|
| Intervention | Individual | Organisational | Mixed/unspecified |
| Outcome | Individual | Organisational | Individual | Organisational | Individual | Organisational |
|
| Parks and Steelman, 2008 | | | | Outcome: absenteeism
Wellness programme effect size (mean difference between those with and without a wellness programme, weighted for sample size)
d = −0.3, 95% CI: −0.48, −0.22*** | | |
|
Richardson and Rothstein, 2008
GHQ, STAI,
SCL-90, various anxiety measures; TQ4, anxiety measure
by Bending 1956 | CBT for overall psychological outcomes combined d = 1.154**
Anxiety d = 2.390***
For psychological outcomes combined d = 0.507***
Anxiety d = 0.611*** | Absenteeism d = 0.213 | Organisational (support groups and participatory action groups) for psychological outcomes combined d = 0.134
Mental Health d = 0.167 | Organisational support groups and participatory action groups for absenteeism d = −0.159 | Stress d = 7.27***
Anxiety d = 0.678***
Mental Health d = 0.441*** | |
|
| Bond et al., 2006 | | | | More control lead to reduced absenteeism 4 studies d = −.11 95% CI: −.15 to −.08
Small and significant
More support leads to less absenteeism 1 study d = −16 95% CI: −.24 to −.09
Small and significant
Communication leads to less absenteeism d = −.23 Small-to-medium effect and significant | | |
|
Marine et al., 2006
Measures of state and trait anxiety STAI, GHQ, Beck | Person-directed interventions versus control:
State anxiety: WMD = −9.42, CI: −16.92 to −1.93
Trait anxiety WMD = −6.91; 95% CI: −12.80, −1.01
Findings sustained in medium term:
State anxiety: WMD = −0.831, CI: −11.49 to −5.13
Trait anxiety: WMD = −4.09, CI: −7.6 to −0.58
GHQ: person directed interventions did not reduce symptoms: WMD = −11.87, CI: −27.24 to 3.49 | | GHQ symptoms reduced following combination of knowledge skills training, programme planning
WMD: −2.9, CI: −5.16 to −0.64.
Anxiety not measured
Other single studies using SCL and GHQ did not change results | | | |
|
Van der Klink et al., 2001
Not listed | CBT on anxiety d = 0.70***
Relaxation on anxiety d = 0.25*
Summation on anxiety d = 0.54***
CBT on depression d = 0.23
Relaxation on depression d = 0.11
Summation on depression d = 0.33** | CBT on absenteeism d = −0.18
Relaxation on absenteeism d = −0.09
Summation on absenteeism d = −0.12 | Depression d = 0 | Absenteeism d = 0 | Anxiety d = 0.50***
Depression d = 0.59*** | |
|
Saunders et al., 1996
Measures of state or trait anxiety, STAI. Others not listed | Performance anxiety r = 0.509**
State anxiety r = 0.373** | | | | | |
|
Penalba, McGuire, Leite, 2009 (electronic searches on 12/5/08
Hand searches 1973–1990) | One primary prevention study Backman (1997): mental imaging training versus control | | | | | |
|
SCL-90 depression subscale
GHQ | Depression outcome: MD (fixed effect) −2.14, CI: −4 to −0.28 at end point (in favour of intervention)
18 months later: MD = −0.97, CI: −2.43 to 0.49
GHQ outcome: MD = 2.74, CI: 0.78–4.7 (in favour of control)
18 month followup: MD = 1.3, CI: −0.61 to 3.21
One secondary prevention study intervention versus control: Norvell (1993)
Depression: MD= −7.32, CI: −11.79 to −2.85 in favour of intervention
Anxiety: MD = −3.1, CI: −6.94 to 0.6 in favour of intervention
All prevention versus control post hoc selected outcomes:
Depression: (Backman, 1977; Norvell, 1993)
Depression outcome: MD = −0.8, CI: −1.36 to −0.24, in favour of intervention | | | | | |
|
Martin 2009
Published 1997–2000
Standardised measures, anxiety, depression and composite measure
CES-D
BSI | Depression: SMD = Small but significant effect:
Depression: SMD = 0.28, CI: 0.12–0.44
Anxiety: SMD = 0.29, CI: 0.06–0.51 | | Single trial of stress management programme: depression: SMD = 0.69 | | Depression: SMD:0.31, CI: 0.1–0.51
Anxiety
SMD: 0.25, CI: 0.03–0.53
Improvement maintained at followup (only 9 of 17 studies report followup) 5 studies had different methods:
Depression in smoking cessation trial: worsening SMD = −0.08 (on CESDscale), no difference in BSI outcomes of depression: SMD = 0.03, anxiety SMD = 0.05 | |
|
Conn 2009
(electronic searches 1969–2007)
Mood (self report-measure not reported)
Work attendance | | | | | Unclear which studies that were reported contributed to the effect sizes, and whether they used individual or organisational interventions
Mood
2 group post test: mean of effect size (MES): 0.13, CI: −0.05 to 0.31 (NS)
2 group pre- and posttest:MES = 0.21, CI: 0.07 to 0.36**
Treatment pre and post: MES + 0.31, CI: 0.22 to 0.4*** | Work attendance:
2 group post test: MES = 0.19, CI: 0.11 to 0.27***
2 group pre post test: MES = 0.05, CI: −0.19 to 0.29
Treatment pre post test: MES 0.02, CI: −0.08 to 0.13 (NS)
Workplace interventions had better results, as did intervention in paid time, studies with onsite fitness facilities |
|
Van Wyk (2010)
State and trait anxiety index | | | Career identity training in one study does not improve anxiety in nurses: mean difference: −0.06, CI: −0.44 to 0.32
Von Baeyer’s 3 session stress management training showed marginal benefit.
Standardised mean difference: −1.45, CI: −2.67 to 0.22 | Weir (1997) assessed effect of management intervention to improve process consultation between nurse managers and staff on mean hours absence of staff in a community hospital No difference: mean difference = 20.35, CI: −10.65 to 51.35 | | |
|
Noordik (2010)
Specific outcomes not listed
Absenteeism not given as separate outcome from work function | Effects on Anxiety
2 studies in meta-analysis, SMD = −0.54, CI: −1.26 to 0.16
Group exposure CBT and medication versus only medication: SMD = 0.87, CI: 0.34 to 1.39
Exposure in vivo and medication versus only medication: 1, CI: 0.52 to 1.49
Large effect sized (>0.8) judged to indicate significant result without formal statistical tests | | | | | |
|
