scholarly journals Prevention of sick leave at the workplace: design of a cluster-randomized controlled trial of a problem-solving intervention among employees with common mental disorders

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Björk Brämberg ◽  
B. Arapovic-Johansson ◽  
U. Bültmann ◽  
P. Svedberg ◽  
G. Bergström

Abstract Background Common mental disorders are highly prevalent in the working population, affecting about 1 in 5 persons in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. About 30% of those affected have a first period of sick leave. Despite several attempts to reduce the risk of sick leave among employees with common mental disorders, there is a lack of knowledge about effective, preventive interventions which aim to reduce such risks. This protocol describes the design of a study to evaluate the effectiveness of a problem-solving intervention delivered by first-line managers to employees with common mental disorders on the prevention of sick leave during the 12-month follow-up. Methods/design The study applies a two-armed cluster-randomized trial design of a problem-solving intervention conducted in private-sector companies. First-line managers are randomized into intervention- or control groups by computer-generated random numbers, allocation ratio 1:1. Employees are eligible if at risk for future sick leave due to common mental disorders. These are identified by self-reported psychological health measured by the General Health Questionnaire 12-item, cut-off ≥3, or a positive answer to risk of sick leave. The intervention is based on problem-solving principles. It involves the training of the first-line managers who then deliver the intervention to employees identified at risk of sick leave. First-line managers in the control group receives a lecture. Primary outcome is number of registered days of sick leave due to common mental disorders during the 12-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes are general health, psychological symptoms, work performance, work ability and psychosocial work environment. A process evaluation will examine the intervention’s reach, fidelity, dose delivered, dose received, satisfaction and context. Research assistants managing the screening procedure, outcome assessors and employees are blinded to randomization and allocation. Discussion The study includes analyses of the intervention’s effectiveness and an alongside process evaluation. Methodological strengths and limitations, for example the risk of selection bias, attrition and risk of contamination are discussed. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04975750 Date of registration: 08/16/2021.

2020 ◽  
Vol 77 (7) ◽  
pp. 454-461 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marijke Keus van de Poll ◽  
Lotta Nybergh ◽  
Caroline Lornudd ◽  
Jan Hagberg ◽  
Lennart Bodin ◽  
...  

ObjectivesCommon mental disorders (CMDs) are among the main causes of sickness absence and can lead to suffering and high costs for individuals, employers and the society. The occupational health service (OHS) can offer work-directed interventions to support employers and employees. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect on sickness absence and health of a work-directed intervention given by the OHS to employees with CMDs or stress-related symptoms.MethodsRandomisation was conducted at the OHS consultant level and each consultant was allocated into either giving a brief problem-solving intervention (PSI) or care as usual (CAU). The study group consisted of 100 employees with stress symptoms or CMDs. PSI was highly structured and used a participatory approach, involving both the employee and the employee’s manager. CAU was also work-directed but not based on the same theoretical concepts as PSI. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, at 6 and at 12 months. Primary outcome was registered sickness absence during the 1-year follow-up period. Among the secondary outcomes were self-registered sickness absence, return to work (RTW) and mental health.ResultsA statistical interaction for group × time was found on the primary outcome (p=0.033) and PSI had almost 15 days less sickness absence during follow-up compared with CAU. Concerning the secondary outcomes, PSI showed an earlier partial RTW and the mental health improved in both groups without significant group differences.ConclusionPSI was effective in reducing sickness absence which was the primary outcome in this study.


2014 ◽  
Vol 100 ◽  
pp. 123-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iris Arends ◽  
Ute Bültmann ◽  
Karina Nielsen ◽  
Willem van Rhenen ◽  
Michiel R. de Boer ◽  
...  

2006 ◽  
Vol 189 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tony Kendrick ◽  
Lucy Simons ◽  
Laurence Mynors-Wallis ◽  
Alastair Gray ◽  
Judith Lathlean ◽  
...  

BackgroundUK general practitioners (GPs) refer patients with common mental disorders to community mental health nurses.AimsTo determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of this practice.MethodRandomised trial with three arms: usual GP care, generic mental health nurse care, and care from nurses trained in problem-solving treatment; 98 GPs in 62 practices referred 247 adult patients with new episodes of anxiety, depression and life difficulties, to 37 nurses.ResultsThere were 212 (86%) and 190 (77%) patients followed up at 8 and 26 weeks respectively. No significant differences between groups were found in effectiveness at either point. Mean differences in Clinical Interview Schedule – Revised scores at 26 weeks compared with GP care were –1.4 (95% Cl –5.5 to 2.8) for generic nurse care, and 1.1 (–2.9 to 5.1) for nurse problem-solving. Satisfaction was significantly higher in both nurse-treated groups. Mean extra costs per patient were £283 (95% Cl 154–411) for generic nurse care, and £315 (183–481) for nurse problem-solving treatment.ConclusionsGPs should not refer unselected patients with common mental disorders to specialist nurses. Problem-solving should be reserved for patients who have not responded to initial GP care.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zulfa Abrahams ◽  
Crick Lund

Abstract Background Common mental disorders (CMDs) such as depression and anxiety are highly prevalent during the perinatal period, and are associated with poverty, food insecurity and domestic violence. We used data collected from perinatal women at two time-points during the COVID-19 pandemic to test the hypotheses that (1) socio-economic adversities at baseline would be associated with higher CMD prevalence at follow-up and (2) worse mental health at baseline would be associated with higher food insecurity prevalence at follow-up. Methods Telephonic interviews were conducted with perinatal women attending healthcare facilities in Cape Town, South Africa. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to model the associations of baseline risk factors with the prevalence of household food insecurity and CMD at 3 months follow-up. Results At baseline 859 women were recruited, of whom 217 (25%) were pregnant, 106 (12%) had probable CMD, and 375 (44%) were severely food insecure. At follow-up (n=634), 22 (4%) were still pregnant, 44 (7%) had probable CMD, and 207 (33%) were severely food insecure. In the multivariable regression model, after controlling for confounders, the odds of being food insecure at follow-up were greater in women who were unemployed [OR=2.05 (1.46-2.87); p<0.001] or had probable CMD [OR=2.37 (1.35-4.18); p=0.003] at baseline; and the odds of probable CMD at follow-up were greater in women with psychological distress [OR=2.81 (1.47-5.39); p=0.002] and abuse [OR=2.47 (1.47-4.39); p=0.007] at baseline. Conclusions This study highlights the complex bidirectional relationship between mental health and socioeconomic adversity among perinatal women during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document