What Could Influence Workers' Decisions to Disclose a Mental Illness at Work?

BACKGROUND: Stigma can be a barrier for workers experiencing a mental illness to access accommodations at work. However, work accommodations may be necessary to maintain a worker's ability to work. Therefore, it may be important to develop effective interventions to address workplace stigma. OBJECTIVE: To determine (1) what proportion of workers would probably disclose their mental health issue to their manager, (2) what are the motivating factors for the decision of whether or not to disclose, and (3) what would potentially change the disclosure decision? METHODS: A link to a Web-based questionnaire was sent to a nationally representative sample of 1671 Dutch adults over 18 years of age. The response rate was 74%. We focused on the 892 respondents who indicated they were either employed for pay or looking for employment, not in management positions, and never experienced a mental health issue. This group comprised 73% of the total sample. They were asked if they would disclose their mental health issue to their manager. For what reasons would they disclose/not disclose the issue? And, what could change their decision? RESULTS: We found that almost 75% of workers would disclose to their managers. The perceived relationship with their managers and feelings of responsibility to their workplaces were important contributors to the decision. A large minority of workers would not tell, preferring to deal with their issues alone. In addition, a significant proportion of workers would choose not to disclose fearing negative consequences. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that the majority of these Dutch workers would disclose a mental health issue to their managers. The relationship with the manager plays a central role. The advice from a trusted individual and the experiences of colleagues are also significant factors in the disclosure decision.

Serious Gaming During Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation for Patients With Chronic Pain or Fatigue Symptoms: Mixed Methods Design of a Realist Process Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Serious gaming could support patients in learning to cope with chronic pain or functional somatic syndromes and reduce symptom burdens. OBJECTIVE: To realize this potential, insight is needed into how, why, for whom, and when it works in actual treatment circumstances. METHODS: Following a realist approach, process evaluations were performed before, during, and after a two-armed, natural quasi-experiment (n=275). A group of patients with interfering chronic pain or fatigue symptoms received a short additional blended mindfulness-based serious gaming intervention during a multidisciplinary rehabilitation program. A control group only received the regular rehabilitation program. During two sessions before and one session after the experiment, expectations about serious gaming processes were discussed in focus groups with local care providers, implementers, and experts. Patients participated in a survey (n=114) and in semistructured interviews (n=10). The qualitative data were used to develop tentative expectations about aspects of serious gaming that, in certain patients and circumstances, trigger mechanisms of learning and health outcome change. Hypotheses about indicative quantitative data patterns for tentative expectations were formulated before inspecting, describing, and analyzing-with regression models-routinely collected clinical outcome data. An updated program theory was formulated after mixing the qualitative and quantitative results. RESULTS: Qualitative data showed that a subset of patients perceived improvement of their self-awareness in moments of daily social interactions. These results were explained by patients, who played the serious game LAKA, as a "confrontation with yourself," which reflected self-discrepancies. Important characteristics of serious gaming in the study's context included innovation factors of relative advantage with experiential learning opportunity, compatibility with the treatment approach, and the limited flexibility in regard to patient preferences. Perceived patient factors included age and style of coping with stress or pain. Learning perceptions could also depend on care provider role-taking and the planning and facilitating (ie, local organization) of serious gaming introduction and feedback sessions in small groups of patients. Quantitative data showed very small average differences between the study groups in self-reported depression, pain, and fatigue changes (-.07

Effectiveness of Serious Gaming During the Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation of Patients With Complex Chronic Pain or Fatigue: Natural Quasi-Experiment.

BACKGROUND: Current evidence for the effectiveness of specialist multidisciplinary programs for burdensome chronic pain and functional somatic syndromes drives the effort to improve approaches, strategies, and delivery modes. It remains unknown to what extent and in what respect serious gaming during the regular outpatient rehabilitation can contribute to health outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of our study were to determine the effect of additional serious gaming on (1) physical and emotional functioning in general; (2) particular outcome domains; and (3) patient global impressions of change, general health, and functioning and to determine (4) the dependency of serious gaming effects on adherence. METHODS: We conducted a naturalistic quasi-experiment using embedded qualitative methods. The intervention group patients received an additional guided (mindfulness-based) serious gaming intervention during weeks 9-12 of a 16-week rehabilitation program at 2 sites of a Dutch rehabilitation clinic. Simultaneously, 119 control group patients followed the same program without serious gaming at 2 similar sites of the same clinic. Data consisted of 10 semistructured patient interviews and routinely collected patient self-reported outcomes. First, multivariate linear mixed modeling was used to simultaneously estimate a group effect on the outcome change between weeks 8 and 16 in 4 primary outcomes: current pain intensity, fatigue, pain catastrophizing, and psychological distress. Second, similar univariate linear mixed models were used to estimate effects on particular (unstandardized) outcomes. Third, secondary outcomes (ie, global impression of change, general health, functioning, and treatment satisfaction) were compared between the groups using independent t tests. Finally, subgroups were established according to the levels of adherence using log data. Influences of observed confounding factors were considered throughout analyses. RESULTS: Of 329 eligible patients, 156 intervention group and 119 control group patients (N=275) with mostly chronic back pain and concomitant psychosocial problems participated in this study. Of all, 119 patients played ≥75% of the game. First, the standardized means across the 4 primary outcomes showed a significantly more favorable degree of change during the second part of the treatment for the intervention group than for the control group (beta=-0.119, SE=0.046, P=.009). Second, the intervention group showed a greater outcome change in depressive mood (b=-2.748, SE=1.072, P=.011) but not in "insufficiency" or concentration problems. Third, no significant group effects on secondary outcomes were found. Fourth, adherence was generally high and invariant. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study suggest a very small favorable average effect on relevant health outcomes of additional serious gaming during multidisciplinary rehabilitation. The indication that serious gaming could be a relatively time-efficient component warrants further research into if, when, how, and for which patients serious gaming could be cost-effective in treatment and why. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Registry NTR6020; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=6020 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/71IIoTXkj).