A Global Perspective on Promoting Workplace Mental Health and the Role of Employee Assistance Programs

Attridge, Mark

doi:10.1177/0890117119838101c

Cited by 76 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The findings from this study indicate that anxiety disorder and depression prevalence rate are similar. The United States 21,22 has a comparable rate for depression but smaller for anxiety disorder. On the contrary, Canada 22,23 and United Kingdom 22,24 have lower prevalence rates in mood and/or anxiety disorder.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Prevalence of Mental Disorders by Socioeconomic Status in Australia: A Cross-Sectional Epidemiological Study

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To present the prevalence of 3 broad categories of mental disorder (anxiety-related, affective and other disorders) by socioeconomic status and examine the associated socioeconomic risk factors of mental disorders in Australia. Design: A population-based, cross-sectional national health survey on mental health and its risk factors across Australia. Setting: National Health Survey (NHS), 2017-2018 conducted by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Participants: Under aged: 4,945 persons, Adult: 16,370 persons and total: 21,315 persons Measures: Patient-reported mental disorder outcomes Analysis: Weighted prevalence rates by socioeconomic status (equivalised household income, education qualifications, Socio-Economic Index for Areas (SEIFA) scores, labor force status and industry sector where the adult respondent had their main job) were estimated using cross-tabulation. Logistic regression utilizing subsamples of underage and adult age groups were analyzed to test the association between socioeconomic status and mental disorders. Results: Anxiety-related disorders were the most common type of disorders with a weighted prevalence rate of 20.04% (95% CI: 18.49-21.69) for the poorest, 13.85% (95% CI: 12.48-15.35) for the richest and 16.34% (95% CI: 15.7-17) overall. The weighted prevalence rate for mood/affective disorders were 20.19% (95% CI: 18.63-21.84) for the poorest, 9.96% (95% CI: 8.79-11.27) for the richest, and 13.57% (95% CI: 12.99-14.17) overall. Other mental disorders prevalence were for the poorest: 9.07% (95% CI: 7.91-10.39), the richest: 3.83% (95% CI: 3.14-4.66), and overall: 5.93% (95% CI: 5.53-6.36). These patterns are also reflected if all mental disorders were aggregated with the poorest: 30.97% (95% CI: 29.15-32.86), the richest: 19.59% (95% CI: 18.02-21.26), and overall: 23.93% (95% CI: 23.19-24.69). The underage logistic regression model showed significant lower odds for the middle (AOR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.53 -1.04, p < 0.1), rich (AOR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.5-0.99, p < 0.05) and richest (AOR: 0.6, 95% CI: 0.41-0.89, p < 0.01) income groups. Similarly, in the adult logistic model, there were significant lower odds for middle (AOR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.72-0.98, p < 0.05), rich (AOR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.62-0.86, p < 0.01) and richest (AOR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.63-0.91, p < 0.01) income groups. Conclusion: The prevalence of mental disorders in Australia varied significantly across socioeconomic groups. Knowledge of different mental health needs in different socioeconomic groups can assist in framing evidence-based health promotion and improve the targeting of health resource allocation strategies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The United States 21,22 has a comparable rate for depression but smaller for anxiety disorder. On the contrary, Canada 22,23 and United Kingdom 22,24 have lower prevalence rates in mood and/or anxiety disorder. Both Australia and the United States have a much higher prevalence rate in depression than the global average.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence of Mental Disorders by Socioeconomic Status in Australia: A Cross-Sectional Epidemiological Study

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some employees will need assistance to navigate complex systems of care. Employee Assistance Programs are well positioned to provide this service (Attridge, 2019). The soft touch principles of psychological first aid, as refereed by Hillenberg and Wolf (1989), offer a non-threatening pathway for mental health professionals in the workplace.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The COVID chronicles: An Employee Assistance Program’s observations and responses to the pandemic

Hughes

Fairley

2020

Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article discusses the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic from the perspective of a large academic health system's Employee Assistance Program (EAP). It builds on a growing literature documenting the psychological effects experienced by Health Care Workers (HCW) during extreme and adverse circumstances. Although it is an observational study based on recent events in the United States, it reviews survey data collected in Wuhan China and New York City. The article discusses the operational responses of an EAP as it responded to the pandemic by adopting virtual communication platforms and developing innovative engagement strategies. It discusses the differential impacts experienced by front line and remote health care workers. A pre and post COVID-19 comparison of EAP activities will be offered. Lastly, the article explores practice implications for other EAPs.

show abstract

“…

The need for mental health support for working adults is well documented in the literature (Attridge, 2019). Epidemiological data on prevalence rates in the United States indicate that about one in every five (20%) working adults have diagnosable mental health disorders and/or substance abuse problems (Karg et al, 2014).

…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Internet-Based Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Employees With Anxiety, Depression, Social Phobia, or Insomnia: Clinical and Work Outcomes

Attridge¹

2020

Sage Open

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This applied study profiled four self-directed behavioral health support tools from Learn to Live, Inc., when offered as an employee benefit. Each of these automated online programs featured eight structured lessons that emphasized cognitive-behavioral therapy techniques. Archival operational information collected across multiple employers in the United States was analyzed for 1,297 unique participants with longitudinal program use data. Significant reductions were found on validated measures of clinical symptoms specific to each program: Depression ( d = 0.93, n = 268; Patient Health Questionnaire–nine-item scale [PHQ-9]), Insomnia ( d = 0.69, n = 295; Medical Outcomes Study [MOS] Sleep), Social Anxiety ( d = 0.53, n = 170; Social Phobia Inventory [SPIN]), and Stress, Anxiety, & Worry ( d = 0.50, n = 633; Generalized Anxiety Disorders–seven-item scale [GAD-7]). Moderators of improvement included greater initial clinical severity and greater engagement in the programs (more lessons used and use of optional live support from a coach or friend/family). Follow-up survey results ( n = 290) revealed high satisfaction and improved work absenteeism and job performance. Financial return to the employer from improved work productivity was estimated at US$2,431 per employee user.

show abstract

A Global Perspective on Promoting Workplace Mental Health and the Role of Employee Assistance Programs

Cited by 76 publications

References 11 publications

Prevalence of Mental Disorders by Socioeconomic Status in Australia: A Cross-Sectional Epidemiological Study

Prevalence of Mental Disorders by Socioeconomic Status in Australia: A Cross-Sectional Epidemiological Study

The COVID chronicles: An Employee Assistance Program’s observations and responses to the pandemic

Internet-Based Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Employees With Anxiety, Depression, Social Phobia, or Insomnia: Clinical and Work Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About