No abstract

Background: Targets of workplace bullying tend to develop severe mental health complaints, having increased risk of sick leave and expulsion from the workplace. Hence, these individuals are likely to be overrepresented among patients seeking treatment for common mental disorders (CMD). This study investigated the prevalence of exposure to workplace bullying in a patient group seeking treatment for CMD. Further we explored if exposed and non-exposed patients differed on clinical and workrelated characteristics. Methods: The sample comprised of 675 patients from an outpatient clinic in Norway and consisted of 70% women and had a mean age of 39 (SD = 10.5) years. The study had a cross-sectional design and differences between the patient groups were analysed using chi-square, Mann-Whitney U-tests and independent sample t-tests. Results: The prevalence of exposure to bullying was 25.8%. The patients exposed to bullying reported significantly more major depressive disorders (MDDs) measured with the MINI psychiatric interview, higher levels of depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, subjective health complaints, alcohol use, and lower resilience as measured with questionnaires. Twice as many were on full-time sick leave, reported lower work ability, lower return to work self-efficacy, and lower job satisfaction. A majority preferred another job than the one they have today over returning to their current employment. Conclusion: Victims of workplace bullying are a vulnerable group at risk of expulsion from working life, being overrepresented among patients seeking mental health treatment for CMD. One in four patients represented with such experience have higher levels of psychological symptoms and are more often diagnosed with depression as compared to other patients. Thus, this is a problem that should be addressed in clinical settings. If not addressed there is an increased risk of sick leave and permanent exclusion from working life.

Objectives: The EQ-5D is a generic, self-report measure of health that is increasingly used in clinical settings, including mental health. The EQ-5D captures health using five dimensions: Mobility, Self-care, Usual activities, Pain/discomfort, and Anxiety/Depression. The validity of the EQ-5D is previously unexplored in patients on or at risk of sick leave due to depression and anxiety. The study’s aim was to examine its validity in this group of patients.Methods: Baseline data were collected from self-report questionnaires in an observational study (N=890) at a Norwegian outpatient-clinic. Participants were adults on or at risk of sick leave due to depression and anxiety who were referred for treatment by general practitioners. The crosswalk methodology was applied to estimate the EQ-5D value. Validity was assessed by comparing responses on the EQ-5D with the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II), the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), and Subjective Health Complaints (SHC). An ordinal regression model was used to assess known-groups validity. Convergent validity was assessed using Pearson’s correlation coefficient, and a multivariate regression model that included sociodemographic characteristics.Results: The mean EQ-5D value was 0.631, indicating reduced health status compared to “full health” anchored at 1.0, and patients reported moderate levels of depression and anxiety. Ordinal regression indicated that the EQ-5D could discriminate between different levels of symptom severity for depression and anxiety. The EQ-5D value showed significant correlation with the clinical measures; r=−0.52 for the BDI-II, r=−0.49 for the BAI, and r=−0.44 for SHC. The multivariate regression showed that the clinical variables significantly predicted the EQ-5D value, explaining 40.1% of the variance. Depression and anxiety scores were the largest determinants of EQ-5D value, respectively, whilst sick leave, subjective health complaints, and gender made moderate contributions.Conclusion: The EQ-5D showed indication of validity in patients on or at risk of sick leave due to depression and anxiety in the present study. The EQ-5D value was sensitive to both symptom severity and functional impairment in the form of sick leave. The findings support the EQ-5D as a feasible and relevant measure of health status in these patients.

Background The EQ-5D is a commonly used generic measure of health but evidence on its responsiveness to change in mental health is limited. This study aimed to explore the responsiveness of the five-level version of the instrument, the EQ-5D-5 L, in patients receiving treatment for depression and anxiety. Methods Patient data (N = 416) were collected at baseline and at end of treatment in an observational study in a Norwegian outpatient clinic. Patients were adults of working age (18–69 years) and received protocol-based metacognitive or cognitive therapy for depression or anxiety according to diagnosis. Responsiveness in the EQ-5D was compared to change in the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) and the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI). Effect sizes (Cohen’s d), Standardised response mean (SRM), and Pearson’s correlation were calculated. Patients were classified as “Recovered”, “Improved”, or “Unchanged” during treatment using the BDI-II and the BAI. ROC analyses determined whether the EQ-5D could correctly classify patient outcomes. Results Effect sizes were large for the BAI, the BDI-II, the EQ-5D value and the EQ VAS, ranging from d = 1.07 to d = 1.84. SRM were also large (0.93-1.67). Pearson’s correlation showed strong agreement between change scores of the EQ-5D value and the BDI-II (rs -0.54) and moderate between the EQ-5D value and the BAI (rs -0.43). The EQ-5D consistently identified “Recovered” patients versus “Improved” or “Unchanged” in the ROC analyses with AUROC ranging from 0.72 to 0.84. Conclusion The EQ-5D showed good agreement with self-reported symptom change in depression and anxiety, and correctly identified recovered patients. These findings indicate that the EQ-5D may be appropriately responsive to change in patients with depression and anxiety disorders, although replication in other clinical samples is needed.