[Implementation of psychotherapeutic consultation at work (PT-A): expectations, announcement, and use : Results of the friaa-study]. / Implementierung einer psychotherapeutischen Sprechstunde am Arbeitsplatz (PT-A): Erwartungen, Bekanntmachung und Nutzung : Ergebnisse der friaa-Studie.

INTRODUCTION: Psychotherapeutic consultation at work (PT-A) offers easily accessible, short-term support for employees experiencing psychological stress. The aim of the study was to evaluate aspects of the implementation regarding announcement, access, and use of the PT­A. METHODS: The study was conducted as part of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) called "Early Intervention in the Workplace". Forty-six company actors answered a questionnaire about how the companies announced the PT­A to their employees, the barriers in the announcement of the PT­A, and the beneficial factors of using the PT­A. The access routes of the 550 participating employees were used from the baseline data of the RCT. Seven company actors were qualitatively interviewed about their expectations of the PT­A and 22 participants of the RCT were interviewed about their experiences accessing and using the PT­A. RESULTS: The company actors hoped that the PT­A would have an impact on all levels of prevention. Most companies announced the PT­A centrally (e.g., flyers and intranet) as well as through individual recommendations (e.g., through the company's social counselling and occupational health professionals). Employees appreciated the opportunity to participate anonymously in the central announcement. Advantages of the supportive access were seen in the accessibility of employees without treatment experience, employees with high levels of suffering, and employees who have not yet recognized their own need for treatment. DISCUSSION: The results suggest that it is useful to announce the PT­A centrally to all employees but also to recommend it personally to affected employees. By using both methods, different PT­A target groups can be reached and the advantages of anonymous participation are retained.

[Mental health in the workplace - What role do socioeconomic-, gender-, and migration-related inequalities play?] / Psychische Gesundheit am Arbeitsplatz ­ Welche Rolle spielen sozioökonomische, geschlechterspezifische und migrationsbedingte Ungleichheiten?

BACKGROUND: Risk factors for mental health can be found in socio-economic-, gender- and migration-specific inequalities. These factors and the extent of depression, anxiety, and somatization among employees were examined in the present study. METHODS: As part of the Early Intervention in the Workplace Study (friaa), mentally burdened employees at five locations in Germany were surveyed on socio-demographic-, work-, migration-, and health-related content. Regression analyses were used to examine the relationship between these factors and depression (Patient-Health-Questionnaire-9, PHQ-9), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-2, GAD-2), and somatization (Somatic Symptom Scale-8, SSS-8) in the entire sample and in people with migration background (MB). For the latter, acculturation (Frankfurt Acculturation Scale, FRACC) and the perception of burden in terms of demands of immigration (Demands of Immigration Scale, DIS) were also taken into account. RESULTS: On average, the 550 employees (12% with MB) showed clinically relevant depression (M = 13.0, SD = 5.1) (PHQ-9 ≥ 10), anxiety (M = 3.5, SD = 1.7) (GAD ≥ 3) and somatization (M = 13.0, SD = 5.8) (SSS-8 ≥ 12). Female gender was associated with higher anxiety and somatization. Older age and night shift work were associated with higher somatization. DISCUSSION: The results confirm the high level of mental burden among this sample of employees in Germany. In order to maintain their mental health, support measures should be offered, especially for vulnerable groups such as women, older employees, and night shift workers.

[Psychotherapeutic consultation at work: associations between company size and psychosomatic health]. / Psychotherapeutische Sprechstunde am Arbeitsplatz: Zusammenhänge zwischen Unternehmensgröße und psychosomatischer Gesundheit.

BACKGROUND: The utilization of psychotherapeutic consultation at work (PT-A) has so far been investigated in large enterprises (LEs). These differ structurally from small(est) and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Differences in the user profiles of a PT­A with regard to psychosomatic health, work-related self-efficacy, and work ability depending on company size have hardly been investigated. This study also examined differences in the employees' perception of the psychosocial safety climate (PSC) in the company, which represents management's efforts to promote mental health. METHODS: As part of the Early Intervention in the Workplace intervention study called "friaa", employees from LEs and SMEs interested in a PT­A were surveyed throughout Germany from September 2021 to January 2023. Using t­ and χ2-tests, differences between employees in LEs (n = 439) and SMEs (n = 109) were examined with regard to the ICD-10 F diagnostic code ("International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems"; mental and behavioral disorders), depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (GAD-2), level of functioning (GAF), somatic symptom burden (SSS-8), health (VR-12), ability to work (WAI), self-efficacy (SOSES), and psychosocial safety climate (PSC-4). The association between these variables and especially the PSC­4 were investigated using correlation analysis. RESULTS: Both groups showed similar levels of stress. From the employees' perspective, psychosocial issues were addressed significantly more frequently in LEs than in SMEs with a medium effect size. The study provided initial indications that in LEs there were positive correlations of the PSC­4 with SOSES and WAI and negative ones with PHQ­9 and SSS­8. DISCUSSION: The comparable psychological strain on employees in LEs and SMEs points to the need for behavioral and structural preventive measures regardless of the company size. Mainly in SMEs, organizational communication of psychosocial health should be given greater priority.

[Mental health problems among employees: service use and costs to the German healthcare system]. / Psychische Belastungen bei Erwerbstätigen: Leistungsinanspruchnahme und Kosten für das deutsche Gesundheitssystem.

BACKGROUND: Service use among employees with mental health problems and the associated costs for the health and social system have not yet been systematically analysed in studies or have only been recorded indirectly. The aim of this article is to report the service use in this target group, to estimate the costs for the health and social system and to identify possible influencing factors on the cost variance. METHODS: As part of a multicentre study, use and costs of health and social services were examined for a sample of 550 employees with mental health problems. Service use was recorded using the German version of the Client Sociodemographic Service Receipt Inventory (CSSRI). Costs were calculated for six months. A generalized linear regression model was used to examine influencing cost factors. RESULTS: At the start of the study, the average total costs for the past six months in the sample were €â€¯5227.12 per person (standard deviation €â€¯7704.21). The regression model indicates significant associations between increasing costs with increasing age and for people with depression, behavioural syndromes with physiological symptoms, and other diagnoses. DISCUSSION: The calculated costs were similar in comparison to clinical samples. It should be further examined in longitudinal studies whether this result changes through specific interventions.

Managers perception of hospital employees' effort-reward imbalance.

OBJECTIVE: Hospitals are frequently associated with poor working conditions that can lead to work stress and increase the risk for reduced employee well-being. Managers can shape and improve working conditions and thereby, the health of their teams. Thus, as a prerequisite, managers need to be aware of their employees' stress levels. This study had two objectives: At first, it aimed to test the criterion validity of the Effort-Reward Imbalance (ERI) questionnaire measuring psychosocial workload in hospital employees. Secondly, mean scales of the ERI questionnaire filled in by employees were compared with mean scales of an adapted ERI questionnaire, in which managers assessed working conditions of their employees. METHODS: Managers (n = 141) from three hospitals located in Germany assessed working conditions of their employees with an adapted external, other-oriented questionnaire. Employees (n = 197) of the mentioned hospitals completed the short version of the ERI questionnaire to assess their working conditions. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were applied to test factorial validity, using the ERI scales for the two study groups. Criterion validity was assessed with multiple linear regression analysis of associations between ERI scales and well-being among employees. RESULTS: The questionnaires demonstrated acceptable psychometric properties in terms of internal consistency of scales, although some indices of model fit resulting from CFA were of borderline significance. Concerning the first objective, effort, reward, and the ratio of effort-reward imbalance were significantly associated with well-being of employees. With regard to the second objective, first tentative findings showed that managers' ratings of their employees' effort at work was quite accurate, whereas their reward was overestimated. CONCLUSIONS: With its documented criterion validity the ERI questionnaire can be used as a screening tool of workload among hospital employees. Moreover, in the context of work-related health promotion, managers' perceptions of their employees' workload deserve increased attention as first findings point to some discrepancies between their perceptions and those provided by employees.

Group-Treatment for Dealing with the Work-Family Conflict for Healthcare Professionals.

Healthcare professionals' exposure to work-family conflict negatively affects the health and well-being of the whole family and organizational outcomes. Specified workplace interventions are lacking. Therefore, the aim of the study was to evaluate the feasibility of a two-day group-treatment specifically designed for the needs of healthcare professionals with family responsibilities concerning participation, satisfaction with the intervention and family- and individual-related outcome variables. 24 mostly female (85.7%) participants of a community hospital in southern Germany attended the treatment. Data were collected at baseline (T0), directly after the treatment (T1) and two months later (T2). A two-factor analysis of variance with repeated measures showed a statistically significant time x group effect for self-efficacy (F = 5.29, p = 0.011). Contrasts displayed substantial pre-post (T1-T0, T2-T0) increases of self-efficacy in the intervention group as compared with the control group. Non-parametric Mann-Whitney-U tests are in line with these findings. The results indicate that the group-treatment adapted to the needs of healthcare professionals has the potential to boost self-efficacy among healthcare professionals and that participants were predominantly satisfied. Perspectives for future research and practical implications are discussed in the light of the manifest lack of healthcare professionals.

Cluster-randomised trial evaluating a complex intervention to improve mental health and well-being of employees working in hospital - a protocol for the SEEGEN trial.

BACKGROUND: Health care employees in Germany and worldwide are exposed to a variety of stressors. However, most of the hospitals in Germany lack a systematic workplace health management. Thus, this study aims at the evaluation of the effects of a behavioural as well as organisational (´complex´) intervention on the mental health and well-being of hospital staff. METHODS: Mental health in the hospital workplace (SEElische GEsundheit am Arbeitsplatz KrankeNhaus - SEEGEN) is an unblinded, multi-centred cluster-randomised open trial with two groups (intervention group (IG) and waitlist control group (CG)). Study participants in the intervention clusters will receive the complex intervention; study participants in the waitlist control clusters will receive the complex intervention after the last follow-up measurement. The intervention consists of five behavioural and organisational intervention modules that are specifically tailored to hospital employees at different hierarchical and functional levels. Hospital staff may select one specific module according to their position and specific needs or interests. Towards the end of the intervention roundtable discussions with representatives from all professional groups will be held to facilitate organisational change. Primary outcome is the change in emotional and cognitive strain in the working environment, from baseline (T0) to 6 month-follow up (T1), between IG and CG. In addition, employees who do not participate in the modules are included in the trial by answering shorter questionnaires (cluster participants). Furthermore, using mixed methods, a process evaluation will identify uptake of the intervention, and mediators and moderators of the effect. DISCUSSION: There seems to be growing psychological strain on people working in the health care sector worldwide. This study will examine whether investing directly in the hospital staff and their interpersonal relationship may lead to measurable benefits in subjective well-being at the workplace and improved economic performance indicators of the hospital. In case of a positive outcome, health promotion strategies looking at behavioural as well as organisational components within the hospital may gain additional importance, especially in regard of the growing financial pressure within the health sector. TRIAL REGISTRATION DRKS: The SEEGEN study is registered at the German Clinical Trial Register (DRKS) under the DRKS-ID DRKS00017249. Registered 08 October 2019, URL. https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00017249.