| 1. |
- Main, Chris J., et al.
(författare)
-
Implementation Science and Employer Disability Practices : Embedding Implementation Factors in Research Designs
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Journal of occupational rehabilitation. - : Springer-Verlag New York. - 1053-0487 .- 1573-3688. ; 26:4, s. 448-464
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose: For work disability research to have an impact on employer policies and practices it is important for such research to acknowledge and incorporate relevant aspects of the workplace. The goal of this article is to summarize recent theoretical and methodological advances in the field of Implementation Science, relate these to research of employer disability management practices, and recommend future research priorities.Methods: The authors participated in a year-long collaboration culminating in an invited 3-day conference, “Improving Research of Employer Practices to Prevent Disability”, held October 14–16, 2015, in Hopkinton, MA, USA. The collaboration included a topical review of the literature, group conference calls to identify key areas and challenges, drafting of initial documents, review of industry publications, and a conference presentation that included feedback from peer researchers and a question/answer session with a special panel of knowledge experts with direct employer experience.Results: A 4-phase implementation model including both outer and inner contexts was adopted as the most appropriate conceptual framework, and aligned well with the set of process evaluation factors described in both the work disability prevention literature and the grey literature. Innovative interventions involving disability risk screening and psychologically-based interventions have been slow to gain traction among employers and insurers. Research recommendations to address this are : (1) to assess organizational culture and readiness for change in addition to individual factors; (2) to conduct process evaluations alongside controlled trials; (3) to analyze decision-making factors among stakeholders; and (4) to solicit input from employers and insurers during early phases of study design.Conclusions: Future research interventions involving workplace support and involvement to prevent disability may be more feasible for implementation if organizational decision-making factors are imbedded in research designs and interventions are developed to take account of these influences.
|
|
| 2. |
- White, Marc, et al.
(författare)
-
Planning, Implementing and Evaluating Successful Workplace Interventions for Psychologically Healthy and Productive Workplaces : A Pattern Analysis of 57 Systematic Reviews
- 2020
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Mental health in the workplace is a key topic in British Columbia, across Canada and internationally with a growing focus on the importance of creating and sustaining safe, healthy, productive and inclusive workplaces. This stakeholder-centred best evidence-based synthesis of systematic reviews searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, CINAHL, PsycINFO, TRIP, REHABDATA (NARIC), REHAB+ (McMaster), and Health-evidence.ca (McMaster) published between January 1, 2000 and February 2016 to identify interventions that addressed: mental health symptomatology (depression, anxiety, PTSD, etc.), job control, job demands, social support, stress management, and wellness (health promotion). Following deduplication 5,646 citations were reviewed by two or more independent reviewers. Following title and abstract review, 168 full text articles were reviewed against inclusion/exclusion criteria, resulting in 57 systematic reviews being included. Based on findings and trend analysis, the academic-stakeholder team proposed a framework for planning, implementing and evaluating interventions to mitigate psychosocial hazards in the workplace. Due to low quality evidence and experimental pre and post design of many studies recommendations should be considered with some caution noting the need for more rigorous monitoring of their implementation.
|
|
