Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Psychological depression prevention programs for 5-10 year olds: What’s the evidence?

403

Published on

Health Evidence hosted a 90 minute webinar on Workplace Wellness. This work received support from KT Canada funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). Key messages and …

Health Evidence hosted a 90 minute webinar on Workplace Wellness. This work received support from KT Canada funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). Key messages and implications for practice were presented on Tuesday November 05, 2013 at 1:00 pm EST.

This webinar focused on interpreting the evidence in the following review:
Bergerman, L., Corabian, P., and Harstall, C. (2009). Effectiveness of organizational interventions for the prevention of workplace stress (Report). Alberta, Canada: Institute of Health Economics. Retrieved from: http://www.ihe.ca/documents/Interventions_for_prevention_of_workplace_stress.pdf

Lori Greco, Knowledge Broker with Health Evidence, lead the webinar.

Published in: Health & Medicine
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
403
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. This work received support from KT Canada funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Welcome! Organizational interventions for the prevention of workplace stress: Evidence and implications for public health You will be placed on hold until the webinar begins. The webinar will begin shortly, please remain on the line.
  • 2. Funding & Partners
  • 3. Participant Side Panel in WebEx Housekeeping Use Q&A to post comments/questions during the webinar •‘Send’ questions to All (not privately to ‘Host’) Connection issues •Recommend using a wired Internet connection (vs. wireless), to help prevent connection challenges WebEx 24/7 help line: 1-866-229-3239 Q&A
  • 4. The Health Evidence Team Kara DeCorby Managing Director Heather Husson Project Manager Lori Greco Knowledge Broker Yaso Gowrinathan Research Assistant/ Coordinator Robyn Traynor Research Coordinator Maureen Dobbins Scientific Director Tel: 905 525-9140 ext 22481 E-mail: dobbinsm@mcmaster.ca Kelly Graham Research Assistant
  • 5. What is www.healthevidence.org? Evidence inform Decision Making
  • 6. Why use www.healthevidence.org? 1. Saves you time 2. Relevant & current evidence 3. Transparent process 4. Supports for EIDM available 5. Easy to use
  • 7. A Model for Evidence-Informed Decision Making Source: National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools. (revised 2012). A Model for Evidence-Informed DecisionMaking in Public Health. [fact sheet]. Retrieved from http://www.nccmt.ca/pubs/FactSheet_EIDM_EN_WEB.pdf
  • 8. Evidence-Informed Decision Making 1. Cultivate a culture of inquiry, critical thinking and evidence-based practice “culture” 2. Ask a clear, focused, searchable question 3. Search for the best available evidence 4. Critically appraise the relevant evidence
  • 9. Evidence-Informed Decision Making 5. Synthesize and integrate the evidence with expertise, local context, and client preference 6. Implement and evaluate the outcome(s) of the change in practice or policy 7. Engage in knowledge exchange
  • 10. Review Bergerman, L., Corabian, P., and Harstall, C. (2009). Effectiveness of organizational interventions for the prevention of workplace stress (Report). Alberta, Canada: Institute of Health Economics. Retrieved from: http://www.ihe.ca/documents/Interventionsforpreven tionofworkplace_stress.pdf.
  • 11. Importance of this Review • 1 in 4 Canadian workers described their daily lives as highly stressful (General Social Survey, 2010) • High level of workplace stress results in a loss of productivity through absenteeism, reduced work output, and increased disability claims • 3 in 4 short-term disability claims in Canada are related to mental health problems
  • 12. Poll Question #1 Who has heard of a PICO(S) question before? 1.Yes 2.No
  • 13. Searchable Questions 1. Population (situation) 2. Intervention (exposure) 3. Comparison (other group) 4. Outcomes 5. Setting Think “PICOS”
  • 14. Evidence Summary: Greco (2013) Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of organizationallevel interventions for the prevention of occupational stress in terms of reducing stress, psychological symptoms, absenteeism, presenteeism, and turnover. P Employed adults I Organizational-level interventions including: job redesign or restructuring, participation and autonomy, training and education, coworker support groups, physical and environmental characteristics, communication, role issues C Other intervention or no intervention O Stress, burnout, psychological wellbeing, sickness or absenteeism, and turnover or retention
  • 15. Overall Considerations • Quality Rating: 9 (strong) Methodologically strong review based on 6 systematic reviews (including 105 studies), varying in quality: 1 high, 4 moderate and 1 low quality • No firm conclusion can be drawn about most effective type of interventions or strategies due to variability in study population, intervention, and outcomes The evidence summary only provides data for effective interventions in high quality studies.
  • 16. What’s the evidence Outcomes reported in the review 1. Interventions aimed at reducing stress (2 SR; 11 interventions assessed in 37 studies) 2. Interventions aimed at reducing burnout (6 SR; 10 interventions assessed in 105 studies) 3. Interventions aimed at improving psychological wellbeing (5 SR; 28 interventions assessed in 95 studies)
  • 17. What’s the evidence Outcomes reported in the review 4. Interventions aimed at reducing absence and absenteeism (2 SR; 11 interventions assessed in 76 studies) 5. Interventions aimed at reducing turnover (2 SR; 4 interventions assessed in 39 studies
  • 18. What’s the evidence - Reducing Stress 1. Training and Education with theory, role playing and experiential exchanges (TRA) (1 SR, 1 high quality study): moderate to small effect on stress immediately following intervention (MD -0.34, 95% CI -0.62 to -0.06) but no effect at 6 months (MD -0.19, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.11) 2. Action teams with management and employees to improve team communication and cohesiveness, working scheduling, conflict resolution and recognition of good work (PAR/COM/JRD) (1 SR, 1 good quality study) were effective at reducing stress compared to no-intervention control groups (P= 0.02) No Impact for: two job redesign or restructuring interventions (JRD), two co-worker support groups / education and training interventions (CSG/TRA), job redesign or restructuring/ training and education (JRD/TRA), training and education (TRA), two co-worker support group interventions (CSG), and participation and autonomy/ training and education (PAR/TRA)
  • 19. What’s the evidence Reducing Burnout 1. A participatory intervention to identify psychological stressors and solutions (PAR) (1 SR, 1 high quality study) had a large to small effect on work-related burnout compared to control (MD -1.83, 95% CI -3.58 to -0.09) 2. Job redesign or restructuring/co-worker support groups/ communication interventions (JRD/CSG/COM) (4 low quality SR and one study) produced inconsistent results No Impact for: job redesign or restructuring/ communication/ co-worker support groups (JRD/COM/CSG), two job redesign or restructuring/ education and training interventions
  • 20. What’s the evidence Improving Psychological Wellbeing 1. A participatory stress reduction committee, more and smaller teams with sub-supervisors, more on-the-job training, and ergonomic improvements (JRD/PAR/PEC) (2 SR, 1 high quality study) significantly improved mean depression scores in the short term (pre 41.1, post 38.6) compared to controls (pre 41.5, post 42.3) (P = 0.025) 2. Control over production transferred to employee work groups with a steering group of representatives responsible for overseeing change (1 SR, 1 good quality study) significantly improved mental health (P <0.05)
  • 21. What’s the evidence Improving Psychological Wellbeing 3. A participative action research intervention (1 SR, 1 good quality study) significantly improved mental health 4. Flexible working hours (1 SR, 1 good quality study) significantly improved mental health compared to controls (P <0.05) No impact for co-worker support groups/ training and education, participation and autonomy/ communication/ role issues (PAR/COM/RIS), job redesign or restructuring, training and education/ co-worker support groups/ participation and autonomy, job redesign or restructuring/role issues, participation and autonomy interventions, participation and autonomy/ training and education, and participation autonomy/ job redesign or restructuring interventions
  • 22. What’s the evidence Reducing Absence and Absenteeism 1. A participatory stress reduction intervention (2 SR, 1 high quality study) significantly reduced absenteeism compared to controls (P <0.05) 2. An intervention of more teamwork, more personnel, role clarification, production goals, fewer supervisors, a partial change in shift system, increased feedback and a new vending machine and microwave (JRD/RIS/COM/PEC) (1 SR, 1 high quality study) significantly reduced sick leave (P <0.05)
  • 23. What’s the evidence Reducing Absence and Absenteeism 3. A participative action research intervention (1 SR, 1 high quality study) significantly reduced absenteeism compared to a control group (P <0.05) No impact - of job redesign or restructuring, job redesign or restructuring/ training and education, participation and autonomy/ job redesign or restructuring
  • 24. What’s the evidence Reducing Turnover No impact - Change to a primary care nursing model with support from managers, advice on core skills and promotion of effective interprofessional communication
  • 25. General Implications • Workplace stress reduction interventions should be rigorously evaluated • Rigorous research should: 1. Continue to assess the effectiveness and potential harms of workplace interventions 2. Determine which interventions or strategies are most effective
  • 26. Poll Questions # 2 and 3 Questions?
  • 27. Survey Participation Your Feedback is greatly appreciated! https://nccmt.co1.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_aV2Y u8vGcrBXPdr
  • 28. Contact Us info@healthevidence.org For a copy of the presentation please visit our posting board: http://forum.healthevidence.org/ Login with your healthevidence username and password or register if you aren’t a member yet.

×