “d” is equal to 0.11, indicating a small effect size in the t-test, confirming that the difference in results between men and women is almost nil.

In Table 3, the percentages and absolute values ​​for each question, distributed across the three options (no, yes, a little, and yes, a lot), allowed an assessment of volunteers´ views concerning working in a home office format during social distancing.

Descriptive statistics such as summary measures (Table 1) showed higher participation by women (58%) than men (42%), corroborating other research findings that show higher female presence in online surveys. Despite this higher percentage, the t-test showed that the mean values between men and women were quite close. Cohen´s d was 0.11, indicating a small effect size in the t test, i.e., the difference between the results for men and women was practically nil.

Another survey (n=589) analyzing patterns in smartphone use by men and women found an increase in the level of use by women when compared to men. Women tended to use more social networks and access more messaging features such as e-mails and apps. Gender was thus considered statistically significant in terms of smartphone use [12].

According to another study, variables such as gender, family, activity, use of smartphones, and frequency and direction of use were correlated with problems arising from excessive use of these technologies [13].

A survey in which 70.9% of the participants were women found that the relationship between the pursuit of goals and the fear of being without their online devices determined the impacts according to gender [14].

The extreme age groups, 18 to 25 and 66 to 70 years, showed the lowest participation, respectively 3.4% and 6.4%, with low significance, to be investigated in future research, since it was not among the current study´s objectives.

The largest participation was found in the three central age groups (34 to 41, 42 to 49, and 50 to 57 years), which totaled 61.9% of the respondents, especially the 42-49-year group with more than 22% of participants.

The demographic data showed consistent frequency and offered satisfactory variability, thereby minimizing the tendency for one age group to dominate (which might have created a statistical bias). Future research using this scale should allow observing behaviors with a predominance of age groups, thus making another contribution from the scale´s use.

According to question 1, only 19% of respondents reported any experience with home office work before social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Even so, only 16% had to adapt their work systems (question 2). Only 12% reported that they had to adapt their furniture at home for continuing online work and to resemble their regular workplace.

Future architectural projects should include spaces suitable for the home office and not merely a room with a bookcase and a table and sofa for watching television. Such spaces will have to offer a physical infrastructure with furniture and layout that allow the work to be performed in conditions closer to those available in the individual´s regular workplace, e.g., in their offices in company buildings [15].

Digital ergonomics must be considered in these spaces, due to the risk of physical injuries related to improper posture and inappropriate furniture when using digital devices at home [16].

This may explain why fewer than half (49%) of the respondents reported that they felt comfortable with their home office work conditions (question 4).

One-fourth of respondents (25%) reported physical and emotional changes (question 5) due to work in the home office format. However, 51% felt some changes due to the home office format during social distancing.

Pandemics and epidemics can affect people's physical and emotional health and disrupt society, usually resulting in a high level of psychological distress and psychosocial maladjustment [1].

From a health perspective, the home office can create various problems, including a sedentary lifestyle, overweight, and failure to take snack breaks or simply having a cup of coffee instead. In the regular physical and in-person workplace, such breaks are healthy, and they energize workers. The same is not necessarily true at home unless the worker is highly disciplined.

Only 31% of our sample reported that their work performance improved in the home office (question 6). More than one-third of the respondents (37%) stated that they had not seen any improvement in their work performance.

Due to rules by some companies that require employees´ constant availability, wherever they are, workers´ well-being becomes fundamentally relevant to organizational results. It is necessary to take proper care of the employees' health [17].

Concerning the impacts of home office work on domestic activities, 45% of the respondents reported some impact (question 7), although 50% reported having maintained their routine within the normal range (question 8).

Impacts on human behavior are relevant when changes occur in individuals´ routine, requiring changes in habits and relations, especially when isolation is imposed with the intensification of online practices [9].

Eating disorders comprise a group of conditions characterized by persistent disturbances in eating or in related behaviors, resulting in altered consumption or absorption of food, impairing physical health and psychosocial functioning.

Home office work tends to situate individuals too close to the refrigerator and pantry. Staying at home requires considerable determination to adhere to mealtimes and to choose what to eat and in what quantities. Surprisingly, people may consume more ice cream and other high-fat foods when sitting at home feeling totally alone in the world [10].

Notwithstanding the current impacts, 39% of respondents reported in question 9 that they may continue home office work after the pandemic´s social distancing ends. In the same question, 33% reported that they believe they will continue to work part of the time in home office format [18].

Finally, 45% answered (question 10) that home office work is a solution for all professions.

Despite numerous benefits to users of information technologies, the adverse effects of the indiscriminate use of technological devices in work environments is a topic that merits further study [18].

Information and communication technologies can change the ways people relate to others, with both positive and negative effects. It all depends on how people use or abuse them [5].

A home office may increase the number of work hours due to the lack of control in the administration of time at home, which does not include the breaks normally practiced in the regular workplace.

It is important to highlight the topic´s original nature, the need to develop a scale due to the lack of other equivalent scales, based on the immediate experience created by an unforeseen pandemic and the lack of knowledge on this type of evaluation.

Home office work with the freedom to come and go is nothing new. However, social distancing with increased use of digital technologies and with no option to leave home imposes different conditions for home workers, which can be a limitation with respect to performance, if compared to performance in the in-person workplace.

The definition of what home office work represents for people in social distancing may differ in relation to more flexible work that allows part of the work to be performed in the regular workplace.