13 research outputs found

    Organizational stressors associated with job stress and burnout in correctional officers: a systematic review.

    Get PDF
    BackgroundIn adult correctional facilities, correctional officers (COs) are responsible for the safety and security of the facility in addition to aiding in offender rehabilitation and preventing recidivism. COs experience higher rates of job stress and burnout that stem from organizational stressors, leading to negative outcomes for not only the CO but the organization as well. Effective interventions could aim at targeting organizational stressors in order to reduce these negative outcomes as well as COs' job stress and burnout. This paper fills a gap in the organizational stress literature among COs by systematically reviewing the relationship between organizational stressors and CO stress and burnout in adult correctional facilities. In doing so, the present review identifies areas that organizational interventions can target in order to reduce CO job stress and burnout.MethodsA systematic search of the literature was conducted using Medline, PsycINFO, Criminal Justice Abstracts, and Sociological Abstracts. All retrieved articles were independently screened based on criteria developed a priori. All included articles underwent quality assessment. Organizational stressors were categorized according to Cooper and Marshall's (1976) model of job stress.ResultsThe systematic review yielded 8 studies that met all inclusion and quality assessment criteria. The five categories of organizational stressors among correctional officers are: stressors intrinsic to the job, role in the organization, rewards at work, supervisory relationships at work and the organizational structure and climate. The organizational structure and climate was demonstrated to have the most consistent relationship with CO job stress and burnout.ConclusionsThe results of this review indicate that the organizational structure and climate of correctional institutions has the most consistent relationship with COs' job stress and burnout. Limitations of the studies reviewed include the cross-sectional design and the use of varying measures for organizational stressors. The results of this review indicate that interventions should aim to improve the organizational structure and climate of the correctional facility by improving communication between management and COs

    Interventions to improve work outcomes in work-related PTSD: a systematic review

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Posttraumatic stress disorder acquired at work can be debilitating both for workers and their employers. The disorder can result in increased sick leave, reduced productivity, and even unemployment. Furthermore, workers are especially unlikely to return to their previous place of employment after a traumatic incident at work because of the traumatic memories and symptoms of avoidance that typically accompany the disorder. Therefore, intervening in work-related PTSD becomes especially important in order to get workers back to the workplace.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A systematic literature search was conducted using Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, and Web of Science. The articles were independently screened based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, followed by a quality assessment of all included articles.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The systematic search identified seven articles for inclusion in the review. These consisted of six research articles and one systematic review. The review focused specifically on interventions using real exposure techniques for anxiety disorders in the workplace. In the research articles addressed in the current review, study populations included police officers, public transportation workers, and employees injured at work. The studies examined the effectiveness of EMDR, cognitive-behavioural techniques, and an integrative therapy approach called brief eclectic psychotherapy. Interestingly, 2 of the 6 research articles addressed add-on treatments for workplace PTSD, which were designed to treat workers with PTSD who failed to respond to traditional evidence-based psychotherapy.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Results of the current review suggest that work-related interventions show promise as effective strategies for promoting return to work in employees who acquired PTSD in the workplace. Further research is needed in this area to determine how different occupational groups with specific types of traumatic exposure might respond differently to work-tailored treatments.</p

    Effective lifestyle interventions to improve type II diabetes self-management for those with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder: a systematic review

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The prevalence of type II diabetes among individuals suffering from schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorders is more than double that of the general population. By 2005, North American professional medical associations of Psychiatry, Diabetes, and Endocrinology responded by recommending continuous metabolic monitoring for this population to control complications from obesity and diabetes. However, these recommendations do not identify the types of effective treatment for people with schizophrenia who have type II diabetes. To fill this gap, this systematic evidence review identifies effective lifestyle interventions that enhance quality care in individuals who are suffering from type II diabetes and schizophrenia or other schizoaffective disorders.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A systematic search from Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and ISI Web of Science was conducted. Of the 1810 unique papers that were retrieved, four met the inclusion/exclusion criteria and were analyzed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The results indicate that diabetes education is effective when it incorporates diet and exercise components, while using a design that addresses challenges such as cognition, motivation, and weight gain that may result from antipsychotics.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This paper begins to point to effective interventions that will improve type II diabetes management for people with schizophrenia or other schizoaffective disorders.</p

    Institutional Accountability for Students With Disabilities: A Call for Liaison Committee on Medical Education Action

    No full text
    Medical educators and leaders have called for greater diversity among the physician workforce, including those with disabilities. However, many students with disabilities are precluded from entering and completing medical training due to historically restrictive technical standards and poor internal practices to protect student privacy. This limits the possibilities for growing this part of the workforce and making progress toward the ultimate goal of having a physician workforce that better represents the patients it serves. To achieve diversity among the physician workforce, medical education must create environments that allow students with disabilities to apply to, flourish in, and feel well supported in medical school. Recent additions to Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requirements have helped to catalyze work in the area of disability inclusion by incorporating disability-focused mandates into graduate medical education accreditation standards. However, similar mandates for undergraduate medical education have not yet materialized. In this article, the authors call for the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) to elevate disability as a valued part of medical school diversity in its accreditation standards and to include protections for disabled students. The authors propose that the LCME can take 5 actions to promote institutional accountability toward students with disabilities: (1) define disability as diversity, (2) mandate disability support, (3) protect from conflicts of interest, (4) protect privacy, and (5) verify schools\u27 technical standards comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. By adopting these recommendations, the LCME would send the powerful message that students with disabilities bring welcome expertise and value to the medical community

    Organizational stressors associated with job stress and burnout in correctional officers: a systematic review

    No full text
    Abstract Background In adult correctional facilities, correctional officers (COs) are responsible for the safety and security of the facility in addition to aiding in offender rehabilitation and preventing recidivism. COs experience higher rates of job stress and burnout that stem from organizational stressors, leading to negative outcomes for not only the CO but the organization as well. Effective interventions could aim at targeting organizational stressors in order to reduce these negative outcomes as well as COs’ job stress and burnout. This paper fills a gap in the organizational stress literature among COs by systematically reviewing the relationship between organizational stressors and CO stress and burnout in adult correctional facilities. In doing so, the present review identifies areas that organizational interventions can target in order to reduce CO job stress and burnout. Methods A systematic search of the literature was conducted using Medline, PsycINFO, Criminal Justice Abstracts, and Sociological Abstracts. All retrieved articles were independently screened based on criteria developed a priori. All included articles underwent quality assessment. Organizational stressors were categorized according to Cooper and Marshall’s (1976) model of job stress. Results The systematic review yielded 8 studies that met all inclusion and quality assessment criteria. The five categories of organizational stressors among correctional officers are: stressors intrinsic to the job, role in the organization, rewards at work, supervisory relationships at work and the organizational structure and climate. The organizational structure and climate was demonstrated to have the most consistent relationship with CO job stress and burnout. Conclusions The results of this review indicate that the organizational structure and climate of correctional institutions has the most consistent relationship with COs’ job stress and burnout. Limitations of the studies reviewed include the cross-sectional design and the use of varying measures for organizational stressors. The results of this review indicate that interventions should aim to improve the organizational structure and climate of the correctional facility by improving communication between management and COs.</p

    Organizational stressors associated with job stress and burnout in correctional officers: a systematic review

    No full text
    Abstract Background In adult correctional facilities, correctional officers (COs) are responsible for the safety and security of the facility in addition to aiding in offender rehabilitation and preventing recidivism. COs experience higher rates of job stress and burnout that stem from organizational stressors, leading to negative outcomes for not only the CO but the organization as well. Effective interventions could aim at targeting organizational stressors in order to reduce these negative outcomes as well as COs’ job stress and burnout. This paper fills a gap in the organizational stress literature among COs by systematically reviewing the relationship between organizational stressors and CO stress and burnout in adult correctional facilities. In doing so, the present review identifies areas that organizational interventions can target in order to reduce CO job stress and burnout. Methods A systematic search of the literature was conducted using Medline, PsycINFO, Criminal Justice Abstracts, and Sociological Abstracts. All retrieved articles were independently screened based on criteria developed a priori. All included articles underwent quality assessment. Organizational stressors were categorized according to Cooper and Marshall’s (1976) model of job stress. Results The systematic review yielded 8 studies that met all inclusion and quality assessment criteria. The five categories of organizational stressors among correctional officers are: stressors intrinsic to the job, role in the organization, rewards at work, supervisory relationships at work and the organizational structure and climate. The organizational structure and climate was demonstrated to have the most consistent relationship with CO job stress and burnout. Conclusions The results of this review indicate that the organizational structure and climate of correctional institutions has the most consistent relationship with COs’ job stress and burnout. Limitations of the studies reviewed include the cross-sectional design and the use of varying measures for organizational stressors. The results of this review indicate that interventions should aim to improve the organizational structure and climate of the correctional facility by improving communication between management and COs

    Structural Barriers to Student Disability Disclosure in US-Allopathic Medical Schools

    No full text
    INTRODUCTION: Leaders in medical education have expressed a commitment to increase medical student diversity, including those with disabilities. Despite this commitment there exists a large gap in the number of medical students self-reporting disability in anonymous demographic surveys and those willing to disclose and request accommodations at a school level. Structural elements for disclosing and requesting disability accommodations have been identified as a main barrier for students with disabilities in medical education, yet school-level practices for student disclosure at US-MD programs have not been studied. METHODS: In August 2020, a survey seeking to ascertain institutional disability disclosure structure was sent to student affairs deans at LCME fully accredited medical schools. Survey responses were coded according to their alignment with considerations from the AAMC report on disability and analyzed for any associations with the AAMC Organizational Characteristics Database and class size. RESULTS: Disability disclosure structures were collected for 98 of 141 eligible schools (70% response rate). Structures for disability disclosure varied among the 98 respondent schools. Sixty-four (65%) programs maintained a disability disclosure structure in alignment with AAMC considerations; 34 (35%) did not. No statistically significant relationships were identified between disability disclosure structures and AAMC organizational characteristics or class size. DISCUSSION: Thirty-five percent of LCME fully accredited MD program respondents continue to employ structures of disability disclosure that do not align with the considerations offered in the AAMC report. This structural non-alignment has been identified as a major barrier for medical students to accessing accommodations and may disincentivize disability disclosure. Meeting the stated calls for diversity will require schools to consider structural barriers that marginalize students with disabilities and make appropriate adjustments to their services to improve access
    corecore