Search

Background: Mental health in the workplace is a growing concern for enterprises and policy makers. MENTUPP is a multi-level mental health intervention implemented in small and medium size enterprises from three work sectors in nine countries. This pilot study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, delivery, and instruments for the MENTUPP intervention to inform the planning of a clustered randomized controlled trial., Methods: We administered items from the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire and the Danish Work Environment Cohort Study measuring psychosocial workplace factors. The questionnaire was answered by 382 participants at baseline, of which 98 participants also answered after six months at follow-up. We calculated mean scores of 19 psychosocial factors at baseline and conducted repeated measures ANOVAs to assess differences in eight psychosocial factors at follow-up. We also examined whether outcomes differed between work sectors and job positions at follow-up., Results: The construction sector and workers with no or a lower leadership role reported more negative working environment factors at baseline. We observed a statistically significant decline in social support from colleagues and social community at work, and a marginally significant decline in justice at work. For the rest of the constructs, we did not observe statistically significant changes., Conclusions: We found significant differences in psychosocial work environment factors among work sectors and job positions at baseline. Contrary to our hypotheses, three psychosocial work environment factors decreased at follow-up. Possible explanations are the utilization of specific psychosocial factors as resources to cope with psychosocial stressors, high participant expectations that were not met by the intervention, insufficient time for structural changes, or the intervention prompting critical evaluations of the work environment. These findings will inform the design and implementation of the forthcoming clustered randomized controlled trial, where they will also be further investigated to validate their significance., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: Multicomponent interventions are recommendable to achieve the greatest mental health benefits, but are difficult to evaluate due to their complexity. Defining long-term outcomes, arising from a Theory of Change (ToC) and testing them in a pilot phase, is a useful approach to plan a comprehensive and meaningful evaluation later on. This article reports on the pilot results of an outcome evaluation of a complex mental health intervention and examines whether appropriate evaluation measures and indicators have been selected ahead of a clustered randomised control trial (cRCT)., Methods: The MENTUPP pilot is an evidence-based intervention for Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) active in three work sectors and nine countries. Based on our ToC, we selected the MENTUPP long-term outcomes, which are reported in this article, are measured with seven validated scales assessing mental wellbeing, burnout, depression, anxiety, stigma towards depression and anxiety, absenteeism and presenteeism. The pilot MENTUPP intervention assessment took place at baseline and at 6 months follow-up., Results: In total, 25 SMEs were recruited in the MENTUPP pilot and 346 participants completed the validated scales at baseline and 96 at follow-up. Three long-term outcomes significantly improved at follow-up (p < 0.05): mental wellbeing, symptoms of anxiety, and personal stigmatising attitudes towards depression and anxiety., Conclusions: The results of this outcome evaluation suggest that MENTUPP has the potential to strengthen employees' wellbeing and decrease anxiety symptoms and stigmatising attitudes. Additionally, this study demonstrates the utility of conducting pilot workplace interventions to assess whether appropriate measures and indicators have been selected. Based on the results, the intervention and the evaluation strategy have been optimised., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Mental health problems are common in the working population and represent a growing concern internationally, with potential impacts on workers, organisations, workplace health and compensation authorities, labour markets and social policies. Workplace interventions that create workplaces supportive of mental health, promote mental health awareness, destigmatise mental illness and support those with mental disorders are likely to improve health and economical outcomes for employees and organisations. Identifying factors associated with successful implementation of these interventions can improve intervention quality and evaluation, and facilitate the uptake and expansion. Therefore, we aim to review research reporting on the implementation of mental health promotion interventions delivered in workplace settings, in order to increase understanding of factors influencing successful delivery., Methods and Analysis: A scoping review will be conducted incorporating a stepwise methodology to identify relevant literature reviews, primary research and grey literature. This review is registered with Research Registry (reviewregistry897). One reviewer will conduct the search to identify English language studies in the following electronic databases from 2008 through to July 1, 2020: Scopus, PROSPERO, Health Technology Assessments, PubMed, Campbell Collaboration, Joanna Briggs Library, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL and Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH). Reference searching, Google Scholar, Grey Matters, IOSH and expert contacts will be used to identify grey literature. Two reviewers will screen title and abstracts, aiming for 95% agreement, and then independently screen full texts for inclusion. Two reviewers will assess methodological quality of included studies using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool and extract and synthesize data in line with the RE-AIM framework, Nielson and Randall's model of organisational-level interventions and Moore's sustainability criteria, if the data allows. We will recruit and consult with international experts in the field to ensure engagement, reach and relevance of the main findings., Discussion: This will be the first systematic scoping review to identify and synthesise evidence of barriers and facilitators to implementing mental health promotion interventions in workplace settings. Our results will inform future evaluation studies and randomised controlled trials and highlight gaps in the evidence base., Systematic Review Registration: Research Registry ( reviewregistry897 ).

Just over 25 years have passed since the major sociopolitical changes in central and eastern Europe; our aim was to map and analyse the development of mental health-care practice for people with severe mental illnesses in this region since then. A scoping review was complemented by an expert survey in 24 countries. Mental health-care practice in the region differs greatly across as well as within individual countries. National policies often exist but reforms remain mostly in the realm of aspiration. Services are predominantly based in psychiatric hospitals. Decision making on resource allocation is not transparent, and full economic evaluations of complex interventions and rigorous epidemiological studies are lacking. Stigma seems to be higher than in other European countries, but consideration of human rights and user involvement are increasing. The region has seen respectable development, which happened because of grassroots initiatives supported by international organisations, rather than by systematic implementation of government policies., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Increasing interest has centered on the psychotherapeutic working alliance as a means of understanding clinical change in digital mental health interventions in recent years. However, little is understood about how and to what extent a digital mental health program can have an impact on the working alliance and clinical outcomes in a blended (therapist plus digital program) cognitive behavioral therapy (bCBT) intervention for depression. Objective: This study aimed to test the difference in working alliance scores between bCBT and treatment as usual (TAU), examine the association between working alliance and depression severity scores in both arms, and test for an interaction between system usability and working alliance with regard to the association between working alliance and depression scores in bCBT at 3-month assessments. Methods: We conducted a secondary data analysis of the E-COMPARED (European Comparative Effectiveness Research on Blended Depression Treatment versus Treatment-as-usual) trial, which compared bCBT with TAU across 9 European countries. Data were collected in primary care and specialized services between April 2015 and December 2017. Eligible participants aged 18 years or older and diagnosed with major depressive disorder were randomized to either bCBT (n=476) or TAU (n=467). bCBT consisted of 6-20 sessions of bCBT (involving face-to-face sessions with a therapist and an internet-based program). TAU consisted of usual care for depression. The main outcomes were scores of the working alliance (Working Alliance Inventory-Short Revised–Client [WAI-SR-C]) and depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9]) at 3 months after randomization. Other variables included system usability scores (System Usability Scale-Client [SUS-C]) at 3 months and baseline demographic information. Data from baseline and 3-month assessments were analyzed using linear regression models that adjusted for a set of baseline variables. Results: Of the 945 included participants, 644 (68.2%) were female, and the mean age was 38.96 years (IQR 38). bCBT was associated with higher composite WAI-SR-C scores compared to TAU (B =5.67, 95% CI 4.48-6.86). There was an inverse association between WAI-SR-C and PHQ-9 in bCBT (B =−0.12, 95% CI −0.17 to −0.06) and TAU (B =−0.06, 95% CI −0.11 to −0.02), in which as WAI-SR-C scores increased, PHQ-9 scores decreased. Finally, there was a significant interaction between SUS-C and WAI-SR-C with regard to an inverse association between higher WAI-SR-C scores and lower PHQ-9 scores in bCBT (b =−0.030, 95% CI −0.05 to −0.01; P =.005). Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first study to show that bCBT may enhance the client working alliance when compared to evidence-based routine care for depression that services reported offering. The working alliance in bCBT was also associated with clinical improvements that appear to be enhanced by good program usability. Our findings add further weight to the view that the addition of internet-delivered CBT to face-to-face CBT may positively augment experiences of the working alliance. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02542891, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02542891; German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00006866, https://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00006866; Netherlands Trials Register NTR4962, https://www.onderzoekmetmensen.nl/en/trial/25452; ClinicalTrials.Gov NCT02389660, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02389660; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02361684, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02361684; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02449447, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02449447; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02410616, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02410616; ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN12388725, https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12388725?q=ISRCTN12388725&filters=&sort=&offset=1&totalResults=1&page=1&pageSize=10; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02796573, https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02796573 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): RR2-10.1186/s13063-016-1511-1 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An expert survey was designed to support the development of a workplace-based multi-country intervention tackling depression, anxiety, and mental illness-related stigma in small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Academic experts and representatives of SME organisations, specific sector organisations, labour or advocacy groups, and occupational health organisations, were contacted across eight European countries and Australia. The survey comprised closed and open text questions to assess expert opinion about interventions for employees with mental health difficulties, interventions supporting their managers, and anti-stigma interventions. The survey was available in six languages. The online platform Qualtrics was used for data collection. Quantitative data was analysed through descriptive statistics and qualitative data was analysed through thematic analysis. Sixty-five of 146 experts responded, representing a 42% response rate. Results showed only 26.2% of experts agreed that employees could speak openly about mental health issues, and 81.5% of experts indicated a large or medium unmet need for support for employees with mental health issues. Psychoeducational materials, face-to-face workshops and interventions based on cognitive behavioural therapy were ranked most likely to be taken up by employees. Experts rated as most useful for managers' guidelines on how to act if an employee has mental health issues (67.7%). The greatest number of experts indicated workshops of people with lived experience of mental illness (80.0%) and awareness campaigns (78.5%) were most required to tackle stigma. Responses were consistent between experts from different countries and areas of expertise. Experts in this multinational survey assessed that interventions supporting mental health in the workplace and tackling stigma are greatly needed. A multicomponent intervention with a wide range of materials and tools is supported. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This document is a correction notice for an article titled "Outcome assessment of a complex mental health intervention in the workplace. Results from the MENTUPP pilot study." The correction states that in the original version of the article, the given and family names of all authors were interchanged. The correct names of the authors are provided in the correction notice. The original article has been corrected. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims and institutional affiliations. [Extracted from the article]