Prevention of Common Mental Disorders in Employees. Perspectives on Collaboration from Three Health Care Professions

Collaboration among occupational health physicians, primary care physicians and psychotherapists in the prevention and treatment of common mental disorders in employees has been scarcely researched. To identify potential for improvement, these professions were surveyed in Baden-Württemberg (Germany). Four hundred and fifty occupational health physicians, 1000 primary care physicians and 700 resident medical and psychological psychotherapists received a standardized questionnaire about their experiences, attitudes and wishes regarding activities for primary, secondary and tertiary prevention of common mental disorders in employees. The response rate of the questionnaire was 30% (n = 133) among occupational health physicians, 14% (n = 136) among primary care physicians and 27% (n = 186) among psychotherapists. Forty percent of primary care physicians and 33% of psychotherapists had never had contact with an occupational health physician. Psychotherapists indicated more frequent contact with primary care physicians than vice versa (73% and 49%, respectively). Better cooperation and profession-specific training on mental disorders and better knowledge about work-related stress were endorsed. For potentially involved stakeholders, the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration for better prevention and care of employees with common mental disorders is very high. Nevertheless, there is only little collaboration in practice. To establish quality-assured cooperation structures in practice, participants need applicable frameworks on an organizational and legal level

Mental Health Applications for Primary and Secondary Prevention of Common Mental Disorders: Attitudes of German Employees

Background: Web-based and mobile mental health applications for the prevention and treatment of common mental disorders (CMDs) are on the rise. Under certain circumstances they have proved to be effective for a range of conditions (e.g., depression).Objective: There is not sufficient evidence regarding the benefits and barriers especially for mobile phone apps and for programs in the field of primary prevention. Studies on the acceptance of potential users of mental health apps yielded mixed outcomes. In a large survey we investigated the attitudes of employees toward mental health apps and various traditional mental health services. Our main research question in this contribution focuses on the acceptance of apps compared to other measures and the moderating influence of individual characteristics. Methods: The standardized survey was completed by members of an online access panel with different job types. A set of 33 self-developed items, including three questions on e-health, captured the perceived relevance of prevention at the (A) occupational, (B) individual, and (C) societal level. On the basis of an exploratory factor analysis, mean scores for mapping seven (sub-)dimensions were constructed and compared using the Wilcoxon test. The influence of potential predictors was analyzed in linear regression models. Results: The data of 610 respondents were analyzed (response rate 75%). Support from mental health applications was rated significantly less important compared to all other dimensions at the levels (A) to (C). Respondents were more likely to use mental health apps if they felt literate with electronic devices, perceived a high relevance of work-related demands as causal factors for CMDs, stated they would be ashamed of having a CMD, and would be willing to begin psychotherapy if recommended. Discussion and Conclusions: The results confirm the critical attitudes of potential mental health app users found in other studies. Since users with a negative attitude toward e-health might have a higher risk for dropout and non-adherence as well as lower intervention effects, well-designed educational strategies should be carried out beforehand

Working conditions and mental health of migrants and refugees in Europe considering cultural origin– a systematic review

Abstract Background Migrants and refugees/asylum seekers, as a large part of the European work force, are often confronted with unfavorable working conditions in the host country. Main aim of this systematic review was to compare the association of these working conditions with mental health between migrants and refugees/asylum seekers due to their diverse migration experiences and cultural origins, and between different European host countries. Methods Systematic search for eligible primary studies was conducted in three electronic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO and CINAHL) using quantitative study designs written in English, German, French, Italian, Polish, Spanish or Turkish and published from January 1, 2016 to October 27, 2022. Primary health outcomes were diagnosed psychiatric and psychological disorders, suicide and suicide attempts, psychiatric and psychological symptoms, and perceived distress. Secondary health outcomes were more general concepts of mental health such as well-being, life satisfaction and quality of life. Two reviewers independently completed screening, data extraction and the methodological quality assessment of primary studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa-Scale. Descriptive summary of primary studies on working conditions and their relationship with mental health were conducted, comparing migrants and refugees/asylum seekers, migrants and refugees/asylum seekers of different cultural backgrounds (collectivistic and individualistic) and migrants and refugees/asylum seekers living in different host countries. Results Inclusion criteria were met by 19 primary studies. Voluntary migrants are more likely to experience overqualification in the host country than refugees. In all examined host countries, migrants and refugees suffer from unfavorable working conditions, with migrants from collectivistic countries being slightly at risk compared to migrants from individualistic countries. Most unfavorable working conditions are related to poor mental health, regardless of migrant status, cultural origin or host country. Conclusions Although the results should be interpreted with caution due to the small number of studies, it is evident that to maintain both the mental health and labor force of migrants and refugees/asylum seekers, their working conditions in host countries should be controlled and improved. Special attention should be paid to specific subgroups such as migrants from collectivistic societies. Ethics and dissemination This systematic review is excluded from ethical approval because it used previously approved published data from primary studies. Trial registration number CRD42021244840

Smartphone and Instagram use, body dissatisfaction, and eating disorders: investigating the associations using self-report and tracked data

Abstract Background Previous research has linked smartphone and Instagram use to higher body dissatisfaction (BD) as well as eating disorder (ED) symptomatology. However, these studies have typically been limited to using self-report measures for technology use which, as shown by scientific literature, might not be reliable. In the present work, we combine self-reported assessments as well as tracked smartphone and Instagram use. Methods The effective sample comprised N = 119 women (34 with ED diagnosis history) who were queried about BD and ED symptomatology, and who provided the data about their smartphone and Instagram use duration for each day of the previous week. Results The study results show that women with an ED diagnosis history scored higher on both BD as well as ED scales. Although women with an ED diagnosis history had higher smartphone screen time, there were no statistically significant differences in Instagram screen time. Tracked smartphone use duration was positively correlated with both BD and ED symptomatology, but the role of Instagram use needs to be further elucidated. Conclusions The results of this study show that while BD and ED symptomatology are correlated with smartphone use, it may be that Instagram use is not the main contributor to that relationship

Effectiveness of psychotherapeutic consultation in the workplace: a controlled observational trial

Abstract Background This study compares the effectiveness of psychotherapeutic consultation in the workplace (PSIW) with psychotherapeutic outpatient care (PSOC) in Germany. Methods Work ability (WAI), quality of life (SF-12), clinical symptoms (PHQ) and work-related stress (MBI, IS) were assessed in 367 patients seeking mental health care via two routes (PSIW n = 174; PSOC n = 193) before consultation and 12 weeks later. Changes in outcome variables were assessed using covariance analysis with repeated measures (ANCOVA) with sociodemographic variables (propensity score method), therapy dose, setting and symptom severity as covariates. Results The PSIW and PSOC groups included 122 and 66 men respectively. There were 102 first-time users of mental healthcare in the PSIW group and 83 in the PSOC group. There were group differences in outcome variables at baseline (p < 0.05); PSIW patients were less impaired overall. There were no group difference in sociodemographic variables, number of sessions within the offer or symptom severity. There was no main effect of group on outcome variables and no group*time interaction. Work-related stress indicators did not change during the intervention, but work ability improved in both groups (F = 10.149, p = 0.002; baseline M = 27.2, SD = 8.85); follow-up M = 28.6, SD = 9.02), as did perceived mental health (SF-12 MCS), depression (PHQ-9) and anxiety (PHQ-7). Effect sizes were between η2 = 0.028 and η2 = 0.040. Conclusions Psychotherapeutic consultation is similarly effective in improving patients’ functional and clinical status whether delivered in the workplace or in an outpatient clinic. Offering mental health services in the workplace makes it easier to reach patients at an earlier stage in their illness and thus enables provision of early and effective mental health care. Trial registration DRKS00003184 , retrospectively registered 13 January 2012

The Role of Work-Related Factors in the Development of Psychological Distress and Associated Mental Disorders: Differential Views of Human Resource Managers, Occupational Physicians, Primary Care Physicians and Psychotherapists in Germany

Objectives: This study analyses the perceived relevance of stress-dimensions in work-settings from the differential views of Human Resource Managers (HRM), Occupational Physicians (OP), Primary Care Physicians (PCP) and Psychotherapists (PT) in Germany. Methods: Cross-sectional study design, using a self-report questionnaire. Descriptive measures and explorative bivariate methods were applied for group-comparisons. Results are presented as rankings of perceived importance and as polarity profiles of contrasting views. Results: N = 627 participants completed the questionnaires (HRM: n = 172; OP: n = 133; PCP: n = 136; PT: n = 186). The stress dimensions with the highest mean ratings across all four professions were: ‘social relationships in the work place’ (M = 3.55, SD = 0.62) and ‘superiors´ leadership style’ (M = 3.54, SD = 0.64). Mean ratings of perceived relevance of stress dimensions differed most between HRM and the three medical professions. Conclusions: The perceived importance of work-related stress-dimensions seems to be higher in the medical disciplines (OP, PCP, PT) than in the group from the management sector (HRM). However, no fundamental disagreement on the role of work-related stress-dimensions seems to hinder e.g., intensified efforts of cooperation across sectors in tackling the “stress-pandemic” and improving the (mental) health of employees

Improving Access to Mental Health Care by Delivering Psychotherapeutic Care in the Workplace: A Cross-Sectional Exploratory Trial.

Common mental disorders like mood and anxiety disorders and somatoform disorders have high costs, yet under-treatment is still frequent. Many people with common mental disorders are employed, so the workplace is potentially a suitable context in which to provide early treatment. Our study investigates whether a change of setting (workplace versus standard care) improves access to treatment for common mental disorders.Conditional latent profile analysis was applied to identify user profiles for work ability (WAI), clinical symptoms like depression (patient health questionnaire depression, PHQ-9), health-related quality of life (QoL, SF-12), and work-related stress (Maslach Burnout Inventory, irritation scale). Patients were recruited consecutively, via psychotherapeutic consultation in the workplace (n = 174) or psychotherapeutic consultation in outpatient care (n = 193).We identified four user profiles in our model: 'severe' (n = 99), 'moderate I-low QoL' (n = 88), 'moderate II-low work ability' (n = 83), and 'at risk' (n = 97). The 'at risk' profile encompassed individuals with reduced work ability (36.0, 34.73 to 37.37), only mild clinical symptoms (PHQ-9 5.7, 4.92 to 6.53), no signs of work-related stress and good quality of life. A higher proportion of the 'at risk' group than of the 'severe' group sought help via the psychotherapeutic consultation in the workplace (OR 0.287, P < 0.01); this effect remained after controlling for gender.Offering secondary mental health care in the workplace is feasible and accepted by users. Offering treatment in the workplace as an alternative to standard outpatient settings is a viable strategy for improving access to treatment for common mental disorders