Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (14) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (14)
Language
- English (14) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (14) (remove)
Keywords
- Workplace (5)
- Anxiety (4)
- Sick leave (4)
- Mental disorders (3)
- Work ability (3)
- mental health (3)
- sickness absence (3)
- workplace (3)
- Mental health (2)
- Work-anxiety (2)
Institute
Work-anxieties are costly and need early intervention. The perception of being able to cope with work is a basic requirement for work ability. This randomized controlled trial investigates whether a cognitive behavioural, work-anxiety-coping group (WAG) intervention leads to better work-coping perception than an unspecific recreational group (RG). Heterogeneous people in medical rehabilitation, who were due to return to work, were interviewed concerning their work-anxieties, and either randomly assigned to a WAG (n=85) or a RG (n=95). The participants (with an average of 50years old [range 23-64]; 51% women; 70% workers or employees, 25% academics, 5% unskilled) followed the group intervention for four or six sessions. The perceived work-coping was assessed by self-rating (Inventory for Job-Coping and Return Intention JoCoRi) after each group session. Although participants had a slight temporary decrease in work-coping after group session two (from M-1=2.47 to M-2=2.28, d(Cohen)=-.22), the WAG led to the improvement of perceived work-coping over the intervention course (from M-1=2.47 to M-6=2.65, d(Cohen)=.18). In contrast, participants from the RG reported lower work-coping after six group sessions (from M-1=2.26 to M-6=2.02, d(Cohen)=-.18). It is considered that people with work-anxieties need training in work-coping. By focusing on recreation only, this may lead to deterioration of work-coping. Indeed, intervention designers should be aware of temporary deterioration (side effects) when confronting participants with work-coping.
BACKGROUND: Work capacity demands are a concept to describe which psychological capacities are required in a job. Assessing psychological work capacity demands is of specific importance when mental health problems at work endanger work ability. Exploring psychological work capacity demands is the basis for mental hazard analysis or rehabilitative action, e.g. in terms of work adjustment. OBJECTIVE: This is the first study investigating psychological work capacity demands in rehabilitation patients with and without mental disorders. METHODS: A structured interview on psychological work capacity demands (Mini-ICF-Work; Muschalla, 2015; Linden et al., 2015) was done with 166 rehabilitation patients of working age. All interviews were done by a state-licensed socio-medically trained psychotherapist. Inter-rater-reliability was assessed by determining agreement in independent co-rating in 65 interviews. For discriminant validity purposes, participants filled in the Short Questionnaire for Work Analysis (KFZA, Prumper et al., 1994). RESULTS: In different professional fields, different psychological work capacity demands were of importance. The Mini-ICF-Work capacity dimensions reflect different aspects than the KFZA. Patients with mental disorders were longer on sick leave and had worse work ability prognosis than patients without mental disorders, although both groups reported similar work capacity demands. CONCLUSIONS: Psychological work demands - which are highly relevant for work ability prognosis and work adjustment processes - can be explored and differentiated in terms of psychological capacity demands.
Purpose: Work perception is an important predictor for work ability and, therefore, of interest for rehabilitation. Until now it is unclear to which extent different psychological aspects explain work perception. This study investigates in which way workplace problems on the one hand, and mental health and coping on the other hand, contribute to work perception.
Methods: A heterogeneous sample of 384 persons in working age with and without mental health problems was recruited. Participants gave self-reports on workplace problems, mental health problems, work-coping, work-anxiety, and work perception.
Results: Persons with mental health problems and workplace problems (M + W) perceive the highest degree of work demands, followed by persons with workplace problems but without mental health problems (NM + W). Work-anxiety appeared as the strongest factor explaining perception of high work demands, whereas general mental health problems did not contribute significantly to variance explanation.
Conclusions: Persons with specific mental health problems in terms of work-anxiety may be expected to perceive higher work demands. They may be detected when asking for work perception, e.g., within the frame of return-to-work interventions in rehabilitation, or in occupational health settings by mental hazard analysis.
Background: Physicians and therapists are also consulted to give judgments on working ability. Ability to work cannot simply be derived from the patient’s symptom status but from the illness-related capacity impairments in relation to the work demands. A structured assessment of capacity impairments has been evaluated and applied internationally: the Mini-ICF-APP Social Functioning Scale. It is currently unclear whether a free-text clinical report (i.e., usual clinical practice: clinical exploration according to clinical standards, but without a standardized documentation form, instead a text is written) and a structured capacity assessment correspond to the overall work ability judgment, i.e., the decision whether a patient is “fit for work” or “unfit for work.” Objectives: This investigation assessed, for the first time, whether usual clinical judgment and the additional structured capacity rating support the work ability decision. Methods: A total of 100 medical reports from patients in a psychotherapy hospital were excerpted for psychopathological symptoms and capacity disorders using a checklist. Additionally, a structured assessment of capacity disorders was documented on the Mini-ICF-APP rating for all patients. Results: In the free-text clinical medical report, endurance, flexibility, and contacts to others were the things mainly reported as impaired. This was similar to the structured Mini-ICF-APP rating. However, other capacity impairments were also reported in the Mini-ICF-APP, i.e., adherence to rules and regulations, planning and structuring, assertiveness, and group integration. When the free-text clinical report and the structured Mini-ICF-APP rating were compared, there was a higher rate of stated impairments covering all capacity dimensions in the Mini-ICF-APP rating. Conclusions: The free-text report in the medical report shows the differences between patients who are fit for work and those who are not, and thus speak for the validity of work ability decisions. However, optimization is possible in terms of depth and differentiation of capacity impairment description by adhering to the standard set by the Mini-ICF-APP.