31
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Work-related psychosocial risk factors for stress-related mental disorders: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

      systematic-review

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          The objective was to conduct an update of a previously published review and meta-analysis on the association between work-related psychosocial risk factors and stress-related mental disorders (SRD).

          Design

          Systematic review and meta-analysis.

          Data sources

          Medline, Embase and PsycINFO were searched for articles published between 2008 and 12 August 2019 and references of a systematic review performed for the period before 2008 were included. Primary prospective studies were included when outcome data were described in terms of SRD assessment or a dichotomous outcome, based on a validated questionnaire, and at least two levels of work-related exposure were reported (exposed vs less or non-exposed). We used GRADE to assess the evidence for the associations between risk factors and the onset of SRD.

          Results

          Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria. In total, a population of 73 874 workers from Belgium, Denmark, England, Finland, Japan, the Netherlands and Sweden were included in the meta-analysis of 14 prospective cohort studies. This meta-analysis revealed moderate evidence for associations between SRD and effort reward imbalance (OR=1.9, 95% CI 1.70 to 2.15), high job demands (OR=1.6, 95% CI 1.41 to 1.72), organisational justice (ORs=1.6 to 1.7, CIs 1.44 to 1.86), social support (ORs=1.3 to 1.4, CIs 1.16 to 1.69), high emotional demands (OR=1.6, 95% CI 1.35 to 1.84) and decision authority (OR=1.3, CI 1.20 to 1.49). No significant or inconsistent associations were found for job insecurity, decision latitude, skill discretion and bullying.

          Conclusion

          Moderate evidence was found that work-related psychosocial risk factors are associated with a higher risk of SRD. Effort-reward imbalance, low organisational justice and high job demands exhibited the largest increased risk of SRD, varying from 60% to 90%.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Can work make you mentally ill? A systematic meta-review of work-related risk factors for common mental health problems.

          It has been suggested that certain types of work may increase the risk of common mental disorders, but the exact nature of the relationship has been contentious. The aim of this paper is to conduct the first comprehensive systematic meta-review of the evidence linking work to the development of common mental health problems, specifically depression, anxiety and/or work-related stress and to consider how the risk factors identified may relate to each other. MEDLINE, PsychInfo, Embase, the Cochrane Collaboration and grey literature databases were systematically searched for review articles that examined work-based risk factors for common mental health problems. All included reviews were subjected to a quality appraisal. 37 review studies were identified, of which 7 were at least moderate quality. 3 broad categories of work-related factors were identified to explain how work may contribute to the development of depression and/or anxiety: imbalanced job design, occupational uncertainty and lack of value and respect in the workplace. Within these broad categories, there was moderate level evidence from multiple prospective studies that high job demands, low job control, high effort-reward imbalance, low relational justice, low procedural justice, role stress, bullying and low social support in the workplace are associated with a greater risk of developing common mental health problems. While methodological limitations continue to preclude more definitive statements on causation between work and mental disorders, there is now a range of promising targets for individual and organisational-level interventions aimed at minimising mental health problems in the workplace.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Psychosocial work environment and stress-related disorders, a systematic review.

            Knowledge on the impact of the psychosocial work environment on the occurrence of stress-related disorders (SRDs) can assist occupational physicians in the assessment of the work-relatedness of these disorders. To systematically review the contribution of work-related psychosocial risk factors to SRDs. A systematic review of the literature was carried out by searching Medline, PsycINFO and Embase for studies published up until October 2008. Studies eligible for inclusion were prospective cohort studies or patient-control studies of workers at risk for SRDs. Studies were included in the review when data on the association between exposure to psychosocial work factors and the occurrence of SRDs were presented. Where possible, meta-analysis was conducted to obtain summary odds ratios of the association. The strength of the evidence was assessed using four levels of evidence. From the 2426 studies identified, seven prospective studies were included in this review. Strong evidence was found that high job demands, low job control, low co-worker support, low supervisor support, low procedural justice, low relational justice and a high effort-reward imbalance predicted the incidence of SRDs. This systematic review points to the potential of preventing SRDs by improving the psychosocial work environment. However, more prospective studies are needed on the remaining factors, exposure assessment and the relative contributions of single factors, in order to enable consistent assessment of the work-relatedness of SRDs by occupational physicians.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Work characteristics predict psychiatric disorder: prospective results from the Whitehall II Study.

              The impact of work on the risk of future psychiatric disorder has been examined in few longitudinal studies. This was examined prospectively in a large epidemiological study of civil servants. In the Whitehall II study, a longitudinal, prospective cohort study of 6895 male and 3413 female London based civil servants, work characteristics measured at baseline (phase 1: 1985-8) and first follow up (phase 2: 1989) were used to predict psychiatric disorder measured by a 30 item general health questionnaire (GHQ) at phase 2 and phase 3 follow up (phase 3: 1991-3). Work characteristics and GHQ were measured at all three phases. Low social support at work and low decision authority, high job demands and effort-reward imbalance were associated with increased risk of psychiatric disorder as assessed by the GHQ at follow up adjusting for age, employment grade, and baseline GHQ score. Social support and control at work protect mental health while high job demands and effort-reward imbalance are risk factors for future psychiatric disorder. Intervention at the level of work design, organisation, and management might have positive effects on mental health in working populations.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2020
                5 July 2020
                : 10
                : 7
                : e034849
                Affiliations
                [1]departmentCoronel Institute of Occupational Health , Amsterdam UMC—Locatie AMC , Amsterdam, North Holland, The Netherlands
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Henk F van der Molen; h.f.vandermolen@ 123456amsterdamumc.nl
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0719-2020
                Article
                bmjopen-2019-034849
                10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034849
                7337889
                32624469
                7d649da8-8c59-4fa6-bfc4-f64fa0c29ad4
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See:  https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 08 October 2019
                : 11 May 2020
                : 14 May 2020
                Funding
                Funded by: Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, the Netherlands;
                Award ID: 5100-24108
                Categories
                Occupational and Environmental Medicine
                1506
                1716
                Original research
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                occupational & industrial medicine,epidemiology,preventive medicine
                Medicine
                occupational & industrial medicine, epidemiology, preventive medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article