Search

Background: Common mental health problems, such as stress, anxiety and depression, are highly prevalent among workers and often lead to long-term absenteeism and work disability. Effective elements found in previous researched interventions were to explicitly focus on return to work (RTW) and not solely on symptom reduction, to take into account the employees' cognition towards RTW and to include the workplace environment. Based on these elements, a stepped-care approach was developed. The aim of this paper is to present the study design of a randomized controlled trial (RESTART), evaluating the effectiveness of the stepped-care approach on lasting RTW and the implementation process. Methods: RESTART is a randomized controlled trial with a 2 × 2 factorial design and a follow-up of one year. Employees eligible for this study are those who reported sick within 2 to 8 weeks with psychological distress based on a distress screener. Participants will be randomized to a group receiving a tailored e-Health app or usual care, as well as randomized to a group receiving a Participatory Approach (PA; conversational method) in the workplace or usual care. The PA will however only be provided in case of persistent sickness absence at 8 weeks. Measurements take place at baseline, after the e-Health intervention period (3 months), and after the PA intervention period (6 months) and 12 months. Primary outcome is lasting RTW, defined as full RTW in previous or equal work for at least four consecutive weeks. Secondary outcomes are (the severity of) stress-related symptoms, total number of sickness absence days, self-efficacy for RTW and self-reported health. A process evaluation including a realist evaluation will also be conducted. Discussion: Early intervention that focuses on RTW, the cognition towards RTW despite symptoms and involves the workplace environment, plays a crucial role in managing sickness absence among employees with psychological distress. If effective, the stepped-care approach is relevant for employees, employers and society as a whole. Trial Registration: ISRCTN: 90663076. Registered on 5 October 2023. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Cancer cases are rising globally, with a noticeable rise in younger adults. Screening and early detection are effective in decreasing mortality. Workplaces can play a role in promoting cancer screening uptake. This systematic review investigated the effectiveness of workplace breast, lung, colorectal, and cervical cancer screening interventions, and the factors impacting their effectiveness. Methodology: Six databases (Embase, Medline, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Scopus) were searched, and cancer screening promotion and cancer screening uptake was analysed using effect direction plots. Magnitude of effectiveness (i.e., change in knowledge or screening rate) was also evaluated. Results: In total, 13,426 articles were identified. After screening and applying the eligibility criteria, 21 articles were included in the analysis. A positive effect direction was seen for all workplace cancer screening promotion interventions. Magnitude of effectiveness for cancer screening promotion interventions resulted in a > 30% change in knowledge or screening uptake in 4/7 of breast cancer, in 3/4 of cervical cancer and 1/3 colorectal cancer screening promotion interventions. For workplace cancer screening uptake interventions, a positive effect direction was observed for the majority (18/22). Cancer screening uptake interventions showed a > 30% change in magnitude of screening rate in 4/7 breast cancer, 5/10 colorectal cancer and in 1/5 cervical cancer workplace interventions. No studies for lung cancer were eligible. Factors positively influencing effectiveness included an interest in health and previous healthcare use, while fear of cancer and embarrassment of screening negatively influenced effectiveness. Conclusion: Workplace cancer screening promotion and uptake interventions can effectively improve cancer screening knowledge and increase uptake of screening tests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Common mental health problems, such as stress, anxiety and depression, are highly prevalent among workers and often lead to long-term absenteeism and work disability. Effective elements found in previous researched interventions were to explicitly focus on return to work (RTW) and not solely on symptom reduction, to take into account the employees’ cognition towards RTW and to include the workplace environment. Based on these elements, a stepped-care approach was developed. The aim of this paper is to present the study design of a randomized controlled trial (RESTART), evaluating the effectiveness of the stepped-care approach on lasting RTW and the implementation process. Methods RESTART is a randomized controlled trial with a 2 × 2 factorial design and a follow-up of one year. Employees eligible for this study are those who reported sick within 2 to 8 weeks with psychological distress based on a distress screener. Participants will be randomized to a group receiving a tailored e-Health app or usual care, as well as randomized to a group receiving a Participatory Approach (PA; conversational method) in the workplace or usual care. The PA will however only be provided in case of persistent sickness absence at 8 weeks. Measurements take place at baseline, after the e-Health intervention period (3 months), and after the PA intervention period (6 months) and 12 months. Primary outcome is lasting RTW, defined as full RTW in previous or equal work for at least four consecutive weeks. Secondary outcomes are (the severity of) stress-related symptoms, total number of sickness absence days, self-efficacy for RTW and self-reported health. A process evaluation including a realist evaluation will also be conducted. Discussion Early intervention that focuses on RTW, the cognition towards RTW despite symptoms and involves the workplace environment, plays a crucial role in managing sickness absence among employees with psychological distress. If effective, the stepped-care approach is relevant for employees, employers and society as a whole. Trial Registration ISRCTN: 90663076. Registered on 5 October 2023.

Employees with mental illness are often the first to be unable to cope with increasingly complex psychosocial work demands. But people without mental illness can also suffer from, for example, high workload. This study compares a short coaching to stabilize work ability for employees with and without mental illness regarding coaching topics, effects on work-related resources, goal attainment, and unwanted events. Individual coaching of three sessions (problem exploration by behavior analysis, practice of new behavior, reflection) was conducted with employees from different professional fields. A medical history was taken to determine whether participants are affected by a mental disorder. All coaching was conducted by the same behavior therapist in training (L.P.W.) under the supervision of an experienced behavior therapist (B.M.). Two hundred and three coachings with three sessions were completed. In total, 103 participants did not have a mental illness (51%), and 100 participants reported a mental disorder (49%). The coaching participants with mental illness had lower initial levels of work-related capacities (more severe impairments) and coping behavior as compared to the participants without mental illness. In the pre–post comparisons, both groups achieved significant improvements in work-related coping after the coaching. There were no differences in goal attainment between both groups. While participants without mental illness reported more unwanted events in parallel to the coaching (30% reported negative developments in life), participants with mental illness reported coaching-related unwanted events (20% felt to be dependent on the coach). Coaching with an individual focus on one topic can improve work-related resources in participants with and without mental disorders. Since participants with and without mental illness experience different unwanted events in coaching, psychotherapeutic expertise is needed in order to set the right focus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent data suggest that only about one-third of employees thrive at work, while most are disengaged. This lack of employee productivity costs U.S. companies billions of dollars annually. Consequently, there is great interest in workplace interventions designed to increase employee performance and engagement. Strengths interventions are one such approach because there is evidence that when employees can identify, use, and develop their strengths at work, it is associated with a range of desirable outcomes. Still, there is a need for experimental research that facilitates causal analysis and the development of reliable strengths interventions that can be applied in organizations. Two longitudinal studies examined the impact of different strengths interventions. The first study tested a 2-week intervention measuring the impact on strengths use, job performance, and flourishing at work. Only job performance improved significantly over time. The second study deployed a 4-week intervention measuring the impact on strengths use, job performance, organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), and engagement, with significant increases in all variables over time. Post hoc analyses indicated that results might have been influenced by the extent to which strengths use changed. If strengths use declined, there were no significant outcomes. However, when strengths use increased, there was a significant improvement in job performance with a large effect size and OCB and engagement with very large effect sizes. These findings suggest strengths interventions can lead to favorable workplace outcomes, though levels of strengths use might impact results. Limitations and future areas of research are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives Workplace psychosocial risk factors, including low autonomy and high demands, have negative consequences for employee mental health and wellbeing. There is a need to support employees experiencing mental health and well-being problems in these jobs. This scoping review aims to describe group-level workplace interventions and their approaches to improving the mental health and well-being of employees in office-based, low autonomy, and high demands jobs. Methods Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, a search was conducted across 4 databases (Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ASSIA). We explored studies presenting group-level interventions, mode of implementation, facilitators and barriers, and intervention effectiveness. The search was restricted to include office-based, low autonomy, and high-demands jobs. Primary outcome of interest was mental health and secondary outcomes were work-related and other well-being outcomes. Results Group-level workplace interventions include an array of organizational, relational, and individual components. Almost all included a training session or workshop for intervention delivery. Several had manuals but theories of change were rare. Most workplace interventions did not use participatory approaches to involve employees in intervention development, implementation and evaluation, and challenges and facilitators were not commonly reported. Key facilitators were shorter intervention duration, flexible delivery modes, and formalized processes (e.g. manuals). A key barrier was the changeable nature of workplace environments. All studies employing behavioural interventions reported significant improvements in mental health outcomes, while no clear pattern of effectiveness was observed for other outcomes or types of interventions employed. Conclusions Group-based interventions in low-autonomy office settings can be effective but few studies used participatory approaches or conducted process evaluations limiting our knowledge of the determinants for successful group-based workplace interventions. Involving stakeholders in intervention development, implementation, and evaluation is recommended and can be beneficial for better articulation of the acceptability and barriers and facilitators for delivery and engagement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is no standard procedure for a return to work (RTW) rehabilitation program used by practitioners. OBJECTIVE: The aim is to investigate the efficacy of occupational rehabilitation programs for workers with back pain. METHODS: Two independent reviewers screened abstracts and full-text articles in a systematic literature search in three databases conducted in 2023. Subsequently, they extracted data according to the PRISMA Statement. RESULTS: Among the 4,010 articles retrieved, 20 met the inclusion criteria. Data from accepted studies were abstracted into tables relating to the RTW, improvement of pain intensity, quality of life (QOL), and degree of disability in persons with back pain. The risk of bias was assessed using the (SIGN)-criteria. Significant improvements in RTW were shown by a workplace intervention with a physical approach and a multidisciplinary intervention but with a wide range of effect sizes. Five studies showed significant improvements in pain intensity and QOL, six studies observed significant improvements in disability. CONCLUSION: The studies that stated positive effects on work-related data differed between intervention programs and traditional care. A combination of activity, maintenance therapy, stretching, and manual therapy showed promising results in improving RTW. In addition, the relationship and mediation between employer/workplace and employee seems to be an important aspect of RTW. However, pain intensity, disability, and QOL were enhanced with interventions that included a high proportion of physical activity. However, the intervention programs differed widely, leading to the assumption that the treatment effect of the intervention programs is not established, yet. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article informs about the effectiveness of a Goldilocks Work intervention in childcare workers, focusing on increasing high-intensity physical activity and improving work-related health. Topics include the design of the intervention based on the Goldilocks Work principle, the outcomes of the intervention including energy at work and need for recovery, and the need for further research on health-promoting interventions in childcare.

OBJECTIVE: Poor cardiorespiratory fitness and health is common among childcare workers. We designed the `Goldilocks-games` according to the Goldilocks Work principle to provide high-intensity physical activity for childcare workers. We investigated the effectiveness of this Goldilocks Work intervention in increasing occupational high-intensity physical activity and improving work-related health. METHODS: In a two-arm cluster randomized trial, 16 childcare institutions with 142 workers were randomly allocated to either an 8-week Goldilocks Work intervention or a control group. The primary outcome was occupational time in high-intensity physical activity. Secondary outcomes were occupational time in active physical behaviors, heart rate during sleep, pain, physical exhaustion, energy at work, work productivity, and need for recovery. RESULTS: The intervention was successfully delivered and received. Both groups had a low amount of occupational high-intensity physical activity at baseline, and the intervention group reported playing the games 3.1 [standard deviation (SD) 1.5] times/week for a duration of 112.2 (SD 175.0) min/week. However, the intervention did not increase high-intensity physical activity or the secondary outcomes, except for energy at work, measured on a scale from 0–10, increasing 0.65 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08–1.21], and need for recovery, measured on a scale from 1–5, decreasing -0.32 (95% CI, -0.54– -0.09). CONCLUSION: The intervention was successfully delivered and received, but did not increase high-intensity physical activity. The intervention group increased their energy at work and decreased their need for recovery, but not the other health-related outcomes. Further research on how to design and implement health-promoting work environment interventions in childcare is needed.

Background: Chronic conditions, especially pain conditions, have a very significant impact on quality of life and on workplaces. Workplace interventions for chronic conditions are heterogenous, multidimensional, and sometimes poorly evidenced. The Joint Action for Chronic Disease Plus (CHRODIS Plus), including The CHRODIS Plus Workbox on Employment and Chronic Conditions (CPWEC), aimed to combat this, prevent chronic disease and multimorbidity, and influence policy in Europe. However, the supporting evidence behind CHRODIS Plus has not been formally assessed. Methods: A scoping review was carried out; Embase, MEDLINE, and CINAHL were searched for literature related to CHRODIS Plus and pain. Title and abstract and full-text screening were carried out in duplicate and independently. Additionally, CHRODIS Plus authors were approached for unpublished data. Secondly, the search was broadened to CHRODIS Plus and pain-causing conditions. Grey literature was also searched. Appropriateness appraisal was derived from the Trial Forge Guidance. Systematic reviews, on which CPWEC was based, were appraised using the A Measurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 tool. Results: The initial search yielded two results, of which zero were suitable to be included in the scoping review. The second, broader search revealed 14 results; however, none were deemed suitable for inclusion. AMSTAR 2 scores revealed that the three systematic reviews influencing CPWEC were of varying quality (from critically low to moderate). Conclusions: CPWEC is based on heterogenous reviews of varying quality. However, comparable tools are designed using alternative forms of evidence. Further research evaluating the post-implementation efficacy of the tool is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study aimed to assess the feasibility and effects of a simple-to-implement multicomponent intervention to reduce sedentary time of office workers. Methods: Six groups of eight to ten office workers took part in the two-week Leicht Bewegt intervention. Participants completed questionnaires at baseline (T0, n = 52), after 2 weeks (T1, n = 46), and after 5 weeks (T2, n = 38), including subjective sedentary measures and social-cognitive variables based on the health action process approach (HAPA). Objective sedentary measures were obtained using activPAL trackers. Results: The intention to reduce sedentary behavior during work increased significantly from T0 to T1. Participants' objective and subjective sitting time decreased significantly from T0 to T1, corresponding to an average decrease per 8-h-workday of 55 min (d = −.66) or 74 min (d = − 1.14), respectively. This reduction persisted (for subjective sitting time) at T2 (d = − 1.08). Participants indicated a high satisfaction with the intervention. Conclusions: The Leicht Bewegt intervention offers a feasible and effective opportunity to reduce sedentary behavior at work. Randomized controlled trials including longer follow-up time periods are needed to validate its benefits in different workplaces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study explores gender differences in managers' responses to a workplace initiative designed to reduce managers' concerns about schedule control in a large IT company. Drawing on a manager-level dataset collected from a group-randomized trial, results show that the workplace initiative significantly reduced concerns managers had about schedule control. In models stratified by gender, the initiative's effect was statistically significant among male managers, but not among female managers. Male managers tended to have greater concerns about schedule control than female managers, but male managers who received the intervention reduced their level of concern to the level of female managers who did not receive the intervention. These findings improve our understanding of the role of organizational initiatives in changing gendered attitudes toward familysupportive workplace policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Employees with mental illness are often the first to be unable to cope with increasingly complex psychosocial work demands. But people without mental illness can also suffer from, for example, high workload. This study compares a short coaching to stabilize work ability for employees with and without mental illness regarding coaching topics, effects on work-related resources, goal attainment, and unwanted events. Individual coaching of three sessions (problem exploration by behavior analysis, practice of new behavior, reflection) was conducted with employees from different professional fields. A medical history was taken to determine whether participants are affected by a mental disorder. All coaching was conducted by the same behavior therapist in training (L.P.W.) under the supervision of an experienced behavior therapist (B.M.). Two hundred and three coachings with three sessions were completed. In total, 103 participants did not have a mental illness (51%), and 100 participants reported a mental disorder (49%). The coaching participants with mental illness had lower initial levels of work-related capacities (more severe impairments) and coping behavior as compared to the participants without mental illness. In the pre–post comparisons, both groups achieved significant improvements in work-related coping after the coaching. There were no differences in goal attainment between both groups. While participants without mental illness reported more unwanted events in parallel to the coaching (30% reported negative developments in life), participants with mental illness reported coaching-related unwanted events (20% felt to be dependent on the coach). Coaching with an individual focus on one topic can improve work-related resources in participants with and without mental disorders. Since participants with and without mental illness experience different unwanted events in coaching, psychotherapeutic expertise is needed in order to set the right focus.

• Influenza and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination of healthcare workers are pivotal. • Mandatory vaccination alone may elicit hostility among workers. • An active recall intervention can increase vaccination uptake in healthcare workers. Influenza and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are respiratory pathogens which significantly impact healthcare systems. Seasonal vaccination is recommended for all healthcare workers (HCWs) to reduce the risk for both operators and patients. Puglia, a region in Southern Italy, has been enforcing since 2018 a law mandating influenza vaccination in healthcare workers. However, vaccination coverages for this category have always been suboptimal. Our study tests the effectiveness of an active recall intervention on vaccination coverage for influenza and SARS-CoV-2 in the HCWs of a large Apulian hospital (Southern Italy). During the 2023–2024 influenza vaccination season, unvaccinated HCWs of Bari's Policlinico General Hospital were contacted. The e-mail reminded them of a regional law mandating influenza vaccination to all HCWs and offered an appointment for vaccination. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was also offered. In 2022–2023, 43.16 % of HCWs were vaccinated against influenza and 21.87 % against SARS-CoV-2. Coverage changed during the 2023–2024 season to 54.11 % and 13.58 %, respectively. A regression model showed that vaccination uptake's increase was associated with the e-mail reception and with the operator being a physician vs. non-medical personnel. On the contrary, subjects who received the e-mail did not show an increased SARS-CoV-2 vaccination uptake, which was on the contrary influenced by the worker's age, sex, job title, and area of risk. Our soft-mandate intervention was effective in increasing vaccination uptake by HCWs. Communication with a trained specialist was probably useful, and the possibility to access vaccination services with dedicated appointments increased convenience. Mandatory vaccination policies and active recall seem to synergically impact vaccination uptake. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Impact on Psychosocial Safety Climate (PSC): The intervention demonstrated significant positive effects on Psychosocial Safety Climate. • Improvement in Psychosocial Hazards and Working Conditions: The intervention group experienced improvements in work roles, peer support, and employee involvement in planning workplace changes. • Importance of Managerial Training: The study emphasizes the importance of training managers at multiple levels to address psychosocial risks, leading to positive impacts not only at the organizational level but also within individual teams. Psychosocial working conditions contribute significantly to worker health and organizational productivity. This longitudinal quasi-experimental study aims to investigate the impact of a multi-level, manager-led psychosocial risk management intervention on psychosocial safety climate and psychosocial hazards in the workplace. Employees from different teams within one organization were assigned to either an intervention or control group. Managers and employees in the intervention group participated in psychosocial risk assessment training. Intervention group managers also participated in 'leader as a coach' training. Data were collected from employees at baseline (Time 0), six months (Time 1), and 18 months (Time 2) about their Psychosocial Safety Climate (PSC) and psychosocial working conditions. Using multi-level analysis, we found significant intervention effects at T1 (Time x Intervention interactions) on overall PSC and the PSC domains of management support, priority, and organizational participation. Significantly higher mean scores were noted for the intervention (vs. control) group at T1 and T2. For psychosocial factors, significant intervention effects were found at T1 and T2 for work roles and employee involvement in change and at T2 for peer support. All significant effects were in line with expectations, whereby the intervention made improvements in the intervention group vs the control group, and effects were sustained at T2. Building capability simultaneously in department managers, middle managers, and supervisors through training to work on reducing psychosocial risks had positive effects at the macro -organizational level (improved PSC) and meso -team level (reduced psychosocial risks). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Relaxation-related workplace interventions can be counterstrategies for stress due to office work and should be evaluated for success after implementation. This study reports on the evaluation and comparison of 3 relaxation techniques introduced as an intervention for health promotion. A Germany-wide multicenter evaluation of a 3-month relaxation intervention (30 min, once a week) including autogenic training, progressive muscle relaxation (PMR) or Tai Chi was conducted at 14 locations as an intervention study. Anonymous questionnaires ( n  = 244) were used to collect self-reports of perceived stress after the courses. Status before the courses (pre) and after completion (post) were reported at the end of the intervention. All 3 relaxation techniques were able to improve the subjective perception of stress (SPS) score. Autogenic training was reported to improve all singular items with large effects, whereas only 2 items showed change for Tai Chi and none for PMR. Singular items were also influenced by the location of the courses. All 3 methods were able to improve stress-related outcomes in terms of stress perception and individual aspects of stress management. For this specific intervention autogenic training yielded the largest and wide-ranging effects. Tai Chi was also effective, but additional effect due to an associated increase in physical activity were not found. For a workplace intervention PMR could not be recommended based on this study. The literature on workplace interventions is surprisingly scarce, and future studies should focus on the selection of appropriate participants while avoiding potential bias., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Heidi Lehmann is the head of the Management Safety and Health Team at the Social Accident Insurance Institution for the Energy, Textile, Electrical and Media products sectors (BG ETEM). Nelly Otte, Thomas Kraus, André Esser and Julia Krabbe have done other research funded by BG ETEM with unrestricted grants.