Self-reported sick leave following a brief preventive intervention on work-related stress: a randomised controlled trial in primary health care

Abstract

ObjectivesTo evaluate the effectiveness of a brief intervention about early identification of work-related stress combined with feedback at consultation with a general practitioner (GP) on the number of self-reported sick leave days.DesignRandomised controlled trial. Prospective analyses of self-reported sick leave data collected between November 2015 and January 2017.SettingSeven primary healthcare centres in western Sweden.ParticipantsThe study included 271 employed, non-sick-listed patients aged 18–64 years seeking care for mental and/or physical health complaints. Of these, 132 patients were allocated to intervention and 139 patients to control.InterventionsThe intervention group received a brief intervention about work-related stress, including training for GPs, screening of patients’ work-related stress, feedback to patients on screening results and discussion of measures at GP consultation. The control group received treatment as usual.Outcome measuresThe number of self-reported gross sick leave days and the number of self-reported net sick leave days, thereby also considering part-time sick leave.ResultsAt 6 months’ follow-up, 220/271 (81%) participants were assessed, while at 12 months’ follow-up, 241/271 (89%) participants were assessed. At 6-month follow-up, 59/105 (56%) in the intervention group and 61/115 (53%) in the control group reported no sick leave. At 12-month follow-up, the corresponding numbers were 61/119 (51%) and 57/122 (47%), respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between the intervention group and the control group in the median number of self-reported gross sick leave days and the median number of self-reported net sick leave days.ConclusionsThe brief intervention showed no effect on the numbers of self-reported sick leave days for patients seeking care at the primary healthcare centres. Other actions and new types of interventions need to be explored to address patients’ perceiving of ill health due to work-related stress.Trial registration numberNCT02480855.

Work-related stress and future sick leave in a working population seeking care at primary health care centres: a prospective longitudinal study using the WSQ

“…Previous studies from the RCT have shown that sick leave was not affected by the intervention [ 41 , 42 ]. In addition, the results from a Pearson's χ2 test showed that intervention group affiliation had no statistically significant effect on being on sick leave 15 days or more during the study period (p-value 0.57).…”

Work-related stress, reason for consultation and diagnosis-specific sick leave: How do they add up?

“…The RCT aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a brief intervention targeting primary health care patients seeking care for mental and physical health complaints [ 42 ]. Based on three outcome evaluations, the brief intervention showed no effect on the number of self-reported or the number of registered sick leave days [ 43 – 45 ]. Hence, the data collected in the RCT were considered useful in this longitudinal observational study to analyse the relationship between factors observed at baseline and future sick leave without regard to the intervention given.…”

Does the Number of Reasons for Seeking Care and Self-Rated Health Predict Sick Leave during the Following 12 Months? A Prospective, Longitudinal Study in Swedish Primary Health Care

“…The overall aim of TIDAS was to evaluate whether the systematic early identification of work-related stress could prevent sickness absence. Results from the RCT are published elsewhere in several studies [ 18 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 ]. In a study protocol, Holmgren et al presented detailed information on TIDAS [ 34 ].…”